Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Health and Wellness > Cancer
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 12-09-2010, 02:38 PM
 
27,957 posts, read 39,754,982 times
Reputation: 26197

Advertisements

The reality is no matter what some people do, they will or will not get cancer.

All my grandparents all lived to ripe old ages. They ate plenty of red meats, my granddad drank like a fish for a long time, he smoked, and used chewing tobacco. Want to know what he died of? Old freaking age at 94 years old. 3 of 4 of my grandparents lived to be 90 plus. They presented plenty of the risk factors you who tout alternative medicines and nutrition only.

Now take me for an example. Non smoker, non drinker had no risk factors and I managed to get cancer.

Your logic is severely flawed. Again diet and weight are not the same as cancer. Sit around drink beer and eat copious amounts of food that bad for you, then yes you will die. Last time I checked we are going going to die. You want to accelerate it feel free.

No matter what some people do they will get cancer. Good clean living doesn't prevent anything.

 
Old 12-09-2010, 02:51 PM
 
106 posts, read 287,431 times
Reputation: 144
yah and a lot can happen in 3 years (3 year old with cancer). as stated above, there are many unknown factors. i was fed formula for the first 6 months. why? cause the docs told my parents that was best. well... after 6 months of throwing up and suffering from chronic sickness (they thought I was going to die, literally), a different doc told my mom to breast feed. problem solved immediately.

regardless of people's 'feelings' (which are important), the truth is the truth. just because someone wouldn't want to hear that certain factors could have been a major contributor to their 4 year old child's lukemia, doesn't mean that the entire notion is baseless and the child has definitely just caught "bad luck". it's amazing complex, and not fully understood even by the brightest minds in the world. it further complicates things that everyone has a different opinion of what 'common sensical thinking' is. hence you have such strongly opposing viewpoints here.

rather than go back and forth, i think we all agree that good points have been made to support the idea that many steps can be taken to give yourself the maximum protection that you are capable of, but in the end, some other factors may come into play that catch you by surprise. besides all that, you might get hit by a mac truck anyway, and unless you are like will smith from hancock, your health won't matter much.

as for me, i will stick with doing all i can with what i have been given. i choose not to allow a victim mentality to grip my future.

cheers
jack k
 
Old 12-09-2010, 03:42 PM
 
2,222 posts, read 10,645,590 times
Reputation: 3328
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
And if any doctors decline treatment for cancer, it may be those for which available treatments do not produce good results. Doctors are probably less likely to agree to things which do not produce meaningful increase in quality or quantity of life. I cannot envision a doctor declining treatment for a cancer with an excellent prognosis.
With prostate cancer, many urologists recommend surgery. My husband chose another treatment. And guess who several of the patients were, urologists. They said they did not want to undergo surgery due to the side affects. Not even the nerve sparing or robotic surgeries.

Many patients were told surgery would cure them, that's why they chose it. Several patients were now being treated as my husband as surgery failed and did not remove all cancer.

I've heard many stories of doctors not choosing what they recommend for their patients.
 
Old 12-09-2010, 04:08 PM
 
27,957 posts, read 39,754,982 times
Reputation: 26197
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth56 View Post
With prostate cancer, many urologists recommend surgery. My husband chose another treatment. And guess who several of the patients were, urologists. They said they did not want to undergo surgery due to the side affects. Not even the nerve sparing or robotic surgeries.

Many patients were told surgery would cure them, that's why they chose it. Several patients were now being treated as my husband as surgery failed and did not remove all cancer.

I've heard many stories of doctors not choosing what they recommend for their patients.
May I ask what treatment did your husband take?
 
Old 12-09-2010, 06:23 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
37,092 posts, read 41,220,763 times
Reputation: 45084
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beth56 View Post
With prostate cancer, many urologists recommend surgery. My husband chose another treatment. And guess who several of the patients were, urologists. They said they did not want to undergo surgery due to the side affects. Not even the nerve sparing or robotic surgeries.

Many patients were told surgery would cure them, that's why they chose it. Several patients were now being treated as my husband as surgery failed and did not remove all cancer.

I've heard many stories of doctors not choosing what they recommend for their patients.
But an alternative treatment is different from NO treatment at all. To one man the sexual side effects of surgery may outweigh the benefits, while to another it would be not as important. I would hope that the urologists you met were presenting all the alternatives to their own patients.
 
Old 12-10-2010, 05:12 AM
 
5,644 posts, read 13,220,811 times
Reputation: 14170
Quote:
Originally Posted by imcurious View Post
We don't know what the children were exposed to in the womb or if the breast milk they drank was polluted by toxins from the environment (actually we do know breast milk is polluted by toxins but I don't have the research to cite right here) . . . .we don't know what chemicals infant formula or baby foods has in them (I don't know, but it would be simple to find out), we don't know about radon in the home, or exposure to radiation or other environmental pollutants, including water . . .there are just too many variables.

But to knowingly not want to reduce risk when you can is just madness, from my perspective. When you know better, you do better, you live cleaner . . .
"When you know better, you do better, you live cleaner"... AND YOU STILL DIE....AND YOU STILL DEVELOP CANCER

So now you are blaming the parents for the child's cancer? Wonderful

We don't know what causes most childhood cancers...but considering how LONG it takes to develop cancer from environmental exposures (typically decades) it is highly unlikely that it has ANYTHING to do with breast milk...

You also make many claims without ANY research to back it up....

Most doctors(says you) avoid mainstream cancer treatment...you "read it somewhere"...NOT TRUE

Breast milk is polluted by toxins(says you) but you provide no evidence to back this up....PROVE IT

Stop making claims if you can't prove them
 
Old 12-10-2010, 08:11 AM
 
2,222 posts, read 10,645,590 times
Reputation: 3328
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD4020 View Post
May I ask what treatment did your husband take?
Proton Beam Therapy at Loma Linda in California.
 
Old 12-10-2010, 08:22 AM
 
2,222 posts, read 10,645,590 times
Reputation: 3328
Quote:
Originally Posted by suzy_q2010 View Post
But an alternative treatment is different from NO treatment at all. To one man the sexual side effects of surgery may outweigh the benefits, while to another it would be not as important. I would hope that the urologists you met were presenting all the alternatives to their own patients.
It is unfortunate, but many urologists do not present all the alternatives. My husband thought he would first go to the best teaching hospital in our area to see a urologist who was considered top notch in the field. Surgery was his recommendation. He even laughed about how quick he can do it compared to other doctors, like it was a game. He mentioned another course of treatment, but said the outcome was best with surgery. Our research did not confirm this.

During the two months of treatment my husband had, most of the other patients stated the same thing. They were not told of all treatments. Information was difficult to get on anything other than surgery or seeds.

You are correct that each man must weigh what is important to him. Each must decide the best treatment for himself. That is why your doctor should be able to discuss all treatments.
 
Old 12-10-2010, 09:20 AM
 
106 posts, read 287,431 times
Reputation: 144
bluedevilz, feel free to exit this conversation at any time. you are out of line.
 
Old 12-10-2010, 09:24 AM
 
5,644 posts, read 13,220,811 times
Reputation: 14170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jack Kronk View Post
bluedevilz, feel free to exit this conversation at any time. you are out of line.
Right back at ya....

You and others want to "blame the victim"...and "i" am out of line...

Get a clue or exit the conversation
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.



All times are GMT -6. The time now is 07:32 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top