Biden's Moon Shot - Solving Cancer

[MrT]

The call by President Obama, during the State of the Union, to seek out another "moon shot" like the one enacted by President Kennedy is a big and powerful goal that should garner the support of the public. In the call, President Obama placed his VP Joe Biden in charge of putting the full force of the United States government behind an initiative to "cure cancer." Biden, who lost his son to cancer, apparently did not know this plan would be part of the SOTU - if you watch him right after the announcement, you can see him leaning over to Speaker Ryan and telling him that specifically - has a very large task ahead of him.

And let me say, I understand and appreciate the skepticism and the willingness to poke fun at President Obama for setting a goal that is so difficult and unlikely to be achieved in the very near future. So I found this article posted yesterday on sciencemag.org and thought I might share what some in the scientific community see as the impact of this plan.

What Vice President Biden?s moonshot may mean for cancer research | Science | AAAS

Cancer researchers are welcoming but eagerly awaiting more details on Vice President Joe Biden’s newly announced plan to lead “a moonshot” to cure cancer. They have tossed out some of their own thoughts on what the plan should entail, while tempering expectations for a single cancer cure. Their overall hope, they say, is that it will mean steady funding increases for the National Institutes of Health (NIH).

Biden’s plan describes increased funding, from both the government and the private sector, for combatting cancer. He also wants to “break down silos and bring all the cancer fighters together—to work together, share information, and end cancer as we know it.” The goal is to double the pace of progress, or as he put it: “to make a decade worth of advances in 5 years.”

To do this, Biden plans to lead an effort involving government, industry, researchers, patient groups, and philanthropies to “target investment, coordinate across silos, and increase access to information.”

 

[Mason66]

The only way I can see to cure most cancers is to kill people on their 30th birthday. (Logan's Run)

Most cancers hit older people so they would be wiped out.

There are still some cases of cancer that hit younger people and those can be worked on but I have no idea what can be done to prevent the cancer.

 

[KLATTU]

The call by President Obama, during the State of the Union, to seek out another "moon shot" like the one enacted by President Kennedy is a big and powerful goal that should garner the support of the public. In the call, President Obama placed his VP Joe Biden in charge of putting the full force of the United States government behind an initiative to "cure cancer." Biden, who lost his son to cancer, apparently did not know this plan would be part of the SOTU - if you watch him right after the announcement, you can see him leaning over to Speaker Ryan and telling him that specifically - has a very large task ahead of him.

And let me say, I understand and appreciate the skepticism and the willingness to poke fun at President Obama for setting a goal that is so difficult and unlikely to be achieved in the very near future. So I found this article posted yesterday on sciencemag.org and thought I might share what some in the scientific community see as the impact of this plan.

What Vice President Biden?s moonshot may mean for cancer research | Science | AAAS

First off, there is really no such thing as a ( singular) 'cure for cancer'. But I'm sure science guys like Obama and Biden know that.

 

[katzgar]

The only way I can see to cure most cancers is to kill people on their 30th birthday. (Logan's Run)

Most cancers hit older people so they would be wiped out.

There are still some cases of cancer that hit younger people and those can be worked on but I have no idea what can be done to prevent the cancer.

thats why you do research

 

[Mason66]

thats why you do research

Research has been going on for how many years now?

A lot of the time cancer is the result of lifestyle choices, so maybe that is the part Obama will want to control.

 

[iguanaman]

First off, there is really no such thing as a ( singular) 'cure for cancer'. But I'm sure science guys like Obama and Biden know that.

There could be if we could understand why our bodies develop an inability to recognize and eliminate cancer cells at some point in our lives. Our own immune systems are the "magic bullet" and we now know that most of us develop cancerous cells through out our lives and they are destroyed by our own body.

 

[MrT]

The only way I can see to cure most cancers is to kill people on their 30th birthday. (Logan's Run)

Most cancers hit older people so they would be wiped out.

There are still some cases of cancer that hit younger people and those can be worked on but I have no idea what can be done to prevent the cancer.

I've got a doctor friend that pointed out that every time your cells divide, there is a chance for an error to occur and for the cell to become cancerous. And so, as we advance our ability to keep people alive for longer, we inevitably come back to a battle of creating more opportunities for cancer to form.

 

[ocean515]

The call by President Obama, during the State of the Union, to seek out another "moon shot" like the one enacted by President Kennedy is a big and powerful goal that should garner the support of the public. In the call, President Obama placed his VP Joe Biden in charge of putting the full force of the United States government behind an initiative to "cure cancer." Biden, who lost his son to cancer, apparently did not know this plan would be part of the SOTU - if you watch him right after the announcement, you can see him leaning over to Speaker Ryan and telling him that specifically - has a very large task ahead of him.

And let me say, I understand and appreciate the skepticism and the willingness to poke fun at President Obama for setting a goal that is so difficult and unlikely to be achieved in the very near future. So I found this article posted yesterday on sciencemag.org and thought I might share what some in the scientific community see as the impact of this plan.

What Vice President Biden?s moonshot may mean for cancer research | Science | AAAS

Funding to the NCI has averaged close to $5 billion a year for a number of years. Add to that the $100's of millions raised each year by various causes, and it's hard to understand what Biden can add to the equation.

I'll admit it's difficult to separate my thoughts from the messengers here, but I'm left with a sense of electioneering, rather than the need to offer some atta boy congrats to the President for his proposal on cancer.

 

[MrT]

First off, there is really no such thing as a ( singular) 'cure for cancer'. But I'm sure science guys like Obama and Biden know that.

I've heard a lot of promising information about immunotherapy drugs - the same type used to cure Jimmy Carter - wherein the drugs are essentially designed to "un-mask" the cancer and help the body recognize the cancer as something that should be attacked and removed.

 

[Casper]

The call by President Obama, during the State of the Union, to seek out another "moon shot" like the one enacted by President Kennedy is a big and powerful goal that should garner the support of the public. In the call, President Obama placed his VP Joe Biden in charge of putting the full force of the United States government behind an initiative to "cure cancer." Biden, who lost his son to cancer, apparently did not know this plan would be part of the SOTU - if you watch him right after the announcement, you can see him leaning over to Speaker Ryan and telling him that specifically - has a very large task ahead of him.

And let me say, I understand and appreciate the skepticism and the willingness to poke fun at President Obama for setting a goal that is so difficult and unlikely to be achieved in the very near future. So I found this article posted yesterday on sciencemag.org and thought I might share what some in the scientific community see as the impact of this plan.

What Vice President Biden?s moonshot may mean for cancer research | Science | AAAS

The reality is that Cancer will probably never be cured because Cancer is not one thing, it is a broad term used form several different things. Me thinks people should do more research before they actually open their mouth and prove they are ignorant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer

Is an American cure for cancer possible? - CNN.com

 

[MrT]

Funding to the NCI has averaged close to $5 billion a year for a number of years. Add to that the $100's of millions raised each year by various causes, and it's hard to understand what Biden can add to the equation.

I'll admit it's difficult to separate my thoughts from the messengers here, but I'm left with a sense of electioneering, rather than the need to offer some atta boy congrats to the President for his proposal on cancer.

What do you mean by that one? As in you think it's designed to score political points and victories for Biden and/or the Democrats?

 

[fmw]

I just returned from the doctor's office. He told me today that what has changed is that cancer is now thought of and treated as a chronic disease that is incurable. The medical profession has had quite a bit of success following this protocol. The percentage of cancer survivors is significantly higher than it was just 10 years ago. I'm one myself.

 

[ocean515]

What do you mean by that one? As in you think it's designed to score political points and victories for Biden and/or the Democrats?

So what is Biden going to add to what is already a Moon Shot effort? I'm just wondering.

 

[UtahBill]

If the problem and the cure were only limited to the laws of physics, which are pretty much fixed, I would say MAYBE, but cancer is within the realm of biology, which is full of ever changing variables, which is still little understood by science.

 

[UtahBill]

Every now and then I see something on TV about people who don't get diseases even though exposed to them. Like the guy who never got HIV even tho he was a rampant homosexual and never used condoms. Likewise those who didn't get the plague even while handling the bodies of those who died of it..

Genetics is likely the best prevention. I am one of those who check NO on every block of the doctors forms, as in NO I never had any of the long list of common diseases they need to know about. My wife is the same. Wondering how that will affect our kids long term...

 

[katzgar]

The reality is that Cancer will probably never be cured because Cancer is not one thing, it is a broad term used form several different things. Me thinks people should do more research before they actually open their mouth and prove they are ignorant.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer

Is an American cure for cancer possible? - CNN.com

buncha negative stuff based on very little on this thread. some cancers are already cured, there are some cancers that have very promising research going on, I bet we can cure several cancers, not just one.

 

[Casper]

buncha negative stuff based on very little on this thread. some cancers are already cured, there are some cancers that have very promising research going on, I bet we can cure several cancers, not just one.

Some yes, but then again you realized what I and the articles stated is thru, one has A Cancer, not just Cancer and to speak of it as if it is one thing is ignorant.

 

[katzgar]

Some yes, but then again you realized what I and the articles stated is thru, one has A Cancer, not just Cancer and to speak of it as if it is one thing is ignorant.

and also pointless

 

[Eric7216]

Unfortunately this seems a little late. After increases in the National Institute of Health's budget from $17.8 billion in FY2000 to $29.6 in FY 2008 and $30.5 billion in FY2009 funding stagnated and was only $30.3 billion in FY2015.