That's just sarcasm not satirization. I choose that because he seemed to imply that my point was to be entirely ignored because of this data. Which I thought was particularly thin and easily seen through.
> Aging is the primary factor in oncology and the vast majority of cancer patients are elderly.
Okay. I'll spare you the sarcasm. What does this have to do with the strategy involved in eliminating cancer? Particularly for those where treatment is intended to prevent early death? To me it seems like this is completely irrelevant to this point.
> But there is still something like twenty elderly cancer patients for one young.
I understand the data. Do you understand that the one young cancer patient does not want or need to hear this?
Thank you for respecting the rules of local debate.
"Do you understand that the one young cancer patient does not want or need to hear this?"
Well ... is this not actually sarcasm?
What made you think that I am either stupid or callous enough not to care about young cancer patients and their fear and need for support and treatment?
That's just sarcasm not satirization. I choose that because he seemed to imply that my point was to be entirely ignored because of this data. Which I thought was particularly thin and easily seen through.
> Aging is the primary factor in oncology and the vast majority of cancer patients are elderly.
Okay. I'll spare you the sarcasm. What does this have to do with the strategy involved in eliminating cancer? Particularly for those where treatment is intended to prevent early death? To me it seems like this is completely irrelevant to this point.
> But there is still something like twenty elderly cancer patients for one young.
I understand the data. Do you understand that the one young cancer patient does not want or need to hear this?