The disease cycle...will it be endless?

What i mean is, a long time ago, most common diseases from today were lethal and killed a lot of people, as the technology advances and with that the possibilities to create either cures or vaccines against diseases, those diseases become something from everyday.

Diseases that were incurable in the past such as tuberculosis, now have a vaccine to prevent it and a cure (as far as i remember), cancer is curable when treated on time (dunno if there is a cure on the works for terminal patients or a vaccine to prevent it) and hell, we're close to have a vaccine and a cure for the AIDS, even it was stated that in about 20 years or so, it will be born the first generation without HIV...

But well, the question is, will it be ever like this? a disease comes, kills some people, and after a time a vaccine and a cure is developed, or someday will there be a seriously dangerous disease that cannot be cured at all?

Meh of course the answer is yes.Whilst something unpredictable such as exposure to an alien life form from some sort of NEO or one that immigrated here on the surface of a returning probe or other exploratory device could be potentially dangerous, something that appears from our world more than likely is a simple variation from something else.Because of this, simple darwinistic logic will concur that we'll adapt to it.But truly the whole thing about fatal diseases is that the goal isn't to cure, it's to mediate the affected into a permissible state, weaken, or lessening the potential carriers of the disease through various applications of strains of that virii or bacteria or the introducing of chemicals in the human body to create a place where it cannot reach homeostasis. If it is such a deadly disease, there is no point for trying to find a cure.Empirically, trying to destroy something rather than excluding it typically makes it stronger as it will try to adapt as needed and if it's symptoms lead to countless deaths even in this age, more than likely it's a worthless case where we are met with the horns of the dilemma,trying to save a doomed person and causing more deaths or giving up on the damned and focusing on the rest.Its the job of the physician to save the most lives possible, not to save all lives.So in summary, there are already diseases(really you should start calling them illnesses) that are incurable, but any dangerous epidemics in the future should not be the target of a futile extermination, only hope that we can mitigate it from decimating too large of a portion of our standing reserve.

Oh and on another note, cancer isn't a disease,illness, or sickness, so it's not "curable". It may cause disease,illness, or sickness, but really it's just a problematic malfunctioning of ones cells that can be remidied.And we're not close to a cure or a vaccine for HIV and subsequent AIDS, we can prevent it,weaken it, and can now be immune to it(well 1 in 21000000 males can be for a short period) because of research of individuals who cannot sustain the virus(that causes a whole different problem for them though) but like all other virii, we can't kill,destroy, or remove it,it'll stay in your body, dormant like all the other virii you've contracted over the years, if we find a way to permanently weaken any strain we come in contact with.

I imagine disease will be a mostly third-world thing. All the diseases you mention, save cancer (which is really the rich man's problem) still kill millions a year in places like africa and asia. The fact we have a cure for tuberculosis does not mean that everyone gets it in time, or at all.

Disease really isn't that much of killer in developed nations... it just isn't. There are scattered deaths, but they generally affect the already old or weak. In the future superbugs might cause a few epidemics, but actual threats would probably be dealt with quickly. I worry more about autoimmune disease from LACK of exposure to disease, which is killing more and more people in developed nations each year.

Well, they may be just contained to isolated locales now; hell, rising instances of Legionnaire's Disease were traced back to the damn Playboy Mansion's hot-tub.

I think there's bound to be outbreaks of new/evolved infectious disease in the future, but the thing about mankind is that we adapt. All it takes is one person to not be killed by a virus and the human race is saved. Even now, all our old viruses are still around, it's just that people the world over have been immunized against them to the point that those viruses have no effect on the vast majority of society.

Humans have been on this planet for 200,000 years. If viruses haven't wiped us all out already I doubt that it will in the future and most definitely not in our lifetime.

There doesn't even have to be a cure or vaccine because the gene pool is huge. Odds are someone will be mutated enough to be immune and guarantee survival of our species.

Well remember heart disease and cancer are very much diseases, and are top killers in America. I think everyone here means infectious diseases, given what we've been saying.

While I'm opposed to all forms of millennialism, there is a very realistic threat of new viral emergence, and even bacterial emergence. Simply put, the widespread usage of antibiotics in the 20th century has selected for antibiotic-resistance in pathogens. Penicillin revolutionized disease treatment after its discovery in 1928; nowadays, so many bacteria possess the gene beta-lactamase (which breaks open and neutralizes the drug), that both types of penicillin are ineffective against many strains of infectious bacteria.

Viruses present an even greater threat, because they evolve soooo much faster. One of the biggest problems in fighting HIV is that it's genome changes so rapidly, that it can easily be selected for resistance to whatever you just threw at it. It's going to be constant battle between researchers inventing new drugs and viruses developing resistance to those drugs for a long time.

Also, there are these things called prions, which are basically misfolded proteins that can cause disease. They don't evolve nearly as quickly as nucleic acid, but they are virtually indestructible, so that's kinda scary.

Of course, the important thing to keep in mind, is that human extinction is not a realistic possibility in any part of the foreseeable future. However, a rise in global pandemics, leading to significant parts of the population being incapacitated and burgeoning healthcare costs, would severely detract from mankind's standard of living. #FirstHumanworldproblems

Yes, it is endless. While diseases may be harmful (or not), all diseases, bacteria, viruses etc. evolve and can become immune to a certain type of antibiotic and adapt to its environment. Antibiotics must always be "updated" and kept in check. It is a vicious cycle and one which there's little hope of ever 100% breaking away from.

[font=verdana][color=green]It's a story of evolution; the disease is made, the antidote is made. In reaction to the antidote being made, the disease mutates to resist the antidote. In reaction to the strengthened disease, the antidote is modified to make it strong enough to deal with the disease. Vicious circle ensues.

This results in super-viruses like MRSA being made; this battle of disease and antidote has been raging for quite some time, so when a human does get infected by one of these, they are pretty doomed.

Well, now i've heard some other opinions, i'm quite convinced that it will never end, i simply think this is a vicious cycle, but now i've remembered the danger of the poles being melted, not only because of the world oceans' water level increase, also because unregistered viruses frozen in them for maybe millions of years, hoping that they're not as dangerous as some things of today, but who knows? well, it seems only time will tell.

Maybe it's just progress and evolution.

Of course there won't be some sort of super disease that cannot be cured. The idea that diseases evolve with the cures given for them is obvious, but the term 'evolve' has been just raped and abused by creationists and Japanese anime. It doesn't mean that these diseases are becoming bigger and stronger and super resistant to everything...it just means they adapt to whatever we use to cure it. Changes in this way can cause problems in other areas of the chemical makeup of the diseases, which means there's something else that can be used to cure the diseases.

Concerning virii though, most doctors will appreciate the fact that virii can't be outright cured. They have to be able to run their course. And as such, virii don't tend to not mutate and change too much. And when they do, the only problem we face is...unpredictable new symptoms. And all THAT means is that we have new symptoms to treat.

Naturally, our bodies are wonderful at adapting and defeating diseases. We still survived diseases prior to medicine, and the same thing happened then as now, just on a much slower scale. Genetic adaptation to diseases that cause death and problems.

I see no reason to fear some supervirus coming out and killing everyone, unless we genetically ENGINEER a supervirus, and it accidentally gets out. I don't think the chances of that happening are very high though.

There will always be a disease because it controls the human population which continues to rise. There will be a super disease one day since we are overpopulated and exceed our carrying capacity,but we will adapt like most animals do and overcome the disease.

From my point of view, a new disease will breakthrough, and kill several thousands of people, the Government will try to find the cure and the vaccine, and so on. Just like how people in South East Asia suffered SARS, nowadays some people if asked might not remember what SARS is, because it does not exist anymore, and new diseases are taking over. It will always be like this as long as human survives in this world.

Humans make vaccine. Virus mutate. Humans make vaccine. Virus mutate.
Works good in some cases. But then we have things like the common cold that there's so many variations of, or HIV which is one of the, if not the, fastest evolving organism we know of. So unless someone comes up with a better idea then vaccines...

Super diseases are also pretty unlikely for two reasons. 1: is that there's a tradeoff, if you're good at something you're bad at something else. 2: if it kills to quickly it'll "starve" to death and disappear. Just as any other thing that are to efficient at killing their prey.

1. You have put a lot of emphasis on INFECTIOUS diseases. I generally refrain from using the word "cure" because having a treatment for a disease does not mean we can cure it. Vaccinations are important in preventative medicine which is a large focus of modern day medicine (keep healthy people healthy). Treatment of common infectious diseases is generally through pharmacological agents but a lot of the time they may recur or fail to respond to treatment. This is why if we have a vaccine we generally recommend you to use it especially if you are in a high risk group.

2. Cancer is most certainly not curable. For one, cancer is not one disease but a collection of many entities. The treatment efficacy of many malignancies (other than things like leukaemia) are poor but a lot of common cancers can be prevented. This is why we recommend people over 50 to get regular colonoscopies because a lot of the time pre-cancerous lesions can be excised without further risk of developing colon cancer. Likewise, we ask women to get pap smears and have the HPV vaccine to prevent cervical cancer. Same goes for smoking, alcohol abuse etc.

3. Will there be a seriously dangerous disease that cannot be cured? That's hard to say. One needs to understand that a lot of disease treatments at the moment rely on the use of medications. Drug companies usually do not develop drugs unless there is a significant number in the population who will benefit from it and thus the company will make a healthy profit. There is no treatment for a lot of dangerous diseases because they simply do not affect enough people for companies to sponsor research in that area.

4. Perhaps a better way of wording your last question is: "Will there be a seriously dangerous disease affecting a significant number of people that cannot be cured at all?" I bloody hope not!

Yes, although the face of disease may change. Even if we were to eradicate all life but ourselves there would still be things like computer viruses, which you may or may not classify as disease but i do.

Heart Disease and Cancer aren't may not necessarily be diseases. Heart disease is more of an injury while cancer is a cell mutating uncontrollably invading the entire body eventually shutting it down.

There is always the chance that our modern methods of fighting disease will just lead to a super-strain which renders our artificial defenses useless. From the other side of things, though, maybe we won't all die of squirrel-bourne ebola or something :D

The only thing we should do right now is keep doing as we do in yesterday and the day before yesterday. Needless to say that diseases already there since the creation of life forms...