In contrast, this piece by a blogger in a recent The New York Times piece headlined "Trying to Live Forever", discussed observational medical studies and referenced a Consumer Reports Health article indicating the scientific weakness of observational studies. So far so good. He points out that the news media bombards their readers with "constant updates on the latest observational studies" which he considers counterproductive. I could not agree more.
The next element in his piece however gave me food for thought and a contrary view. Agreed we are all going to die and how is always an unknown event. Agreed that following common sense as regards nutrition, and avoidance of smoking is to our advantage, however dismissing gaining years by reducing risk of heart attack and the like because I may die ten years later of dementia does not resonate with my experience, logic nor philosophy.
The argument does not accommodate the wonderful quality of life that can be enjoyed in that ten years. An opportunity cost to say the least if I forgo my colonoscopy at 70 and as a consequence miss a colon polyp the removal of which has prevented a cancer growing and become incurable? Actuarial statistics/life tables indicates that at the age of 60 I can expect 20.92 years of life and a women 23.97 years! Dying of pneumococcal pneumonia because I did not have my vaccination at 70 for example would cheat me of
13.73 years.
How do I maximize quality of my remaining years to ensure that "gain" is pleasurable. Thats easy. Recognize the factors that are in your control and manage them. Start by reviewing the self help section of cancer-management.com.
The alternative is to be like Raymond in the movie Rain Man: paralysis by analysis.
What did those three patients with chronic lymphatic leukemia think?
What do you think?
No comments:
Post a Comment