[quote]pookie wrote:
Or better, explain your particular insistence on “cures” to the exclusion of every other illness management method? Why cures, and why exclude infectious diseases?
[/quote]
What the hell is your problem?
I never said anything to the effect that “cures” should be the standard of treatment and I never said anything to denounce any other treatment method. I also did not “exclude” infectious diseases (you fail to specifiy what I am supposedly excluding them from). Rather, I conceded them- get the difference??
[quote]postcrime wrote:
What the hell is your problem?
I never said anything to the effect that “cures” should be the standard of treatment and I never said anything to denounce any other treatment method. I also did not “exclude” infectious diseases (you fail to specifiy what I am supposedly excluding them from). Rather, I conceded them- get the difference??[/quote]
That still doesn’t tell us what’s particularly special about cures vs. the other forms of treatments.
Why would medicine get credit for cures, but not prevention, treatment, etc. That’s all. I’m not really sure how I can word it so that you don’t take it as a personal attack, but I’m just curious.
If you don’t want to discuss it, no problem, but why the thread then?
What the hell is your problem?
I never said anything to the effect that “cures” should be the standard of treatment and I never said anything to denounce any other treatment method. I also did not “exclude” infectious diseases (you fail to specifiy what I am supposedly excluding them from). Rather, I conceded them- get the difference??[/quote]
Instead of arguing with pookie, how about you clarify your stance? TQB mentioned appendicitis, does that count? Because it opens the door for a whole host of illnesses (kidney/gallstones, tonsillitis, etc.).
The ‘disallowing the body to fix itself’, IMO is very contrary. Why would we waste time and effort doing something the body already does (usually better) when there’s so many pathologies out there just to get to that level (engineering and sports competition motives aside)? Especially once you’ve largely stopped the disease from killing people (IMO, cured).
Skin cancer, if excised early enough, is cured, I don’t think anyone will ever develop the technology to the point where someone waves a wand over the tumor and it is magically replaced by healthy cells. Maybe a shot, redifferentiation or necrosis and some form of regeneration, but even that is wasteful overkill. I’d hope the medical community has better things to do and I wouldn’t say they haven’t cured skin cancer until they get to that level.
[quote]pookie wrote:
That still doesn’t tell us what’s particularly special about cures vs. the other forms of treatments.
Why would medicine get credit for cures, but not prevention, treatment, etc. That’s all. I’m not really sure how I can word it so that you don’t take it as a personal attack, but I’m just curious.
If you don’t want to discuss it, no problem, but why the thread then?
[/quote]
You were less reasonable in previous posts. Anyway, my point is, the purpose of this thread is not about giving or denying credit to medicine. I was just specifically interested in the issue of cures, that’s all.