Leading US doctor says he won't get treatment if he gets cancer after 75 (painful, bleeding)
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 agree. My mom had radiation and she went down fast. I have no doubt it killed her not the cancer.
True story, we told them to stop the treatment and I went down stairs to cafeteria. When I came back they were rolling her down for treatment. They "didn't get the message" - and happened to come for her at the exact time I was out of the room.
Later when I saw some of the bills for radiation... I understood why.
So sorry to hear about your mom.
The most dangerous cancer in our midst today is the insurance system monster built to facilitate and feed Big Medicine's graft.
Did you consider legal action for their ignoring you?
My bf has declined cancer treatment, accepting only palliative care. His lung cancer is not curable. The treatment would have been to slow it down.
More pressing is that the cancer was only discovered because it caused paraneoplastic cerebellar degeneration, if anyone wants to Google that. Basically his immune systen in attacking a cancer we had no idea was there also attacked the part of the brain responsible for all coordination. It is not reversible. He is bedbound and incapacitated. The diagnosis was over a year ago.
Meanwhile, this past summer, my brother-in-law found out he had bladder cancer at 69. He had surgery, two chemo treatments, then developed an infection picked up in the hospital, his kidneys failed, body could not fight the infection and he coded in the hospital and died in November.
My best friend has multiple myeloma at 59. Had a stem cell transplant and is in remission and doing well.
Yeah, speaking as an active 77 year old, I don't really understand his broad brush approach.
Some cancers are fairly easily defeated, some are not. Pancreatic cancer?....... I'm pretty much toast. Melanoma?....... Treat it and see.
I had assumed the doctor's view was based on a bad prognosis. I don't think anybody would deny treatment if the prognosis was "treatment is effective in 99% of people".
My pretty healthy husband is 75 and we'd both advocate for him living longer if he got a cancer diagnosis. But... it would depend on what kind of cancer, what the cure rate is and other questions. Lots of gray areas and never ask a cancer specialist whether to get treatment, when you're a hammer everything looks like a nail (or a paycheck).
I had a non-smoker relative age 70 get lung cancer diagnosis with no treatment recommended (wouldn't help IOW) so they didn't do chemo/radiation. Changed their mind 6 months later and decided to do chemo that affected quality of life greatly, died 3 months later. Were they right/wrong? I think their cancer doc influenced the decision but will never know.
My pretty healthy husband is 75 and we'd both advocate for him living longer if he got a cancer diagnosis. But... it would depend on what kind of cancer, what the cure rate is and other questions. Lots of gray areas and never ask a cancer specialist whether to get treatment, when you're a hammer everything looks like a nail (or a paycheck).
I had a non-smoker relative age 70 get lung cancer diagnosis with no treatment recommended (wouldn't help IOW) so they didn't do chemo/radiation. Changed their mind 6 months later and decided to do chemo that affected quality of life greatly, died 3 months later. Were they right/wrong? I think their cancer doc influenced the decision but will never know.
I'm 75 and about 7 months ago received a cancer diagnosis. It was colon cancer, a mass in the hepatic flexure of the transverse colon, discovered by a colonoscopy to find the source of bleeding that had lowered my hemoglobin significantly.
No one, not my family, friends or medical providers even hinted at not pursuing treatment due to my age, and I had no plans to just let nature take its course either. The presurgical scans showed no evidence that the cancer had spread, and the surgeon suggested that the colon resection surgery that is the first line of treatment for this type of cancer might be curative, if the lymph nodes were negative ( they were) they got good margins ( got all the tumor tissue- they did) and there was no spread to other tissues ( there wasn't). I'd have pursued this surgery to get rid of the tumor even if I had not planned to go any further, as letting nature take its course with a large growing cancerous mass would have involved an inevitable bowel blockage, more bleeding and pain as the tumor grew and invaded other tissues- not my idea of spending my last days with any quality of life.
So I had the colon resection, laparoscopically, and bounced back from both the anesthesia and the surgery in what must have been record time, especially for someone my age. The surgeon was impressed, taking credit for my quick recovery ( and why not, he did a great job) though I am a tough old goat. The pathology report listed the cancer as a IIa moderately differentiated adenocarcinoma with some high risk features, so we discussed the possibility of chemotherapy with the oncologist to whom I was referred.
This was where I had to consider my age, as well as the stage and nature of the tumor. Stage IIa colon cancer ( indicating the tumor has spread through the colon into the tissues around it but not into surrounding organs), falls into a grey area where post-surgical chemotherapy may or may not prevent the recurrence of the cancer or extend the patient's life all that much, or it may not be needed at all as 5 year survival rates are pretty high anyway with stage II colon cancer- somewhat less with the higher risk factors shown on my pathology report, but still....
So I discussed this with the oncologist, my primary care doc whose opinions I respect and trust, my family and the consensus was that I should go for the chemo if it was indicated since as my PC put it, I'm a "young 75" and she said I had at least 10 good years left. But there was also quite a bit of genetic testing done on the tumor tissue ( results of which drives chemotherapy decisions) and the tumor was found to have a genetic type ( microsatellite instability high mutation) that actually had a better prognosis in stage II colon cancer) than those tumors without this mutation, so chemotherapy was NOT recommended for me. Halleluia!!!!
I'm going through the surveillance protocol currently and from all indications seem to be cancer free at this point. But in line with what Rahm Emmanuel said in the video linked in the OP ( did anyone even listen to that video all the way through?????),
I may be 75 but still contribute to my community, I believe, with a part time at home gig as an editor with a medical continuing education company, ( still paying into SS and Medicare) do volunteer work, take care of a household and our finances, have close relationships with family ( including a loving husband) and friends and generally enjoy life. I'm not ready to give up.
Rahm Emmanuel commented when asked by the interviewer if he still believed he wouldn't accept treatment for cancer, get a pacemaker, undergo dialysis, etc, at 75 now that he's closer to that age ( 65 now, IIRC). He said he still believed he would not, but when considering other examples with other people, said it really depended on " where the person was", if he was still vital and contributing to the community, his overall health and vitality, his comorbidities. He also commented that a person was in a much better position to make decisions about medical interventions for cancer and other life-threatening conditions when he was actually faced with them, compared to looking at hypothetical scenarios that may never happen.
Last edited by Travelassie; 01-30-2023 at 02:03 PM..
This showed up in my feed this morning. I completely agree. I've been saying this for years. His main point is qualify of life. I'm not interested in prolonging my life, having been born with a genetic condition that is incurable and not well managed by current treatments. Now that I have other health issues related to aging, I'm even stronger in this viewpoint and decision.
I have always said that I won't treat a cancer, in general, if it's outlook is terrible. Those include:
Pancreatic;
Lung;
Brain;
Advance colorectal.
When I said "in general" I mean that I might get one operation, say, for pancreatic, a Whipple and then not follow it with chemo. I can't see prolonging life for its own sake. I would rather play tennis, jog or walk until I could no longer rather than have those months or years robbed by being in a chemo fog, and then just inevitably have to stop treatments. By the way I'm 65.
I have experienced three parental deaths involving cancer. Only my natural father, who died at 47 when I was 15 entirely died of cancer. He was operated on for rectal cancer around Labor Day 1971. He began active recurrence around 10 months later, but we still playing tennis into mid- October. He stopped working on December 8, 1972, after significant but intermittent pain. He went to the hospital on Monday, December 11. I was told he was going to die on December 15, and he died exactly 3 weeks later, January 5, 1973. In those days they did not use chemo for that kind of cancer, and I consider that to be a good thing. He was doing all of the activities he loved up until nearly the end.
My mother was not so fortunate. She had a hysterectomy in July 2008, and began active, painful recurrence in November 2011, around the time that dementia seriously took hold. She received brutal rounds of chemo after after the July 2008 surgery. This weekend, her knee, causing a This weekend, her knee, causing a break around Christmas 2008. After the recurrence she had fruitless surgery in January 2012. During that surgery, the surgeon sliced the ureter, and she wore a bag for the rest of her life. She found that very degrading. She frankly was never really herself after the first round of chemo, during the winter of 2008–9.
My stepfather was a bit luckier. He was well medicated for a form of blood cancer, which really did not give him very much trouble during most of the 13 years leading up to his death at age 94. Similarly, he did not have aggressive or debilitating treatments. During his last year, he did experience some gangrene, but I do not know how much that was due to his age as opposed to cancer.
My general point remains; I do not believe in futile were useless treatments.
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.
