Linked by Thom Holwerda on Thu 6th Oct 2011 00:02 UTC
Apple On its website, Apple has just confirmed that its co-founder and former CEO, Steve Jobs, has passed away at age 56. After bringing the company back from the brink of bankruptcy and turning it into one of the world's most succesful technology companies, Jobs lost the battle with pancreatic cancer.
Thread beginning with comment 492128
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: I'm angry
by Morgan on Thu 6th Oct 2011 11:06 UTC in reply to "RE: I'm angry"
Morgan
Member since:
2005-06-29

Cancer will be never be cured completely, sad but true.


I hope you're wrong about that. Unfortunately, the future is not much brighter than it was 20 years ago.

Cancer is basically when your own cells start to attack your own body, thereby completely ignored by your own immune system.


This isn't entirely true. Take it from someone who has survived cancer; my immune system went batshit-crazy throughout the ordeal. One of the ways my oncologist measured the status of treatment was my white blood cell count.

Those rogue cells can be created at any time, but some products can increase the chance of the creation of such cells (chemicals, radiation, cigarettes).


I don't disagree with you about external accelerators, but let's face it: Cancer has been around since complex living beings first started roaming the earth. We will be dealing with it for as long as humans exist. Not to mention, pretty much any animal is susceptible.

But even without those products, there is chance that your body makes a mistake and creates cancer cells, and that chance only increases when we get older.


I wouldn't be surprised if the "cure" for cancer also turned out to greatly increase longevity.

Cancer is part of life, and it's nature's way to make sure that everything that lives, will eventually die...


Well if we never died physically I'm pretty sure our minds would eventually go insane. I think the current average lifespan is a bit shorter than it should be though; many people (like Jobs, though age had little to do with his death) die at the pinnacle of their achievements, and so many times you hear the sentiment "I hope I live long enough to ________ ".

Then again, the longer we live (especially if we remain virile in later years) the more overpopulated the planet becomes. It's a precarious balance and I fear we are tipping the scales in a negative direction. Of course, the last thing I want to see is a morally bankrupt solution like eugenics, forced sterilization, artificial limits on childbearing, and so on. I just hope we can find a way to sustain the human race while simultaneously finding ways to live longer and healthier lives.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[3]: I'm angry
by mistersoft on Thu 6th Oct 2011 12:40 in reply to "RE[2]: I'm angry"
mistersoft Member since:
2011-01-05

Also, to agree with Morgan - and I think anyone that has worked in cell cycle or cancer research or developmental biology or aging research will probably agree with the following. While there probably are 'cures' for certain cancers -many would simply have to be patient specific and require tailored gene therapies and or involve cell specific targeting etc that is mostly still tantalisingly out of reach (just) - if we can target recurrent cancers(and very probably cancers of various different types too in very elderly patients)then greatly increased longevity probably will be a side effect

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[3]: I'm angry
by Neolander on Thu 6th Oct 2011 13:17 in reply to "RE[2]: I'm angry"
Neolander Member since:
2010-03-08

Nice post ! Just about this...

I wouldn't be surprised if the "cure" for cancer also turned out to greatly increase longevity.

To the best of my knowledge, dying from "old age" is nowadays essentially about cardiac problems and cancers, so a cure for the main cancers, coupled with cheaper artificial hearts, would certainly improve longevity much.

Now, as you mention, there's life expectancy and healthy life expectancy... If we can keep the body alive but cannot do something against, say, brain ageing, what we'll get in the end is 120 years old living deads who cannot move, eat, or remember their names by themselves. What would be the point ?

Edited 2011-10-06 13:18 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[4]: I'm angry
by smashIt on Fri 7th Oct 2011 11:01 in reply to "RE[3]: I'm angry"
smashIt Member since:
2005-07-06

Now, as you mention, there's life expectancy and healthy life expectancy... If we can keep the body alive but cannot do something against, say, brain ageing, what we'll get in the end is 120 years old living deads who cannot move, eat, or remember their names by themselves. What would be the point ?


the point is that these living deads are worth their weight in gold
at least for the pharmaceutical industry

Reply Parent Score: 2