Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

nature.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 280 posts

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#261

Post by ornornor »

IAmGraydon wrote: post #252
irrational wrote: post #97

I feel like there has been a great increase in mental health issues: anxiety, depression, etc., especially among youth. I don’t recall these being major issues from when I was a youth in the late 80s and early 90s. I’m told that I’m wrong and people just didn’t talk about it so I wasn’t aware of it. But even amongst close family members and friends it wasn’t a thing. Now, I’ve seen some claim it is the post 9/11 worl…

1. Toxic social media 2. Toxic mass media 3. Devisive, polarizing politicians 4. Being constantly threatened with nuclear death from a madman half a world away Humans have to be able to visualize a better tomorrow to be propelled toward it. Do you see a better tomorrow? Maybe people are depressed and anxious because deep down, in the recesses of our collective consciousness, we already know how all of this ends.

This is easily solved: quit social media (it does nothing for you, it’s just a massive advertising machine), and quit the news (why worry about things you have no influence over?)

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#262

Post by Test0129 »

hirvi74 wrote: post #255
Test0129 wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I used to think this and I don't think so anymore. Consider a company who develops the de-facto cure for a cancer. Let's say a course of normal treatment to remission cost $200,000. There's no reason this company wouldn't release the cure. They would simple charge * + for the drug. People would pay almost any amount for such a cure. The company would have no problem padding it's bottom line sufficiently.

Devil's Advocate: What if these companies did find a cure, and after running the numbers, determined it was less profitable? Wouldn't 'death by a thousand costs' be more profitable a one-time cure (or limited rounds)? Just because people would be willing to pay almost any amount does not mean they can pay almost any amount. (Personally, I think they would release a cure if they could find one, but I have heard argume…

It might be less profitable if you view cancer treatment as MRR. Actuarial tables tell you that this MRR will certainly end unless you produce remission and so I'm not sure if that is a good reason for them to not release it as a single dose. Though, there's no reason they wouldn't divide the dose. Charge say 375,000 instead 200,000 for the treatment using 3 doses instead of 1. But then the question is asked - why wouldn't they just release the treatment at 375,000 then?

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#263

Post by [deleted] »

enviclash wrote: post #257
superbiome wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since I was born via c-section I've tried to make up for the lack of my microbiome diversity by spending many years going down on a lot of different women and it seems to be working.

I suppose you are making fun of it. In case you need arguments to extend your joke: my friend and I were recommended pills made of colostrum of cow -- he took them.

[deleted]

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#264

Post by superbiome »

enviclash wrote: post #257
superbiome wrote: post #244

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Since I was born via c-section I've tried to make up for the lack of my microbiome diversity by spending many years going down on a lot of different women and it seems to be working.

I suppose you are making fun of it. In case you need arguments to extend your joke: my friend and I were recommended pills made of colostrum of cow -- he took them.

It was a joke but then it made me think there might be some fact to it. The way married peoples start to share biomes and are probably lacking in diversity compared to someone who more frequently changes partners. There’s probably some gut health aspects there that could be studied.

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#265

Post by tasuki »

coenhyde wrote: post #139
blablabla123 wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But I also think "back in the days" life was more fixed. Probably getting a full time job as employee, starting a family, getting a house was not really optional. Now there are much more choices. Add to that all the hyper-connectivity. I don't really think people were better off but were just forced to handle everything more calmly. Growing up in the 90s, what I've found is that things changed a lot when people were…

Not to mention living in America is like playing life on hard mode; at least relative to other OECD countries. There's a lot more things you have to take care of / think about in America. There's a level of mental overhead that does not exist in other developed countries that many Americans do not realize are optional. eg health insurance, education, unemployment safety net, or even little things like way too many co…

> Not to mention living in America is like playing life on hard mode;

Do you have any idea what living in third (or even second) world countries is like?

> at least relative to other OECD countries.

Such as Turkey? Or Mexico? Why do you think Mexicans escape to the US? Because their life was too easy and they wanted to have more of a challenge?

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#266

Post by shusaku »

pasquinelli wrote: post #164
Gatsky wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is this even worth doing when people are still smoking, drinking alcohol, living in polluted areas and eating red meat? These are all known risk factors with large effects on cancer risk in younger people. I think the effort is better spent as follows: - ban sale of combustible tobacco products - ban advertising of alcoholic beverages

has smoking, drinking, and eating red meat gone up in the past several decades? because, according to the first sentence of the abstract early onset cancers have gone up in the past several decades.

I think his point by was that instead of chasing the cause of the recent uptick, it would be better to focus on the known causes

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#267

Post by 7952 »

soundnote wrote: post #220
galdosdi wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> At a quick glance, a lot of the intersectional feminist/activist modes of thought seem to be the polar opposites of what eg. cognitive behavioral therapy What a non sequitur. Why would feminism and stoicism have any incompatibilities?

I literally gave one example in the post you quoted. The intersectional types are vehemently against owning your emotional responses in the way stoicism advocates, and instead actively encourage finding more and more ever more minute things that might be rationalized to be a slight against themselves. On a deeper level, stoicism acknowledges and is built on the idea that not everything in the world is changeable, whi…

Activisim is a more masculine way of thinking. Stoicism more feminine. As society changes these different modes of thinking get more and more mixed up and seperated from preassigned roles. That could be quite a positive thing. I think we benefit from both. Sometimes passion and anger is needed to change your life and the situation. And sometimes you need to just accept the world as it is. And in something like race/sexism we need a little bit of both. Prejudice is bad, but not all prejudiced people are bad. We should be able to identify it, address it and move on without it being a big taboo that gets people in lots of trouble.

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#268

Post by thombat »

swayvil wrote: post #242
thombat wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The article being discussed starts with these words "Over the past several decades", and you suggest as a cause a vaccine that the general public wasn't exposed to just two years ago. You're not being censored, you're receiving feedback that you did a dumb.

It's announced today though. Fuck it. It isn't because "I did a dumb". You know it, I know it, the microbes on my keyboard know it. Let's not pretend.

What is announced today?

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#269

Post by coenhyde »

tasuki wrote: post #265
coenhyde wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not to mention living in America is like playing life on hard mode; at least relative to other OECD countries. There's a lot more things you have to take care of / think about in America. There's a level of mental overhead that does not exist in other developed countries that many Americans do not realize are optional. eg health insurance, education, unemployment safety net, or even little things like way too many co…

> Not to mention living in America is like playing life on hard mode; Do you have any idea what living in third (or even second) world countries is like? > at least relative to other OECD countries. Such as Turkey? Or Mexico? Why do you think Mexicans escape to the US? Because their life was too easy and they wanted to have more of a challenge?

I explicitly wasn't talking about second and third world countries, so your comment is mostly moot. I don't know about you, but I prefer we compete with our peers on quality of life rather than the tiers below. We should strive to be the best, not just better than the worst.

> Such as Turkey? Or Mexico? Why do you think Mexicans escape to the US? Because their life was too easy and they wanted to have more of a challenge?

They come the US because the quality live in the US is superior ... I didn't say it wasn't.

Re: Is early-onset cancer an emerging global epidemic?

#270

Post by soundnote »

7952 wrote: post #267
soundnote wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I literally gave one example in the post you quoted. The intersectional types are vehemently against owning your emotional responses in the way stoicism advocates, and instead actively encourage finding more and more ever more minute things that might be rationalized to be a slight against themselves. On a deeper level, stoicism acknowledges and is built on the idea that not everything in the world is changeable, whi…

Activisim is a more masculine way of thinking. Stoicism more feminine. As society changes these different modes of thinking get more and more mixed up and seperated from preassigned roles. That could be quite a positive thing. I think we benefit from both. Sometimes passion and anger is needed to change your life and the situation. And sometimes you need to just accept the world as it is. And in something like race/s…

Uh, have you looked at the demographics of intersectional activists and of people preaching stoicism lately?
Post reply on HN