|
|
| Turbonium |
| quote: | Originally posted by StaticFive
Before anyone gets pissed... I'm running ligandfit right now...
I'm only curious to see what other people think concerning this issue.
At the risk of starting a neverending thread, I have to question the moral stipulations involved with finding cures for cancer and protein-based diseases. Most people are of the beleif that throwing a cure at any ailment a human is capable of attaining is a wonderful thing. I don't disagree with this viewpoint, nor do I agree with it. Simply stated, whether you beleive in fate or not, these things are around for a reason. Cancer exists to some because god made it, and it exists to others because in some people, oncogenes have a tendency to stop functioning properly. Aside from the pain of losing a loved one, is cancer such a problem in society? Yes, death is painful, but to avoid one's problems is no way to solve them. If cancer were miraculously cured tomorrow as a result of this innovative breakthrough in technology, would the world be a better place? Surely overpopulation cannot be a very fun burden on society, and it cannot be solved by the means of a technological miracle such as this. Food production has its limits, especially when all the people who didn't die from cancer are living on the world's current farmlands. At this point, I'm not sure whether the cost of a solution to cancer is greater than it's positive yield; I fear if it is, the cost will not be evident until far in the future.
My intention is not to upset those that have lost friends and family to cancer. If I have, I am deeply sorry! My intention was only to discuss the possible foibles of a cure to cancer, and and to see what other people think about it. |
I take no offense, even though I lost my grandpa to cancer.
I have an opinion on your comment, but I have stuff do to, so I'll brief it...
1) Curing cancer will not significantly increase the world's population. Even if it did, it is still worth saving the countless lives. What you are basically saying is that the loss of countless lives is worth keeping nature's human population balance (as if we know about it in the first place).
2) There are always new diseases coming into existence which must be handled (ex. Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome or SARS, as well as migrating diseases such as West Nile Virus)
3) Our ability to find cures for future diseases relies on our scientific discoveries today, which include how to tackle unique problems like cancer. |
|
|
| Dmatrox |
I agree with both of you Turbonium and StaticFive^^^
I really doubt cancer or diseases will be cured entirely.
If you step back from our world, you will see that humans strive to be PERFECT beings; however, its impossible for us to be perfect. Perfection is what we strive for by developing new "cures" and solutions to our problems, such as cancer and AIDS. Naturally, we do evolve to some degree and our behaviors are passed on to our offspring along with innate behaviors.
Anyways, i wish cancer could be cured. The world's population is increasing pretty fast, especially in Africa and China, so naturally diseases come about from poor sanitation and crowding. |
|
|
| StaticFive |
I totally agree, dmatrox. To respond to turbonium, I'm not talking specifically about cancer, but many life-threatening diseases that pose a problem to any given society today.
There is a butterfly effect in the population though (the chaos butterfly effect, I mean), partially because any change in population is compounded exponentially, and in 20 years it could change the world's population by a significant percentage. Take AIDS for instance: millions upon millions of people are infected/affected with/by AIDS, and aside from cancer, AIDS is the virus most worked on to remedy. A cure for AIDS would have a tremendous impact on the world's population. I should have been more specific in my original post, but it was only a rough sketch of something that could answer a few of my questions!! Namely, I wanna see if people think if I'm an cynical for thinking this way, or if anyone actually shares my opinion. Yes, always curious! |
|
|
| chandler |
Hi, I joined and installed the program today, but I'm quite dissapointed to see that this project no loger does research for cancer cures, it's working on a project to find a cure for smallpox and send the results to the United States Department of Defense.
Cancer it's one of the biggest health problems for our society as a whole, smallpox is a virus that has been erradicated decades ago and that it's only used by the Bush administration to frigthen US tax payers and win some contracts for his friends in the so-called "war on therrorism".
I joined because I wanted to contribute with the TA's group to a good cause, but if it's for making smallpox research for the US military I will quit.
If this is not the case please explain.
Thanks. |
|
|
| djSlain |
| go to your member page and click to box to stop working "other" projects. then it will focus back on the cancer or whichever project u choose. or look at page 9 of this thread |
|
|
| chandler |
Thanks djSlain for the tip, now I'm only on the cancer research program.
If the Us military wants to do smallpox research they can use the 97 billions that Dubya and congress got for the "war on terrorism", not my volunteer work. |
|
|
| djSlain |
:) your welcome
i'm about to add 2 brand new comps to the pack. a 1.7ghz and a 2ghz
:) |
|
|
| djSlain |
ya, i guess it's kind of a step back to be working on "media influeced" projects. Smallpox was definently a mistake. Same with the Anthrax study that happened a while ago. I thought they would've started a SARS project, which i would've considered to put time into, as i thought SARS was gonna be a lot bigger and widespread. but it seems controlled now in certain regions. anyways, back to cancer research.
keep on keeping on! |
|
|
CLICK TO RETURN TO TOP OF PAGE
tranceaddict Forums Archive > Archives > Classic old threads / Inactive Forums
|
