Previous in Forum: Non-Lethal Is Now Ok, What Is Going On?   Next in Forum: Non invasive sensor for hydraulic lines
Close
Close
Close
13 comments
Guru

Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1818
Good Answers: 7

Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/02/2007 5:06 PM

Hi all,

I read this article via my google news feed and found it very confusing.

It seems to start of with stating that researchers are frustrated with the slow rate of improved cure rates and treatment due to frozen funding but then sweeps to the other side of the scale by stating that we are very happy to have turned a corner in our fight with cancer and most peoples outlook is better now than it has ever been.

Wouldn't be so bad if they did not do another u-turn and finished by claiming that most survivors are leaving the hospitals feeling like a time bomb.

What is the story really about and which of the different versions is prevalent here. Why do they write these news flashes in such a way that you could, if hard pushed, read anything you like in them.

Am I supposed to feel good, bad or cheated here? Yes cancer is a question mark floating over us as we have it in our family, I would love some good news so these kinds of reports are not helpful to say the least.

Anybody any thoughts on this?

Register to Reply
Pathfinder Tags: cancer chemo radio therapy research
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Guru

Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Earth - I think.
Posts: 2143
Good Answers: 165
#1

Re: cancer research advances or not?

12/02/2007 9:33 PM

After reading the article, it sounds to me like the writer is trying to call "Bullsh**", on the rosy reports from the Gov that say the "war is being won".

My sister's husband had a brain tumor, that was completely removed 10 years ago. Unfortunately, the surgery did more damage than the tumor. And the "state of the art", hasn't changed much. It sounds as if early detection is still the best bet. Then it can be operated on, without damaging the surrounding tissue to much.

I have a friend that I work with, whose wife just went through the same procedure. They couldn't get all of the tumor. So he is looking into cyberknife surgery (http://www.accuray.com/) for her. I hope it works; for both their sakes. In the meantime, he and his wife are doing things like taking Cruises, that they have been putting off for years.

Hope I didn't depress you as much as I did myself. There is SOME progress being made; it just isn't as dramatic and upbeat, as some reports make it sound.

Call me cynical, but I think the most telling statement the article made was: "With government financing for cancer research frozen since 2003, critics say the pace of progress could slow even more as young researchers leave the field.". Which sounds to me like politically acceptable population control. Hope I'm wrong.

Hang in there Case

__________________
TANSTAAFL (If you don't know what that means, Google it - yourself)
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Construction Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Civil Engineering - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Hunting - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member United States - Member - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Latitude 38.701979 Longitude -90.439540 Coordinates 38.701979, -90.439540 N38°42.11874, W090°26.3724
Posts: 669
Good Answers: 15
#2

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 7:42 AM

Having much experience with various Cancers & treatments in my family.

And Having been thru the time tested versions of Surgery then Chemo & Radiation therapy for colon rectal cancer myself and survived.

And just a few years ago a experimental treatment for a small tumor in my spinal column at the base of my skull. That I was worried that the surgery to remove would do more damage than good.

The tumor in my spinal column hasn't gotten any better but it hasn't gotten any worse either. And when they originally found it they said a year to live at the most.

I can safely say that there are advancements being made but they are slow in coming.

I like to say "If it weren't for Cancer in my family, we would live for ever." Seems to be the only disease that we die of. Lost 3 grand parents, 2 brothers, 1 sister, 1 father and probably soon my mother. Among many other aunts & uncles & cousins to one form of cancer or another.

But they still insist that its not a genetic disorder. Guess they say that because of the many different types that each of us have or had.

__________________
scotchdrnkr
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1818
Good Answers: 7
#5
In reply to #2

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 2:08 PM

Really sorry to hear of your predicament scotchdrnkr, my experience is nothing compared to yours.

It was never a genetic issue in my family, none of my wifes family ever had( read known about) cancer. Unfortunately we have a 14 year old daughter who now lives with cancer in the family for whom the story has significantly changed.

She will have to be checked from the age of 18 to catch it early if it happens. Fingers crossed it does not but she will still have to go for the check ups so the stress related to that is going to be there.

I know there has been a lot of improvements and they have followed eachother faster and faster as well. It is just too close to our heart to see the media "rape" a story with such ridiculous science and evidence. It upsets me so I lash out.

Thank you for your reply, It is much appreciated and I wish you and your family well.

Register to Reply
Associate

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 41
Good Answers: 1
#3

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 8:14 AM

I believe that IF funds have been frozen, a big reason why they have been frozen--that is frozen in the US--is because of the Bush administration setting in place a huge roadblock to cancer research advancement and that is the halting of funding for embryonic stem cell research. However advances are being made in that field that sidestep the current legistration such as

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/23/science/23cnd-stem.html

Which describes how stem cells have been duplicated without destroying embryos.

Another advancement that is extremely helpful is the use of nanoparticles that target only mestastic cells and have a high success rate.

http://news.med.cornell.edu/wcmc/wcmc_2005/03_16b_05.shtml

I also read an article in the past month or so that stated they had found some sort of protein/hormone that is absent in patients that have prolonged cancer, I forget the name of the protein/hormone currently, but they took the similiar gene that causes the production of this protein/hormone that occurs in mice, and introduced the protein/hormone into the mice and the cancerous cells disapeared. It sounded a highly uninvasive method that had few side effects with very promising results.

So, unless there is some large anonymous funds donor, I find it hard to believe that if funds have completely frozen from the government since 2003, that these types of advancements are still being made. As for cancer, advancements ARE being made, and I believe cancer treatment is becoming less harsh, with a slowly declining death rate percentage. Slow, but deffinitely present.

__________________
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Retired Engineers / Mentors - New Member

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Brecksville, OH
Posts: 1604
Good Answers: 18
#4
In reply to #3

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 12:43 PM

Recently saw a news release on the Internet indicating that there may shortly not be a need for embryonic stem cells. The news release was aimed at having women donate their placenta directly after delivery of the baby. It suggested there were far more stem cells available there than from the embryos.


I share the concern of the one poster who has had numerous family members pass away from the disease. I have had several close relatives succumb to cancer also. My son-in-law has been involved as a cancer researcher for several years and I like to discuss the subject with him for the sake of my knowledge base. It seems that much is known, but there are so many mechanisms involved whereby cancers can occur and grow that the task is ominous. From my perspective, I believe cancer to be genetic in many cases, especially since cell reproduction seems to become less accurate as we age. I suspect some cancers even come about because of the inaccuracies in cell reproduction, in spite of the many different checks and balances built into the system.

__________________
"Consensus Science got us into this mess, then why can't it get us out?" : Rephrase of Will Rogers Comment
Register to Reply
Associate

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 41
Good Answers: 1
#6

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 2:23 PM

Although there is proof behind cancer being genetic, it has also been shown that cancer cells are generated when a defect happens in the replication, and a lot of times this is either because of foreign chemical introduction, bombardment from the various types of wave radiation that is all around us, or lack of a certain chemical/protein/hormone that induce the production of cancer cells.

Catch falls in our body are made to protect ourselves from defective replications. Defects only pass through at the most at 1 in several million cell reproductions--usually tens of billions, and for those single defects that often occur in sections of our genes that do not affect our lives (well over 50% of our genetic material) the ability to create cancerous cells with those odds is small, so many researchers believe that certain chemicals mixed with excess energy from the waves that surround us has been the big culprit behind the "cause" of cancer.

Although certain types of cancer are prevalent in various families,these are typically specific types of cancer, not cancer as a whole. For example, prostate cancer may be prevailent in your family but no one in your family has ever had a brain tumor, or breast cancer. But all the same it is still just prevalent, not imminent. There have been countless cases where only the grandmother will have breast cancer, and maybe one other relative will also have it. Keep in mind that sometimes your cousins, or other relatives that have cancer also have various genes and odds that they had to be the one in their family. there are many sides of probability involved in genetics, not necessarily genetic inheritance. genetic inheritance affects the odds that you have, but does not determine whether or not you will get cancer.

Cancer as a whole is not from genetic inheritance, but rather from polution, (environmental and wave radiations) substance abuse by the individual and on a corporate level, and general lack of maintainance of our bodies. The way you take care of yourself will certainly affect whether you will be diagnosed with cancer.

Sorry for the bluntness of my post to any of you that have someone affected by cancer in your family and may have become upset at my post.

__________________
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1818
Good Answers: 7
#7
In reply to #6

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 2:34 PM

Thank you for your post biggjoshie,

I would like to ask you how do you take care of yourself?

Before reading on I would like to ask you to think about that in earnest.

In a world where everything is wrapped in plastic, where mobile phone masts are emitting radio waves, where electricity pylons emit magnetic waves, where governments make legislation affecting your wellbeing, where gasses are pumped into the atmosphere by industry, where...........................................................................................................................

you seem to have very little to say about what you are surrounded by.

In one sentence you state the influences around you as a major cause of cancer but you then follow through with making a statement that almost sounds like an accusation to the individual concerned.

I don't get that myself. Cancer is now so prevalent that every person alive at least knows somebody who had cancer. Most know somebody that died from it. Can you put your hand on your heart and tell us that you really believe what you just said?

Register to Reply
Associate

Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 41
Good Answers: 1
#8
In reply to #7

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 3:22 PM

Certainly, I mean we are surrounded by all these toxic un niceties and the amounts are steadily rising. Why do you think there are so many more cases of cancer, and different kinds of cancer. I am sorry if my words made you think that the individual is at fault here,it was deffinitely not my aim to target cancer patients and put them at fault. I am saying there are cerainly things that can be done by the individual that help to lower the odds of getting cancer throughout our lives, from maintaining a healthy diet to lowering one's personal contribution to pollution, through cutting down on buying unneeded consumer items-to walking 20 minutes to work every day rather than drive your car to help lower congestion and pollution. but here I digress because there are countless things that can be done to try to better our surroundings, and I try to stay away from the treehugger attitude when talking about cancer. However these things would not hinder any better global health.

I guess my main point was much too subtle, and that instead I should have said that polution of any kind is not helping your chacnes of avoiding cancer. The second point I intended to convey was that the individual does have some say throughout their lives to help prevent cancer from invading their bodies.

__________________
"Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." Albert Einstein
Register to Reply
Guru

Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 1818
Good Answers: 7
#9
In reply to #8

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/04/2007 3:30 PM

Ok, that is much better balanced and sounds quite acceptable to me. I am sorry to have "hacked" on that point but it worries me sometimes how elementary aspects of statements are glossed over.

I understand you now and I fully agree. Our environment does not help a lot but we can still do a lot towards helping ourselves with regards to cancer and indeed other illnesses.

Take care,

Case491

Register to Reply
Guru
Engineering Fields - Construction Engineering - New Member Engineering Fields - Civil Engineering - New Member Hobbies - Fishing - New Member Hobbies - Target Shooting - New Member Hobbies - Hunting - New Member Popular Science - Weaponology - New Member United States - Member - New Member Hobbies - DIY Welding - New Member

Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Latitude 38.701979 Longitude -90.439540 Coordinates 38.701979, -90.439540 N38°42.11874, W090°26.3724
Posts: 669
Good Answers: 15
#10
In reply to #9

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/05/2007 8:47 AM

I agree with how we take care of ourselves & our environment having a lot to do with the particular Cancer we have.

I for the most part take care of my body. Other than my drinking of alcohol I try not to put any more poisons into my body than I can help. I eat as healthy as I can. Lots of Fresh Fruits & Veggies maybe to much red meat. But for the most part healthy stuff. But I still have to deal with the disease.

My brother who passed at the age of 30 was what I considered oner of the Healthiest people I've ever met. Till he got Cancer.

He never drank alcohol or smoked. Played so many sports that we never saw him except when he came home to eat, take a shower or sleep. He didn't even have the body shape of our family. We are all tall skinny bean poles. He was tall and all muscle as wide as he was tall. So either the environment or genetics caused his cancer.

My father smoked & drank since he was a teenager in the army. And died with his favorite pipe in one hand and a beer in the other. He Had lung, prostrate, and colon cancer. His cancers probably came from the way he treated his body.

__________________
scotchdrnkr
Register to Reply
Anonymous Poster
#13
In reply to #6

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

09/26/2009 11:20 PM

anti cancer pharmaceutical intermediates

whsrtech@yahoo.com.cn

Name
4-AA
4-BMA
Abamectin
AZD6244
Acarbose
Acebutolol
Acetazolamide
Acetylcorynoline
ACETYLDIGITOXIN
Acetylferrocene
Acetylkidamycin
aciclovir sodium
Acifran
Acipimox
Acteoside
Aclarubicin
Acyclovir
Acitretin
Adefovir
Adrenaline
Adriamycin
Adenine
Alfacalcidol
Alanosine
Alarelin Acetate
Albaconazol
alendronate Sodium
Alfuzosin HCL
Algestone acetophenide
Alibendol
Aliskiren
Ambroxol
Amifloxacin
Amikacin
Amiloride Hcl
Aminoglutethimide
Amisulpride
Amlexanox
Amlodipine
Amorolfine
Amsacrine
Amtolmetin guacil
Anastrozole
Ascomycin
Atracurium Besylate
Aprepitant
Agomelatine
Abacavir
Adapalene
Arbidol HCL
Argatroban
Aspoxicillin
Atosiban
Atoraquone
 Atomoxetine
Axitinib
BI-2536
balofloxacin
beta-Methyl vinyl phosphate (MAP)
Betaxlol
BENDAMUSTIN HCL
Benfotiamine
Benidipine
Betamethasone-17-valerate
Bexarotene
Bicalutamide
Biapenem
Bimatoprost
Blonanserin(AD-5423,Lonasen)
Brivanib Alaninate
Brinzolamide
Bortezomib
Bosutinib
Bosentan
Capecitabine
Canertinib Dihydrochloride
Canertinib
Calcipotriol
Calcium levofolinate
Cediranib
Captopril
CP-547632
Cilnidipine
Cisatracurium besylate
Ciclosporin A
cisplatin
Ciclesonide
Cladribine
Clopidogre
Colesevelam HCl
C22H17Br
Cytidine
Cytarabine
CHLOROQUINE DIPHOSPHATE
CONJUGATED ESTROGENS
Cryptotanshinone
Darunavir
Darifenacin Hydrobromide
Daptomycin
Dasatinib(TINIBS)
Daunorubicin hydrochloride(BICINS)
Decitabine
Didanosine
Dipyridamole
Dmxaa(as-1404,5,6-MeXAA,NSC-640488)
Dofetilide
Docetaxel(other anti-cancers)
Drospirenone
Doramapimod
Doripenem
DOXORUBICIN HYDROCHLORIDE
Doxcetaxe.trihydrate
Doxercalciferol
Doxorubicin HCl(BICINS)
Domiphen Bromide
Domperidone
Demecanium Bromide
Dutasteride
Dovitinib
Dydrogesterone
2-(2-(Dimethylaminomethyl-4-thiazol)methylthio)ethylamine
Escitalopram oxalate
Echotiopate Iodide
Eberconazole Nitrate
Entecavir
Epirubicin HCl(BICINS)
Ezetimide
Esomeprazole
Escitalopram oxalate
Eprosartan mesylate
Epirubicin HCL
Eplerenone
Eletriptan
Efavirenz
Etoricoxib
EVEROLIMUS
Erlotinib HCl(TINIBS)
Faluopeinanna
Fesoterodine Fumarate
Febuxostat
 Fenofibrate
Flavopiridol
Florfenicol
Fluoxetine HCL
Flunixin meglumine
Fludarabine(TABINS)
Fulvstrant
Finasteride
Frovtriptan
Griseofulvin
Gefitinib(TINIBS)
Gemcitabine HCl(TABINES)
Glabridin
Glimepirde
Glipizide
Glatiramer Acetate
Gestodene
Ibudilast
Ifosfamide
Iloperidone (ILO-522,HP-873,Zonaril)
isotretionoin
isoliquiritigenin
isoliquiritin
Itraconazole
Imatinib
Indomethacin
Idarubicin HCL(BICINS)
Imatinib mesylate(TINIBS )
Imiquimod
Ixabepilone
Imipenem
intermediate for cilastatin
Irinotecan(TECANS)
Isotretinoin
Ibutilide Fumarate
Ivabradine hydrochloride
Ketanserin Tartrate
Lamivudine
Landiolol hydrochloride
Liquiritigenin
Liquiritin
Lapatinib(TINIBS)
Letrozole
Lestaurtinib
Leucovorin calcium
Lenalidomide(other anti-cancers)
Linezolid
Lumiracoxib
Lopinavir
Masitinib
Maraviroc
Mephedrone
Mecobalamin
Meropenem
8-METHOXYPSORALEN
Methotrexate
Mesna
Methylprednisolone Aceponate
Minoxidil
Mizoribine
Miltefosine
Mitoxantrone HCL
Mitoxantrone
Motesanib Diphosphate
Morpholin-3-one
Moguisteine
Moxifloxacin
Mubritinib
Montelukast Sodium
Nateglinide
Naloxone Hydrochloride
Naltrexone HCl
Nicarbazin
Nebivolol hydrochloride
 Nelfinavir mesylate
Nelarabine
Neratinib
Nelfinavir nesylate
 Nevirapine
Norethisterone Enanthate
Nilotinib(TINIBS )
Nilutamide(other anti-cancers)
Norgestimate
Nizatidine
Oxiracetam
Oxaliplatin
Ozagrel
Oxomenazine
Oxcarbazepine
Ornoprostil
Olanzapine
Palonosetron Hydrochloride
Panobinostat
Pazopanib
Paclitaxel(other anti-cancers)
Paliperidone
Parecoxib sodium
Patchouli alcohol
Pemetrexed disodium
Pimavanserin
pimecrolimus
Pirarubicin(BICINS)
Pizotifen malate
Pioglitazone HCl
Polymyxin B sulphate
posaconazole
Prasugel
Pramipexole
Protected Meropenem 
raltegravir
raltegravir Salt
Rizatriptan Benzoate
Ritanserin
Rivastigmine Hydrogen Tartrate
Ranolazine
Rapamycin
Resveratrol
Retigabine
Ritonavir
Rivastigmine Tartrate
Riluzole
Rocuronium Bromide
Rosuvastatin Calcium
Rasagiline nesylate
Risperidone
Rupatadine
Rufinamide
Rosiglitazone
Rotigotine
Salmeterol Xinafoate
Saracatinib
Sevelamer Hydrochloride
sitagliptin phosphate monohydrate
Solifenacin succinate
Sorafenib Tosylate(TINIBS)
Sunitinib malate(TINIBS)
Streptozocin
Strontium Ranelate
Tamibarotene
Taltirelin
Tanshinone II A
Tamibarotene
Tacrolimus
Tandutinib(TINIBS)
Temozolomide
Telicoplanin
Terzosin HCL
Tigecycline
Tadalafil
TOLMETIN SODIUM
Topotecan Hydrochloride(TECANS)
Tolterodine tartrate
Tioconazole
 Tiotropium Bromide
Tilmicosin
Toltrazuril
Tirofiban HCL
Triptorelin acetate
Trimethoprim
TRIAMCINOLONE ACETONIDE
Timolol Maleate Acid
Tirapazamine
Tretinoin
Vandetanib
Varenicline tartrate
Valsartan
Verapamil HCl
Vinflunine Tartrate
Vinorelbine (BICINS )
vinorelbine tartrate
Vildagliptin
VX-680
VX-950
Valrubicin
Voglibose
Zoledronic
Zolmitriptan
Zilpaterol HCL
Ziconotide
Zidovudine
Register to Reply Off Topic (Score 5)
Guru

Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Germany 49° 26' N, 7° 46' O
Posts: 1950
Good Answers: 109
#11

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/05/2007 3:34 PM

Hi to all,

cancer is not a single illness but more that 1200 different illnesses!

And any one of these in the course of progressing disease is developing in an unpredictable manner that is judged on a statistical basis or - if better medical support is existing - is judged on the basis of biomedical markers and chromosomal analysis. But nobody can precict which course the illness will take.

The farther the chromosomes have developed away from the healthy set of code the worse the outlook.

You are right that progress of development of new meds is much too slow.

To blame is the FDA and similar other government instititions in other countries.

Also for treatment of final illnesses as cancer in late stages when conventional established therapy is no longer giving results, in this desperate situation the doctors are not allowed to use new an unproven meds but have to wait for years and 200 to 300million $ spent for evaluation of safety of use: it is necessary to prove that these new meds do no harm to the patients.

This is ridiculous but established policy. The patients are in desperate need for saving their lives and the meds are tested if safe to anybody!

See for the story of "Provenge" this year.

Worse than this is the stora of USPIO (search for Barentsz in Nijmwegen in Holland),

this new imaging method can detect metastasis of prostate cancer (may be others too) as small as 2mm, where conventional methods are limited to 8mm (30times the volume!), so very often too late. There was an experimental trial in the US that was suspended by the FDA because there was 1 unexpected death during his imaging. This imaging is done by ultrafine magnetic particles that attach to the cancer cells. 1 unexpected and unexplained death is very bad but what about the lives that are not saved because metastatic disease has spread to many other sites because accepted diagnostic tools are so inferior?

So the best you can do is to intensify pressure on government officials to change this practice!

And if you hav some venture capital to invest then go to immvarx.com

And don't believe too much to public rumor: there is a warning to stay away from sunlight because too severe exposure is triggering maligneous melanoma , the black skin cancer, very, very dangerous.

But enough sunlight will cause enough synthesis of vitamine D3 and this will prevent nearly 50% of cancers of most of our inner organs. See LEF.org for compiled experience, search pubmed.gov for any information you need, use quosa.com to organise this search and you will know more than most docs.

And don't forget to put pressure on your government!

RHABE

Register to Reply
Power-User

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Near Rochester, New York
Posts: 157
Good Answers: 2
#12

Re: Cancer Research - Advances or Not?

12/07/2007 9:12 AM

case491:

About 30,000 American men die of prostate cancer each year. About 600 will die this week. The good news is that, for future years, almost all of them could be saved by taking the correct action starting now. The technology exists, but the will-to-win doesn't. Here's how it COULD be:

1) Beginning at age 40, or earlier if there's a family history, all men could be effectively screened, using PSA and DRE's (Digital Rectal Exams), for early cancer.

2) Suspicious results could be followed up with biopsies and appropriate scans.

3) Diagnosis could be followed by immediate surgery or radiation to remove or destroy the tumor(s) before they metastasize, resulting in a cure.

That's how it COULD be, and almost all of the 30,000 lives per year would be saved. Here's how it really IS:

1) "Experts" bicker endlessly about recommending general screening because of cost, possible false positives, and questions as to whether it really extends life (more on that later).

2) Once diagnosed, patients are advised that there is really no need to rush into the risks and side effects of treatment because there is "no proven survival benefit" for early treatment (WRONG!!!). "Watchful Waiting" and other euphemistic terms entice patients to indulge in a particularly dangerous form of Russian Roulette in order to continue the good life for a few more months or years. Meanwhile the cancer is growing in size and aggressiveness and, at some moment, will metastasize and the battle will be lost.

Why is there this "disconnect" between what could be and what is? Several reasons. One of them is obvious from the foregoing material. If you take the trouble to find the cancer early, then do nothing until it's too late, is it surprising that survival statistics don't show a clear benefit for early screening? That's normal practice.

There's too much more to this to include here, but one major root cause is the perception in the medical world that prostate cancer is very slow growing and probably won't kill you...... but they aren't mathematicians or statisticians. They proceed as though it's true of ALL patients. For most patients, in the beginning, it is true, but those 30,000 people aren't being killed by an indolent, passive disease. They are dying in pain from an aggressive cancer that can double as frequently as every 10 days and can mutate to defeat any known treatment.

There's enough more to this story to fill a book, but I tried that and found that few people turn to an engineer for cancer information.

Best Regards.

DickL

Register to Reply
Register to Reply 13 comments
Interested in this topic? By joining CR4 you can "subscribe" to
this discussion and receive notification when new comments are added.
Copy to Clipboard

Users who posted comments:

agua_doc (1); Anonymous Poster (1); biggjoshie (3); case491 (3); DickL (1); Kilowatt0 (1); RHABE (1); scotchdrnkr (2)

Previous in Forum: Non-Lethal Is Now Ok, What Is Going On?   Next in Forum: Non invasive sensor for hydraulic lines

Advertisement