4 ms·
> It's not possible in a short time frame. This is not true. Cancer is wide, it's not "one thing" but lets talk real world. We have saved millions with hardco
by aaron695 2y ago
> It's not possible in a short time frame.
This is not true. Cancer is wide, it's not "one thing" but lets talk real world.
We have saved millions with hardcore anti-smoking campaigns. I don't agree with them, but they cured millions none the less.
Ozempic will cure millions of cancer if it works, which so far it seems to.
We can and do jump.
If we do as the article warns, be losers and pretend 'cancer' is a mysterious Satan and accept it's fate then we won't.
- gus_massa 2y agoI agree that we can cure somo cancers. But a cure for all cancers is probably impossible.
- inglor_cz 2y agoInterestingly, those mammals that are highly resistant to cancer (such as bats or whales), tend to be resistant against all cancers at once, for decades. Maybe a stronger immune system, such as the bats have - it is really incomparable to humans - can whack cancer cells reliably regardless of their particular genetic signature. Much like it can kill various germs without analyzing their DNA/RNA first.
- metadat 2y agoYou are conflating "curing" with "preventing through abstinence via social means". Both are good, but they're also very different.
- gizmo385 2y ago> We have saved millions with hardcore anti-smoking campaigns. I don't agree with them, but they cured millions none the less. Can you expand on that last bit? Why don’t you agree with them?