should we cure cancer?

Question

given that cancer is not a disease it it just a cascade effect caused by a flaw in the binary fission of two cells (this is why we age) on a long enough time line every human will develop cancer. thus we could consider cancer to be the natural end of life given it will eventually occur. if we insured that every cellular division was perfect, we would not age and would be in theory (could always redecorate the front of a bus or find some other nasty end) be immortal

Answer 1

There are other ways to cure cancer that don't invole perfect cell division. Besides we'd die in the end anyways, because brain cells divide rarely you lose thousands irreplaceably all the time, but you die long before you run out. So, eventually you'd die because you don't have enough brain cells. Aging is completely caused by faulty cell division either.

Answer 2

Oh heavens, we wouldn't want anyone achieving immortality now, would we?

Actually there are many causes of aging, and perfect cell replication will not stop it. Your cells still accumulate toxins and junk, take damage from free radicals, your telomeres are shortening with each cell division, etc. Bacteria outnumber your body's cells 10 to 1 inside of you, and most but not all of them are good.

Cancer is NOT natural, it is an abnormality. Some people live past 100 without getting cancer, others get it while they are still kids. It is very much a disease; just because it's not caused by germs doesn't disqualify it. If cancer is considered "normal" because it's almost inevitable if you live long enough, then so should infection by any number of diseases. Live long enough and it's all but inevitable that you will be the victim of a violent crime. Or a workplace accident. Any number of things approach being inevitable if you live long enough, but that does not mean they should be considered "natural," nor does it give any reason why we shouldn't try to do something about it.

We hairless apes only managed to survive in the wild because our clever brains gave us an evolutionary advantage. In modern times we have made gargantuan strides in medicine, agriculture, and taming our environment. To give up the fight against cancer would be much more unnatural for us, as it would mean giving up on our problem-solving abilities which made us the masters of this planet to begin with.

Answer 3

Well that is true that if the time line is long anyone can get cancer but it is not simple as you explained it that it is JUST a cascade effect caused by a flaw in the binary fission....

It is not just that...there are transcription factors and many regularotry proteins and enzymes that get a mutated and cause proliferation of cells very quickly and there are patterns that are occuring among people with cancer.

Like tumor supressor p53 which in many patients is mutated and not checking the cells proliferation rate so if we can research and find enzymes or drugs than can revert back a mutation in say brest cancer or any specific cancer then we can at least do something.

Cancer is not that simple but there are many things scientists have done and pairing and finding genes that can me matched to certain cancers.

Answer 4

I'm studying Ecology. If you look at the ebb and flow of the lives of species, there are diseases, natural disasters, predators, and mutations that kill off large numbers of any given species. The entire ecosystem is in balance because nothing is stable except the certainty of change. Humans offset this entire equilibrium. In the long run we are just another species on this earth, and not just a contributing one but one that causes destruction to everything rather than renewal. A species can only have so many to its number before it exceeds its carrying capacity; that is the number of organisms in a species an environment can support before there there are not enough provisions left. As humans keep defying death we push this ourselves to the cusp of the carrying capacity and consume without renewal all that is in our environment. From an environmental perspective it is not desireable.

That being said, humans are capable of such strong emotion, I cannot begin to do it justice in words. I have a friend currently losing a battle with cancer. When you watch the struggle that one individual goes through and the wake left for all those that surround them, it is almost impossible to retain such an outlook.

Basically I cannot answer your question.

Answer 5

Really? It's a flaw alright! My understanding is that, our bodies cellular regeneration, goes to the tune of 10,000 cells that replicate per day. Cancer develops when the white blood cells are fooled into thinking these extra 10,000 cells belong there, bypassing them for annhilation. The aging process is a wee different. Granted, living in immortality would suck for Ol' Mother Earth, and her inhabitants ,as the world would be over-populated, and we now what the results would be for that!

Answer 6

I have cancer and I would be the stupidest person on earth if I'd just sit here, endure the pain and wait till I finally stop breathing when I have family and friends who don't want me to die and willing to spend their time, energy and money just to see me well again. So there is actually no cure for cancer. And people have to die to maintain the balance of nature. But pain is evil and it's a normal and natural reaction of a person to eliminate pain.

Answer 7

Yes. All healing is mercy.

"Climb the Highest Mountain," Mark Prophet; "Men in White Apparel," Ann Ree Colton.

cordially,

j.

Answer 8

So do you think we should have medicine at all considering we're all gonna die in the end anyway?

Answer 9

If you actually had cancer, would you still be asking this same question?