DARPA for NIH?

[Lamount]

Excerpt from Biden's speech last night:

"The Defense Department has an agency called DARPA – the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency – that’s there to develop breakthroughs to enhance our national security – which led to the internet and GPS and so much more. The National Institutes of Health, the NIH – should create a similar Advanced Research Projects Agency for health. To develop breakthroughs – to prevent, detect, and treat diseases like Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and cancer.

This is personal to so many of us. I can think of no more worthy investment. And I know of nothing that is more bipartisan. Let’s end cancer as we know it. It’s within our power."


I saw this part of the speech and he seemed to focus in on cancer in some off-the-cuff remarks (for obvious reasons). Does anyone know more about this?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[TheWallnerus]

We could end a lot of cancer "as we know it" if we outlawed cigarettes, alcohol, and obesity. Guess that's too easy!

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

Excerpt from Biden's speech last night:

"The Defense Department has an agency called DARPA – the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency – that’s there to develop breakthroughs to enhance our national security – which led to the internet and GPS and so much more. The National Institutes of Health, the NIH – should create a similar Advanced Research Projects Agency for health. To develop breakthroughs – to prevent, detect, and treat diseases like Alzheimer’s, diabetes, and cancer.

This is personal to so many of us. I can think of no more worthy investment. And I know of nothing that is more bipartisan. Let’s end cancer as we know it. It’s within our power."


I saw this part of the speech and he seemed to focus in on cancer in some off-the-cuff remarks (for obvious reasons). Does anyone know more about this?

Wait I thought the Moonshot was gonna fix this?

 

[thecarbonionangle]

We could end a lot of cancer "as we know it" if we outlawed cigarettes, alcohol, and obesity. Guess that's too easy!

Menthols i think may be no longer allowed which is a start.

 

[deleted969641]

We could end a lot of cancer "as we know it" if we outlawed cigarettes, alcohol, and obesity. Guess that's too easy!

Listen, suggesting that obesity is unhealthy is actually really offensive. It's healthy and beautiful and is not dangerous or something you can really control anyway. Cigarettes, yes of course we can't have people stinking up the air, but lets make sure people can have as much alcohol and THC delivered to their door as they want. Those are harmless. But mostly, lets focus on a virus that >99% of people quickly and completely recover from with lasting immunity for which there are multiple effective vaccines that are available to all American adults. That's our biggest health issue and the government needs to spend trillions right now and make sure we are taken care of and constantly reminded that we could die from it any minute rather than focusing on our well-being, economic independence, and encouraging healthy diet, exercise, social interaction, spirituality, and moderation of substance use.

"Lets end cancer as we know it"
I am reminded of... Miss Teen USA 2007 - South Carolina answers a question - YouTube

 

[Palex80]

We could end a lot of cancer "as we know it" if we outlawed cigarettes, alcohol, and obesity. Guess that's too easy!

Did you not try that 100 years ago?

 

[medgator]

. But mostly, lets focus on a virus that >99% of people quickly and completely recover from with lasting immunity for which there are multiple effective vaccines that are available to all American adults.

Which segment of faux news did you catch that on?

 

[deleted969641]

Which segment of faux news did you catch that on?

Just so I'm clear, which of those 3 objectively and easily verifiable facts are you suggesting is false? That over 99% of all comers do not quickly recover from covid (as in they don't live with the virus and its complications for a long time), that they do not develop lasting immunity after recovering, or that there are multiple vaccines?

I know some people desperately want those things to not be true for whatever reason, but saying it just doesn't make it so.
The vaccines work and they are available to everyone. At this point, if you chose not to get a vaccine and you get sick that's on you. It's not on everyone else to alter their life because you are either afraid the vaccines have microchips in them or are some kind of anti-vaccine nut. People need to start calling this absurdity out.

 

[medgator]

Just so I'm clear, which of those 3 objectively and easily verifiable facts are you suggesting is false? That over 99% of all comers do not quickly recover from covid (as in they don't live with the virus and its complications for a long time), they do not develop lasting immunity after recovering, or that there are multiple vaccines?

I know some people desperately want those things to not be true for whatever reason, but saying it just doesn't make it so.
The vaccines work and they are available to everyone. At this point, if you chose not to get a vaccine and you get sick that's on you. It's not on everyone else to alter their life because you are either afraid the vaccines have microchips in them or some kind of anti-vaccine nut.

None of that has been proven to be true actually, but keep trying. Did you listen to the pfizer ceo recently? Have you looked into the research on the long term effects of covid in survivors, even those who aren't intubated?

 

[deleted969641]

None of that has been proven to be true actually, but keep trying. Did you listen to the pfizer ceo recently? Have you looked into the research on the long term effects of covid in survivors, even those who aren't intubated?

Feel free to prove me wrong with data demonstrating the actual percentage of people that contract covid who have significant long term effects (I already know what that percentage is (edit with link - 2.3% with a symptom at 12 weeks) despite cries of "long covid" from scientifically illiterate fear-mongers). Regardless, unless you are debating the efficacy of the vaccines it's now a non-issue. This is over, and anybody trying to prolong this crisis artificially for political reasons can screw off.

On a related note, I saw this piece of trash in the NEJM this morning: Vaccine Breakthrough Infections with SARS-CoV-2 Variants | NEJM
Fairly obvious what the point of this article is. 2 people out of 417 people who received the vaccine were infected and nobody died. That's awesome!
NEJM has already previously declared itself as a journal that has part of its mission factoring in sociopolitical topics in what it chooses to publish, so it's not entirely surprising.

 

[medgator]

Feel free to prove me wrong with data demonstrating the actual percentage of people that contract covid who have significant long term effects (I already know what that percentage is despite cries of "long covid" from scientifically illiterate fear-mongers). Regardless, unless you are debating the efficacy of the vaccines it's now a non-issue. This is over, and anybody trying to prolong this crisis artificially for political reasons can screw off.

On a related note, I saw this piece of trash in the NEJM this morning: Vaccine Breakthrough Infections with SARS-CoV-2 Variants | NEJM
Fairly obvious what the point of this article is. 2 people out of 417 people who received the vaccine were infected and nobody died. That's awesome!
NEJM has already previously declared itself as a journal that has part of its mission factoring in sociopolitical topics in what it chooses to publish, so it's not entirely surprising.

Welcome back KHE88, missed ya buddy!! How's the biryani these days?

 

[thecarbonionangle]

Welcome back KHE88, missed ya buddy!! How's the biryani these days?

Sounds extremely KHE, agree lol. welcome back!!! Stay away from mask topic this time.

 

[Lamount]

But mostly, lets focus on a virus that >99% of people quickly and completely recover from with lasting immunity for which there are multiple effective vaccines that are available to all American adults

I wouldn't say 'completely'. I still don't have a sense of smell... which is more annoying than one would guess.

 

[Lamount]

Wait I thought the Moonshot was gonna fix this?

I was less interested in the "curing cancer" applause line, and more curious about the possibility of increased federal funding for cancer research.

 

[TheWallnerus]

And will Biden be for mandatory HPV vaccinations in the children?

I am only being half tongue in cheek. There are about 1.8 million new cancers a year. I reckon with no obesity, no smoking, no alcohol and total HPV vaccination we could be down to a million a year. Which let’s face it if that happened it would a be moonshot or a Mars shot.

 

[RickyScott]

And will Biden be for mandatory HPV vaccinations in the children?

I am only being half tongue in cheek. There are about 1.8 million new cancers a year. I reckon with no obesity, no smoking, no alcohol and total HPV vaccination we could be down to a million a year. Which let’s face it if that happened it would a be moonshot or a Mars shot.

Aging is a huge cause of cancer.

 

[Palex80]

I am only being half tongue in cheek. There are about 1.8 million new cancers a year. I reckon with no obesity, no smoking, no alcohol and total HPV vaccination we could be down to a million a year. Which let’s face it if that happened it would a be moonshot or a Mars shot.

Indeed, no obesity, no smoking and no alcohol will reduce many of the cancers favored by these risk factors.
On the other hand, these 3 risk factors also produce a lot of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
These are competing risks.

In other words: If Mr. Smith keeps a healthy diet and doesn't smoke, he does not die from congestive heart failure at the age of 72. Thus, Mr. Smith gets the chance to get diangosed with prostate cancer at the age of 74. And since Mr. Smith is still quite healthy and has a favorable life expectancy, he will need radiation at 74.

 

[Chartreuse Wombat]

Indeed, no obesity, no smoking and no alcohol will reduce many of the cancers favored by these risk factors.
On the other hand, these 3 risk factors also produce a lot of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
These are competing risks.

In other words: If Mr. Smith keeps a healthy diet and doesn't smoke, he does not die from congestive heart failure at the age of 72. Thus, Mr. Smith gets the chance to get diangosed with prostate cancer at the age of 74. And since Mr. Smith is still quite healthy and has a favorable life expectancy, he will need radiation at 74.

Before dying of neurocognitive disease at age 79

 

[TheWallnerus]

Indeed, no obesity, no smoking and no alcohol will reduce many of the cancers favored by these risk factors.
On the other hand, these 3 risk factors also produce a lot of cardiovascular morbidity and mortality.
These are competing risks.

In other words: If Mr. Smith keeps a healthy diet and doesn't smoke, he does not die from congestive heart failure at the age of 72. Thus, Mr. Smith gets the chance to get diangosed with prostate cancer at the age of 74. And since Mr. Smith is still quite healthy and has a favorable life expectancy, he will need radiation at 74.

Well that's Mr. Smith. What about Mrs. Smith. Lifestyle changes can affect prostate cancer risk, too, though...

Just sayin'. Every time Biden says "let's eliminate cancer," or anytime any politician (or person!) says this, a far more effective, achievable, and cost-conscious policy would be: quit smoking, don't drink, get HPV vaccine, and exercise and eat right. And then that politician would get defeated in the next election probably.