Erpan

Adam the contrast was the point. Two different bad/fatal diseases yet very different response from the field to advances. We do not have a functional cure for many cancers but HR < .7 in any cancer is described as practice changing in oncology. Neurology seems underwhelmed by the same degree in disease change. Of course cancer is not one thing and I could have been more precise- CLL is not good but now mostly not fatal, due to many advances from Lilly and our peers HR+ HER - breast cancer has long survival now yet GI cancers are mostly unsolved and survival curves are terrible. You know what else is terrible? Almost every neuro-degenerative disease including AD and we (including the media) need to discuss it that way. Unfortunately I’ve witnessed end of life journeys up close in both diseases, while different horrors present themselves in each I’d say they are both pretty bad. Advancement 30%+ at a time should change practice and routinely be offered to patients and families. Oncology does this Neurology doesn’t.