为什么抗癌战争失败了

IF 0.9 4区 经济学 Q3 ECONOMICS American Journal of Economics and Sociology Pub Date : 2022-10-27 DOI:10.1111/ajes.12479
Ignacio Castuera
{"title":"为什么抗癌战争失败了","authors":"Ignacio Castuera","doi":"10.1111/ajes.12479","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>In 1971, President Nixon launched the “war on cancer” with great fanfare. The dramatic increase in spending on targeted cancer research was supposed to quickly yield new treatments. That did not happen. The cancer establishment, which profits from the $200 billion spent annually on cancer treatment, has never provided an adequate accounting of how more spending translates into lives saved. In fact, by the mid-1980s, it became apparent that most of the “progress” in the war on cancer was little more than statistical sleight of hand. The death rate from cancer had climbed, not declined. Eventually, cancer deaths began to fall, but little of that improvement was due to better treatment. It was mostly a result of campaigns to reduce smoking and to promote early detection of treatable cancers. One reason the progress of treatment stalled was the unwillingness to consider unconventional treatments that were developed by doctors and other healers. Practitioners of unapproved treatments often sought refuge in Mexico from the medical apartheid system in the United States.</p>","PeriodicalId":47133,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology","volume":"81 4","pages":"671-700"},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why the War on Cancer Failed\",\"authors\":\"Ignacio Castuera\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/ajes.12479\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>In 1971, President Nixon launched the “war on cancer” with great fanfare. The dramatic increase in spending on targeted cancer research was supposed to quickly yield new treatments. That did not happen. The cancer establishment, which profits from the $200 billion spent annually on cancer treatment, has never provided an adequate accounting of how more spending translates into lives saved. In fact, by the mid-1980s, it became apparent that most of the “progress” in the war on cancer was little more than statistical sleight of hand. The death rate from cancer had climbed, not declined. Eventually, cancer deaths began to fall, but little of that improvement was due to better treatment. It was mostly a result of campaigns to reduce smoking and to promote early detection of treatable cancers. One reason the progress of treatment stalled was the unwillingness to consider unconventional treatments that were developed by doctors and other healers. Practitioners of unapproved treatments often sought refuge in Mexico from the medical apartheid system in the United States.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47133,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Economics and Sociology\",\"volume\":\"81 4\",\"pages\":\"671-700\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Economics and Sociology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"96\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajes.12479\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"经济学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Economics and Sociology","FirstCategoryId":"96","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajes.12479","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"经济学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

1971年,尼克松总统大张旗鼓地发起了“抗癌战争”。靶向癌症研究经费的大幅增加本应迅速产生新的治疗方法。但这并没有发生。癌症机构从每年花费在癌症治疗上的2000亿美元中获利,却从来没有提供足够的数据,说明更多的支出是如何转化为挽救生命的。事实上,到20世纪80年代中期,很明显,抗癌战争中的大多数“进展”只不过是统计上的花招。癌症的死亡率没有下降,反而上升了。最终,癌症死亡率开始下降,但这种改善很少是由于更好的治疗。这主要是减少吸烟和促进早期发现可治疗癌症的运动的结果。治疗进展停滞的一个原因是不愿意考虑医生和其他治疗师开发的非常规治疗方法。从事未经批准的治疗的从业者经常到墨西哥寻求庇护,以逃避美国的医疗种族隔离制度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Why the War on Cancer Failed

In 1971, President Nixon launched the “war on cancer” with great fanfare. The dramatic increase in spending on targeted cancer research was supposed to quickly yield new treatments. That did not happen. The cancer establishment, which profits from the $200 billion spent annually on cancer treatment, has never provided an adequate accounting of how more spending translates into lives saved. In fact, by the mid-1980s, it became apparent that most of the “progress” in the war on cancer was little more than statistical sleight of hand. The death rate from cancer had climbed, not declined. Eventually, cancer deaths began to fall, but little of that improvement was due to better treatment. It was mostly a result of campaigns to reduce smoking and to promote early detection of treatable cancers. One reason the progress of treatment stalled was the unwillingness to consider unconventional treatments that were developed by doctors and other healers. Practitioners of unapproved treatments often sought refuge in Mexico from the medical apartheid system in the United States.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.90
自引率
12.50%
发文量
39
期刊介绍: The American Journal of Economics and Sociology (AJES) was founded in 1941, with support from the Robert Schalkenbach Foundation, to encourage the development of transdisciplinary solutions to social problems. In the introduction to the first issue, John Dewey observed that “the hostile state of the world and the intellectual division that has been built up in so-called ‘social science,’ are … reflections and expressions of the same fundamental causes.” Dewey commended this journal for its intention to promote “synthesis in the social field.” Dewey wrote those words almost six decades after the social science associations split off from the American Historical Association in pursuit of value-free knowledge derived from specialized disciplines. Since he wrote them, academic or disciplinary specialization has become even more pronounced. Multi-disciplinary work is superficially extolled in major universities, but practices and incentives still favor highly specialized work. The result is that academia has become a bastion of analytic excellence, breaking phenomena into components for intensive investigation, but it contributes little synthetic or holistic understanding that can aid society in finding solutions to contemporary problems. Analytic work remains important, but in response to the current lop-sided emphasis on specialization, the board of AJES has decided to return to its roots by emphasizing a more integrated and practical approach to knowledge.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Issue Information Supply chain digitalization and corporate ESG performance Configurational paths of entrepreneurial activity: An analysis based on the technology–organization–environment framework Digital financial inclusion, rural consumption and economic growth in China
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1