|
|
 |
| [Apr 20, 2012, 09:18 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
For some reason I thought all the recent Titanic hype was leading to the 100th anniversary of the ocean liner's sinking today, but I wasn't paying enough attention, as this was actually on the 15th. This shows how much less obsessed with this I am than about anyone else in the world, because I didn't really need to hear any more about this in the first place. Maybe the centennial will finally put the story to watery rest. Today is still a commemoration of course, as 4/20 is like stoner Christmas, but if there's anything that gets more than its share of exposure all year round, it's the use of 420 in gamertags etc, so maybe we can just sink that reference while we're at it?
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 26. |
Re: Out of the Blue |
Apr 21, 2012, 02:21 |
zirik |
|
|
Dades wrote on Apr 21, 2012, 01:05:
You can't just throw money at everything to solve it, some things are just that complex. You talk about cancer as if it was a simple ailment cured through enough mindshare and money. Cancer isn't just one thing, it's a broad range of malignant cell growth issues that span several different diseases. It has numerous causes and attacks many different organs in the body, it is a very complex thing to simply cure when we don't even fully understand everything about it yet. Do some research about it because you are incredibly uninformed.
you must have missed my original post. my mother died of metastatic cancer. we tried everything from chemo to radiation including the latest version of the gamma knife (called cyber knife in the east coast). went from one privately funded clinical study to another. doctors told us to try one drug after another with no effect. in the end we found a doctor in the west coast who has the highest survival rate even for stage 4 cancer. but my mother died before we could start the procedure. the very successful technique is not approved by the FDA or insurance companies. it is a very expensive procedure. which is why most of his patients are medical doctors and CEOs of large companies. so whats the controversial treatment? it involves cancerous tissue taken from the patient and growing it in the lab to test with various cancer drugs. the one that works best is given to the patient. all that came from one doctor who did not have billions of dollars and 75 years to develop. yet he came up with a very effective way of treating cancer. its so simple and obvious but no insurance company will cover the cost of the procedure. the recent study suggesting that there are 10 different types of breast cancer is a good reason for the aforementioned technique to become standard because a majority of oncologists simply shoot in the dark with their drug of choice and hope for the best. tell me again why money cant treat the disease because i am incredibly uninformed.
This comment was edited on Apr 21, 2012, 04:44. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.
Twitter 
