This forum post is hidden because you have chosen to ignore mbillingsley. Show Details
This forum post is hidden because you have submitted an abuse report against it. Show Details
In this post I'm slightly paraphrasing the Independent story pasted below.. In the 1970s there was a US National Cancer Act which was widely perceived as a "war on cancer" and it was believed that a cure for cancer would be found within five years. (as if it was so simple) It was perhaps naively thought that man had landed on the moon, and it was only a matter of time before we stamped out cancer altogether.
However, 40 years later, one cure for cancer is highly unlikely and there are now 200 types of cancer. We are seeing more cases of cancer but is this down to better diagnosis and management of the disease?
Umberto Veronesi, a veteran oncologist and a former Italian health minister said perhaps a distinction needs to be made betweeb two types of war on cancer: one focused on a cure for patients and the other based on the elimination of the disease.
Also, we have had the Stand Up To Cancer movement in the UK have their own charity night on Channel 4. I see that this is a charity which began in the US (hence stars such as Larry David, Jennifer Aniston) lending their support. Again, their aim is to find a cure to all cancers, and to encourage people to donate their money which will go towards research.I'm not an oncologist but cancer seems a very complicated thing and might be related to a whole range of factors: genes, lifestyle, diet, environment. We might be able to find cures for cancer but will we ever be able to completeley eliminate it? What do you think? I realise this is a bit of future-gazing, but do you think that anything is possible or do we need to accept cancer is something which is part of life?