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.
I repeat what others have already said. Cancer isn't one disease, its a great many diseases. Some treatments work well on certain cancers and don't work at all on other cancers. Sixty-eight percent of all cancers are cured according to the best statistics available. The numbers are slightly better for whites than among blacks. The greatest success story of all is the cure rate for childhood cancers. This is now about 80% or greater.
One question for you: If you are so convinced that all medical links are biased and there is no cure for cancer than why do you participate in this discussion at all? Isn't it rather a waste of time for you?
Did you bother to read the link you posted? The author does a good job of explaining why the argument that "big pharma" is engaged in a conspiracy to suppress effective cancer treatments is nonsense. I would think if you took the trouble to post a link here that you would actually take the time to read what it says. Just a little hint. Science based medicine is not a good source for you. You might remember that in the future.
So with ALL the money why isn't there a cure for cancer? We throw billions of dollars each year looking for a cure. Yet there isn't one. You can spout all the links you want and not prove anything other then each doctor back up another. I'm sorry that you can't see it or refuse too either way your wrong. Yes, cancer is more then one disease I will agree with you there. As I have said before remission is not a cure shrinking cancer cells isn't the answer.
There is a doctor out of N.J named Ron Weiss While I don't totally agree with him on everything he makes some very valid points on why no one is really looking for a cure. Another Doctor whose name is Kim A. Williams, president-elect of the American College of Cardiology.
I'm sorry that you and some other's cant see that what's right in front of you.
No need to apologize. I am glad you reposted it. Maybe some people who initially ignored it will decide to hear what Cassandra has to say instead of just believing what they've read in news snippets.
If we can't choose to be born, every human should damn well be able to choose when they want to stop living, or even merely stop trying to force oneself to continue living.
If we can't choose to be born, every human should damn well be able to choose when they want to stop living, or even merely stop trying to force oneself to continue living.
You should watch the video I just posted when you get the chance. Cassandra didn't just decline more chemo and sit around waiting to die. She's doing well with "alternatives". The point isn't to die; it's to avoid the effects of conventional therapy. Refusing it doesn't mean you're going to automatically succumb to cancer (unless you really do just sit on your hands doing nothing).
So with ALL the money why isn't there a cure for cancer?
The biochemistry behind it is very complicated. The best thing one can do to understand it is read a book called "The Emperor of All Maladies".
Quote:
There is a doctor out of N.J named Ron Weiss While I don't totally agree with him on everything he makes some very valid points on why no one is really looking for a cure.
Oh but this is wrong. People are looking for a cure. Adamantly doing so. The reason why none has been found is because until the 1980s we did not have a way to peer into the biochemistry in the cells. And now that we do have a way, we realize how incredibly complex it is.
Exactly bud but you can almost 100% guarantee the CHEMO will most likely destroy your natural system!!!
Your natural system meaning, what, your life?
No, sweet pea, that's what happens when you "treat" cancer with hopes, wishes, and snake oil. My "natural system" is still kicking 5 years after chemo to treat the same time of cancer as Cassandra had. I would have died an exceptionally painful death before my 25th birthday otherwise. As it was, I was in 24/7 pain from my tumors and having a harder time breathing due to the grapefruit sized mass in my chest than I do now even with lung damage from one of my chemotherapies.
By the way, because of this nice little thing we call science, the chemo that caused my lung damage is no longer considered front line protocol.
No, sweet pea, that's what happens when you "treat" cancer with hopes, wishes, and snake oil. My "natural system" is still kicking 5 years after chemo to treat the same time of cancer as Cassandra had. I would have died an exceptionally painful death before my 25th birthday otherwise. As it was, I was in 24/7 pain from my tumors and having a harder time breathing due to the grapefruit sized mass in my chest than I do now even with lung damage from one of my chemotherapies.
By the way, because of this nice little thing we call science, the chemo that caused my lung damage is no longer considered front line protocol.
But you have to understand that different people respond to different drugs differently.
I have Pulmonary/Systemic Sarcoidosis. I have been given Prednisone for it. It's the gold standard of treatment for this disease. It's a powerful immune suppressant. It's also one of the components of the chemical cocktails used to treat some types of Cancer.
So most people will have side effects from Prednisone. Most people will see these side effects go away when they go off it. Some lucky people can remain on low doses for years and feel good without any side effects at all.
You see where I'm going with this, sweet pea? One size does not fit all. In my case the Prednisone was worse than the disease. I won't go into the severe problems that arose from taking this stuff. Suffice it to say I wish I hadn't. Although the doctors would like to see me back on it because it does diminish the symptoms of my disease I would rather suffer through the pain and debilitation I have from the illness than suffer the far worse side effects of Prednisone.
When it comes to medication, again, one size does not fit all. It's a gamble. Something will work for one person and not work for another. But you don't know until you try. That's what the patient should have the right to know. If Cassandra made an informed decision as to whether or not she wanted to take the chance that treatment would work for her, that decision should be honored based on her judgement, not yours, mine or anyone else's.
But you have to understand that different people respond to different drugs differently.
I have Pulmonary/Systemic Sarcoidosis. I have been given Prednisone for it. It's the gold standard of treatment for this disease. It's a powerful immune suppressant. It's also one of the components of the chemical cocktails used to treat some types of Cancer.
So most people will have side effects from Prednisone. Most people will see these side effects go away when they go off it. Some lucky people can remain on low doses for years and feel good without any side effects at all.
You see where I'm going with this, sweet pea? One size does not fit all. In my case the Prednisone was worse than the disease. I won't go into the severe problems that arose from taking this stuff. Suffice it to say I wish I hadn't. Although the doctors would like to see me back on it because it does diminish the symptoms of my disease I would rather suffer through the pain and debilitation I have from the illness than suffer the far worse side effects of Prednisone.
When it comes to medication, again, one size does not fit all. It's a gamble. Something will work for one person and not work for another. But you don't know until you try. That's what the patient should have the right to know. If Cassandra made an informed decision as to whether or not she wanted to take the chance that treatment would work for her, that decision should be honored based on her judgement, not yours, mine or anyone else's.
I gained 80 pounds in 6 months thanks to prednisone while on chemo. As I've had lung struggles from my lung damage, I've had rounds of prednisone that make me angry and gain at least 20 pounds a pop. I still struggle from the side effects, including gaining so much weight while also losing virtually all of my muscle mass at the same time. But I'm alive.
Yes, drugs impact different people differently. No one is saying any different. But in a situation where the vast majority of people are cured, I fail to see any compelling reason why you would choose to forgo a treatment that works the vast majority of the time for a "treatment" that does not work all of the time.
Right now, I have a dear friend who I am watching die because she chose to go with alternative treatment when her cancer relapsed. She made this decision when she wasn't thinking straight - to add to the tragedy of getting cancer so young, her infant daughter was diagnosed with a different and unrelated malignant brain tumor around the same time. My friend lived, her daughter did not. Her relapse came shortly after she gave birth to a second child. In 2 years, her quality of life has declined to the point where she can no longer parent. Her child's future is destroyed from the 6 figures of debt and climbing that she will leave her husband in when she dies because none of the snake oil was covered by insurance. She finally accepted palliative chemotherapy - palliative, meant to make her end as comfortable as possible when, had she gone through with a stem cell transplant - the odds are that she would have seen her son go to kindergarten, graduate from high school, have a life. No guarantee, but a chance. By choosing alternative therapies, she not only lost that chance but severely hurt her son's future. She regrets her decisions deeply, acknowledging she was motivated more by fear than reason. She even had an oncology team that was more than willing to work with her to utilize alternative therapies as a compliment to very effective chemotherapies.
This is personal.
There is no cure for sarcoidosis. There is a cure for Hodgkin's lymphoma for the vast majority of patients - and growing all the time since current studies do not take into account adcentris/brentuximab.
Yes, drugs impact different people differently. No one is saying any different. But in a situation where the vast majority of people are cured, I fail to see any compelling reason why you would choose to forgo a treatment that works the vast majority of the time for a "treatment" that does not work all of the time.
The "vast majority" of cancer patients are NOT cured by chemo and radiation. Many of them die from complications of the treatments (not counted as a cancer mortality, of course). Some reach their 5-year survival date, only to die months later (oh, but they made it to the 5 year mark!). The ones who do make it sometimes end up with cancer later on because of the first treatments. And don't forget the hell those people had to go through to gain a few more months/years of life...
Quote:
Right now, I have a dear friend who I am watching die because she chose to go with alternative treatment when her cancer relapsed. She made this decision when she wasn't thinking straight - to add to the tragedy of getting cancer so young, her infant daughter was diagnosed with a different and unrelated malignant brain tumor around the same time. My friend lived, her daughter did not. Her relapse came shortly after she gave birth to a second child. In 2 years, her quality of life has declined to the point where she can no longer parent.
Maybe if she hadn't been treated conventionally the first time, it wouldn't have relapsed.
Quote:
Her child's future is destroyed from the 6 figures of debt and climbing that she will leave her husband in when she dies because none of the snake oil was covered by insurance. She finally accepted palliative chemotherapy - palliative, meant to make her end as comfortable as possible when, had she gone through with a stem cell transplant - the odds are that she would have seen her son go to kindergarten, graduate from high school, have a life. No guarantee, but a chance. By choosing alternative therapies, she not only lost that chance but severely hurt her son's future. She regrets her decisions deeply, acknowledging she was motivated more by fear than reason. She even had an oncology team that was more than willing to work with her to utilize alternative therapies as a compliment to very effective chemotherapies.
Hm. And what "snake oil" was that which cost $100,000 or more?
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.
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.
