This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Appeal to Freethinkers to Fight Cancer

Appeal to Freethinkers to Fight Cancer - Comments

drumdaddy's Avatar Comment 1 by drumdaddy

What a wonderfully generous matching fund! Best of luck.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 06:11:27 UTC | #926622

cheesedoff17's Avatar Comment 2 by cheesedoff17

Whilst I applaud the sentiments, it"s our life style that causes cancer, aggravated by polluted air, water, land, and our chemical laced, sugar doused food supply. Plenty of money has been raised over the last 50 years to "fight" the disease which is the result of the above without ever solving the causes.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 09:55:11 UTC | #926653

rod-the-farmer's Avatar Comment 3 by rod-the-farmer

OK, lemme see what I can do to arrange something in SW Ontario.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 10:15:10 UTC | #926656

Pete H's Avatar Comment 4 by Pete H

@Comment 2 by cheesedoff17

I agree.

Much of billions spent so far has been wasted looking at the wrong end of the problem. It doesn't really matter exactly what goes wrong when cellular mechanisms are disrupted by toxins. The key is understand the cause so as to avoid the disruption in the first place. it might be interesting and profitable but, from the perspective of curing or preventing disease, there's little value in studying the infinite variety of consequences.

it would be great to see research focussed in the politically incorrect areas like the sugar and glucose question. Instead we keep getting utter bullshit such as today’s latest epidemiology announcement that eating red meat or taking a little alcohol are major risk factors for cancer. (Combined with the logical fallacy that not eating red meat or drinking alcohol must therefore be a cure for cancer!

This new fundraising project is worth supporting because only private funding sources, independent of government and the lobbying and marketing of patent remedy cures, have the discretion to enable the transition towards real science. At present we seem to have sophisticated marketing masquerading as science and 'informing' political decisions.

It's timely because things are beginning to turn. There was a TV item last night (in Australia) about the impact of sugar on obesity, including an interview with Robert Lustig. Plus a disturbing behind the scenes glimpse of the team of highly qualified and influential medical experts representing the sugar lobby. It’s great to see this stuff about dietary sugar finally coming to public awareness, decades after John Yudkin was ridiculed for linking cancer with the chronic saturation of body tissues in a glucose solution.

It looks like Yudkin was right all along. He probably didn’t know about protein glycation, but he could tell something bad was happening. The turnaround in the media seems to be driven by all the middle age and fat aged baby boomers who, after years of jogging, gym, dieting etc. just simply gave up sugar and are now apparently miraculously reverting to their teenage body shape. If sugar is the simple underlying cause of obesity, then people might also be wondering if it's the cause of any other chronic health issues.

Based on how long it took for cigarette smoking to be addressed as a public health crisis, my prediction is that it won’t be long know (maybe 30 or 40 years) before pretty much every major chronic disease becomes regarded as a category of diabetes. So far we’ve got type 1 (diabetes – inadequate insulin availability), type 2 (insulin resistance etc), type 3 (parkinsons). Eventually I’m anticipating that diabetes type 4, 5, 6, 7, 9 will turn out to be high blood pressure, heart disease, alzheimers, stroke, and pretty much most forms of cancer. It will make the cigarette question of the late 20th century look like a sideshow in comparison.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:48:44 UTC | #926673

RichardofYork's Avatar Comment 5 by RichardofYork

Totally off topic , apologies in advance . How would anyone add to the list of articles and topics shown on the home page? For example I spotted this http://www.physorg.com/news/2012-03-scientist-religious.html and thought it might be a worthy discussion piece . Thanks Richard

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:09:15 UTC | #926679

Naturalist1's Avatar Comment 6 by Naturalist1

Comment #3....Rod...I am in Cambridge. Let me know how I can help. Darrell dcadieux@golden.net

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 12:59:04 UTC | #926682

ANTIcarrot's Avatar Comment 7 by ANTIcarrot

The problem is that 'freethinking' and 'secular rationality' in specific leads to the conclusion that humans are not the centre nor the moral-yardstick of the universe - and the justification that 'one day a human might benifit' does not justify absolutely anything. Ethics of animal testing aside, this is hipocrasy, and I wouldn't give them money if my life depended on it.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 13:37:28 UTC | #926687

aquilacane's Avatar Comment 8 by aquilacane

Comment 3 by rod-the-farmer

OK, lemme see what I can do to arrange something in SW Ontario.

I'm in Oakville, count me in.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 14:49:36 UTC | #926695

TeraBrat's Avatar Comment 9 by TeraBrat

Totally agree.

Comment 2 by cheesedoff17 :

Whilst I applaud the sentiments, it"s our life style that causes cancer, aggravated by polluted air, water, land, and our chemical laced, sugar doused food supply. Plenty of money has been raised over the last 50 years to "fight" the disease which is the result of the above without ever solving the causes.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 16:58:29 UTC | #926718

ganggan's Avatar Comment 10 by ganggan

NOT totally agree.

Cancer is not the disease mainly caused by life style. Sure, tobacoo smoking, alchanol comsuption, and exposure to pollutants can induce cancer, but they are not the major causes. Cancer is a gentic suceptible, aging related disorder. That is why screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer is recommended for people older than 40 years. 40 years of war on cancer failed to tackle the root of the problem.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 17:37:59 UTC | #926729

cheesedoff17's Avatar Comment 11 by cheesedoff17

There is an enlightening, disturbing video worth watching on YouTube, by Journeyman TV. called Best Before-Germany concerning food pollution via packaging for those interested.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 19:00:59 UTC | #926743

TeraBrat's Avatar Comment 12 by TeraBrat

Comment 10 by ganggan :

NOT totally agree. Cancer is not the disease mainly caused by life style. Sure, tobacoo smoking, alchanol comsuption, and exposure to pollutants can induce cancer, but they are not the major causes. Cancer is a gentic suceptible, aging related disorder. That is why screening for breast cancer and prostate cancer is recommended for people older than 40 years. 40 years of war on cancer failed to tackle the root of the problem.

Compare breast cancer rates in countries like China and Japan with the US. It's 99% lifestyle.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:51:27 UTC | #926788

QuestioningKat's Avatar Comment 13 by QuestioningKat

Look at you Scott Burdick stepping up as an atheist! Could you now please improve your and Susan's website? Thanks.

Tue, 13 Mar 2012 22:53:04 UTC | #926789

Sample's Avatar Comment 14 by Sample

Cancer is not a single disease. It is hundreds, even perhaps thousands of diseases. Some cancers can be cured, yes. Stage IV metastatic solid tumor cancers? No way. It's easier to go to the Moon than cure those.

I'm not going to get into the debate about the causes of cancers. That's a red herring to me.

For instance, I am not prepared to tell people the only way to avoid rabies is to never be around animals who provide the virus a vector to humans. Nor will I tell someone who gets rabies, well, it's your lifestyle to live in India and pet feral dogs so I'd rather put money anywhere but R&D for a cure.

We need to find a way to cure rabies regardless of lifestyle. And, we need to find ways to cure cancers regardless of lifestyles. That's the challenge.

This sounds like a great cause, glad to see it posted here.

Mike

Wed, 14 Mar 2012 00:20:53 UTC | #926803