tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post7331344356246596269..comments2007-09-21T13:22:13.036-07:00bwhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07541279438184352860noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-88331070048220273802007-09-21T13:22:00.000-07:002007-09-21T13:22:00.000-07:00It takes time to progress from one stage of cancer to another. Imagine a world where 50% of cancers kill in the 5th year from their formation, and 50% kill in the 6th year. If previous tests found cancers in their 3rd year, the 5-year survival rate for identified cancer patients would have been zero. A new test that detected all cancers as soon as they formed would improve 5-year survival rates *from the time of detection* by 50%, even if medicine could do nothing.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-36482893078282995452007-09-21T11:23:00.000-07:002007-09-21T11:23:00.000-07:00I am not sure I understand what support you are asking about. I provided the statistical record on 5 year survival rates for various stages of lung cancer. If there was a method to detect all cancer at stage 0 then treatment could begin. Therefore, all survival rates for cancers that could be detected at stage 0 would have stage 0 survival rates.<BR/><BR/>In terms of deaths in the USA<BR/><BR/>the 1980 deaths of 1,989,841 was a death rate of 0.88%<BR/>the 2003 deaths of 2,448,288 was a death rate of 0.84%<BR/>the 2004 deaths of 2,398,343 was a death rate of 0.82%<BR/>So total deaths fell to go along with a falling death rate (falling for decades) but now they think it was a mild flu season.<BR/>number of deaths in the United States for 2005 was 2,447,903<BR/>Death rate of 0.816<BR/><BR/>http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=healthus05.chapter.trend-tables<BR/><BR/>2006 info<BR/>http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/hus.htm<BR/><BR/>cancer death rates are falling slightly<BR/>http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hestat/preliminarydeaths05_tables.pdf#B<BR/>1.1% less in 2005 than in 2004bwhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07541279438184352860noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-17555522.post-45141513684730055872007-09-21T11:01:00.000-07:002007-09-21T11:01:00.000-07:00Brian,<BR/><BR/>You should offer some support for the thesis that early detection will lead to dramatic improvements. Survival rates will be better for people who are diagnosed early, regardless of whether we have effective treatments or not. We've had years of bad science reporting on the 5-year survival time of patients with a variety of cancer (which has increased because of detection of cancers that have not yet and may never become deadly) without big changes in population death rates, and with many false positives.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com