"We won't stop until cancer does!" slogan

Pictures Of Lilly

Really? Shut up I say! I'm sure a lot have heard this this slogan! There's unlikely to even be a cure for HIV, let alone cancer. Let's get real.

I remember I saw some students once posing for a photo in front of one of these banners... and one of them had a can of diet coke in her hand! The irony I thought to myself. These very same students go off out smoking, drinking, eating fast food, microwaving their food in plastic, often taking drugs, etc. The only thing I can conclude, is that it's amazing how peer pressure and social conditioning will always trump logical arguments.

There's only one way you can stop cancer, and that's by doing little things correctly each day over a long period of time. But people really don't want to hear that. The way I see it, is that diet (maybe not exercise) is incredibly easy to get right. It doesn't take any skill or courage. And to be honest, it doesn't even take will power. I know people who are responsible to have their pension schemes set up in their 20s, but yet with the way they live, you'd wonder would they make it past retirement.

As another example, I was talking to a young lady recently who had an uncle that got lung cancer. Her concluding thoughts were "Gee, it just goes to show... you never know what might happen to you - health insurance is actually really important." She then asked me if I'd health insurance. I said "that's private" but she continued to rant about how I should get it, even though I hadn't answered. I felt like answering to her "health insurance? sweetheart, you are the perfect victim of marketing". I remember thinking to myself "I've a good idea how your uncle got cancer", but if I were to talk about diet and exercise to her, I've no doubt she'd have looked at me like I've two heads.

I just can't help seeing things for what they are sometimes. I don't understand people's attitudes. Is their something I'm missing?

sxt

Fun fact. If All types of cancer were eradicated, life expectancy would only increase by 2-3 years

Tabnabs

They are as close as they have ever been to finding a cure to HIV, a nine year old SA girl no longer shows any symptoms of the virus after having one year of treatment followed by eight years of no drugs. She's about the third person to be cleared of the virus to date.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/24/hopes-future-hiv-cure-revived-south-african-child-becomes-third/

As for cancer, I sincerely hope you're one of the top consultants in the country, that's a keen insight, diet and exercise equals a get out of jail card. All those fat & lazy people...

hairyslug

There's people out there that live the perfect lifestyle and still get cancer.

As for the logo, or whichever logo they run with in their next campaign, it can give those with cancer and their loved ones some hope in that there will be a cure or something to delay it even if it's not in their lifetime.

So what if the kids are having a can of coke or microwaving their dinner, they are doing something for a charity that I presume they feel close to.

challengemaster

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

There's only one way you can stop cancer, and that's by doing little things correctly each day over a long period of time. But people really don't want to hear that.

As a cell biologist I have but one question. What the actual fúck are you on about?

One eyed Jack

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

I just can't help seeing things for what they are sometimes. I don't understand people's attitudes. Is their something I'm missing?

I don't think you're "missing" anything as such, other than the fact that cancer is not something that can be stopped, no matter what kind of diet or exercise a person undertakes. A healthy diet and exercise are of course to be encouraged as part of a healthy lifestyle, but, they will only reduce a persons risk of developing certain types of cancers.

I do take your point though about attributing personalities to diseases as though cancers have a particular motivation. But these simplistic slogans are intended to grab peoples attention, and clearly, they are having the intended effect - no such thing as bad publicity and all that.

judeboy101

Tabnabs wrote: »

They are as close as they have ever been to finding a cure to HIV, a nine year old SA girl no longer shows any symptoms of the virus after having one year of treatment followed by eight years of no drugs. She's about the third person to be cleared of the virus to date.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/07/24/hopes-future-hiv-cure-revived-south-african-child-becomes-third/

As for cancer, I sincerely hope you're one of the top consultants in the country, that's a keen insight, diet and exercise equals a get out of jail card. All those fat & lazy people...

You still wouldn't get a blood donation from her

_Whimsical_

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

Really? Shut up I say! I'm sure a lot have heard this this slogan! There's unlikely to even be a cure for HIV, let alone cancer. Let's get real.

I remember I saw some students once posing for a photo in front of one of these banners... and one of them had a can of diet coke in her hand! The irony I thought to myself. These very same students go off out smoking, drinking, eating fast food, microwaving their food in plastic, often taking drugs, etc. The only thing I can conclude, is that it's amazing how peer pressure and social conditioning will always trump logical arguments.

There's only one way you can stop cancer, and that's by doing little things correctly each day over a long period of time. But people really don't want to hear that. The way I see it, is that diet (maybe not exercise) is incredibly easy to get right. It doesn't take any skill or courage. And to be honest, it doesn't even take will power. I know people who are responsible to have their pension schemes set up in their 20s, but yet with the way they live, you'd wonder would they make it past retirement.

As another example, I was talking to a young lady recently who had an uncle that got lung cancer. Her concluding thoughts were "Gee, it just goes to show... you never know what might happen to you - health insurance is actually really important." She then asked me if I'd health insurance. I said "that's private" but she continued to rant about how I should get it, even though I hadn't answered. I felt like answering to her "health insurance? sweetheart, you are the perfect victim of marketing". I remember thinking to myself "I've a good idea how your uncle got cancer", but if I were to talk about diet and exercise to her, I've no doubt she'd have looked at me like I've two heads.

I just can't help seeing things for what they are sometimes. I don't understand people's attitudes. Is their something I'm missing?

There's a whole lot you're missing, too much to put into one post.

Let's start with the fact that lifestyle only plays a limited role in the development of cancer, yes you can make changes and decrease your chances of developing it somewhat but you won't eliminate your risk altogether, or even by half. The main factor influencing your future health as regards cancer is luck!
Want proof : https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/most-cancer-cases-arise-from-bad-luck/

Second, while there's no cure we need to develop as many good treatments as we can to buy the lives back of those affected or give them extra years with their kids and family. Huge developments have taken place in treatment in recent years. That's why we can't stop even if cancer won't!

Thirdly, Jesus, your attitude stinks!! This sort of moralistic indignation based on having read a few Daily Mail articles on nutrition and using it as a basis for blaming patients for their suffering is something I cannot abide.
I hope if you'd talked about diet and exercise to your friend who's uncle had lung cancer that she'd have given you a slap quite frankly. Lung cancer can be caused by many things, radon gas in your home, genetic susectability, exposure to asbestos, secondhand smoke in childhood. That you'd think you have the right, or the knowledge, to judge someone in that man's position reflects incredibly badly on yourself.

eeguy

sxt wrote: »

Fun fact. If All types of cancer were eradicated, life expectancy would only increase by 2-3 years

Average life expectancy will only increase a little.
But the lifespan of those who would have died from cancer would increase by a huge amount.

.......

This post has been deleted.

eviltwin

What is the point of this thread and what is it's relevance to this forum

Pictures Of Lilly

Tabnabs wrote: »

As for cancer, I sincerely hope you're one of the top consultants in the country, that's a keen insight, diet and exercise equals a get out of jail card

Sorry, I'm not sure I get that. Is that sarcasm, or are you suggesting that I'd actually be a good consultant?

Pictures Of Lilly

challengemaster wrote: »

As a cell biologist I have but one question. What the actual fúck are you on about?

Take a wild guess mr cell biologist. I didn't think I needed to elaborate for that one.

Lose the attitude too.

Pictures Of Lilly

hairyslug wrote: »

So what if the fat kids are having a can of coke or microwaving their dinner, they are doing something for a charity that I presume they feel close to.

They're not kids. They're students, and I'm only a few years older than they are.

I was just pointing out the irony.

challengemaster

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

Sorry, I'm not sure I get that. Is that sarcasm, or are you suggesting that I'd actually be a good consultant?

Absolutely.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_w_n-8w3IQ

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

Take a wild guess mr cell biologist. I didn't think I needed to elaborate for that one.

Well the only thing you've elaborated on so far is you haven't a clue how cancer works.

Pictures Of Lilly

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

I hope if you'd talked about diet and exercise to your friend who's uncle had lung cancer that she'd have given you a slap quite frankly. Lung cancer can be caused by many things, radon gas in your home, genetic susectability, exposure to asbestos, secondhand smoke in childhood. That you'd think you have the right, or the knowledge, to judge someone in that man's position reflects incredibly badly on yourself.

Maybe, but I've seen the way the man lives! He smokes.

Shur I'm probably paying for his treatment (to a small extent) in one way or another.

Christy42

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

Take a wild guess mr cell biologist. I didn't think I needed to elaborate for that one.

Lose the attitude too.

I think you do as right now it makes very little sense.

Cancer has all sorts of causes and even then some might not affect you.

Secondly many forms of cancer have had survival rates increase thanks to research partially funded by campaigns like these. It is essentially saying they won't stop until the job is done. Now what is your problem with that exactly?

Do you want anyone involved not to touch anything that might cause cancer cos that is going to be a pretty big and life limiting list right there. Also why would you care if they make money for worthwhile research but don't have peak optimum lifestyle choices?

alberto67

Cancer is a metabolic disease, maybe a disease of civilisation... And that's true, genes play a role. Also, there will always be a smoker who never gets lung cancer (outlayer).

But I mostly agree with the OP, lifestyle plays a significant part: "staying a healthy weight can prevent an estimated 40730 cancer cases among men in 2017".
http://www.aicr.org/learn-more-about-cancer/infographics/men-and-cancer.html

It's also a reality that people who have lost a loved one who had cancer don't want to hear that it might have been prevented by improving lifestyle (diet + exercise).

cruizer101

eeguy wrote: »

Average life expectancy will only increase a little.
But the lifespan of those who would have died from cancer would increase by a huge amount.

Not to mention the increase in quality of life for all those who would have suffered through chemotherapy and radiation treatment.

I 'd be sceptical that we will ever really eliminate cancer altogether mind, get better at treating various kinds of cancer yes but not every reach some magical cure all cancers point.

Pictures Of Lilly

_Whimsical_ wrote: »

There's a whole lot you're missing, too much to put into one post.

Let's start with the fact that lifestyle only plays a limited role in the development of cancer, yes you can make changes and decrease your chances of developing it somewhat but you won't eliminate your risk altogether, or even by half. The main factor influencing your future health as regards cancer is luck!
Want proof : https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/most-cancer-cases-arise-from-bad-luck/

Second, while there's no cure we need to develop as many good treatments as we can to buy the lives back of those affected or give them extra years with their kids and family. Huge developments have taken place in treatment in recent years. That's why we can't stop even if cancer won't!

Thirdly, Jesus, your attitude stinks!! This sort of moralistic indignation based on having read a few Daily Mail articles on nutrition and using it as a basis for blaming patients for their suffering is something I cannot abide.
I hope if you'd talked about diet and exercise to your friend who's uncle had lung cancer that she'd have given you a slap quite frankly. Lung cancer can be caused by many things, radon gas in your home, genetic susectability, exposure to asbestos, secondhand smoke in childhood. That you'd think you have the right, or the knowledge, to judge someone in that man's position reflects incredibly badly on yourself.

Did I hear that certain tribes in Africa (or was it Africans in general) almost never get cancer? Now this might be down to them not living as long, or not being detected, but I must read all about that. And I might come back ta ya.

One eyed Jack

Pictures Of Lilly wrote: »

Take a wild guess mr cell biologist. I didn't think I needed to elaborate for that one.

Lose the attitude too.

Really OP? What would you expect when according to your own standards, you want people to shut up, and then come out with an ill-informed assertion about "the only way to stop cancer"?

In all honesty if I ever develop a male cancer such as prostate or testicular cancer, an unhealthy diet and lack of exercise will have had very little to do with it, and a healthy diet and exercise would have done little to prevent it.

Pictures Of Lilly

Christy42 wrote: »

I think you do as right now it makes very little sense.

Cancer has all sorts of causes and even then some might not affect you.

Secondly many forms of cancer have had survival rates increase thanks to research partially funded by campaigns like these. It is essentially saying they won't stop until the job is done. Now what is your problem with that exactly?

Do you want anyone involved not to touch anything that might cause cancer cos that is going to be a pretty big and life limiting list right there. Also why would you care if they make money for worthwhile research but don't have peak optimum lifestyle choices?

You're right. I guess I just feel not enough people see it the way I do.

You can be guessing as to what I mean by doing the little things correctly every day!

Pictures Of Lilly

One eyed Jack wrote: »

Really OP? What would you expect when according to your own standards, you want people to shut up, and then come out with an ill-informed assertion about "the only way to stop cancer"?

In all honesty if I ever develop a male cancer such as prostate or testicular cancer, an unhealthy diet and lack of exercise will have had very little to do with it, and a healthy diet and exercise would have done little to prevent it.

Sounds like the perfect lie to tell yourself. Lets not forget that male sperm counts are 60% lower than the 70s. Do you know how to avoid that? But mine's not!

Wibbs

Annnnd we're done here. Bad enough is the scant knowledge of the subject, but I'm beyond figuring out the thought process that thought this was the suitable forum for the matter.