It's not quite that dramatic. Globally [1] it's closer to 100x-200x for an early 20 something vs early 70 something. For the US [2] it's 3.4 per 100k at 20-24

It's not quite that dramatic. Globally [1] it's closer to 100x-200x for an early 20 something vs early 70 something. For the US [2] it's 3.4 per 100k at 20-24 years of age, and 659 per 100k at 70-74 years of age (call it 200x). A large number of people 50-70 die of cancer however. For the 60-64 group, the rate spikes to 331 per 100k. 50 to 70 can be high quality years for a person. In response to the parent comment that mentioned solving cancer only adding a few years, the lives to be saved in the 50-70 group is a very potent counter argument for the economic value and considerable high-quality years that can be added rather than dying at eg 55 or 63. [1] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cancer-death-rates-by-age?country=~OWID_WRL https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/cancer-death-rates-by-age... [2] https://rivercountrynews.com/an-update-on-cancer-deaths-in-the-united-states-p10169-293.htm https://rivercountrynews.com/an-update-on-cancer-deaths-in-t...