English Kings named Charles and dying due to their own stubbornness - name a better duo.

  • hamid@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    It means at his age the only thing cancer treatment can do is prolong your 5 year survival without regard to quality of life. Nothing he will do at this point will really prolong his life further than it has gone and taking chemo will undoubtedly ruin the last few years and chances are chemo doesn’t work and you die near-term anyway. Oncology has pitiful success rates.

      • hamid@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        7 months ago

        Absolutely an edge case and not typical of anyone’s experience. Several of my family members are dead after painful chemo in their 50s

          • hamid@startrek.website
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            7 months ago

            I simply do not believe that first statistic that you googled from a Finnish study. 80 is over the median age of most people. Now if you are King Charles and you are probably going to die in 5 - 10 years anyway do you want to spend your last 5 years extremely sick getting poisoned by chemo or do you want to spend it doped up on drugs having everything you can possibly want while you get to be the king you waited for 75 years to be then meet the inevitable anyway?

            • Saeculum [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              7 months ago

              80 is over the median age of most people

              Sure, but if you make it to 75, you are considerably more likely to make it to 80 than the median person.

              The median person also does not have parents that each made it to their late 90s, or access to the world’s best medicine.

              • hamid@startrek.website
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                7 months ago

                And you really think someone who has the best medicine in the would choose to not treat because they are dumb dumbs or because they probably know its useless to treat? If I were him I wouldn’t take chemo either after watching what it did to my sister in her 50s.

                • Saeculum [he/him, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  7 months ago

                  And you really think someone who has the best medicine in the would choose to not treat because they are dumb dumbs

                  Yes. Look at Steve Jobs, plenty of people refuse treatment for easily curable diseases. Being rich and powerful does not stop you from being a moron.

                  • hamid@startrek.website
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    7 months ago

                    I don’t think you know the whole story and you think you know what happens inside peoples heads. Steve jobs had pancreatic cancer with a 5 year survival rate of 10% for eight years, he already beat the odds. He had a kind of cancer computer fabricators got in the 70s and ravaged grey beard engineers across silicon valley.

                    You really have no idea what you are talking about, what it is like to be sick and what chemo does to you. It is their right not to seek treatment and to go out with dignity if that is their decision and that doesn’t make them a moron.