elahiehSolution to CIA’s Kryptos sculpture is found in Smithsonian vault
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/10/16/science/kryptos-cia-solution-sanborn-auction.html
There was a Standford professor that was wondering why he had void of cancer patients around 63 and 64. Turns out people wait to get on Medicare for treatment because they cannot afford it with their standard health insurance.
USA would save money in the long run with Universal health care. Since people in the US wait until it gets bad before seeking treatment. This means fights cancer at stage 3 and 4 instead of 1 and 2. Latter the stage the more it costs and less likely for success.
This is one reason foreign doctors come to the US to study and train. Modern countries with Universal Health Care treat at stage 1 and 2 with 3 and 4 being rare ... except for the USA. Need to study advance cancer and aggressive, this USA is a great place.
[0] https://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2021/03/Cancer-diagno...
This doesn't have anything to do with the thread, and hashing this out would tilt a story about Kryptos sharply towards a story on health policy. He's 79, he's very covered by Medicare.
Where is the rule that comments must stay on topic and avoid diversion? It was a more interesting and informative comment than yours that you've restated here (particularly given that being "very covered by Medicare" does not even counter what you originally replied to, as it will not cover all or perhaps even most costs)
I found their aside relevant to my interests as a fellow HN reader. The guidelines also advise against fulminating; you made your point, and I think it’s fair that theirs also stands.
Their aside is also false though. Look at my comment below the OP.
> Their aside is also false though.
You are drawing a conclusion that was not proven by your comment.
OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates.
Both of you could be correct: OP could be correct that many income-constrained folks delay treatment until they age into qualifying for Medicare, and you could be correct that on the whole, folks in the USA have better cancer treatment outcomes.
If you reread OP, they were speaking to there being more advanced cases of later stage cancers in the US, which you didn’t really speak to or refute, so to my reading, you are jumping to conclusions when you say that their aside is false per se.
> OP was talking about folks delaying treatment due to not being able to afford it, whereas you were focusing on survival rates.
Yes, and you can make a straightforward logical deduction from survival rates to delaying diagnosis which I left out, but detail it below:
1. From Data: Assume equal or worse cancer rates in the US and similar levels of cures across US and Europe (cancer rates are indeed worse in the US and Europe does have good cancer treatment on par with US)
2. OP claimed: People delay diagnosis in the US 2a. From data/science: Delayed diagnosis => Higher death rate
3. Deduction from 1 and 2, and 2a.: Higher death rate in the US
4. Data: Lower death rate in the US
5. Contradiction: 3 and 4
6. Reductio: We have a contradiction. We have to negate one of our assumptions or more. We can't throw away data, so we can only throw away OP's claim (2).
I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that.
Did you copy and paste the numbered list from somewhere else? That isn’t how folks on HN typically format things here, and it seems reminiscent of AI output, which is not allowed under the HN guidelines.
> I agree there may be some folks in the US who delay diagnosis but population-wise, data doesn't support that.
We aren’t talking about population-level statistics in this thread, but rather a specific named individual meeting their personal healthcare costs, so your point is off-topic, not OP’s.
Both of you are hashing something out that 'dang has already called out as off-topic across the thread.
Dang has told me more than once to let the mods do the moderating and to not hash it out amongst ourselves, as it steps on their toes and makes any enforcement by mods seem selective. Email and/or flag, and move along.
I don’t work here, and neither do you, so let’s both agree to disagree on it being on-topic or not, as it’s not my place to speak for dang or the other mods, and it’s not yours either, for that matter.
[flagged]
They should say so in their bio, and they should not speak for each other, and so on. It’s messy and unprofessional as it is, and big if true.
I don’t appreciate you jumping into the thread to dogpile either, but you do you.