Anderson 1

Ashley Anderson
Professor Timmins
BIOL 1090
March 10, 2016
Taking Sides Assignment
In the fourth issue that is presented the book Biology 1090, Human
Biology: Taking Sides readings, two scientists, John R. Seffrin and Reynold
Spector, go toe-to-toe on the issue of whether or not we are winning the war
on cancer.
Seffrin is the author of the Yes side. His optimistic thesis is that we are
winning the war on cancer for the first time in the history of the medical
profession. He believes that if scientists and doctors continue making the
strides that they have been that is entirely possible to eliminate the group of
diseases (cancer) as the health problem that it is in the world. Seffrin claims
that for the first time researchers know what it will take to win the war on
cancer, based on evidence. He also shows the urgency of this battle by
stating that if current trends persist, by 2020, the number of new cancer
cases worldwide will grow to 15 million and the number of deaths will double
to as many as 12 million (65). However, these numbers do not dampen his
hope and enthusiasm. To move forward, he believes that we must combine

Anderson 2
science, public heath, and public policy. If any of these areas initiate the fight
alone, they are not enough to realize the dream of conquering cancer.
Rather, all three areas need to work together, and if they do, it is very
possible to cure cancer.
Spector is the author of the No side, and he is quite a bit more cynical
than his counterpart is. His experience as a physician and professor have led
him to believe that the gains on fighting the disease have been limited and
that in reality there is very little progress being made in the war on cancer.
Instead, progress is reported because it encourages continued funding of
the research, which is the livelihood of many researchers. In order to prove
that the progress toward curing cancer is not as successful as Seffrin says it
is, Spector shows that the death rates from other diseases like stroke and
cardiovascular disease have fallen drastically since 1950, while the high
death rates for cancer persist (71). He also points out that despite this
discouraging evidence, the Federal Government has spent over $105 billion
dollars on the effort to cure cancer. In his opinion, Cancer is an incredibly
tough problem to solve.
This leaves us still with the original question: Are we winning the war
on cancer? After reading these two arguments, I feel like the answer is No.
This is because I feel like the business of finding a cure for cancer makes
too much money to really want to make any progress. In addition to this,
Cancer is a complicated problem. It is more profitable to be optimistic about

Anderson 3
fighting cancer, while not making any progress that in is to 1) actually cure
cancer, or 2) be realistic about how the fight is going. I feel like a few
examples from the texts point to this. There were some fallacies in Seffrins
argument. Chief among these is the conjunction fallacy, which states an
outcome simultaneously satisfying multiple conditions is more probably than
an outcome satisfying a single one of them. Seffrin falls into this fallacy
when he talks about how combining the World Cancer Congress and the 13th
World Conference on Tobacco OR Health will bring additional results. In
addition, Spector, the author of the No side, impressed me as being the most
empirical in presenting his thesis. This is because of the amount of facts and
data that he used to present his case. In addition, his position as a professor
places him in a position to be less biased on the issue. Seffrin, on the other
hand, is the president of the American Cancer Society. In his speech, he talks
about needing more funding and support. While this might be true, it is also
something that will benefit his financial stability and his career, whether or
not cancer is cured. Thus, I think it is safe to say that we are not winning the
war on cancer
Of course, this does not mean that cancer research should not
continue. The societal implications of this realization could be disheartening
to people who are suffering from the disease or have loved ones suffering
from the disease. However, this just means that we need to redouble our
efforts and recognize that failures only lead to an eventual greater success.

Anderson 4
While I agree more with Spectors thesis, position, and analysis, I glean
hope from Seffrins positivity and enthusiasm. Although we may not be
winning the war on cancer right now, we will eventually win it. Part of
winning it will mean taking a realistic and serious approach.

Reflection:
Doing this assignment was very interesting to me as my grandfather
has just been diagnosed with prostate cancer, and twenty years ago, my
other grandfather died of prostate cancer. I worry that this means I am at a
higher likelihood for someday suffering from cancer. However, it is important
not to let pseudo-scientific information play off your hopes, fears, and
worries. Ultimately, it is more comforting to recognize the approaches of
good science and realize that things are always changing for the better, but
maybe not in the same ways that people who are hoping to profit from quick
cures say they are. This is a lesson that I learned from this class and this
assignment.