Fidi

Another awesome "TEDtalk." Incredible possibilities for application---an idea I have been waiting for years for someone to implement.

I'm wondering...how many studies do we need to have that disprove the "prayer and positive thought help" fallacy before we'll agree this is junk science. Now, these folks want payment for their voodoo. WTF? Kind of disproves their "altruistic" motives when they want to be paid for "doing God's work."

Here...for all the little dilettantes who want to try to make a point from something they have no training or education in:

"Survival was significantly higher in the United States for all solid tumors, except testicular, stomach, and soft-tissue cancer, the authors report. The greatest differences were seen in the major cancer sites: colon and rectum (56.2% in Europe vs 65.5% in the United States), breast (79.0% vs 90.1%), and prostate cancer (77.5% vs 99.3%), and this "probably represents differences in the timeliness of diagnosis," they comment. That in turn stems from the more intensive screening for cancer carried out in the United States, where a reported 70% of women aged 50 to 70 years have undergone a mammogram in the past 2 years, one-third of people have had sigmoidoscopy or colonoscopy in the past 5 years, and more than 80% of men aged 65 years or more have had a prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test. In fact, it is this PSA testing that probably accounts for the very high survival from prostate cancer seen in the United States, the authors comment.

Further analysis of these figures shows that, in the case of men, more than half of the difference in survival between Europe and United States can be attributed to prostate cancer. When prostate cancer is excluded, the survival rates decreased to 38.1% in Europe and 46.9% in the United States. For women, the survival rate of 62.9% for all cancers in the United States is comparable to that seen in the wealthiest European countries (eg, 61.7% in Sweden, 59.7% in Europe), and the slightly higher survival in the United States was largely due to better survival for colorectal and breast cancer, the authors comment.

The differences in survival are due to a variety of reasons, Dr. Verdecchia and colleagues write. They include factors related to cancer services â€" for example, organization, training, and skills of healthcare professionals; application of evidence-based guidelines; and investment in diagnostic and treatment facilities â€" as well as clinical factors, such as tumor stage and biology.

For hematological malignancies, except for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, the survival rates in Europe and the United States were comparable. The authors suggest that the reason may be that "these malignancies are usually referred to specialist centers for treatment, in accordance with evidence-based guidelines, and they are frequently included in international clinical trials."" (source: medscape.com/viewarticle/561737 [medscape.com/viewarticle/561737] )

IT IS WORTH NOTING that many in the medical community are (and have been) debating the extensive pre-screening carried out here in the US for clients with extensive health coverage. Because ALL tests have a margin of error, we KNOW that we are diagnosing patients with cancers they do not have. The concern then is that we are treating clients who do not have cancers with toxic medications that are known carcinogens. When testing rates increase, so do rates of diagnosis--we know this. It comes as NO surprise then that rates of survival increase as well---it's hard not to "effectively" treat a cancer that did not exist in the first place.

I don't think Franken didn't know this...in fact, the beginning of his response indicates he probably knows this, but...YOU DON'T MAKE AN ARGUMENT and then CHANGE THAT ARGUMENT COMPLETELY when you lose based on the first assumption. Debating 101. That was what Franken was trying to emphasize. The simple fact is, we are paying more for health care and getting less, regardless of how a bunch of cubicle jockies want to spin to save their multi-million dollar salaries and benefits. I want some of these ass-suckers to come down to my floor, and look a patient in the eye who has been injecting arsenic into herself trying to treat a cancer both parents died of because she has no health insurance coverage to pay for real, effective treatment. A woman who works a full-time job and pays taxes... Then tell me, after looking at this person who has maybe a month to live, dying from what was a treatable disease, that this is a great nation with great health care. My fukkin ass.

Bunk. And, btw, my "fake" burger is healthier than a "real" burger any day of the week, and anyone who eats "real" food like hamburgers is sorely mistaken if he/she thinks it isn't loaded in chemicals. Hamburger meat is not that red by nature, folks.

"The village cannot reorganize village life to suit the village idiot." Unfortunately, this is exactly what has been done in the US for the past 30 years. Yay, conservatism. We don't need no stinkin' brains.

Sorry...we're all full up on crazy here...please go somewhere else.

LOL. It's fun to curse in French!