Scorcher Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 It's all about money...Does anyone really think that we couldn't have cured cancer by now? There is nowhere near as much money in a cure as there is in a lifetime of treatment. This will be unpopular, but what we need is a Global Over-Population Awareness Month where we remind people that no one lives forever, and there is nothing tragic about death by natural causes. Keeping people alive into their 90's who were supposed to die in their 70s is not about doing them any favors. It is getting 20 more years worth of money in the pharmaceutical companies pockets. Before you crucify me, know that every member of my family has died from either cancer or heart disease, most of them in their 60's. I have no illusions that I will live forever. I believe that it is better to die when you are supposed to than to be kept alive by drugs and machines. Tell this to the women in their 20's , 30's and 40's with breast or ovarian cancer who are not only kept alive by drugs but are also cured by drugs and machines. It's about quality of life. If a drug or machine ( ex. dialysis ) can keep someone active, lucid, and able to enjoy life then they should be available and used with age being a non-factor.Someone on a respirator with no hope then yes pull the plug. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphin_Akie Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I read something the other day like 10-15% of the cost of NFL "pink" merchandise goes to breast cancer research. Unless its more about somebody wearing the pink to show their support, they're better off donating the cost of whatever they were going to buy (or even half of that) directly to research. Its mostly about the NFL trying to appeal to women, trying to seel them merchandise and trying to generate some good PR for an organization where we read a lot about their employees being gutless thugs, including assaulting their women. At least they scrapped that stupid idea of having the flags be pink, while players had pink towels that looked quite similar. Like the whole post but the bold is the best part. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ted Goings Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I appreciate that you feel the need to insert your cynicism into all the threads involving health issues, but your unsolicited views on life and death may be better suited for forums dedicated to those topics. Please go find the forums where those 70 year old people are fighting to survive by their choice, and explain to them why they should just give up and except their fate of death now. Make sure they understand that all pharmaceutical companies are evil entities that should not be given money and it is better for them to follow the natural order of things and die, rather than following their choice to survive and spend more time with their families or accomplishing their life goals. I'm sure everyone will appreciate you inferring on their beliefs. There is a word for people who try to stifle unpopular opinions because they don't conform to their ideal of what everyone should think. Are you a fascist? My views were unsolicited? Did I miss where you went around and asked for the other 100 responses to this thread? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud29 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 It's all about money...Does anyone really think that we couldn't have cured cancer by now? There is nowhere near as much money in a cure as there is in a lifetime of treatment. This will be unpopular, but what we need is a Global Over-Population Awareness Month where we remind people that no one lives forever, and there is nothing tragic about death by natural causes. Keeping people alive into their 90's who were supposed to die in their 70s is not about doing them any favors. It is getting 20 more years worth of money in the pharmaceutical companies pockets. Before you crucify me, know that every member of my family has died from either cancer or heart disease, most of them in their 60's. I have no illusions that I will live forever. I believe that it is better to die when you are supposed to than to be kept alive by drugs and machines. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ted Goings Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Y'all aren't real big on free thinkers around here, huh? My fault. How about that Christine Michael? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud29 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) Y'all aren't real big on free thinkers around here, huh? My fault. How about that Christine Michael? As "free thinkers" often translates to "uninformed thinkers," I guess you could say that. "You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant." Edited October 16, 2015 by bud29 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ted Goings Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 As "free thinkers" often translates to "uninformed thinkers," I guess you could say that. As "uninformed thinkers" often translates to "people who don't agree with me", I'm ok with that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Def. Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 There is a word for people who try to stifle unpopular opinions because they don't conform to their ideal of what everyone should think. Are you a fascist? My views were unsolicited? Did I miss where you went around and asked for the other 100 responses to this thread? Sorry but it was unsolicited. This thread is about the NFL's actions in supporting breast cancer. They are not about your views that those with cancer or sickness of any kind should just die because you believe it is the natural way. Again, you want to discuss that I'm sure there are other forums out there. Please go to them and tell them how they are fascist for conforming by trying to survive. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 (edited) So ... I didn't read the whole thread ... but I have always thought the NFL only does this because they believe it improves their image. Who the hell watching NFL games is not aware of breast cancer (and cancer in general). Putting on pink to raise awareness IMO is a cop out, takes minimal effort and minimal investment - and they get to say "I'm doing something to help". I think there is a ton more meaningful ways they could help than the least effort, least meaningful way of "raising awareness". [ETA] In addition to the idea it improves their image, I suspect there is also a merchandising angle at play as well. Edited October 16, 2015 by Grits and Shins 2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rajncajn Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 So ... I didn't read the whole thread ... but I have always thought the NFL only does this because they believe it improves their image. Who the hell watching NFL games is not aware of breast cancer (and cancer in general). Putting on pink to raise awareness IMO is a cop out, takes minimal effort and minimal investment - and they get to say "I'm doing something to help". I think there is a ton more meaningful ways they could help than the least effort, least meaningful way of "raising awareness". [ETA] In addition to the idea it improves their image, I suspect there is also a merchandising angle at play as well. You think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Ted Goings Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Sorry but it was unsolicited. This thread is about the NFL's actions in supporting breast cancer. They are not about your views that those with cancer or sickness of any kind should just die because you believe it is the natural way. Again, you want to discuss that I'm sure there are other forums out there. Please go to them and tell them how they are fascist for conforming by trying to survive. No, my friend. This thread stopped being solely about the NFL and breast cancer and became a debate about supporting one type of cancer research over another, awareness vs cure, and where the money goes that is collected. My original point that we could have already found a cure if we wanted to has just as much place in that debate as any other. I will give you that the Global Overpopulation Awareness Month comment extended into the unnecessary. Having said that, I believe that plenty of people are aware of breast cancer, and if they get a month, why shouldn't there be a month to consider the massive negative effects to this planet as a result of overpopulation brought on by people's desire to live forever and pharmaceutical companies willingness to exploit that desire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bud29 Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 As "uninformed thinkers" often translates to "people who don't agree with me", I'm ok with that. If you're willing to explain how it's rational and plausible that research centers around the world (many of them non-profit) are hiding a cure to gain profit, I'd be willing to listen. It would need its own thread in the tailgate, since that discussion really doesn't belong here, but I'd be willing to listen. Would be much better than your current schtick of making a wild comment and laughing at those who disagree, using "free thinking" as your only justification. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 You think? There you go ... they put in minimum effort and minimum investment -AND- make money off the deal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 So ... I didn't read the whole thread ... but I have always thought the NFL only does this because they believe it improves their image. Who the hell watching NFL games is not aware of breast cancer (and cancer in general). Putting on pink to raise awareness IMO is a cop out, takes minimal effort and minimal investment - and they get to say "I'm doing something to help". I think there is a ton more meaningful ways they could than the least effort, least meaningful way of "raising awareness". [ETA] In addition to the idea it improves their image, I suspect there is also a merchandising angle at play as well. THIS If they want to run a legitimate awareness campaign, take on a cancer/disease that has totally out of whack funding to fatality ratio, not the form of cancer that has more research funding than any other. For example: Estimated 2015 deaths from breast cancer: 40,730 2014 research funding for breast cancer: $682M Estimated 2015 deaths from pancreatic cancer: 40,560 2014 research funding for pancreatic cancer: $123M How much money do you think the NFL stands to make by smoke screening women into thinking that they are sensitive to women's issues? How much money do you think the NFL stands to make by appearing to be sensitive to cancer patients in general? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Def. Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I will give you that the Global Overpopulation Awareness Month comment extended into the unnecessary. Having said that, I believe that plenty of people are aware of breast cancer, and if they get a month, why shouldn't there be a month to consider the massive negative effects to this planet as a result of overpopulation brought on by people's desire to live forever and pharmaceutical companies willingness to exploit that desire. So you admit it, and yet continue...alright then. We'll I apologize that my type 1 diabetes helps the pharmaceutical companies in my desire to not live forever, but have at least lived a normal life past the age of 13 with the hope of reaching 50's or if I'm lucky 60's. I should of made the correct choice and let myself die right then. No need to respond. I will no longer be listening. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Tell this to the women in their 20's , 30's and 40's with breast or ovarian cancer who are not only kept alive by drugs but are also cured by drugs and machines. It's about quality of life. If a drug or machine ( ex. dialysis ) can keep someone active, lucid, and able to enjoy life then they should be available and used with age being a non-factor.Someone on a respirator with no hope then yes pull the plug. I watched my father kept alive for a short time while we tried to learn the truth about what was killing him, and then finally made the painful decision to let go. I now have a brother in his 60s liver failure, dementia and not the same guy. It isn't my choice if he stays alive or not, but last time I saw him I could tell his quality of life was pretty bad. Not sure I'd want to be that way. There's nothing wrong with continuing to live if there is some quality there, many recover from serious illnesses and live many good years. Had a friend survive multiple bouts with cancer, then lived free of it for a long time and had a great life. It came back, the treatments kicked his but and caused other problems, and he eventually succumbed. I don't think he'd give up those good years for anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 If you're willing to explain how it's rational and plausible that research centers around the world (many of them non-profit) are hiding a cure to gain profit, I'd be willing to listen. It would need its own thread in the tailgate, since that discussion really doesn't belong here, but I'd be willing to listen. Would be much better than your current schtick of making a wild comment and laughing at those who disagree, using "free thinking" as your only justification. I'm enjoying the forums more since I've been ignoring Ted Goings, many of his posts smacked of troll behavior and superiority complex. So you admit it, and yet continue...alright then. We'll I apologize that my type 1 diabetes helps the pharmaceutical companies in my desire to not live forever, but have at least lived a normal life past the age of 13 with the hope of reaching 50's or if I'm lucky 60's. I should of made the correct choice and let myself die right then. No need to respond. I will no longer be listening. And another poster gets it, welcome to the club. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
40Spiners Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Maybe I'm a bit bias as I am in the health field, but when someone asks for a donation to cure cancer, I respond by asking what we're doing to prevent cancer (i.e cigs, bad food, etc). Why are we spending millions of dollars trying to cure something that we allow the cigarette companies (and others) to foster? If you keep backing out over a nail in the driveway, should you spend the money by continually fixing the tire, or pay someone to remove the nail? I'm with Atlas. I have no desire to ban things from people...do what you want. But don't expect me to fork over cash for your stupidity in health choices. Besides, Komen uses less than 10% of their donations for any actual research. They blow the rest on salaries and funding more fundraising. That's a great gig if you can fool the masses. To me, that is throwing good money after bad. No thanks. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grits and Shins Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I'm with Atlas. I have no desire to ban things from people...do what you want. But don't expect me to fork over cash for your stupidity in health choices. Besides, Komen uses less than 10% of their donations for any actual research. They blow the rest on salaries and funding more fundraising. That's a great gig if you can fool the masses. To me, that is throwing good money after bad. No thanks. In general I am on board with the whole concept of prevention over recovery. In general I am on board with the whole concept of personal responsibility for your own bad decisions. Having said that, don't we have to understand what causes cancer before we can talk about how to prevent it? What exactly is it that causes breast cancer or pancreatic cancer or prostate cancer or any of a variety of other cancers NOT related to tobacco use? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Friend of mine had lung cancer, and many people would say "yeah but you never smoked", they think its the only cause. I don't think cancer is one of those things you can really prevent. My father passed of liver cancer, no idea what caused it. Its getting a bit deep for a fantasy football discussion, to be expected on this topic. Now about my starting lineup, JStew or Abdullah, or that Woodhead guy. Anybody? Bueller? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Big John Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Now about my starting lineup, JStew or Abdullah, or that Woodhead guy. Anybody? Bueller? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dolphin_Akie Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Now about my starting lineup, JStew or Abdullah, or that Woodhead guy. Anybody? Bueller? Whichever is wearing the least pink. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevegrab Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 Thanks I needed that (and I was kidding) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Avernus Posted October 16, 2015 Share Posted October 16, 2015 I read the title as reapect for those who chew the pink Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BA Baracus Posted October 17, 2015 Share Posted October 17, 2015 Whichever is wearing the least pink. Or the one with the biggest tits Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.