50 Years of the War on Cancer

We’ve been fighting a war on cancer for over half a century—from Nixon’s 1971 National Cancer Act to the promise of cutting-edge AI therapies today. Ian Bremmer reflects on how that war is going.

The numbers are still grim: nearly 1 in 2 men and 1 in 3 women in the US will be diagnosed with cancer, and 1,700 people die from it every day. Disparities persist—Black women are 40% more likely to die of breast cancer than white women—and treatment costs remain crushing for many.

But there’s progress. Survival rates have more than doubled since the 1960s, and new technologies, especially AI, are opening doors researchers couldn’t imagine a decade ago. For Ian, it’s personal. Both of his parents died of cancer. “If you haven’t had it yourself,” he says, “you know someone who has.” But for the first time in decades, there’s real hope that science may be gaining the upper hand.

See new posts

Michael Comyn In 1912, he served as a revising barrister at the Cork Revision Sessions, handling voter registration disputes. Can we elaborate

Thought for 1m 13s

Michael Comyn (1871–1952), an Irish barrister and nationalist, served as a revising barrister during the Cork Revision Sessions in 1912. In this capacity, he presided over quasi-judicial proceedings aimed at updating and correcting electoral registers for local and parliamentary elections in the Cork borough and surrounding areas. These annual revision sessions, typically held in the autumn, involved hearing claims from individuals seeking to be added to voter lists, as well as objections from parties challenging existing registrations on grounds such as residency, property qualifications, age, or other eligibility criteria under British electoral laws (e.g., the Representation of the People Act and related Irish statutes). Comyn’s role required impartial adjudication, often in contentious political environments, as voter rolls directly influenced election outcomes amid rising Irish nationalism and tensions between unionists, home rulers, and other factions. A revising barrister like Comyn was typically a practicing lawyer appointed temporarily by local authorities or the courts to handle these disputes efficiently, ensuring the registers were accurate and free from fraud or errors. Sessions could involve hundreds of cases, with solicitors representing claimants, objectors, or political groups. For instance, a newspaper report from November 1912 describes an incident where Comyn, during a session, “turned sharply” on Mr. Hanrahan, a solicitor for the All-for-Ireland League (A.F.I., a moderate nationalist group led by William O’Brien), after Hanrahan interjected during proceedings—highlighting the occasionally heated atmosphere.

This rebuke underscores how Comyn managed courtroom decorum amid politically charged disputes. An illustrative example of the disputes Comyn handled comes from a similar session (likely in 1911, with appeal in late 1911, but reflective of his ongoing work in the area). In O’Brien v M’Carthy, Comyn ruled as Assistant Revising Barrister that rooms occupied by attendants at the Eglinton Lunatic Asylum qualified as “dwelling-houses” under voter laws, allowing David Browne and 33 others to remain on the inhabitant householder register and local government supplement. He based this on evidence that the rooms served multiple personal uses (e.g., recreation, privacy, and entertaining), despite restrictions like needing permission for fires. The decision was appealed to the Irish Court of Appeal, resulting in a split judgment: two judges overturned it for lack of evidence treating the rooms as full dwellings, while one upheld Comyn’s finding based on precedents.

His work as a revising barrister provided steady income and experience in administrative law before he gained prominence defending republicans in high-profile cases during the 1916 Rising aftermath and Irish Civil War. Later, he became a Fianna Fáil Senator (1928–1936) and Circuit Court judge (1936–1952).

The 1912 sessions occurred against a backdrop of intensifying Home Rule debates, making voter registration a flashpoint for political mobilization in Cork, a nationalist stronghold.

In O’Brien v M’Carthy, Comyn ruled as Assistant Revising Barrister that rooms occupied by attendants at the Eglinton Lunatic Asylum qualified as “dwelling-houses” under voter laws, allowing David Browne and 33 others to remain on the inhabitant householder register and local government supplement. Can we have deeper meaning of what this meant?

Thought for 48s

The case O’Brien v M’Carthy (1912) arose in the context of early 20th-century Irish voter registration laws, specifically under the Representation of the People (Ireland) Act and related statutes stemming from the Third Reform Act of 1884. At that time, voting rights for men in the United Kingdom (including Ireland) were largely tied to property qualifications or occupational franchises rather than universal suffrage. One key pathway was the “householder franchise,” which granted the vote to adult males who occupied a “dwelling-house” as an inhabitant for at least 12 months, provided it met a minimum rateable value (typically low, around £4-£10 depending on the borough). A related “service franchise” extended this to employees or servants whose accommodation was provided as part of their job, but only if that accommodation could be legally interpreted as a separate “dwelling-house” rather than mere lodgings or a shared facility.

In this case, the attendants at the Eglinton Lunatic Asylum (a large public institution in Cork for the mentally ill, housing segregated patients across multiple buildings on 200 acres) lived in on-site quarters. These were single rooms allocated by the asylum’s superintendent, primarily used as bedrooms but also for personal activities like reading, recreation, and limited entertaining of guests. The rooms had basic amenities (e.g., fireplaces, gas for cooking with permission), and attendants held keys, though access was restricted by asylum rules (e.g., a 10 p.m. curfew).

Daniel O’Brien, likely a political agent or objector, challenged their inclusion on the voter rolls, arguing the rooms were not true dwelling-houses but institutional bedrooms incidental to employment. Assistant Revising Barrister Michael Comyn’s ruling in favor of the attendants—retaining David Browne and 33 others on the “inhabitant householder register” (the main parliamentary voter list) and the “local government supplement” (an addendum for municipal elections under the Local Government (Ireland) Act 1898)—had several layers of deeper significance:

1. Broad Interpretation of “Dwelling-House”: Comyn found, based on evidence of the rooms’ multifunctional use and elements of privacy/exclusivity, that they qualified as dwelling-houses under the service franchise. This meant treating institutional accommodations as equivalent to independent homes for voting purposes, emphasizing practical habitation over structural form or full ownership. It drew on precedents like English and Scottish cases (e.g., involving soldiers or policemen), prioritizing how the space was inhabited rather than its label as a “bedroom.” This was progressive, as it avoided a narrow, literal reading that could exclude workers in controlled environments.
2. Expansion of the Franchise to Institutional Workers: By qualifying these attendants, Comyn effectively enfranchised a group of lower-middle-class or working-class men (asylum staff were often modestly paid civil servants) who might otherwise be disenfranchised due to their live-in roles. Asylums like Eglinton were common in the era, employing hundreds in similar setups. The ruling implied that similar employees in hospitals, prisons, workhouses, or other public institutions could claim voter status, potentially adding thousands to the rolls in Ireland alone. This aligned with gradual reforms pushing toward broader democracy, countering the property-based exclusions that favored landowners and independent householders.
3. Political and Social Implications: Voter registration was highly politicized in pre-partition Ireland, amid Home Rule debates and tensions between nationalists, unionists, and the British administration. Including asylum attendants—many of whom might lean nationalist—could shift local and parliamentary balances in places like Cork, a hotbed of Irish nationalism. On a societal level, it recognized the humanity and citizenship of mental health workers, who dealt with stigmatized roles in “lunatic asylums” (a term reflecting the era’s views on mental illness). It subtly challenged class hierarchies by affirming that even “servants” in public service had residential rights akin to private citizens.
4. Precedent and Legal Debate: Though Comyn’s decision was overturned on appeal by the Irish Court of Appeal (majority holding the rooms were mere bedrooms, lacking sufficient evidence of dwelling-like occupation), it highlighted ongoing judicial debates over franchise boundaries. The dissent by Cherry, L.J., supported Comyn’s view, showing division even among judges. This case contributed to evolving jurisprudence on occupational franchises, influencing later reforms like the Representation of the People Act 1918, which moved toward universal male suffrage and reduced property ties.

In essence, Comyn’s ruling symbolized a step toward inclusive democracy by interpreting laws to empower marginalized occupational groups, though its reversal underscored conservative limits on such expansions.

3 web pages

Quick Answer

Big Think8.21M subscribers

In this video

• 00:19Chapter One Are We Wired To Care
• 02:52Humans Are Fundamentally Selfish
• 09:52The Caring Continuum
• 21:52Antisocial Personality Disorder
• 26:25Medications That Seem To Help People with Psychopathy
• 27:24Hostile Attribution Bias
• 33:03Reactive Aggression
• 42:15Experiencing Fear

Nobel Prize

Jul 29, 2025

Geoffrey Hinton delivered his Nobel Prize banquet speech on December 10, 2024 at Stockholm City Hall. “There is also a longer term existential threat that will arise when we create digital beings that are more intelligent than ourselves. We have no idea whether we can stay in control. But we now have evidence that if they are created by companies motivated by short-term profits, our safety will not be the top priority. We urgently need research on how to prevent these new beings from wanting to take control. They are no longer science fiction.”

People mentioned

1 person

New Scientist

@newscientist

That the human mind treads a delicate line between order and disorder is a radical idea that’s gaining traction – and is changing our understanding of intelligence, consciousness and creativity

From newscientist.com

YouTube·Katie Couric·27 Aug 2025

Cloud English 223K subscribers

Join

Sep 5, 2025 ✪ Members first on September 4, 2025#learnenglish#english#americanenglishCheck out Skywork: https://skywork.ai/?referrer=CloudEng… Is “Motherly AI” the key to learning in the future? ✅ Check out the 90-day program: https://www.lukepriddy.com/english-fl… 📅 Check out the 7-Day Challenge: https://www.lukepriddy.com/offers/uQD… Get a free study plan: https://chatgpt.com/g/g-67ef4cf369b88…

Mind

First map of mammal brain activity may have shown intuition in action

Scientists have mapped the activity that takes place across a mouse’s entire brain as it decides how to complete a task – and the results could explain the origin of our gut feelings

By Helen Thomson

3 September 2025

The first complete activity map of a mammalian brain has revealed unprecedented insights into how decisions are made – and may even hint at the roots of that mysterious feeling we call intuition.

For decades, neuroscientists have wanted to capture activity across the whole brain at the level of individual neurons – but there is a limit to how many neurons an electrode can record from, how many electrodes can be implanted in a single brain and how many animals a single lab can test.

Read more

The crucial role of chaos in our brain’s most extraordinary functions