Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

I'm sorry I should have said the last _major_ innovation that made any difference.

All the things you mention are innovations, they just haven't really changed average mortality numbers, which is what I care about.

Edit: the parent post changed their argument to being about 'efficacy' or quality of care. Personally, I prefer a cure to a high-quality and effective 3 months in hospital then death. Thus I focus on the mortality statistics.

Edit again: quote:

> This doesn't qualify as "major"? The ability to reprogram our immune system to kill cancer cells, or to reprogram pathways in faulty cells?

I'd define major as some large change to average mortality from cancer. The same way heart attacks are now vastly more survivable, or we don't get them in the first place. For example, in another comment, someone linked to the NIH's numbers

https://report.nih.gov/nihfactsheets/viewfactsheet.aspx?csid...

They show from 1975 to 2007 incidence of cancer going from 400 per 100k to 461 (e.g. up). I'd define a major improvement as that going to 200 or 100 per 100k people (e.g. down). The 5-year survivability has gone up for the same reason incidence went up, early detection.

Yes, there are specific therapies that improve things 20% here or there for certain very targeted groups. I hope I am in one of those groups if I ever get cancer, but again the averages haven't changed much at all, especially when compared to other chronic disease.



Consider applying for YC's Winter 2026 batch! Applications are open till Nov 10

Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: