> Compared to AIDS, a disease also without a real cure but that has extended survivability by decades this is unacceptable.
AIDS is a single disease, cancer is not. AIDS in fact pretty much causes certain types of cancer, so those are more survivable on account of their incidence decreasing. The same goes for certain types of cancer.
There are a number of cancers that are better treated or prevented today than 40 years ago (like cervical cancer and all the HPV cancers). On the other extreme you have pancreatic cancer.
But overall frankly you don’t know what you’re blabbering about and seem to be conflating political arguments (the book you mention was a thesis about health policy and prevention, it didn’t somehow disprove that we have very treatment advancements today that we did not have 40 years ago) with some very explainable trends in cancer incidence and mortality.
Where’s your contribution to cancer treatment, nerd.
AIDS is a single disease, cancer is not. AIDS in fact pretty much causes certain types of cancer, so those are more survivable on account of their incidence decreasing. The same goes for certain types of cancer.
There are a number of cancers that are better treated or prevented today than 40 years ago (like cervical cancer and all the HPV cancers). On the other extreme you have pancreatic cancer.
But overall frankly you don’t know what you’re blabbering about and seem to be conflating political arguments (the book you mention was a thesis about health policy and prevention, it didn’t somehow disprove that we have very treatment advancements today that we did not have 40 years ago) with some very explainable trends in cancer incidence and mortality.
Where’s your contribution to cancer treatment, nerd.