How Long Have I Got Left?

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/01/25/opinion/sunday/how-long-have-i-got-left.html?smid=tw-share&_r=0

by conesus • 12 years ago

276 171 12 years ago

melling• 12 years ago

"And then my health began to improve, thanks to a pill that targets a specific genetic mutation tied to my cancer."

Isn't tailoring drugs to specific mutations the next big revolution in medicine that we've been waiting for? Steve Jobs had his DNA sequenced to help fight his cancer.

http://appleinsider.com/articles/11/10/21/steve_jobs_had_his...

gregpilling• 12 years ago

Yes, I am friends with Dr. Mark Nelson at University of Arizona and he is doing a startup in that area. http://pathology.arizona.edu/faculty/mark-nelson-phd

CreakyParrot• 12 years ago

No offense, and it bothers me in almost any use, but the phrase "doing a startup" seems especially out of its depth in this context.

hrq• 12 years ago

http://www.technologyreview.com/view/519686/steve-jobs-left-...

Another article describing a business that was started around this concept and seems to be having an important impact in medicine.

taylodl• 12 years ago

"I began to realize that coming face to face with my own mortality, in a sense, had changed both nothing and everything. Before my cancer was diagnosed, I knew that someday I would die, but I didn’t know when. After the diagnosis, I knew that someday I would die, but I didn’t know when."

Within this passage lies the meaning of life.

nightski• 12 years ago

The logical person inside of me wants to say that there is no meaning to life. But of course, that is not how I feel.

md224• 12 years ago

Well, of course, that's the trick: to acknowledge a lack of objective meaning while seeking out your own subjective meaning, something that transcends the banal logic of the everyday. That's the tough part (or at least, it can be for many, myself included).

GhotiFish• 12 years ago

well. I could make a decent argument that reproduction is a serviceable meaning to life if you like.

philwelch• 12 years ago

Life is a sandbox game. You can choose your own goals, but from time to time it suggests goals to you. You get rewards for completing them, but you don't have to, it's just a way of making things easier if you have trouble deciding what to do.

the_cat_kittles• 12 years ago

meaning is created, and its worth creating

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

The Christian in me wants to say "hey guys, I know what you mean, I've felt the same way, and I found a reasonable answer." But my experience reminds me that kind of conversation is futile.

benched• 12 years ago

One thing about knowledge, and being a tiny little human, is that if you don't know about the whole framework behind existence, then not only do you not know if there is such a thing or what it is, but you also don't know whether anybody knows. And don't you even think about reaching for that Razor.

wpietri3• 12 years ago

The way I resolve it: meaning is something we construct. So yes, there's no Meaning of Life written in the stars, no absolute truth there. But you can make as much meaning as you need.

Personally, I like that better. If somebody tried to tell me the One True Meaning of Life, the first thing I'd do is argue with 'em. This way I get to argue with myself.

_random_2• 12 years ago

The meaning of life is to never die. I hope we will reach this within next few generations. Dead have no choices.

obituary_latte3• 12 years ago

For you, maybe. And even then, probably not.

It's so easy to try and attempt to break it down. And every-time we work towards that, we are neglecting the true nature of the chaos from which we were sewn.

You don't know when you will die. I don't know when either of us will die. OMFG it can't make sense. Should it? Do I prepare? If so, how? WTF will my dog do? The truth is: you can't know the truth until the moment comes to you. When it does, be it with fear or amazement, it will be only yours. You will get to tell no-one. It will just be yours. In the same way you remember Sandy or Tim's glance in the third grade. In the same way as now. In the same way it is for everyone telling you the theory they believe in that moment.

The question should not be "when will I die?" but rather "how will I feel about my life in the last moment I'm lucidly able to do so?". It will hit you in the same way as Sandy/Tim: it will be something you know you feel no matter what anyone could say. Analogous to someone in love. They might be a jerk, but that time they did that thing...that's what grips you. It will feel like that. And it's likely money won't be the kicker. Nor will knowing that this is the moment you die.

pops confetti cannon

6d0debc071• 12 years ago

The question should not be "when will I die?" but rather "how will I feel about my life in the last moment I'm lucidly able to do so?"

--------------------

The second question includes the first as a subset - if I knew I were going to die in a couple of years, there's no way I'd work on things I don't enjoy that have a longer-term pay-off. But, if I live longer than those two years, and have spent everything having fun within them, then I'm kinda stuffed for the long run.

We're all gamblers, and happiness may be what we want to walk away from the table with but the odds still matter.

sireat• 12 years ago

Assuming one is not religious, why should the last moment in life be more important than your experiences the previous 10 years?

That is if you are Ivan Ilyich, is the last moment really that important?

MichaelGG4• 12 years ago

"Before I saw the rain clouds, I knew it'd rain, but I didn't know when. After the sky grew darker, I knew it'd rain, but I didn't know when."

Within that passage lies the meaning of weather.

I'm not belittling the OP; I enjoyed the article quite a bit. I just find the whole "meaning of life is explained by the inevitability of death" sentiment to be rather empty.

jotm• 12 years ago

More like "Before cancer, I knew I was going to die within a few decades (accidents excluded)" and "After the cancer, I knew I was going to die within a few months/years (miracles excluded"...

scorpioxy• 12 years ago

Nicely written. Why is it that we only look for what is important to us when we realize that we don't have long to live? Don't people realize that this is true starting the day you're born?

invalidOrTaken• 12 years ago

Because there's a lot of "unimportant" stuff necessary to sustain the important stuff.

bjelkeman-again• 12 years ago

I think there is a lot true in that. It took me a good few years to get to the point of being able to focus on what is important for me. But, it do not think that the journey was wasted. Indeed it feels like everything/most what I have done up until now has put me in the position to do what is important, much more effectively and with some actual impact.

I learn slowly, so it took a while, but the journey is what was important in the end not the goal. So now I look at every step along the way and make sure it is both useful to my surrounding world, fun and gives me experience to do something bigger, better, funner for the next step. It probably sounds like a cliche, but it is nevertheless true for me.

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

For a long time I've been pretty worried about my mortality. But ever since I became a Christian a couple years ago, I've been much more at peace about it. Not all the way (yet?), but much more than before. I highly recommend looking into Christianity to anyone else feeling that same fear.

obituary_latte3• 12 years ago

Please don't downvote just because you disagree. Have a discussion if you're comfortable with your beliefs. It would do more good for all involved.

300bps5• 12 years ago

Sorry, I was raised Christian and realized at 12 years old that it was complete bunk. How did I realize that? I read the bible. Literally every day. I read it cover to cover at least 15 times. It contains pearls of wisdom floating in a sea of nonsense. No rational person can read that book cover to cover and remain a Christian. Which is why Christians have bible study groups where they focus on John 3:16 and other pretty verses while ignoring the wackjob parts that make up most of the bible.

But it is pointless for me to even point this out to you so I'll stop here.

pstack4• 12 years ago

There's no discussion to be had. A toddler may feel at ease because someone convinced him his flashlight will fend off the monsters in his closet and under his bed. It helps the kid sleep, but there's no enlightened, meaningful, or useful discussion to be had from that.

If I tell you "I believe in the healing power of crystals and wear them around my neck and it has helped me come to a certain peace with my mortality", you would either say "well, good for you if that helps your mental state cope with things" or "you're fucking nuts". Neither avenue is going to progress, inform, or help anyone.

milesf• 12 years ago

Same here. Been following Jesus for over 24 years. For the skeptics out there, have a listen to this guy http://waltermartin.com/realaudio.html

It's a website that is desperately in need of a makeover (real player? that still exists?) but when I was a skeptic he was the only guy that gave straight answers, and would admit when he didn't know something. Too bad there are so many false teachers out there today. Makes it confusing for people.

learc83• 12 years ago

I've been much more at peace about it. Not all the way (yet?)

I've been a Christian for 25 years. I don't think you'll ever be completely at peace with your mortality--in the same way that riding a roller coaster is still scary even though you know it's safe.

But I've seen the difference in the way my Christian and non-Christian friends handle death, and the difference is striking.

Yhippa• 12 years ago

What would you say the difference is?

GuiA• 12 years ago

I recommend The Little Schemer

gfodor• 12 years ago

I find it strange people can die knowing about Jesus but not lisp and somehow think they are enlightened :)

kunai• 12 years ago

I hate to break it to you, but religion is just a ruse to help people come to grips with their mortalities. It's extremely unlikely beyond belief that there is any notion of heaven or hell in this universe.

I don't want to start a religious war. I just don't want you to be let down when you're on your deathbed 30, 40, 50, 60 years from now.

benjohnson2• 12 years ago

As a Christian, I would agree that there is no heaven in this universe. God is out of place and time.

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

Thanks for your sympathy. But I've done my homework. Jesus did actually rise from the dead. Research it and you'll come to the same conclusion. I don't have many books on it, but I'd probably start with Handbook of Catholic Apologetics[1] by Kreeft and Tacelli.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Catholic-Apologetics-Reasoned...

mrmincent• 12 years ago

belief systems are tools for living in the world. If it is a ruse that helps them live their lives happily and with purpose, then it is a useful ruse. I myself had a lot of fun with discordianism.

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

For anyone interested in rational arguments for believing in Christianity, I recommend the Handbook of Christian Apologetics[1] by Kreeft and Tacelli.

[1] http://www.amazon.com/Handbook-Christian-Apologetics-Peter-K...

JunkDNA• 12 years ago

Thanks for sharing this link. As a lifelong Catholic, as well as a biologist and software developer, I have often thought my background in this particlar area was not what it should be.

MichaelGG4• 12 years ago

And what changed? What things stopped worrying you?

If I believed getting killed immediately let to perfect joy, and my family would be with me in a sec and be totally happy, yeah, death wouldn't bother me at all. I'd probably try to get us all into high risk jobs and locales, too.

I've got the peace that a process that's going to segfault has. At least I know the OS will close my sockets for me.

polysics2• 12 years ago

I have gone the exact opposite path, from a life pretty entrenched in Christianity, to skepticism, to a conclusion that led me towards hard atheism. I feel like I am sure there is no supernatural creator, and the only love we receive is from people. I now thank people for their good, not God, and get angry at them for their bad, not at Satan. Religion starts off by lifting your responsibilities, and that is the worst part in my opinion.

That said, it has improved my outlook on death too. I think there is no point worrying about an inevitable event that has no consequences other than the disappearance of a, maybe loved, person.

No one knows what you feel, and no one ever has come back from it. That makes death pretty unconsequential, as there is NOTHING you can do about it.

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

Many people have taken the route you've described, and their stories are usually the same. They finally found reason (maybe at 8 or 12) and realized all the "obvious, gaping holes and flaws" in Christianity.

But very few people have gone from atheist to Nicene-creed-believing Christian in their adult life, which I did. This seems so backwards, don't you just wonder what their reasoning was? I do.

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

To almost everyone who replied: Were your responses really in the spirit of HN? I don't believe anything I said deserved the condescending tone I received in response.

kpmah2• 12 years ago

Respectfully, I would instead recommend secular Buddhism and mindfulness for dealing with emotions related to your own mortality. I believe it to be a healthier alternative without the need for a belief in god, an afterlife, or any superstition.

I recommend the writing of Jon Kabat-Zinn and Stephen Batchelor.

sdegutis25• 12 years ago

This approach of "pick what works best for you" only works if it's actually true. Christianity claims that it is objectively true, for all people, regardless of whether they believe it. So it's not like a Christian can just change to a religion that "fits" them better on a whim.

aaronem4• 12 years ago

Oh, good Lord! I made my previous comment to you before I noticed you'd thrown this rock at the hornets' nest. Good man! Not that bright, maybe, but with moral courage to spare, and that's a rare pleasure to run across in this degraded age.

ifktaotc2• 12 years ago

A few years ago I got testicular cancer. The information about the disease came in pieces: first all I knew was that there was a lump; then came the ultrasound, the CT scan, then biopsy of the testicle, then a second surgery to sample lymph nodes to which the cancer might have spread. At every step I would obsessively query my doctors for conditional probabilities: given what we'd just found out, what were the chances of dying? Of relapse? Of chemo? Of sterility? I was always incredibly frustrated at how vague their responses would be - they'd say, e.g. "we don't like to give probabilities because you just never know what will happen!". And I would think, "That's exactly the point of a probability! Please just tell me a number!"

One doctor eventually showed me a paper on outcomes for the lymph node surgery I had, with a relapse rate curve going out five years so. I found this incredibly helpful for managing my emotions because it let me track my progress in a very precise way: every monthly checkup that would go by uneventfully, I knew exactly what my chance of relapse had dropped to. The goal was to get to zero. More importantly, having actual numbers gave me something on which I could focus my optimism. It's so much worse to hear "you might become sterile" than "there's a 5% chance of becoming sterile". With the 5% number in mind, I'd do things like imagine myself in a room full of 20 people and think "wow, it would be incredibly unlikely to be randomly chosen from this group". Having spent a lot of time in a cancer hospital now -- around people who were much worse off than I was -- I believe that almost everyone has incredible reserves of optimism. I think it's better when the hopeful possibility is concretely defined - it makes it easier to imagine a path forward while you're stuck waiting for more information.

Mine is obviously a completely different situation from the terminal cancer described by the author, where the question isn't, "when will I be free of this cancer", but rather "when will I die from it". Testicular cancer is very treatable, and I never faced a significant chance of death. I'm sure I would have been in a much different psychological state if I had.

Also, PSA: testicular cancer is REALLY common for young males (if you're male you have a 1 in 500 chance of getting it between 20 and 34). Given HN user demographics, there are almost certainly some of you reading this who've gotten it already, or who will. You can save yourself a ton of trouble if you do a self-examination every once in a while. That's actually how I found out, and is a big reason that I avoided chemotherapy.

yeukhon• 12 years ago

Thank you. I supposed you just create this new account to share the story. But thank you, now I know I should do body check. I am only 22 and I already feel unsafe.

zrail• 12 years ago

Thank you. When I was diagnosed (IIa good) my fiancé an I spent three hours with my medical oncologist going through exactly what treatment would be, probabilities of relapse, relative risks, everything. She is a wonderful doctor.

Also, just to jump on the train, if something is weird with your testicles, pain or lumps or whatever, go see a doctor. I waited longer than I should have and it probably made my treatment harder than it could have been.

pstack4• 12 years ago

It doesn't help that life or death issues for men, like testicular cancer, are almost completely ignored. About a decade ago, I had the same concern as you and after a scary doctor visit (which included his female assistant observing, which added to the discomfort but that all mitigated by the more terrifying prospect of this being a life-threatening concern) followed by an ultrasound at the hospital, I was relieved to find out it was nothing to be worried about.

After that, though, I started to think. I realized that the only reason I knew to be concerned was because just shortly before that, I'd heard Lance Armstrong's story in a sport's magazine.

I realized that every single male 20-34 knows about breast cancer and ovarian cancer and that women are supposed to be regularly checked all all of these concerns promoted by countless events and product promotions and charities . . . but very few of them probably have the slightest clue about their own medical concerns that they should be looking after. Because nobody bothers to emphasize the need to inform them and educate them.

philh2• 12 years ago

It doesn't help that life or death issues for men, like testicular cancer, are almost completely ignored.

This isn't a great example, because testicular cancer is rarely fatal. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testicular_cancer

Testicular cancer has one of the highest cure rates of all cancers: a five-year survival rate in excess of 90 percent overall, and almost 100 percent if it has not spread (metastasized).[6] Even for the relatively few cases in which malignant cancer has spread widely, modern chemotherapy offers a cure rate of at least 80%.[7]

Obviously, awareness still helps. (And openness. I had an ultrasound when I was 16 (turned out to be a hydrocele), but I think it was a few weeks from when I noticed the lumy to when I told my mum about it, because how do you bring something like that up?)

ct1• 12 years ago

I have (had?) salivary gland cancer. Diagnosed before 30 at a IVa stage. I had surgery, radio and chemo. After that, the 5-years survival rate is 1 in 10. And if you do make it, your quality if life is significantly impacted and you're permanently disfigured - radical neck surgery ain't pretty.

I have a background in academia and despite the fact that I like to tell myself that I am some unique snowflake and that I'll make it, I know where I stand. No doctor told me, but I went to PubMed myself.

Am I pleased to know that? Not sure. And it kind of bothers me the fact that all my daily careful efforts will all boil down pretty soon to an event that is as dumb as the outcome of rolling a dice.

saboot2• 12 years ago

Given HN user demographics, there are almost certainly some of you reading this who've gotten it already, or who will.

Just checked myself .. I may (hopefully not) have proven your statement. Will see doctor on Monday.

Thanks for the PSA

ifktaotc2• 12 years ago

Good luck. It could be a number of things, but please do see the doctor soon.

And if you (or anyone else reading this) want to chat, get advice on picking a specialist, etc., I'm more than happy to talk - hit me up at ifktaotc7583@hmamail.com.

davedx• 12 years ago

Good luck! I have had recurring epididymitis for the last 15 years or so, starting when I was around 19, and every time I wonder if it could be cancer, but it proves to be an infection that is treatable with antibiotics.

Well done booking the doctor visit straightaway. It took me weeks, and I was massively stressed the whole time.

dollar3• 12 years ago

For Christ's sake, is there no safe haven in this world for the unapologetic atheist? I thought that Hacker News might be the one safe zone where Jesus brainwashing is not regurgitated to the masses, but I guess not. News flash for everyone, death is inevitable, and people do not rise from the grave, whether they harbor sympathy for humans or not. Life's meaning, if there is one, is at this stage incomprehensible to human beings. If there is life beyond the grave, it definitely isn't life, and it definitely isn't what you think it is. How many more years must humanity be shackled to superstition and death fear before we fucking get over it and move on to the important work of getting off of this planet? For fucks sake...

dollar3• 12 years ago

That's right Jesus freaks, downvote me to HELL!

gjm11• 12 years ago

Unapologetic atheist here. I downvoted your complaint about downvoting because such complaints add nothing to HN.

(I do share your distaste at the way some Christians have seized on this as a preaching opportunity.)

nova• 12 years ago

News flash for everyone, death is inevitable

As far as we know there is nothing in the laws of physics about death (or life). It's all about fields and particles. Or maybe strings or loops or something else, but vitalism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitalism) is over.

So death "is" inevitable only because we don't know how to prevent it.

How many more years must humanity be shackled to superstition and death fear before we fucking get over it and move on to the important work of getting off of this planet?

I'm totally okay with space colonization but conquering death (with science, I mean) seems like a more pressing issue. After all, even if we already had space colonies people would still die.

dollar3• 12 years ago

People would still die indeed. But I think technologically our odds favor tackling the issue of colonization over death. If we remain here on this planet, death of the entire species is a certainty. That could happen a lot sooner than people think.

parasight• 12 years ago

Most Christians I know are way more open-minded than you seem to be. Your tone reminds me of the few intolerant christians I know.

factorizer• 12 years ago

Religious discussions aside, wtf do you mean with "getting off of this planet"? Whereto? There's nothing around for TRILLIONS of klicks!

First fuck up the planet, then leave, does not appear to be a trait of highly developed civilisations. More one of perishing ones.

kaybe• 12 years ago

I don't think that's what he meant. This planet is great, we should definitely keep it and take care of it. But it is just one single planet, we should try and hedge against problems out of our control (such as big meteorites).

cliveowen• 12 years ago

I get so scared and sad when I read these articles. I always wonder "could it be prevented?", sure, you know you shouldn't smoke, you shouldn't be overweight and you should do at least 15 minutes of exercise every day, but does it really help? I bet a doctor would know better than anyone else how to live a healthy life, so this obviously begs the question: could cancer really be prevented?

kayoone• 12 years ago

Hardly. Even if you are perfectly healthy you can still develop some form of cancer. You see, theres people smoking for 40 years living on to be 80+ and other non-smokers who develop lung cancer at 35. Or be run over by a car, or have a heart attack or whatever. Of course you could be super cautious with everything, do checkups of everything every year, but in most cases thats a gigantic waste of metal energy, money and time when you are young and you might also develop hypochondriac mental issues. Could it be prevented ? Sure, like almost any kind of premature death could have been prevented, but that doesn't help much.

has2k1• 12 years ago

According to the professionals of the field, there is little hope for ever preventing cancer. For a protein life that has sufficient complexity, cells have to divide/replicate to maintain the life of the protein machine, e.g a human body. Stuff can go wrong with the division/replication, it can be inaccurate in so many ways but what matters most is that the replicates can also replicate.

Some cells die before they attempt a single replication. This could be due to a disease attack, vulnerable imperfect replicate, plus plus. As long as those that get to replicate can make up the numbers for those that die early. Cells that are resilient and can replicate fast and frequent enough before they die tend to pass on forms of this attribute to their imperfect clones.

With time, many types of cells in the whole protein body get to attempt replications faster and faster. Pure natural selection at work -- a concrete example, smoking kills lung cells, so for the lung cells to maintain their numbers they have to replicate early enough in their life time and frequently.

Most environmental pressures seem to force the biology of the cells in this direction, which increases the likelihood of replication eager cells aka cancerous cells.

That is why at this moment in time, prevention seems bleak.

gytdev• 12 years ago

one of the most clear, lucid and scientifically literate stories about existentialism I have heard in a long time. I bow my head to Paul Kalanithi, the author: http://www.stanford.edu/group/dlab/images/paulk.jpg

thomasz4• 12 years ago

We never cite detailed statistics, and usually advise against Googling survival numbers, assuming the average patient doesn’t possess a nuanced understanding of statistics

When I was at the receiving end of that talk, this attitude made me incredibly angry. They know exactly that we will look up those numbers, they are just too afraid to have a honest discussion with us. People make very bad decisions because those numbers are discussed at forums, without the involvement of people who can interpret the statistical and medical significance of scientific studies.

smnrchrds• 12 years ago

Exactly. It's kind of like not telling your kids about sex: They will try to find information on their own and most probably they will be misinformed.

vanderZwan2• 12 years ago

And would you suggest doctors would take two to three extra hours with every patient to work them through a basic statistics class which still isn't sufficient to explain the concept?

thomasz4• 12 years ago

Two to three extra hours is vastly exaggerated, and not that much time for someone who needs to know the chances of dying a horrible death. I might add that this is an objection based on economic argumentation, which, while not invalid, is not the one given by doctors. They argue like the author of the article did: That they know better than you how you will react to this kind of information, and that they can manage your morale by taking certain freedoms with the truth.

I think that this is an unworthy and authoritarian approach which only leads to distrust: How can that guy say that I will certainly survive when Wikipedia, Lymphoma.org and the fucking New England Journal of Medicine agree that there is a one in five chance of me biting the dust in the next few years?

robert-wallis• 12 years ago

In the case of terminal illness. Absolutely. In fact, they should be sending the charts to a specialist teaching a week long personalized class to help them understand the data.

thejteam• 12 years ago

Many doctors also don't have a nuanced understanding of statistics. They can quote you the survival numbers you can read elsewhere and they can quote you other people's interpretation of them, but if you have a question that deviates from the literature they are familiar with they may not be able to provide additional interpretation.

Do medical schools teach stats? I know a couple of doctors(General Practitioners) that never took a stats class as an undergrad. My brother is a PhD in Cellular Biology and he learned stats as he went and never had a formal class.

bladedtoys• 12 years ago

If they get such classes, they sleep through them and have for decades.

There are studies (Eddy 1982; Gigerenzer and Hoffrage 1995) that show only a small percent of physicians understand even basic statistics.

Just Google same and you'll get a zillion links to freshman college homework discussing the problem.

kyleblarson• 12 years ago

I suspect that in the US in particular, doctors are also hesitant to give specific numbers or statistics for fear of the abusively litigious nature of our system.

saraid2162• 12 years ago

If they gave numbers and explained the statistical significance, people would go and Google things and come to the conclusion that the doctor was wrong. Doesn't matter if the doctor was right; they'd still think they were wrong.

MarkMc2• 12 years ago

I too was on the receiving end of that talk. Are statistics so really so difficult that doctors cannot give them to patients?

Here's a Kaplan-Meier curve for patients with Leukaemia: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3202035/figure/F...

Would it really be so difficult to say, "We estimate you have a 50% chance of being alive in 18 months, and a 25% chance of being alive in 10 years. But don't give up hope because that will reduce your chances."

thomasz4• 12 years ago

The problem with the Kaplan-Meier curve is that most of the time, they represents figures about the whole patient population, but depending on the disease, there are extreme differences between stages and possibly dozens of cytogenetic factors. AML 5 year survival can be as low as ~15% and as high as ~70%. For Melanoma patients, it ranges between 100% (in situ) and 10% (stage IV).

aaronsnoswell• 12 years ago

I don't understand how everyone here was able to read this article - I browse to that link and get a message telling me it is locked behind a paywall, requiring my subscription before I can read it. Do all HN readers also subscribe to the NY Times?

nicolethenerd• 12 years ago

You should get 10 free articles a month before the paywall appears. I'm guessing most HN readers haven't used up their quota yet.

mkempe• 12 years ago

How to read the article: Search for the article's title in Google (hint: select the title in the non-working NYT URL, dashes are fine), and the link from Google's (probably) top result to NYT will let you in, freely.

icegreentea• 12 years ago

Try visiting in incognito mode. The paywall is cookie based.

powertower• 12 years ago

It's really difficult to read these types of stories and comments because it shows us that happy endings are not guaranteed for anyone by the universe.

We're just all flesh that's about to fail - sometime, eventually.

And that sometime comes sooner for some of us than latter.

brosco45• 12 years ago

Alternative medicine is the only solution.

marincounty• 12 years ago

I was told that Japanese Doctors don't discuss mortality rates with their patients. I was told they don't even mention the word Cancer. If a patient has stomach cancer, the patient is given the best currently available treatment, and is told they have a bad case of heart burn--and told they will get better! The reasoning is they want to get every once of magic The Placebo Effect has to offer. I don't know if it's better to quote stats to a patient, or lie(hopeing the Placebo Effect will take over?).

Personally, I don't use the Internet for any health related concerns--It has always just made me feel worse, and is loaded with hysteria, and just horrid advice.

And yes, I know U.S. Doctors can't lie to their patients. I'm just relaying what I was told twenty years ago.

When I get sick--I'm not sure if I would want to the statistics of survival. I would live every day as my last. I would take any drugs the Pallitive care Physician offered though. My father benefitted greatly from the opiates the doctors prescribed before he died.

I hope the doctor makes a full recovery, and commend him on his honesty and openness. Sometimes I forget doctors will someday be patients.

Oh yea, to the Marin General counter person who asked me if I wanted to sign a Advanced Procedure Directive, before even saying hello--if you happen to read this--one day you will be on the other side of the counter.

Good night! I hope you all stay well and are happy!

cko• 12 years ago

I'm very curious: are there people who fear samsara? I sure do.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saṃsāra

MarkMc2• 12 years ago

This part annoys me:

Where was the study of nonsmoking 36-year-old neurosurgeons? Maybe my youth and health mattered? Or maybe my disease was found so late, had spread so far, and I was already so far gone that I was worse off than those 65-year-old smokers.

You don't need a 'study', you just need a comprehensive database that includes patients' age, smoking status, body-mass index, health status, and other prognostic factors. Then run a query to find what percentage of similar patients are still alive after 5 years.

Just about every person who is diagnosed with cancer asks, "What are my chances?". (And the best treatment usually depends on an accurate answer). Wouldn't the benefit of compiling and maintaing a central database of all US cancer patients be worth the cost?

How Long Have I Got Left?

Related Stories