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

Cancer and Startups

chris-granger.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–59 of 59 posts

Re: Cancer and Startups

#51

Post by pyre »

ef4 wrote: post #19

Always remember that no amount of specialist skill by itself gets things done. Healthcare, and everything else, depends on the vast capital structure of our global economy. If you sent a great doctor back in time to the 15th century, she could do somewhat better than the locals (hand-washing helps a lot). But she would come nowhere near her capabilities when backed by a modern economy. If you can make one little piec…

  | she could do somewhat better than the locals
I get what you're saying, but I think that 'somewhat better' is an understatement. Obviously she's not going to be performing heart transplants and bi-pass surgeries, but just knowing about things like penicillin, would be huge (not to mention knowledge of things like disease vectors, etc).

Re: Cancer and Startups

#54

Post by csomar »

pyre wrote: post #51
ef4 wrote: post #19

Always remember that no amount of specialist skill by itself gets things done. Healthcare, and everything else, depends on the vast capital structure of our global economy. If you sent a great doctor back in time to the 15th century, she could do somewhat better than the locals (hand-washing helps a lot). But she would come nowhere near her capabilities when backed by a modern economy. If you can make one little piec…

| she could do somewhat better than the locals I get what you're saying, but I think that 'somewhat better' is an understatement. Obviously she's not going to be performing heart transplants and bi-pass surgeries, but just knowing about things like penicillin, would be huge (not to mention knowledge of things like disease vectors, etc).

I would actually say "she probably knows less than the locals and can do much less than the locals".

I studied Medicine for two years, and was surprised by how much advanced and knowledgeable our ancestors were.

Pharaons did brain surgery to remove cancer tumors a thousands years back successfully. This alone, shows the degree of sophistication and technology they had.

Now I'm not saying before is better, but today we rely a lot on technology (IRM, Radiology, Echography...) that we don't keep much of the details and don't even need to learn them.

Re: Cancer and Startups

#55

Post by mbrock »

carbocation wrote: post #36
kyro wrote: post #28

Beautifully written. The question of whether my contribution to the world and how meaningful it should be has been in my head for a long, long time. It's not an easy answer. Working on an IDE certainly isn't performing life-saving surgery on someone who's bleeding out, but it does serve its purpose in the world. I used to criticize people working on social apps until I started training in the hospital here and notice…

> Know there is much more to a meaningful life than health Nicely said. There seems to be a pervasive notion among my classmates (yours too, I bet) that health is the most important value. I think people should and do decide which things they value most, and that top value is not always maximizing every aspect of health. There are tradeoffs to be made. (Otherwise, ahem, nobody would do residency.) Health, by the way,…

There's a nice Nietzsche quote about this:

"Even the determination of what is healthy for your body depends on your goal, your horizon, your energies, your impulses, your errors, and above all on the ideals and phantasms of your soul. Thus there are innumerable healths of the body; and the more we allow the unique and incomparable to raise its head again, and the more we abjure the dogma of the “equality of men,” the more must the concept of a normal health, along with a normal diet and the normal course of an illness, be abandoned by medical men. Only then would the time have come to reflect on health and illness of the soul, and to find the peculiar virtue of each man in the health of the soul."

Re: Cancer and Startups

#56

Post by acjohnson55 »

I had a similar dilemma. I taught high school in one of the most impoverished school districts in the country. I certainly felt (and still feel) that the work I did there was incredibly crucial, but I left to follow my heart and pursue a career studying music.

I went through a few months of logical conflict, trying to rationalize for my logical brain the commitment I'd made to do something for my own fulfillment, and arguable selfishness. This was made more stark by the fact that I was moving from a job that had a very immediate impact in an area of very obvious and dire need to something that could be viewed as recreational.

But eventually I realized that what drew me to music was the fact that it was one of the great constants in my life. It has enhanced my happiest moments, and it has helped my ride out some brutally difficult times in my life. It serves that same purpose for my former students. Music led me to doing my own startup, http://breakrs.com.

And, the fact is, I was leaving teaching anyway. It is by a long shot the most difficult and stressful thing I've ever done. It was a completely unsustainable lifestyle. Pouring my heart and soul into this undermanned startup--it's not even a comparison. We've had numerous failures, and only hints of success. We've had very tough pitches. None of it's comparable to how hard I had to work as a teacher and what it feels like to bomb four lessons in one day in front of an audience of cynical teenagers and feel as though you've failed to educate them.

This thing we do is a tremendous privilege, when it comes down to it. That's nothing to be ashamed of, but it should be recognized. It's not the hardest or most crucial job in the world "to disrupt the basketweaving market" or whatever each of us works on. In the real-world, nearly all of those kids I taught are de facto denied the opportunity to do what I'm doing today, with even a shade of my probability of success. That's a tremendous injustice.

However, I know that I can't spend my life tilting after windmills. I will never forget to find ways to give back and give a hand up to those who are less fortunate, but I'm going to enjoy this life by doing things that are fun and important to me. Innovating something that the improves the market for X is fun, challenging, multifaceted, highly rewarding, and important. It allows you to actualize a vision. There's nothing wrong with being proud of that.

I've experienced a lot of untimely loss in my life, but never in a prolonged way, and I know that is in many ways more difficult. My thoughts and prayers go out to you and your family.

Re: Cancer and Startups

#57

Post by refurb »

Udo wrote: post #40
SCdF wrote: post #38

Boots on the ground are important. Tools are important. Ancillary tools are important. I've worked with doctors, researchers and software developers. We're all important. Doctors solve problems that are occurring right now . They save lives right now . They're assisted by nurses, and the guy who resets the sheets on the beds. They're all important. Tool builders are like nurses, or the guy who resets the sheets. They…

I don't disagree in principle, but as a fellow biomedical/hacker hybrid I'd like to point out that the notion of doctors and nurses saving lives is probably too simplistic for the purpose of this discussion. I see research as the sole enabling factor for saving lives and healing people in general. It's very important that there are people out there applying our knowledge, but it's also painfully clear that we still h…

I'd have to disagree with the "modest gains" in life expectancy for cancer patients. We have made some incredible progress in the last few years.

The best example is chronic myelogenous leukemia. Before Gleevec was launched, the 5 year survival rate was 30%. Now? It's into the mid-90s and basically the same as the general population.

And Gleevec isn't the only drug that has changed the natural progression of cancer. There are drugs in the pipeline that will basically "cure" other types of cancer as well.

Re: Cancer and Startups

#58

Post by pyre »

csomar wrote: post #54
pyre wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

| she could do somewhat better than the locals I get what you're saying, but I think that 'somewhat better' is an understatement. Obviously she's not going to be performing heart transplants and bi-pass surgeries, but just knowing about things like penicillin, would be huge (not to mention knowledge of things like disease vectors, etc).

I would actually say "she probably knows less than the locals and can do much less than the locals". I studied Medicine for two years, and was surprised by how much advanced and knowledgeable our ancestors were. Pharaons did brain surgery to remove cancer tumors a thousands years back successfully. This alone, shows the degree of sophistication and technology they had. Now I'm not saying before is better, but today w…

Well, then depends on the part of the world and the period. I was assuming 15th century Europe, which is a different story. Also, things like penicillin have a much broader affect than removing a couple of brain tumors. On the other hand, advanced knowledge could be called witchcraft, and she could be burned at the stake.

Re: Cancer and Startups

#59

Post by Udo »

refurb wrote: post #57
Udo wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't disagree in principle, but as a fellow biomedical/hacker hybrid I'd like to point out that the notion of doctors and nurses saving lives is probably too simplistic for the purpose of this discussion. I see research as the sole enabling factor for saving lives and healing people in general. It's very important that there are people out there applying our knowledge, but it's also painfully clear that we still h…

I'd have to disagree with the "modest gains" in life expectancy for cancer patients. We have made some incredible progress in the last few years. The best example is chronic myelogenous leukemia. Before Gleevec was launched, the 5 year survival rate was 30%. Now? It's into the mid-90s and basically the same as the general population. And Gleevec isn't the only drug that has changed the natural progression of cancer.…

Chronic myelogenous leukemia might be the best example because the improvement has been so drastic. I challenge you to look up historical average 5 year survival numbers for lung cancer, colo-rectal cancer, cervical cancer, or even breast cancer (where we maxed out in the mid nineties). Fact is, an actual cure is missing. Available treatment options tend to be palliative.
Post reply on HN