Disease Debates

Human mortality, aging, and disease are popular topics of interest in modern culture. We see numerous television shows that detail the lengths people go to in order to defy the aging process through the use of plastic surgery. We see awareness organizations for diseases ranging from Alzheimer’s to Down Syndrome to Depression, and we see a fascination with the ability to thwart death, as evidenced in various sci-fi movies and books, most recently the Twilight Saga involving immortal vampires. Mortality, aging, and disease are not only areas of interest and curiosity, but are areas that affect every single individual personally and thus prove to raise controversial questions in the political and societal realm. In the article “Brain Burdens,” which can be found in Nature Journal, the author presents a bold and relatively new claim to Western research and medicine. He or she proposes that neurological diseases do not receive enough attention or funding for adequate research and funds from other areas, namely cancer, should be relocated. In a contrasting article entitled “The Triumph against Cancer,” the author indirectly refutes the claim “Brain Burdens” raises by revealing the cost of the trade-off it propose through the use of a personal account of a cancer victim. Each article presents a separate perspective, “Brain Burdens” with a scientific and clinical  overtone and “The Triumph against Cancer” with a more personal and emotional overtone,  on the costs that two different types of diseases pose to both society and individuals, which, in turn, creates a debate on the allocations of funds between different types of medical research.

In the article “Brain Burdens” the author argues that there needs to be a shift in funds toward research on neurological and mental disorders and away from other types of research, specifically cancer and cardiovascular disease. The author points out that the research and funds allotted towards a particular disease should be proportional to the burdens that disease places on the population. In order to support this reasoning, he or she then goes on the detail the significant burdens neurological and mental disorders bring. In a span of thirty European countries, it was found that 38% of the collective population will have a mental disorder in a typical year. It was also found that the single most widespread disease in the countries was depression, which affected thirty million people. Furthermore, only one out of two people that suffer from mental or neurological diseases received any medical treatment, and only ten percent of those that received the treatment actually received what is deemed to be “notionally adequate” treatment. The author pointed out that while cancer and cardiovascular disease typically result in early deaths, the same is not true for neurological and mental disorders. The quality of life that neurological and mental disorders cause is much lower for longer portions of time. Mental disorders commonly emerge in the first twenty years of a person’s life, yet little is known of a healthy versus unhealthy adolescent brain. The author argues that preventative measures that can be used at an early age should be researched and developed further.

The article “A triumph in the War against Cancer” Indirectly opposes “brain Burdens” in that it praises the immense amount of time and funds being poured into cancer research. The article is written with a personal and individualistic perspective, which is in contrast to the utilitarianism perspective of the first article. “A Triumph in the War against Cancer” illuminates cancer research by delving into the perspective that cancer victims and their families share on the matter. The article indirectly brings light to the fact that while cancer victims do not necessarily have to live with the effects of their disease due to death, as victims of neurological and mental disorders do, the effects are no less worse. The article details the account of a woman with a specific type of Leukemia, CML, and her journey from hopelessness and imminent death to normalcy, all because of the cancer research done by Dr. Druker. One striking image the article discusses is that of the woman taking a picture at her own tombstone, which she bought before taking a drug that managed her leukemia for over ten years and is still currently doing so. The article highlights the importance and the need for the continuation of cancer research.

While “Brain Burdens” points to various statistics and hard data, “A Triumph in the War against Cancer” was far more convincing and much more relateable because it discussed the reality a certain individual faced as opposed to abstract situations and predicted outcomes. “A Triumph in the War against Cancer” would arguably appeal to almost every single reader. Most everyone knows someone, be it a family member, friend, colleague, or acquaintance who has suffered from some type of cancer. At the very least most everyone has empathized with a movie character who was victimized be the disease. Modern culture places a huge emphasis on cancer research, as evidenced by recent movies such as “My Sister’s Keeper” or the less recent “A Walk to Remember.” Martina McBride’s latest country hit is a song dedicated to survivors of breast cancer and the breast cancer awareness now has its own month. While the general public would most definitely see the benefit of more research for neurological and mental disorders, it would not be prone to give up funding for cancer research, as “Brain Burdens” deems necessary, which leads us to a problematic question. If funds are not directly taken from cancer research and transferred to neurological research, than where will the extra funding come from in an economy that is floundering, and, beyond that, how do we quantify the pain, loss, disruption, fear, and sadness each type of disease causes in a systematic method that results in the ranking of one disease to be worse than the other?

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/science-nature/A-Victory-in-the-War-Against-Cancer.html?c=y&page=5