English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-09-21 01:40:26 · 24 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Other - Science

Im not saying I dont want a cure for cancer it was just a hypothetical question. jeez.

2006-09-21 02:05:04 · update #1

24 answers

No - cancer is not the biggest killer of people.
Most people die from much more common illnesses - one thing about cancer is it is more prevalent the older you get and many people die before that.

Sadly big killers of people remain starvation - drought, common preventable illnesses such as diarrhoea (sorry can't spell!), diptheria, Malaria, cholera. Many women still die in childbirth.

Also diseases like humans evolve to survive - it wouldn't take long for another disease to become important. The older we get the more prone we are to diseases - heart disease and dementia to name but a few.

So never fear, mother nature always has a few nasty tricks up her sleave.

Also it is difficult to define what overpopulated means - there is more than enough food and clean water in the world for the entire population - the issue is that it is not distributed evenly - There are food mountains here in Europe and the USA. It is not necessarily population size that matters to out survival but the use of our resources. Some of us use far more than others.

2006-09-21 01:46:06 · answer #1 · answered by Bebe 4 · 1 0

I doubt it...as the medical cures we have available become more sophisticated so do the things that cause the illness in the first place - whether that is a virus or a man made item.

We mangaged to wipe out small pox...now we have AIDS. We might be able to cure all different types of cancer but already we are being told mobile phones, certain food additives and even make-up are harmful to our health so there is always something to keep the population trimmed down.

2006-09-21 08:53:58 · answer #2 · answered by Stargirl644 1 · 0 0

okay...the take out out of cancer would make the world more populated but wouldnt a new strain of cancer would form and then scientists would have to find that one, then the next strain which would again morph. These micro-organisms are far more intelligent than we give them granted for (usually due to the fact that we dont really want them to be) anyway back to the point this would go in an endless cycle of morphing and 'breakthroughs' and then new disceases replacing old.
**note: i also heard on a radio programme about that even if all disceases are taken out, we would still die before 450 [maybe not exact figure..a long time ago!] years old due to car accidents etc.**

2006-09-21 09:42:39 · answer #3 · answered by pandamad2005 2 · 0 0

there are a lot of people working very hard to cure cancer and i think they would be offended at the sugestion that a cure would cause problems its the illness that creates problems and it attacks adult and child alike some progress is being made in the cure department already i guess the next thing we need to cure is ignorance cancer like aids is ahorrible way to die ask any relative of a sufferer a better way to reduce the risk of overpopulation would be making birth control (available )to all

2006-09-23 04:09:01 · answer #4 · answered by madeleine b 2 · 0 0

No. Over population is a problem which is mainly concerned with having too many people and not enough resources to support them and or not enough distribution to get the resources to them. Curing diseases means that there will be more people alive, however, there will also be more people to work, some in distribution and some in developing new resources so this kind of increase in the population takes care of itself.

2006-09-21 08:48:52 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Probably not, but my concern is this: with the most powerful and state-of-the-art technology ever seen by man these days, why haven't researchers been able to find a cure. We can build humanlike robots, fly to the moon, build artificial body parts, but can't cure cancer. BULLSHIT. I don't believe they want to, becuase drug companies and doctors would lose to much money treating it. Very sad.

2006-09-21 08:44:37 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 1 0

Probably not, but the pharmaceutical companies would suffer greatly in terms of profit if they cured cancer. It is a trillion dollar worldwide industry, and keeps the ecomony afloat.

If the pharma companies had the cure, would they make it public.... who knows! They want customers for life, its good for profits.

2006-09-21 08:52:12 · answer #7 · answered by HarryBore 4 · 1 0

No. There are other things apart from cancer that kills. War ,Smoking, Drugs, Alcohol. So find a cure. Only the good die young

2006-09-21 08:50:29 · answer #8 · answered by herewe_goho 1 · 1 0

That's sad you're more concerned about the world being over populated rather than people who are suffering with cancer. May god help you if you ever get ill.

2006-09-21 08:54:03 · answer #9 · answered by Actionchick 2 · 0 0

As the world already is grossly overpopulated the answer is yes.

As an additional point cancer is not just one single disease.

2006-09-21 08:42:47 · answer #10 · answered by Bob-bob 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers