U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [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)
 
Old 07-11-2016, 04:14 PM
 
Location: Camberville
11,395 posts, read 15,999,324 times
Reputation: 18035

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by 80skeys View Post


completely false. There is no such thing as a blanket statement "85% survival rate." If you're talking about all cancers across the board, this is definitely not the case. Even if you are talking about the most common cancers, it is not the case. Furthmore, you need to define what you mean by "survival rate." Are you talking greater than 10 year survival? Most cancers have a high 5 year survival rate, even if they are left completely untreated, so talking about 5 year survival rates is misleading.

85% >10year survival rate is virtually unknown except in a very few well-known cancers that respond well to chemo, or in a few other cancers that are known to last a long time with little effect on the body, or a few cancers that are caught very early and excised very early. In other words, to get the "85%" rate you're talking about, there are a lot of "or's" "buts" and "exceptions.".


It's great that you were cured. But statistics are what is important here. The numbers to look at are: what percentage of people with cancer X and treatment Y lived for longer than 10 years after treatment?
Cassandra has one of those "very few" (false) "well-known cancers that responds well to chemo." Did you read any of the articles? Hodgkin's lymphoma in fact has upwards of a 90% 5 year survival rate and has had several new drugs since I was diagnosed 5 years ago that bumps that closer to 95% across the board, regardless of stage. Hodgkin's diagnosed in stage I or stage II always had a 95%+ 5 year and 90% 10 year survival rate. Age drags down some of the statistics for Hodgkin's. The cancer has two peak incidence timeframes: between 15 and 30 and then again after 55. Elderly people who develop Hodgkin's do not fare as well as young adults, but they are also grouped together in the statistics.

The vast majority of people who were treated for Hodgkin's in even the 70s and 80s, when treatment was less effective and much harsher on the body, are still alive and went on to have children of their own and normal lives. And, again, in just the past 5 years we've had several phenomenal advances on this cancer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-11-2016, 04:17 PM
 
Location: Camberville
11,395 posts, read 15,999,324 times
Reputation: 18035
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minervah View Post
I wish the Media and the ads for the Cancer treatment centers would give a disclosure on this as do ads for pharmaceuticals we see advertised all the time. Most people have no idea of the side effects that go along with Cancer treatment.
Oncologists are very clear. It's a no brainer. I live with irreversible lung damage due to chemo. But I live. I'll take the lung damage in exchange for the funeral before my 25th birthday, thanks.

Media gets survivorship all wrong. Just look at how many people in this thread still think cancer is a death sentence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 04:21 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,498 posts, read 26,102,510 times
Reputation: 26457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Texas Ag 93 View Post
No question the chemo has potentially devastating affects on health later in life, but if the prognosis is good, treatment is better than the alternative. I would think that detailed discussion of the risks and long term side effects would be discussed by the Oncologist. It certainly should be.

They go to great efforts to track these childhood cancer survivors. There are long term survivors clinics at many of the big centers, and a comprehensive LT survivors study. My family member has received questionnaires about his health status several times a year for almost 20 years now.
My son is also participating in a long term followup study. He is now 27 1/2 years from his leukemia diagnosis.

The consent form for his treatment was many pages long and detailed all of the known risks of the drugs he would be given, including a new one he received under the study protocol he was on. It also made it clear that he could drop out of the study at any time. He did so because we wanted him to get two new drugs (one for nausea and one to increase platelet counts when they dropped due to treatment) that were not allowed under the protocol.

One thing that I find difficult to understand is that people reject cancer treatment because they overestimate the long term side effects. Nausea is treatable and stops when the chemo stops. Hair grows back. Most of the side effects go completely away. Not everyone gets long term effects from treatment. I even know someone who got pregnant after treatment for childhood leukemia, despite heavy duty chemo.

To decide you rather die than be nauseated or lose your hair is irrational. Losing your fertility due to treatment is a tragedy, but there are other options if you want to be a parent and some that include IVF to preserve the option to get pregnant after treatment.

http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/586815_1

Fertility in female survivors of Hodgkin's lymphoma
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 04:22 PM
 
Location: Rutherfordton,NC
12,131 posts, read 8,106,619 times
Reputation: 8609
No one should have to have their body to be pumped full of poison! The side effect's are terrible.
Losing feeling in your hands & fingers so you can't hold anything in them for very long. It kills healthy cells in your body along with killing your immune system. Motor skills, etc . No one should have to go though this kind of hell if they don't want too.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 04:39 PM
 
Location: Lakewood OH
20,865 posts, read 22,446,360 times
Reputation: 32615
Quote:
Originally Posted by charolastra00 View Post
Oncologists are very clear. It's a no brainer. I live with irreversible lung damage due to chemo. But I live. I'll take the lung damage in exchange for the funeral before my 25th birthday, thanks.

Media gets survivorship all wrong. Just look at how many people in this thread still think cancer is a death sentence.
Please reread my post. I never said the Oncologists don't tell people of the side effects, I said I wish the Media did. They often show so-called "miracle drug cocktails" allowing people to believe Chemo is a walk in the park.

I not reading here that posters claimed Cancer is an automatic death sentence. I believe you are mistaking that for the comments people are making that they have the right to choose whether or not to take a chance on chemo fulling knowing it could help but prefer instead to not to go through it. Choosing chemo or no chemo is a gamble either way. But the choice should be up to the patient.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 05:10 PM
 
Location: MD's Eastern Shore
2,250 posts, read 2,724,791 times
Reputation: 3932
Quote:
Originally Posted by reed067 View Post
No one should have to have their body to be pumped full of poison! The side effect's are terrible.
Losing feeling in your hands & fingers so you can't hold anything in them for very long. It kills healthy cells in your body along with killing your immune system. Motor skills, etc . No one should have to go though this kind of hell if they don't want too.
My body was pumped full of this poisen back in 1999. I had lost all feeling from my elbows and knees down. I couldn't grip anything because I had absolutely no feeling so I kept closing my hand waiting to feel something. More often then not I would wear a McDonalds coke or big gulp before even being able to drink it. Not only that but if the lights were turned off while I was standing I would topple over as I had not one bit of feelin in my feet.

1 year of heavy duty chemo treatment for statge 3 testicular cancer wipped me out. I lost a year and my job on a sportfishing boat at the time as well. Got off chemo and was declared cancer feee April 2000. September of that year I was mate on a sportfishing boat again leaving from MD and went on to Venezuela. The start of a dozen years international traveling and working on assorted sportfishing boats there, in Costa Rica and back home in MD among other places.

Your feeling does come back. Llok at me, 5 month's after debilitating treatment and I was back on the water on higher end boats doing what I never dreamed about. I'm still here with absolutely no cancer as I've been free of that mess since april 2000.

Knowing the affects I had and what I went through for what turned out to be such a short period of my life and knowing I would go through the same again if I ever came down with some other form of cancer, would I go through with it? Hell yeah! I am 16 years post chemo for a very aggressive form of testicular (a curable) cancer. With a collapsed lung and hardly able to breath and AFP numbers way, way, way above the chart I would not have even seen the year 2000 had I not taken Chemo.

The funny, stupid, scary thing is I still run into people who at that time said I was stupid for going with chemo and a couple of them still claim I made a dumb move and should have never taken chemo. What is wrong with these people? That nasty poisen gave me my life back and not only did I just lexist but I have lived it to the fullest.


Edited. Of the close to dozen chemo drugs I was on, it was only one that affected my nerves like I described, so not all drugs will have those effects. I'm pretty sure it was cysplatinum. Some drugs didn't affect me at all and some made me feel sick for a couple of days but that one I mentioned was the hard one with the debilitating affects - which did come about 95% back.

Last edited by marlinfshr; 07-11-2016 at 05:29 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 05:25 PM
 
Location: MD's Eastern Shore
2,250 posts, read 2,724,791 times
Reputation: 3932
As far as the initial question? I don't think she has the right at her age. Just too young to make that kind of decision and it seems she has been bombarded by the anti-chemo quacks so that would weigh heavily in her decision. A 85 plus percent survival rate and all these statistics take everybody into count so the 70 year old who comes down with it but has a bad heart and gets a heart attack 6 months later gets added to the statistic as one of those who didn't even make the first year mark after being diagnosed!

After 18, I guess it's up to them to be able to make their own choice - no matter how poor a choice it would be. And for those who say, "well 17 is close enough to 18 bla bla bla" well you may have a point! Buuuuut, the line has to be drawn somewhere otherwise it will continue to move. So 17 is close enough? Lets change the line. Now 16 is close enough! Next thing you know we have 12 year olds able to make life and death decisions when their attention span doesn't last more then a few days. And that carry's through the teens for many which is why I really think it should be 21 before they can make that decision. But I accept 18 because that is when one is legally not a minor and can join the military!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 05:44 PM
 
67 posts, read 38,670 times
Reputation: 179
If you watched the video one part she said was that she wanted to get a second test to make sure she had it but they refused. Why? Perhaps that would've made it easier for her to make the decision.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 05:54 PM
 
Location: Rutherfordton,NC
12,131 posts, read 8,106,619 times
Reputation: 8609
Quote:
Originally Posted by marlinfshr View Post




Your feeling does come back. Look at me, 5 month's after debilitating treatment and I was back on the water on higher end boats doing what I never dreamed about. I'm still here with absolutely no cancer as I've been free of that mess since april 2000.


Not true it depends on how many times you've undergone chemo. As I said on another post my mom had cancer most if her life & it always came by in some form. What people don't want to hear or admit it can come back & odds are that it will at some point. It might not come back in the same place though.


My mom's hands were never the same while her hair did grow back she was always in pain in some form.


My mom's cancer spread until it went to her brain & at the point it was over. Like I've said over and over again there is no money is the cure only the treatment. Again, it really depends how aggressive the cancer is.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2016, 05:55 PM
 
Location: Georgia, USA
21,498 posts, read 26,102,510 times
Reputation: 26457
Quote:
Originally Posted by Johanastra View Post
If you watched the video one part she said was that she wanted to get a second test to make sure she had it but they refused. Why? Perhaps that would've made it easier for her to make the decision.
Because the original test was definitive. No need to repeat it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - 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 - Top