7 ms·

"Cancer isn't a single disease" is often shouted from the Dunning-Kruger peak of cancer research. I think it was popularized by an explainer video on Youtube,

"Cancer isn't a single disease" is often shouted from the Dunning-Kruger peak of cancer research. I think it was popularized by an explainer video on Youtube, and now it's being memed. The people who think this way want to legitimize funding a particular research niche that they benefit from. A more sophisticated view is that cancer (one idea) is an problem of rates (like most things in biology) and there is a tumor burden per unit time from whatever causes vs. the immune system's capacity to detect and destroy them per unit time. As humans age, the balance tips in one direction. If the balance is too far off for too long, tumors accumulate, doctors take notice, and assign whatever labels to the condition. Looking into particular causes of tumors (and calling each cause its own cancer) can create a vast research program that employs a lot of people, since there are so many mutations that lead to tumors. But interrupting the development of a particular mutation is not going to have the same society-changing effect that solving the fundamental issue of rates would.

inciampati 1mo ago
And this business of rates is also why getting the immune system—such as via personalized vaccine—to recognize a tumor is functionally "curing cancer". The problem is it isn't one disease in the sense that different tissues, cell types, and systems are affected leading to different parameters in the design and delivery of said vaccines.
root-parent 1mo ago
>> "Cancer isn't a single disease" is often shouted from the Dunning-Kruger peak of cancer research. Literally first phrase on Cancer Wikipedia entry.... [1] "Cancer is a group of diseases involving uncontrolled cell growth typically resulting in tumors with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body...." [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer
bonsai_spool 1mo ago
[dead]
datsci_est_2015 1mo ago
Is there something like a meta-Dunning-Kruger, where someone invokes Dunning-Kruger in a way that itself is a potential Dunning-Kruger phenomenon? I'm inclined to believe that the thing - that everyone intelligent says is complicated - is actually complicated. I would be surprised if the thing - that everyone intelligent says is complicated - is actually simple. This is almost like an application of the conspiracy theory gambit where you try to find out how many people would have to be "in on it" in order to disprove the theory's likelihood. Like flat earth.
- bigfishrunning 1mo ago
  People are constantly Dunning-Krugering the Dunning-Kruger effect
preg_match 1mo ago
No, cancer is actually many diseases. They hold some commonalities, but it’s not one thing. That’s why chemotherapy can straight cure some cancers and do nothing for others. That’s also why we have hundreds of chemotherapy drugs. Also, not even all cancers have tumors. You have solid tumor oncologists and then oncologists who specialize in blood and lymphatic cancers, “liquid cancers”. In addition, cancer does not arise from one mutation. It’s a set of mutations that allow cancer to occur. You need mutations for growth, mutations for preventing cellular death, mutations for stealing energy, mutations for hiding from the immune system. Your body, right now, has probably millions of cells that could be candidates for cancer. They either kill themselves or your immune system nukes them. You really need the stars to align on this stuff to get actual cancer. And then, it’s not like the cancer stops mutating. Cancer becomes resistant to chemotherapy through mutations. Cancer is “smart”, it will even temporary slow its own growth (metabolism) to intake less chemotherapy through treatment.
alphazard 1mo ago
I should have expected this level of discourse from 2026 HN. Here's another way of framing things that might encourage better discussion: Suppose in a few years, it was announced that an LLM did discover a cure for a cancer. What approach would you expect it to have taken? 1. Developing an intervention for every possible mutation that leads to loss of cellular identity, and uncontrolled growth. 2. Preserving immune function later into life. 3. Preserving genetic and epigenetic accuracy later into life. Maybe it will be 1. But I would bet on 2 or 3. Which both assume that by reducing the difference between rates, the phenomenon of cancer could be reduced or eliminated.
- overgard 1mo ago
  Or maybe these companies are just bullshitting. Also: https://pivot-to-ai.com/2026/07/30/google-kills-alphafold-so-much-for-ai-curing-cancer/ https://pivot-to-ai.com/2026/07/30/google-kills-alphafold-so...

inciampati 1mo ago

And this business of rates is also why getting the immune system—such as via personalized vaccine—to recognize a tumor is functionally "curing cancer". The problem is it isn't one disease in the sense that different tissues, cell types, and systems are affected leading to different parameters in the design and delivery of said vaccines.

root-parent 1mo ago

>> "Cancer isn't a single disease" is often shouted from the Dunning-Kruger peak of cancer research. Literally first phrase on Cancer Wikipedia entry.... [1] "Cancer is a group of diseases involving uncontrolled cell growth typically resulting in tumors with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body...." [1] - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer

bonsai_spool 1mo ago

[dead]

datsci_est_2015 1mo ago

Is there something like a meta-Dunning-Kruger, where someone invokes Dunning-Kruger in a way that itself is a potential Dunning-Kruger phenomenon? I'm inclined to believe that the thing - that everyone intelligent says is complicated - is actually complicated. I would be surprised if the thing - that everyone intelligent says is complicated - is actually simple. This is almost like an application of the conspiracy theory gambit where you try to find out how many people would have to be "in on it" in order to disprove the theory's likelihood. Like flat earth.

bigfishrunning 1mo ago
People are constantly Dunning-Krugering the Dunning-Kruger effect

preg_match 1mo ago

No, cancer is actually many diseases. They hold some commonalities, but it’s not one thing. That’s why chemotherapy can straight cure some cancers and do nothing for others. That’s also why we have hundreds of chemotherapy drugs. Also, not even all cancers have tumors. You have solid tumor oncologists and then oncologists who specialize in blood and lymphatic cancers, “liquid cancers”. In addition, cancer does not arise from one mutation. It’s a set of mutations that allow cancer to occur. You need mutations for growth, mutations for preventing cellular death, mutations for stealing energy, mutations for hiding from the immune system. Your body, right now, has probably millions of cells that could be candidates for cancer. They either kill themselves or your immune system nukes them. You really need the stars to align on this stuff to get actual cancer. And then, it’s not like the cancer stops mutating. Cancer becomes resistant to chemotherapy through mutations. Cancer is “smart”, it will even temporary slow its own growth (metabolism) to intake less chemotherapy through treatment.

alphazard 1mo ago

I should have expected this level of discourse from 2026 HN. Here's another way of framing things that might encourage better discussion: Suppose in a few years, it was announced that an LLM did discover a cure for a cancer. What approach would you expect it to have taken? 1. Developing an intervention for every possible mutation that leads to loss of cellular identity, and uncontrolled growth. 2. Preserving immune function later into life. 3. Preserving genetic and epigenetic accuracy later into life. Maybe it will be 1. But I would bet on 2 or 3. Which both assume that by reducing the difference between rates, the phenomenon of cancer could be reduced or eliminated.

overgard 1mo ago
Or maybe these companies are just bullshitting. Also: https://pivot-to-ai.com/2026/07/30/google-kills-alphafold-so-much-for-ai-curing-cancer/ https://pivot-to-ai.com/2026/07/30/google-kills-alphafold-so...