Cycling and bicycle discussion forums. 
   Click here to join our community Log in to access your Control Panel  


Go Back   > >

Fifty Plus (50+) Share the victories, challenges, successes and special concerns of bicyclists 50 and older. Especially useful for those entering or reentering bicycling.

User Tag List

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 08-26-07, 05:03 PM   #1
Kurt Erlenbach
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kurt Erlenbach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Bikes:
Posts: 2,423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
LiveStrong Presidential Cancer Forum this week

The LiveStrong Presidential Cancer Forums (Fora?) are Monday and Tuesday this week starting at 10:00 a.m. Central each day, with the Dems on Monday and the Republicans on Tuesday. It's billed as "a unique opportunity to the 2008 presidential candidates to go on record with their strategy for fighting cancer, a disease that kills 560,000 Americans every year." The forums will be on MSNBC. I think health care is close to a crisis point in the US, and what happens in the next four years will be very important. We all should be watching.
Kurt Erlenbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-07, 05:59 PM   #2
mandovoodoo
Violin guitar mandolin
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Friendsville, TN, USA
Bikes: Wilier Thor, Fuji Professional, LeMond Wayzata
Posts: 1,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Should be interesting - I missed the one today. Can probably find it on the livestrong site. We just got back from the Livestrong Challenge in Philadelphia. Gianna, my wife, rode the 100. Her first century. She briefly encountered Lance on the road. I saw him talk on stage. Very persuasive and powerful guy. Easy to understand message. He's dead on. The means and methods to cut deeply into cancer (and other health challenges) exist and can easily be extended. We simply need to decide to do that. And the next 4 years can mark a great change in our priorities. We've lost one family member to cancer this year. Another friend has cancer. But in general we do fine because we can afford it. Part of Lance's concern is that those who can't afford it now simply get screwed. That's not right.
mandovoodoo is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-27-07, 10:18 PM   #3
oilman_15106
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 6,900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerlenbach@cfl. View Post
The LiveStrong Presidential Cancer Forums (Fora?) are Monday and Tuesday this week starting at 10:00 a.m. Central each day, with the Dems on Monday and the Republicans on Tuesday. It's billed as "a unique opportunity to the 2008 presidential candidates to go on record with their strategy for fighting cancer, a disease that kills 560,000 Americans every year." The forums will be on MSNBC. I think health care is close to a crisis point in the US, and what happens in the next four years will be very important. We all should be watching.
I did a Cancer Society ride this weekend which got me thinking. Why after 50 years of working on this problem and billions of dollars has so little progress been made in actually curing cancer? I have been reading about new research on cures(Forbes Magazine does a good job reporting this stuff) for at least 20 years but all that seems to happen is better treatments.

Throwing more money at the problem is not the answer unless it is something like a contest where the person that actually cures cancer gets a Billion dollar prize. You have to use private money for the research.

My mother had cancer for almost 50 years and was a OR nurse. She felt that the powers that be did not really want to cure cancer because of all the money in the system both researching and treating it.
oilman_15106 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-29-07, 10:35 AM   #4
Kurt Erlenbach
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
Kurt Erlenbach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Space Coast, Florida
Bikes:
Posts: 2,423
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oilman-

Here's the answer, I think. Cancer is not a single disease. Each organ that becomes cancerous can do so in a different way. The human papilloma virus, for exampe, can cause cells in the cervix to become cancerous, polyps in the colon can become cancerous, and so forth. As a result, it's not like there is a cure for cancer any more than there is a cure for the common cold, since it actually is many different diseases.

That said, once cells experience genetic damage that causes them to grow out of control, the medicine to stop the growth and kill the abnormal cells also differs depeding on the organ involved. Many of the newer medicine you read about are targeted specifically toward cancerous cells; past medicines were aimed at any fast growing cell (whihc explains why cancer paitents lose their hair), but the indiscriminate attack on the body by the medicine can kill the patient as well as the cancer. Figuring out the right dose involves more guesswork than you'd imagine.

Many otherwise normal folks beleive a cure has been found and is being suppresed due to the money involved. I don't beleive that becuase I understand that there is not a single disease called cancer. The money involved in treatment is staggering (my second time through chemo resulted in bills of $10,000 - $12,000 per session, for 13 sessions), but I don't beleive there is a cure yet, although some are close. Childhood leukemia, which used to be a death sentence, is almost always curable now.

Genetic research will ultimately result in a cure or a prevention for most kinds of cancer. That's why stem cell research is so important. I think the President's prohibition against embryonic stem cell research is practially a crime against humanity; the promise presented by this kind of research, not just for cancer but for many serious diseases, is tremendous. Private money, mostly from the drug companies, funds a lot of reserch at present, but the federal governemnt's role is pathetic, in my opinion. The budget for the National Cancer Institute is about $5 billion per year, while we are spending around $10 billion per month in Iraq. Budgets are about priorities.
Kurt Erlenbach is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-07, 09:26 AM   #5
oilman_15106
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2005
Bikes:
Posts: 6,900
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerlenbach@cfl. View Post
Oilman-

Here's the answer, I think. Cancer is not a single disease. Each organ that becomes cancerous can do so in a different way. The human papilloma virus, for exampe, can cause cells in the cervix to become cancerous, polyps in the colon can become cancerous, and so forth. As a result, it's not like there is a cure for cancer any more than there is a cure for the common cold, since it actually is many different diseases.

That said, once cells experience genetic damage that causes them to grow out of control, the medicine to stop the growth and kill the abnormal cells also differs depeding on the organ involved. Many of the newer medicine you read about are targeted specifically toward cancerous cells; past medicines were aimed at any fast growing cell (whihc explains why cancer paitents lose their hair), but the indiscriminate attack on the body by the medicine can kill the patient as well as the cancer. Figuring out the right dose involves more guesswork than you'd imagine.

Many otherwise normal folks beleive a cure has been found and is being suppresed due to the money involved. I don't beleive that becuase I understand that there is not a single disease called cancer. The money involved in treatment is staggering (my second time through chemo resulted in bills of $10,000 - $12,000 per session, for 13 sessions), but I don't beleive there is a cure yet, although some are close. Childhood leukemia, which used to be a death sentence, is almost always curable now.

Genetic research will ultimately result in a cure or a prevention for most kinds of cancer. That's why stem cell research is so important. I think the President's prohibition against embryonic stem cell research is practially a crime against humanity; the promise presented by this kind of research, not just for cancer but for many serious diseases, is tremendous. Private money, mostly from the drug companies, funds a lot of reserch at present, but the federal governemnt's role is pathetic, in my opinion. The budget for the National Cancer Institute is about $5 billion per year, while we are spending around $10 billion per month in Iraq. Budgets are about priorities.

It is really easy to turn this into a cheap shot about if the money would have been spent elsewhere bridges would not have fallen or cancer would be cured. Stem cell research is ongoing. My original contention goes unanswered, after 50 years and billions of dollars, much of it public, why is there no cure or better yet preventive measure.

Call me a black helo guy, but I am convinced that there is so much money in the system that the goal is to keep that system alive as long as possible. It is the same thing as the death tax. The government makes no real revenue when you take in the amount of money they spend to collect it. Yet the accountants, lawyers, planners and such make sure it never goes away.

If I had $50 billion like Bill Gates I would offer a billion or 2 to the first party to prove they can actually cure cancer without killing the patient in the process. Pick your type of cancer to address first. Breast cancer seems to impact alot of women and would be the place to start.
oilman_15106 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-30-07, 09:38 AM   #6
BluesDawg
just keep riding
 
BluesDawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Milledgeville, Georgia
Bikes: 2015 Specialized AWOL Comp frameset (custom build), 2015 Zukas custom road, 2014 Specialized Crave Pro 29, 2003 KHS Milano Tandem, 1986 Nishiki Cadence rigid MTB, 1980ish Fuji S-12S
Posts: 13,275
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 43 Post(s)
I remember way back in my days as a Sociology student studying organizational structure they taught us that at a point in the life of any organization, the majority of its energy turns to the preservation of the organization. It doesn't matter what the original intended purpose of the organization was. It eventually becomes a self preservation machine.
BluesDawg is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:31 PM.