The Cure
 

By controlling medical research fund, you are in the position to guarantee that a cure will be found in 15 years for any disease you choose. Unfortunately, no prgress on any others would be made during that period.

Would you target one disease?




(Today I placed a different question in each forum of the D9 Sororities.)

I would focus on one disease. Not just because this disease has the potential to destroy us bit by bit but because most of the major diseases being reseached have more effective treatments than the one I have in mind. Having said all that, I'd focus on curing HIV. It's systematically killing us at an alarming rate because we aren't taking care of ourselves. Even if the infection rate wasn't as high as it is in the US, the infection rate outside the country is equally disturbing. The number of children being orphaned is just saddening. I may be being selfish but if we could cure HIV/AIDS in the next 15 years that's where all of my money would be directed.

I will focus on curing cancer. Anyone at anytime can get this disease regardless how they lived their life.

I think I'm with you on this one.

That is true, but not everyone getting HIV is living foul. Children, uninformed partners, wives, husbands, health care workers aren't out doing things that will make them more succeptible to getting the disease. And as I said we can treat cancer effectively enough to save most people that get it, if it's caught in time. Not to mention there are a number of cancers (skin, lung as two examples) that are directly related to how you are living in some cases.

I would cure Sickle Cell. This disease receives little "air time", little funding and has had a tremendous effect on on community.

Sickle Cell was on the scene long before HIV was even heard of, yet most of the treatments are still experimental. I tend to believe that white America is not going to fund finding a cure for something that doesn't affect their communities, and black people tend to be oblivious unless they know and/or love someone with this disease.

HIV/AIDS. Worldwide this has dessimated [sp?] numerous countries. "Cancer" covers tooooo wide of a variety of conditions. AIDS walks are going on all of the country this summer [I already signed up - Anyone want to sponsor me:D ]. A communicable disease like AIDS has a greater potential to damage the human community. With sickle cell, it's a genetically inherited disease, you don't catch it. Sickle has less damaging potential to society. Not to discount the pain or suffering that people with sickle cell go through, but, it just doesn't have the same damaging potential as AIDS.

I would target on cancer, because some diseases can be prevented by the person and others just happen without so much as a warning. Cancer is one of the many.......

Re: The Cure
 

No. I would continue to attempt to research multiple diseases as this has afforded us many vaccines in the past. The reason SOME cancer is curable (please don't be deceived into thinking all are), life with herpes livable and even the life of AIDS patients prolonged is because they have all received funding and research over the past years. If all funding to each [as well as to other diseases] is shut off as the disease change and mature and particualrly as viruses morph, the effect will be devastating and likely a pandemic in some cases.

I'm torn
 

I immediately thought Cancer- Pancreatic Cancer to be exact because that is the disease that killed my mother. But then I thought about HIV/Aids. I think that HIV/AIDS would be of greater benefit to us as a people.

...How about IGNORANCE? Is that a disease?

definitely AIDS/HIV....

lost too many close friends to that dreadful disease.