Again, you keep trying to spin.
If the general death rate from complications of ALL surgeries (and yes some surgeries are more risky than others) is .07%, then risk of cancer from transplant is .05%, that’s a lower risk than general complications across the board.
As I stated before, Your likelihood of buying a lemon car from a top auto manufacturer is about twice the risk of getting cancer from a transplant... Would you believe that the risk of getting a lemon car is high??? If it is, how do these companies stay in business?
Just because you can find an example of something that is lower risk, does not mean that something else is innately high risk... All you are proving is that it is higher risk than something else, whether that something else has any relevance or not.
As to your down syndrome example.. I can personally counter your assumptions. My wife and I had a child in our early 40s, and at no time did ANYONE even broach the topic of termination. In fact, today they can genetically test the child for genetic issues with relatively high probability without amnio, they actually can extract the child’s DNA from within the mothers blood, so no need for Amnio or the risk associated with it... Oh and for the record, the odds of someone my wifes age having a child with Down’s Syndrome, was about 1-2%, which for the record is 40-80 times higher a risk than catching Cancer from a transplant.. but you claim a 1-2% risk is them overselling the risk, while .05% is them underselling... you can’t have it both ways... By your reasoning 2% is INSANELY high risk, if you are claiming .05 isn’t low risk... yet here you are claiming its not high risk... make up your mind.
Risk is only meaningful when compared to other relevant things... and in medicine, particularly surgery, an .05% risk is very low risk. Is it as low as other things? Nope, can always find something less risky... no matter what it is.. but to say that .05% is not low risk is comically naive when it comes to medicine, let alone a surgical procedure as complicated as organ transplantation.
Last numbers I saw, roughly 5% of folks who get a transplant die within a year of their surgery. 5%, thats a full 100 times more risky than getting cancer from the transplanted organ. To know this, and to claim .05% is high risk is just fool hearty.
I’m not the one spinning, here. I’m attempting to un-spin the article that is the subject of this thread, and you seem to take offense at that.
Seems to me that perhaps you have more that just a passing interest in maintaining the overly-positive marketing hype, here.
Me, I’m just a casual observer with some understanding of statistics and have no axe to grind other than disliking marketing hype disguised as objectivity.