Prostate Cancer Morality Vs Science

Prostate Cancer Morality Vs Science



Prostate Cancer Morality vs. Science
With such widespread diseases as​ prostate and​ various other forms of​ cancer, there are concerns which eventually arise about the​ treatments and​ tests for​ such illnesses. Because such illnesses are so prevalent in​ developed countries, diseases like cancers and​ diabetes are widely studied by research institutions all over the​ world in​ hopes that there will be better cures and​ quicker tests to​ determine if​ someone has the​ illness or​ not. However, by developing such treatments, preventative measures and​ genetic tests, people fall into the​ problem of​ what constitutes morality. for​ illnesses like prostate cancer, morality is​ on the​ verge of​ being sent to​ the​ wayside in​ an effort to​ allow high risk individuals to​ be tested for​ the​ prostate cancer gene long before they reach the​ age in​ which prostate cancer will spring up within their bodies.
Perhaps the​ biggest debate over prostate cancer morality is​ whether or​ not scientists should develop early screening tests for​ the​ illness in​ high risk patients. Due to​ the​ extremely high genetic correlation between those affected by prostate cancer and​ the​ probability of​ their children getting the​ disease when they are older, a​ genetic test would be an excellent way to​ help people realize if​ they will have prostate cancer in​ the​ future or​ not.
Unfortunately for​ the​ technologies which could ultimately screen for​ prostate cancer, morality soon enters the​ debate. if​ people find out when they are young that they will have a​ high risk for​ prostate cancer at​ age sixty or​ so, they may have a​ slightly traumatic experience growing up and​ feeling that they will die at​ around age sixty especially if​ there is​ no cure for​ prostate cancer by that time. Furthermore, they would have difficulty finding health insurance as​ no self respecting insurance agency will want to​ insure a​ person who will be catching a​ costly disease at​ age sixty. These are two major concerns from a​ point of​ prostate cancer morality.
On the​ opposite side of​ the​ argument, however, people who say that prostate cancer morality should take a​ back seat to​ scientific advancement proclaim the​ benefits of​ early genetic testing. People should be aware of​ the​ status of​ their health. if​ more people were to​ receive blood tests to​ determine if​ they are at​ risk for​ prostate cancer, they would go get more prostate exams which would in​ turn lower the​ mortality rate for​ prostate cancer. After all, it​ is​ pretty difficult for​ those who support prostate cancer morality to​ argue against less people dying.
The whole battle between prostate cancer morality and​ the​ necessary science to​ help cure people will certainly turn into a​ raging debate in​ the​ future. Ultimately, the​ outcome will determine how well we handle other emerging diseases and​ whether or​ not we will do whatever it​ takes to​ combat them.




You Might Also Like:




No comments:

Powered by Blogger.