Cure for cancer and end of oncrad

[Dock1234]

I was reading article about Ray Kurzweil and he said that genetherapy/nanotech will cure cancer in 5-10 years because of exponential tech.

So will that be end of radonc? Are you worried?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[medgator]

No and no

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/faq-updated-2-20-13.674353/

 

[mpdoc2]

I was reading article about Ray Kurzweil and he said that genetherapy/nanotech will cure cancer in 5-10 years because of exponential tech.

So will that be end of radonc? Are you worried?

Are you a troll and/or idiot?

 

[Neuronix]

The idea of a "cure for cancer" is silly. Every cancer is its own distinct disease, which makes it very implausable to cure all cancers with a single modality.

That said, I hope we do find the cure for cancer. Think of how many lives would be saved with such a technology. I can find something else to do for a career in the highly unlikely, but miraculous case of a cure for all cancers that does not involve radiation therapy.

 

[ReOxygenation]

Your source knows nothing about either of those topics nor does he know cancer. You should be embarrassed of your citation (gene therapy - ha). Hypothetically, if such a silver bullet cure did exist, why does everyone rush to the conclusion rad Onc is particularly vulnerable? This would also end surg Onc (i believe before rad Onc in reality), and.... Wait for it.... Med Onc. Guess no one should go into oncology at all.

 

[Gfunk6]

A nice little cartoon explaining why the cure for "cancer" remains ever elusive . . .

http://www.phdcomics.com/comics.php?f=1162