Health landmark Study Shows Half of Cancer Patients are Killed by Chemo – Not Cancer The MSM seem to miss this I guess they think it is not important or there is no cancer and don’t use chemo in the U.S. http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/868425 https://sputniknews.com/europe/20160907/1045038571/uk-cancer-patients-chemotherapy.html http://thefreethoughtproject.com/chemotherapy-study-cancer-patients/
If I ever get cancer, I'll do my research and make my decision based on that...it will probably be chemo though. I've seen many saved by it. By research I mean talking to people I trust and who know what they are talking about. Not going to base my life on random websites. Sorry, but everyone has an angle.
No, I didn't say who I trusted Martin. I trust my BIL a doctor and other family members in the medical field. Just because a website has a dr on it doesnt mean I trust it.
As I view it, since cancer generally kills eventually, treatment may or may not delay death from the cancer. Or, it may resolve the cancer, to allow death to be from some other cause. Chemotherapy is, IMO, the use of poison to destroy other poison, the cancer. Some of it is effective, some is not. But, given a patient accepting chemotherapy, and then dying not from the cancer, how can it be shown the chemo caused the death? Collateral damage? Chance? Frank
This thread is related to Aunt Nene, the youngest sister of my father-in-law. She is in the hospital for more than a month now due to breast cancer that is in stage 4. But the oncologist couldn't prescribe chemotherapy because of complications - she is diabetic, has a tumor in her spine, pneumonia had hit her lungs, some veins have ruptured. But she looks okay last Wednesday when we visited her except for he complaint about her digestive system. As per another aunt, Aunt Nene's body is already deteriorating and she might not reach the stage that she will undergo chemotherapy. The doctors have explained that chemotherapy will make the patient very weak and may die if the body couldn't endure the process.
Yes sometimes Chemotheraphy isn't an option. With my husband it gave him a good 10 years but the second time around it wasn't even an option. Each case is different, each cancer is different. You have to decide what's best for you and what you want or are willing to endure. It's not pleasant but it's come a long way from how horrible it was say 30 years ago...at least for some of the cancers.
I'm afraid this isn't a question that can be resolved. When faced with cancer, everyone is faced with a number of choices. After consultation with their doctors, specialists, holistic healers, friends, anonymous gurus, or whoever they choose to listen to, they will make a choice. A result will follow. That much is certain, but what can never be known is what the results may have been had they made another choice. When I was diagnosed with prostate cancer, I chose to go with radiation alone. More than five years later, the cancer is gone but there have been some lasting side effects. Had I opted for surgery, perhaps I wouldn't have the side effects, but it is also possible that something would have gone wrong and I'd be emitting my wastes into a bag right now. Had I decided to simply do nothing, which was an option since the cancer was slow growing and in the very early stages, perhaps I would still be asymptomatic. Had I not even been diagnosed, perhaps I would live a full life without ever realizing that I had prostate cancer. Or maybe it would have metastasized into my bones and I'd be dead now. We might learn what the results of the decisions we make are, but another person making the same choice under similar circumstances might have entirely different results, and we can't know what the results would have been had we made another choice. I have known people who chose holistic treatments rather than to go with the advice of the medical professionals, and who seem to be doing quite well now. But I also know people who decided against medical advice, and probably regret their decision because it is now too late to make other choices. It's fine to discuss this stuff but, in the end, we will trust whoever we choose to trust, and some of us will rely on prayer, or plain dumb luck. Que sera sera.
I usually post medical document with references and not hear say but a friend had colon cancer and in the hospital they told him he had to have chemo he refused because he seen all the others that did. He got to know many of the people there at the same time as him. Now some 8 years later he is alive and all the others died within a year. Another friend with pancreatic cancer was diagnosed he refused treatment and he is still alive some 6 years after diagnosis. This is the worst cancer you can get. This man was the one who wrote the bible for cruisers heading south.
My husband had colon cancer stage 3 and lived 10 years because of chemo, surgery and radiation. Everybody has a different story... 10 years later it was in his bladder, he didn't have chemo and he died a year later.
@Martin Alonzo What you are confirming here Martin, relates to something I have maintained for a long time: Given a person feeling relatively well, then told he/she has cancer, how can he/she be certain of the diagnosis? Heaven forbid, that doctors facing an uncertain set of possible reasons, tests, etc., would if not sure, go with the positive diagnosis. You have cancer. But, what if they are wrong? Or worse yet, would they lie? If one did, be assured the second opinion, if derived from knowledge of the first, would concur. As one hand washes the other, they once said. Where am I "coming from"? Having been diagnosed by a surgeon as having a tumor in my upper jawbone. He convinced both my Mother and I, age 19, of the absolute need for surgery amounting to butchery. My Dad saved me from it, through sheer will power. Was he taking a chance with his son's health? Very, very little. Had the "tumor" been malignant, then possibly yes. But I saw all the X-rays, inexperienced though I was medically, and saw no tumor, only the shadowed outline of the bone softened by infection. Sure, I would be remiss to write-off all doctors, and I don't. But given past experience, a number of them actually, I must remain extremely cautious. Frank
Yes Frank : if you had to do work on your house you might get two or three estimates or had work done on your car get two r three estimates from different people. When it comes to the most important thing in your life you see the one doctor and believe all that he says.
Maybe you people do but I wouldn't. If I was diagnosed with cancer I'd get a second opinion. I'd want to see my X-rays or Whatever. I'd ask my BIL for his opinion and I'd ask my daughter in law's best friend who is a radiologist to have a look too. In fact my brother in law probably could read the x ray because he wasted a couple years going for a radiology degree but switched when he saw the field was saturated at that time.
@Frank Sanoica , it would be the odd duck sicko who would lie at the second opinion. I can't imagine my daughter agreeing to something some other dr said if she didn't agree. You must think people have no ethics. They do in my world. You forgot the gory pic you always post, Frank! Time for me to take a break again.....for my well being.