Have we lost the war on cancer?
More than 40 years after the war on cancer was declared, we have spent billions fighting the good fight. The National Cancer Institute has spent some $90 billion on research and treatment during that time. Some 260 nonprofit organizations in the United States have dedicated themselves to cancer—more than the number established for heart disease, AIDS, Alzheimer’s disease, and stroke combined. Together, these 260 organizations have budgets that top $2.2 billion.
As a result, we know much more about the disease than we once did, but we are not much closer to curing it. From 1975 to 2007, breast cancer rates increased by one third and prostate cancer rates soared by 50 percent. Widespread screening played a significant role in detecting these cases, making direct comparisons difficult. Still we clearly have a problem. Almost 1.6 million people were diagnosed with cancer in 2011. Meanwhile, the rates of certain cancers are rising. An upward trend is especially apparent in kidney, liver, and thyroid cancer and in melanoma and lymphoma. The steady increase in the incidence of childhood leukemia and brain cancer since the mid-1970s is a particularly alarming trend. When have Americans ever waged such a long, drawn-out, and costly war, with no end in sight?…
Simply put, we have not adequately channeled our scientific know-how, funding, and energy into a full exploration of the one path certain to save lives: prevention. That it should become the ultimate goal of cancer research has been recognized since the war on cancer began. When I look at NCI’s budget request for fiscal year 2012, I’m deeply disappointed, though past experience tells me I shouldn’t be surprised. It is business as usual at the nation’s foremost cancer research establishment. More than $2 billion is requested for basic research into the mechanism and causes of cancer. Another $1.3 billion is requested for treatment. And cancer prevention and control? It gets $232 million altogether. (Remarkably, in the very same budget report, the NCI states, “Much of the progress against cancer in recent decades has stemmed from successes in the areas of prevention and control.”)
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
well, there’s one of the problems.
Dusty on October 2, 2012 at 10:20 PM
The problem is, cancer isn’t really a single “disease,” but rather is a syndrome, a matrix of related conditions. The reason we can’t cure “it” is that we have assigned “it” a single noun, and we thereby demand a cure for all aspects of the related syndrome.
“Curing cancer” would be similar to “curing bacteria” — borderline impossible.
We’re doing our best. A diet of too many science fiction shows have wildly amplified our expectations about what “future medicine” is “supposed” to be like. We demand miracles in a matter of months.
Chill, people. Give it a few decades, a few more centuries.
I predict that “cancer” will be the very last major disease cured. It’s too multifarious.
Zombie on October 2, 2012 at 10:20 PM
In 1972 the life expectancy in the US was 72.6. Now it is 78.24.
Dr. Margaret Cuomo is a moron.
pedestrian on October 2, 2012 at 10:22 PM
I ain’t arguing with you, Zombie, because you’re right, but as someone who’s been fighting the beast for over 5 years now, I’m with Glenn: faster, please.
Bob's Kid on October 2, 2012 at 10:24 PM
Probably the best explanation I’ve ever read for why we don’t have a cure. What is your profession good sir?
adurb44 on October 2, 2012 at 10:26 PM
You know what that means. Government running every aspect of your life. Regulations galore. May a million Bloombergs bloom.
Dusty on October 2, 2012 at 10:27 PM
Oh, we’re getting better at dealing with cancers all the time. Most forms of it we CAN treat, with a reasonably high chance of success, if we catch it early enough. Thus, why so much research is poured into improving our ability to diagnose cancer.
WolvenOne on October 2, 2012 at 10:34 PM
Wrong question.
Universal cure for all types of cancer will take some time if it ever happens. We have however cured many and advanced significantly in both detection and lengthening the life and living quality of many types of cancer patients.
lester on October 2, 2012 at 10:36 PM
Sometimes its not profitable going after certain diseases that affects a small number of people.
V-rod on October 2, 2012 at 10:43 PM
I don’t think we are done yet. It wouldn’t surprise me if the progress they have made on AIDS will help out.
Cindy Munford on October 2, 2012 at 10:45 PM
Bruce causes cancer.
Ugly on October 2, 2012 at 10:45 PM
I had surgery on Feb. 6th to remove a cancerous thyroid gland.
So far so good.
I’m 47, and have never been sick before.
pseudonominus on October 2, 2012 at 10:45 PM
Perhaps if Mitt weren’t running around infecting people there wouldn’t be so much cancer.
Bishop on October 2, 2012 at 10:46 PM
Cancer rates are increasing because people are living longer, long enough to die of cancer instead of consumption, malnutrition, auto accidents, child birth, infection, etc. In other words if you survive most other things (due to amazing advances in healthcare over the last 50 years), then cancer may be what finally does you in. That, or the flu.
cep on October 2, 2012 at 10:50 PM
Lung cancer continues to reign as the #1 cancer killer among men AND women, regardless of smoking history. It would be nice to see some advances in screening and treatment of this beast. Lung cancer research is woefully underfunded in comparison with other cancers like breast cancer. That is partly due to awareness. Most people consider lung cancer a smoker’s disease, but there is a not insignificant number of nonsmokers every year diagnosed with it.
NoLeftTurn on October 2, 2012 at 10:52 PM
When we lost the ability to use military metaphors with some sense of proportion or self-awareness.
HitNRun on October 2, 2012 at 10:54 PM
I thought they just discovered a virus that treats many forms of breast cancer…?
John the Libertarian on October 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM
Zombie nailed it. Cancer isn’t one disease or even a single ‘family’ of diseases; it’s technically a term for illnesses that – literally – can occur anywhere in the body for any number of reasons.
Might as well try to stamp out world hunger while you’re at it.
MelonCollie on October 2, 2012 at 10:56 PM
I’ll take “The war on poverty” for a kajillion, Marge.
Bishop on October 2, 2012 at 10:57 PM
I’ve seen this movie, and no I wouldn’t be stupid enough to build my basement lab without innumerable UV lights shining down from every angle, just in case.
Bishop on October 2, 2012 at 11:00 PM
Good luck! That’s one that’s usually easy to lick, just not for me.
Bob's Kid on October 2, 2012 at 11:06 PM
My Profession? Half-assed blogger.
But I play a doctor on the Internet!
(Actually, in real life, I’ve been a science writer [among other things], but don’t tell anyone that.)
Zombie on October 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM
I have my sign out offering free breast exams, but alas, no takers as of yet.
John the Libertarian on October 2, 2012 at 11:10 PM
My wife’s cancer history:
1996: Cervical cancer. Spots frozen and lasered.
1998: Cervical cancer again: Same as before.
2002: Uterine cancer. Complete hysterectomy, chemotherapy.
2008: Cancer in the abdomen. Surgery to remove the mass, chemotherapy.
2010: Cancer in the abdomen again, minor surgery, mass was small. Chemotherapy for three months.
We also had a scare back in 06 where a benign mass was found in her left lung. Removed with no problem. also had a scare in her breast, small mass was removed and was benign. This was just in the last month.
She was approached to participate in a clinical trial for a preventive therapy, since she’s had cancer recur so frequently. She’s mulling that over.
We have not lost the war on cancer. Research and breakthroughs in treatment, surgery and medications along with symptoms management therapies have kept my wife alive and fighting for 16 years.
catmman on October 2, 2012 at 11:30 PM
This device was to be promising.
Schadenfreude on October 2, 2012 at 11:38 PM
catmman on October 2, 2012 at 11:30 PM
Your story is extraordinary, catmman. Thank you for sharing and all the best to you and family.
Schadenfreude on October 2, 2012 at 11:44 PM
Best of luck to bobs kids and catmman
We be thinkin about you guys
blatantblue on October 2, 2012 at 11:45 PM
Easy. Vietnam and Afghanistan.
Oh, and the “War on Drugs”.
WeekendAtBernankes on October 3, 2012 at 12:03 AM
That is often correct. Sixteen years ago I was diagnosed with a pretty rare neuro-muscular disease that relatively little is spent on since there are so few off us. The treatment is to use ever increasingly stronger anti-rejection immno-suppressant drugs developed for transplant patients.
Those drugs all carry the warning that they may cause cancer. Well, one of them has. But the original disease continues to progress, so the answer is to increase the dose of the drugs.
And I say WHAT! But actually the doctor’s have learned enough to be able to assure me that, at the age of 71, the original disease will get me before the cancer does if I stop taking those drugs. That is progress.
Yoop on October 3, 2012 at 12:05 AM
I wish that there were cures for many of the cancers out there, particularly breast and prostate cancer. Both of my parents had these, both had the offending organs removed as a treatment, and both have recently been rediagnosed as having metastatic cancers. The statistics are not in either of their favor right now.
Chuckie on October 3, 2012 at 1:02 AM
A nice woman, my radiation oncologist, tells me my cancer will be cured when I die of something else.
She’s right.
countrybumpkin on October 3, 2012 at 1:44 AM
There is no cure but today’s treatments can add 10yrs to someones life. The drugs will often beat it down for several years and then it will come back resistant to the previous drug and you have to try something else. It bought my mom 10 years, 8 good ones too!! Some people have been given 15-20 extra years or more and some have actually been cured because of our advances in cancer research so far. No cure yet, but you can’t put a price on an extra decade or even 5 extra years is a blessing to the victims.
Dollayo on October 3, 2012 at 2:55 AM
If cancer was cured today a lot of people would lose their jobs tomorrow.
albill on October 3, 2012 at 6:09 AM
The truth is that once someone is born they will necessarily die. Some sooner than others. Yes, good things happen, then sometimes bad things happen, and all we have control over is how we treat each other every day.
2L8 on October 3, 2012 at 8:20 AM
@Yoop – my husband takes one of those immunosuppressant drugs for his Crohn’s disease. It can cause a rare, fast-moving, and always-incurable form of cancer, which I am now pretty good at not thinking about.
@albill – ding ding ding! This is why so little money goes to prevention efforts.
mrsknightley on October 3, 2012 at 8:26 AM