We can’t know how medicine would be practiced under socialism, but we do know that our bodies would be the same. Cancer wouldn’t be any different. Maybe there would be less cases of lung cancer, and maybe treatments would be less expensive or would be found earlier. Maybe we’d find the cure for all types of cancer simultaneously. But the limitations imposed by the nature of disease itself wouldn’t change.

Capitalism always favors non-curative treatments over curative ones, and makes newer curative treatments extremely expensive (e.g. CAR-T cell therapies or genetic treatments).

But, as other users rightly point out, there are millions of ways our bodies can misbehave. Even something like “cancer” is just an array of several hundred diseases, wherein even each of them is not homogeneous across all cases. Cancer survival slowly goes up over the years as specific variants of it are tackled, but that wouldn’t be different under socialism, at most just faster (Cuba has made some great contributions to cancer research) or more accessible.

I should say this to people who claim “capitalism” has nothing to do with capital and is nowadays just a synonym of freedom.

Dancing in occupied territory.

I like this perspective of yours. I may as well expand the range of activities of mine I call hobbies.

Linux (windows at work tho).

Rare FT “China good” moment /s

Or so it would be if people wouldn’t personally relate to billionaires for some reason.

Late-Permian extinction. Not very imaginative, but I find it cool that there are so many hypotheses even about the largest mass extinction ever.

Cool! Books are an amazing source of knowledge and fun. I just got a (second hand) math book that another user recommended, and it’s so far enthralling. Do you read Marxist books?