Bill Gates world's richest man - again

This is simply not true. The vast majority of improvement in cancer survival is related to (earlier) detection through population screening. You don't want to know the $/life_year cost.

 

You need a cure when they discover you have it regardless of the stage.

Many are told there is no cure, chemo, radiation, drugs, side effects and a shortened lifespan.

 

Here is India from the site you provided -- Population over time. Note that it does not include migration.

 

Is the Indian Birth Rate a Gates Foundation priority. It just seems like throwing good money at bad. China implemented the One child law. Maybe that is government responsibility. Like to see Gates Re evaluate his foundation goals every 5 years

 

Yes, but the point is that cures are not improving at anything worth talking about despite all the money that is poured into cancer research. As I said, the improvement in survival to date is from earlier detection.

Here is one example, just to give you a flavor of how expensive it is to prolong life with cancer (in this case RCC of the kidney):

From Economic Evaluation of First-Line Treatments for Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis in A Health Resource–Limited Setting

You want affordable, effective cancer healthcare ? Tax the lifestyles that cause it.

 

Whoa, we have switched the terms. I never said population went down with improved health care (because they don't necessarily). I said RATES ("a reduction in population growth") went down. This is a necessary mathematical reality that must occur prior to population leveling off and then going down.

 

Sage if your saying that the cure for cancer is early detection than your deeply flawed.

If Gates can invest in early detection sure, but treatment improvement is needed. Radiation treatment shrinks the tumor but leaves the heart so weakened that life Span and quality of life is reduced. That is not a cure.

 

Yes, I know. I showed that graph as an example of fairly linear population increase, despite urban and foreign migration.

 

Gates Foundation. My message. Cure Cancer!

 

No. Saving lives is the priority.

They do it constantly, not every five years. The funding commitments necessary have to be for long enough to see if they are working or not.

 

Maybe cancer victims can move to India so Mrs. Gates notices them!

 

Nah, I am saying that the best cure for cancer is prevention. I mentioned early detection only to point out how miserable the actual progress in treating cancer has been once you normalize for stage and grade. Although without a doubt earl(ier) detection is a vastly smarter and cost effective strategy than improvements in cancer therapy per se. Lymphoma and some Leukemias are exceptions, but they are only a small fraction of cancer in adults.

Rarely is the heart affected by radiation therapy. Perhaps you are thinking of anthracyline therapies ?

I should perhaps mention that I am a physician with board certification in Internal Medicine and Pathology.

 

OK. Just to be clear, We have a severe population problem and measures should be taken to alleviate this problem. One of the non-intuitive lessons of the past few decades has been improving the health care of a population has consistently resulted in a birth rate decline. I did not really believe it till I looked first hand....then I understood. I'm glad I was mistaken. We have nothing to fear and good reasons to continue down this path of getting rid of children dying needlessly.

 

I recall numerous conversations on radiation treatment on breast cancer will weaken the heart. PArt of the decision process of treatment.

Doctors support medical research. Not following you logic.

Charles Duell had a flawed opinion of research.

 

Man, how I wish it was that simple. I think you are ascribing to infant mortality what is much more due to urban migration.

 

How come Gates gets special criticism for not doing enough for Cancer and every other billionaire in the world gets a free pass? (e.g. The Walton clan that is doing so well?)

 

(Humor, but factual humor). The same effect applies to the planet as a whole. Is there a urban migration factor in play there?

 

Read this: Breast Cancer Radiation Has Long-Term Heart Effects: Study – WebMD

To put the finding in perspective, for a 50-year-old woman with no pre-existing heart disease risk factors, a dose to the heart of 3 grays would increase the risk of death from ischemic heart disease before age 80 from 1.9 percent to 2.4 percent, Taylor said.

There is no 'weakening.' The data is that over time a 7% increase in risk of CAD is seen per Gray heart irradiation. Compare that to, e.g., the increased CAD risk from obesity, hypertension, or tobacco.

Is that a tautology ?
Doctors (good ones, anyway) advocate for their patients. I was pointing out the public health perspective and trying to disabuse you of the notion that a few more $ thrown at cancer research will eradicate it.

 

Sounds like the Gates Foundation got blown off course in my humble opinion.

Wonder how Balmer spends his charity money?

 

Sage are you saying we have a cure for cancer and no father research Is needed?

That early detection is the holy grail?