4 ms·

The book "The Emperor of all Maladies" doesn't put it in those exact terms, but makes it clear that essentially the same is true of cancer. Cancer is a symptom

The book "The Emperor of all Maladies" doesn't put it in those exact terms, but makes it clear that essentially the same is true of cancer. Cancer is a symptom of many kinds of health problems, not a single disease that responds to a single treatment. If we understood bleeding as poorly as we understood cancer, then everything from R&D for better bandages to public campaigns to reduce gun violence would be lumped together as "treatment for bleeding."

astazangasta 8y ago
There is a difference, that cancer has a biological cause (a genetic lesion). "Mental illness", e.g. schizophrenia, has no such origin in a bodily abnormality.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- amanaplanacanal 8y ago
  What? How do you know that? That doesn't seem like something you can say is known.
  - astazangasta 8y ago
    How about, "after decades of searching using all of the best available tools, none has been found".
    - amanaplanacanal 8y ago
      We know that some mental illnesses have a genetic component. How would that happen if there were not something physical? Just because we don't know now, doesn't mean we will never know. That's how science works.
      - astazangasta 8y ago
        I'm obviously not rejecting materialism, I'm merely attempting to distinguish between "mental" and "physical", i.e., the cause of your 'mental illness' is "nutrient deficiency" vs. "your wife left you". If, on balance, people experience mental distress when they experience extreme emotional turmoil without any significant accompanying physical event, we can't posit a physical cause and therefore shouldn't seek a purely physical solution (drugs). People have 'mental illness' because of mental problems, not physical problems. Also: everything has some genetic component, this is trivially true. Genetics are what separates humans from dogs and plants. It doesn't necessarily help us to explain the phenomenon adequately. Also also: another way science works is its inability to prove negatives. Therefore, saying, "someday we might discover this" can be said for pretty much anything that remains unproven.
        amanaplanacanal 8y ago
        I suspect I don't understand exactly what you are distinguishing here. If your identical twin has schizophrenia, there is a 48% chance that you will have it too. This is compared to the chance of the general population, which is something like 1%. This feels like something is physically wrong in those who are schizophrenic. I don't know how else you would get that kind of result.
        astazangasta 8y ago
        Yes, twin studies have often been trumpeted to demonstrate that schizophrenia has a strong genetic basis. However, we've yet to find any actual genetic variation strongly associated with schizophrenia, which, with such a high rate of concordance, should be a snap. Twin studies themselves are suspect in a number of ways - the assumption of environmental equivalence between twins and the general population is suspect, for example. Fraternal twins also show higher concordance than siblings, even though their genetics should be the same.
drablyechoes 8y ago
The real difference is that a cancer diagnosis is probative (based on measurable, detectable underlying physical pathology) whereas a psychiatric diagnosis is not.
GuB-42 8y ago
Cancer is a class of well identified diseases. Like a bacterial infection. There are many types of cancer just like there are many types of bacterial infection. But they are both well identified. We can see the cancer cells and bacteria, and when they are gone, the patient is cured. Mental illnesses are more like the "flu-like syndrome". The causes can range from leukemia to heroin withdrawal to a wide variety of viral infections like AIDS, the common cold, and of course, the flu. You can treat the symptoms with Tylenol but we can't really call that a disease, more like the symptoms of a yet undiscovered disease.
- new12345 8y ago
  Cancer is no where close to "well identified disease". Bacterial infection is one as we understand what causes it and that's why we have been successfully able to bring down the number of bacterial infection cases by educating folks on how and what to avoid. Its not the case for cancer(or we intentionally ignoring the cause here) whose numbers are rapidly increasing every year.
  - GuB-42 8y ago
    We have a pretty good idea of what causes cancer, and unfortunately, time and random chance are the biggest factors. You can lower the odds by following some recommendations but unless something else kills you first (probably your heart), you will get it eventually. Also, once it's there, we know it's there, and we know exactly how to cure it: destroy all the cancer cells. The hard part is doing it without killing you in the process, and making sure that not a single cell is left in the end.

astazangasta 8y ago

There is a difference, that cancer has a biological cause (a genetic lesion). "Mental illness", e.g. schizophrenia, has no such origin in a bodily abnormality.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
amanaplanacanal 8y ago
What? How do you know that? That doesn't seem like something you can say is known.
- astazangasta 8y ago
  How about, "after decades of searching using all of the best available tools, none has been found".
  - amanaplanacanal 8y ago
    We know that some mental illnesses have a genetic component. How would that happen if there were not something physical? Just because we don't know now, doesn't mean we will never know. That's how science works.
    - astazangasta 8y ago
      I'm obviously not rejecting materialism, I'm merely attempting to distinguish between "mental" and "physical", i.e., the cause of your 'mental illness' is "nutrient deficiency" vs. "your wife left you". If, on balance, people experience mental distress when they experience extreme emotional turmoil without any significant accompanying physical event, we can't posit a physical cause and therefore shouldn't seek a purely physical solution (drugs). People have 'mental illness' because of mental problems, not physical problems. Also: everything has some genetic component, this is trivially true. Genetics are what separates humans from dogs and plants. It doesn't necessarily help us to explain the phenomenon adequately. Also also: another way science works is its inability to prove negatives. Therefore, saying, "someday we might discover this" can be said for pretty much anything that remains unproven.
      - amanaplanacanal 8y ago
        I suspect I don't understand exactly what you are distinguishing here. If your identical twin has schizophrenia, there is a 48% chance that you will have it too. This is compared to the chance of the general population, which is something like 1%. This feels like something is physically wrong in those who are schizophrenic. I don't know how else you would get that kind of result.
        astazangasta 8y ago
        Yes, twin studies have often been trumpeted to demonstrate that schizophrenia has a strong genetic basis. However, we've yet to find any actual genetic variation strongly associated with schizophrenia, which, with such a high rate of concordance, should be a snap. Twin studies themselves are suspect in a number of ways - the assumption of environmental equivalence between twins and the general population is suspect, for example. Fraternal twins also show higher concordance than siblings, even though their genetics should be the same.

drablyechoes 8y ago

The real difference is that a cancer diagnosis is probative (based on measurable, detectable underlying physical pathology) whereas a psychiatric diagnosis is not.

GuB-42 8y ago

Cancer is a class of well identified diseases. Like a bacterial infection. There are many types of cancer just like there are many types of bacterial infection. But they are both well identified. We can see the cancer cells and bacteria, and when they are gone, the patient is cured. Mental illnesses are more like the "flu-like syndrome". The causes can range from leukemia to heroin withdrawal to a wide variety of viral infections like AIDS, the common cold, and of course, the flu. You can treat the symptoms with Tylenol but we can't really call that a disease, more like the symptoms of a yet undiscovered disease.

new12345 8y ago
Cancer is no where close to "well identified disease". Bacterial infection is one as we understand what causes it and that's why we have been successfully able to bring down the number of bacterial infection cases by educating folks on how and what to avoid. Its not the case for cancer(or we intentionally ignoring the cause here) whose numbers are rapidly increasing every year.
- GuB-42 8y ago
  We have a pretty good idea of what causes cancer, and unfortunately, time and random chance are the biggest factors. You can lower the odds by following some recommendations but unless something else kills you first (probably your heart), you will get it eventually. Also, once it's there, we know it's there, and we know exactly how to cure it: destroy all the cancer cells. The hard part is doing it without killing you in the process, and making sure that not a single cell is left in the end.