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.
- why do you go to the doctor at all? If you don't plan to get treated for something like cancer, what things do you bother with?
I'm wondering the same thing. If someone refuses routine screenings and also refuses treatment for a diagnosed illness, there is no reason to see a doctor, really. The doctor won't be able to help them.
Jam is trying to look at an even bigger picture than most of you ever do.
On this subject of a person not screening and not going to doctors very much, that is me as well and plenty in our population. There are people out there who choose to treat cancers on there own terms. There are so many alternatives out there, so many. Not everyone wants chemo and radiation.
The population here is a mere speck of the population.
Last edited by jaminhealth; 09-08-2019 at 09:02 PM..
Ok I have a question for you experts and since I'm probably the oldest member talking now, how many of you had mothers/women in your life who NEVER had mamms and lived long lives and just died from something...many people don't know what a lot of folks died from.
I'm talking about times before mammography tests were out there. B.C. was never talked about in my life and again my mother and aunts etc would be in the 100's today.
Did many women die with cancer cells that were "just there" and caused no issues.
Maybe just maybe all this squeezing and radiation does cause the cells to spread....
I believe the above poster was posting similar to what I just posted.
This has been the age-old question - why don't doctors advise that every single test be given to every single person twice a year? Every 3 months? Every month? From the ages of 40-60? How about 30-70? Why not 20-80 years of age?
Believe it or not, recommendations for how often and at what ages testing is best done is based on the odds of getting cancer at those ages as well as how lethal the cancer might be and how likely you are to die from it given a certain time period. It's not just a casual suggestion based on nothing - or based on how doctors can get the most money. Insurance companies don't like to pay more than they have to so they don't pay for a bunch of extra tests if in the long run it doesn't save treatment dollars - that means over the entire population.
It's a fine balance - you've all heard of people saying their 25 year old got a certain kind of cancer but why weren't they tested for it? Well, because most people don't get it until they are 40? So do you want to subject every person from 25 years old to an admittedly imperfect test (even your own monthly breast exams aren't perfect and you'd think you would know your own boobs, right?!) and maybe have to get extra tests to rule out a false positive?
In a world where everyone thinks in a black-and-white-why-can't-things-be-perfect way, medicine is maddeningly imperfect. If you like easy answers, just keep your head in the sand and you'll never have to make an informed decision - easy!
Jam is trying to look at an even bigger picture than most of you ever do.
Not true. While she certainly may have valid points, she almost exclusively relies on anecdotal “evidence” that her way is THE right way. Her relatives lived incredibly long lives without doctor’s visits, she’s absurdly healthy for 81 because she eschews western medicine, everyone she knows who’s suffering from some malady would improve/never gotten sick if they just follow her supp protocol.
Are drugs over prescribed ? Yes. Are some medical procedures unsuccessful? Yes. Can supplements help? Maybe.
It’s our responsibility to research our ailment, the prescribed treatment, alternative treatments. Consider research from multiple sources, keeping in mind who funded the research, and make an informed decision from there.
If all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Not true. While she certainly may have valid points, she almost exclusively relies on anecdotal “evidence” that her way is THE right way. Her relatives lived incredibly long lives without doctor’s visits, she’s absurdly healthy for 81 because she eschews western medicine, everyone she knows who’s suffering from some malady would improve/never gotten sick if they just follow her supp protocol.
Are drugs over prescribed ? Yes. Are some medical procedures unsuccessful? Yes. Can supplements help? Maybe.
It’s our responsibility to research our ailment, the prescribed treatment, alternative treatments. Consider research from multiple sources, keeping in mind who funded the research, and make an informed decision from there.
If all you’ve got is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
Yes, true. But you're entitled to your opinion.
I don't share her enthusiasm for "supps", as that is just a more affordable walk down the same road traveled by big pharma.
But whereas most people, particularly women, are knee-jerk followers of medical cartel edict, Jam's perspective is on a higher plane. She asks questions that need to be asked, as sometimes the whole truth is not that which immediately meets the eye. And some will just never get that.
I'm wondering the same thing. If someone refuses routine screenings and also refuses treatment for a diagnosed illness, there is no reason to see a doctor, really. The doctor won't be able to help them.
That is precisely how I feel and why I don't have or go to doctors. There is no point if you do not want treatment.
I haven't had a pap in 15 years and don't intend to--it's invasive and unnecessary, but I'm still on BCP. My dr wanted me to have a mammogram, and I refused that as well. I will never have one. She mentioned a colonoscopy at my last visit, and when I looked at her, she knew it wasn't going to happen and dropped it. IMO those tests represent more ways for the healthcare system to waste my time and money (I have private insurance through my employer, but it still costs tons in co-payments and overages, even though I have a good state-based system). If I get cancer, then so be it; I will refuse that treatment as well.
I have never had a GP in my life. The only reason I had pap tests in my 20's and 30's was it was part of the exam in order to get a script for BCP. Then I went to same doctor when I had my children. Once my family was complete and did not need to be on the Pill any longer (husband had vasectomy), I stopped going to that OB/GYN. This was in 1984. This OB/GYN was "my" last doctor.
I don't share her enthusiasm for "supps", as that is just a more affordable walk down the same road traveled by big pharma.
But whereas most people, particularly women, are knee-jerk followers of medical cartel edict, Jam's perspective is on a higher plane. She asks questions that need to be asked, as sometimes the whole truth is not that which immediately meets the eye. And some will just never get that.
The “knee-jerk followers of the medical cartel edict” also live longer, while the men who refuse to go to the doctor until something is seriously wrong with them tend to die earlier.
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.