I agree you could argue that. But rather than crunching numbers, I think his point was to illustrate the state of some cancer treatments today. How despite of everything and all advances in medicine,we still need to make HUGE improvements in cancer.
For example, pancreatic cancer. Prognosis is 20% 1 year survival and five-year rate is 4%. The best approved treatment so far is Gemzar, which was introduced in the early 80's. It's improve rate over other chemos was that it works in 23% of the patients, and improves the median survival to 5.65 months compared to 4.41 months with 5-flu chemo.
Over 20 years and some of the best we got is +1.2 months and for only 23% of the patients. That's what he's pushing for and I support,improving this rates.
In the end It's not about crunching numbers and making one disease or other look better tackled. It's about having hope for all this people and know something can be done, instead of staring at such a grim prognosis.
For example, pancreatic cancer. Prognosis is 20% 1 year survival and five-year rate is 4%. The best approved treatment so far is Gemzar, which was introduced in the early 80's. It's improve rate over other chemos was that it works in 23% of the patients, and improves the median survival to 5.65 months compared to 4.41 months with 5-flu chemo.
Over 20 years and some of the best we got is +1.2 months and for only 23% of the patients. That's what he's pushing for and I support,improving this rates.
In the end It's not about crunching numbers and making one disease or other look better tackled. It's about having hope for all this people and know something can be done, instead of staring at such a grim prognosis.