Survivors who have used only alternative treatments
Comments
-
Sorry but wanted to say thank you for the kind words to Matty
0 -
Why Don't More Doctors Use Alternative Medicine?
You may wonder why these methods are not being used by more doctors. Although they are being used by many, too many mainstream doctors today become so specialized that they treat the body parts and forget they are treating the whole body. This is fine for surgery, emergency or trauma but not for perpetuating good health.
1.One reason for this specialization is that medical schools are organized into organ-specific departments with no common link between them. Although disease usually appears as a local symptom, it is always related to the entire system. So you must treat the whole person to cure the disease, otherwise you are just treating the symptom. The medical school department heads ignore or deride this idea to defend their own orthodox concepts.
2.It takes time for new ideas to be accepted. In the 1800s, a Viennese doctor suggested that his colleagues wash their hands after they finish working on cadavers, instead of using their unwashed hands to deliver babies. After 30 years of ridicule and debate this idea finally caught on. How many babies died waiting for this idea to be accepted? How many cancer, heart and AIDS patients are dying today for the same reason?
Many doctors today are refusing to accept the common sense truths that have existed for centuries. The "cut, burn and poison" mentality of fighting the war on disease that exists today, completely ignores the importance of the immune system. In fact, it often weakens an immune system that is already under assault.
The important truth that is ignored is--it is not the doctors job to fight the war on disease. It is the patient's own immune system that must win that war. The doctor's job is to help the immune system and provide the tools with which it can fight. Since this is not being done in the U.S., American doctors are winning many battles but losing many wars. The majority of cancer patients who are given a "clean bill of health" die within five years. No attention is being paid to the immune system because this area is out of the realm of drugs and modern medicine.
3.Also one of the most powerful industries in America, the pharmaceutical industry, provides a huge amount of funding for the medical schools with the intent of marketing their medicines. There is a great deal of pressure from this industry to keep alternative methods from being taught. However, due to popular demand, some alternatives are now offered as electives. It's a small step--but it's a step in the right direction. Perhaps, 30 years from now, we may be living in a new era when we look back with great disgust at the many lives unnecessarily lost at the hands of conventional medicine.
4.Why don't we hear more about natural medicine from the news media? We are hearing more and more from the news media every day. But have you ever counted the pharmaceutical advertisements during a typical one hour program --especially if it's a movie where one of the characters has a specific health problem? How many drug ads do you think you would see during an expose of the drug industry or a show on the benefits of alternative medicine? The news media, like everyone else, is in the business of making money. Much of those revenues come in the form of advertising dollars. The pharmaceutical giants spend dearly on advertising.
5.Young doctors leaving medical school find themselves in a system that rewards "rescue medicine." That is what they are taught. There is no reward, and there may well be scorn from fellow doctors, for those who take the time to prevent illness or correct the deficiencies that may cause it. To do so would hurt the pocketbook of the medical establishment. Medical insurance supports this view. Financial rewards follow only from sticking to the model of ill-health and treatment. As educated consumers, we need to be keenly aware of the politics of conventional medical care.
6.Malpractice is another great fear for doctors. The definition of malpractice is not whether the treatment is good or bad for the patient, but rather if the practice in question is what other doctors in the given locality normally do or prescribe. Did you ever wonder why some therapies are only available in certain localities or why you may have to travel to a big city for a particular treatment?
7.We, the public, need to change our attitudes toward the "practice" of medicine. It's not about "medicine" or treating bad health. It's about producing good health. Drugs won't get you there and most of the time they will set you back by suppressing a symptom that is pointing to the real problem. Instead of treating the symptom, treat the cause. The symptom will then disappear. Only then will you experience a true cure.
0 -
Honey is not prescribed for very small children (under 12 months) due to possible botulism. It is fine over 12 months. I use it for coughs for my children all the time. Their pediatrician even recommended it. Heck, when my children were teething we were told to use clove oil by the same pediatrician. Their pediatrician is very traditional but does not mind using other things if they work.
As for the above discussion: I am very open minded and plan on using traditional medicine along with things like diet and lifestyle changes. We don't know what causes cancer, always. If it helps, I will try it. I don't think it is wrong to question about what causes cancer. I think we need question this. If we can stop it from ever starting, what a wonderful world it would be. So yes, I'm opting for the surgical/drug route for me. It is my choice for my body and it is what I am most comfortable with. Am I afraid? Oh heck yeah. I've read enough on this site to know nothing is perfect and there are no guarantees. Will I be making some diet and lifestyle changes? You bet. Cancer comes from somewhere and if I can stop it by trying those things, absolutely. I need to get the cancer out that I have right now, and then deal with hopefully stopping it from coming back.
I think my issue with using non-traditional methods is it is very rare to ever see stats or studies to back them up, or they are hard to find or often can be unreliable. However, if a woman decides to use non-traditional methods, then I believe that is up to her, however much I may disagree with it. I believe it is her body and she needs to make the final choice on what is best for it. No one has the right to take that away from her.
0 -
Not meaning to serial post but you said: "The majority of cancer patients who are given a clean bill of health will die within 5 years" Serious? Does it depend on the cancer? The stage of cancer? How they are treating? I'm not being snarky, these are honest and truthful questions and I am really really new to this and no one has mentioned that to me
I have 3 doctors and no one has said as such. This scares the bejesus out of me. I mean I know no treatment is perfect...but I would really like to understand where you are pulling these stats from. I tried googling it and it only came back with altmedange.com.Dear gods, this is not going to be a good night for my brain. Talk about being ruled by fear.
0 -
This is what we don't want, in my opinion~
To scare people that are new to this and just trying to find valuable information.
Hugs to you Emaline.
0 -
This thing about the majority of cancer patients who are given a clean bill of health are dead in five years is utter and complete nonsense. Complete bs.
0 -
There is an incredible amount of research being done on the immune system as it relates to both cancer and autoimmunity.
So many inaccuracies in that post -- it just boggles the mind.
0 -
MOM - "why don't more doctor's use alternative medicine" - Because it doesn't work!!!!!
Emaline - don't listen to what MOM said - it's total bullshit - it would probably be true if they didn't have any conventional treatment. You haven't posted your diagnosis, but go and read some of the threads that match it and see for yourself. We have lots of lovely ladies on the HER2 forum who are many many years out after their conventional treatment.
0 -
Member of the Club,
You were diagnosed in 2004. That was about seven years ago. You've not had a recurrence. You appear to be cancer free. Why are you still a member here? Is it to give advice or what? If I was out of the woods, I wouldn't want to go back in and encounter wild animals. It may rub off on you. I just don't understand why some just can't let it go.
0 -
mindovermatter -- if you are copying someone else's essay, it's good to provide the source or at least the author's name.
Your 7-point post also appears on a number of other websites:
The author appears to be "AltMedAngel" (http://altmedangel.com/author.htm) as Emaline guessed.
The statement about "majority of cancer patients die within 5 years" has no supporting citation -- and couldn't, because it's insanely untrue. Actually, according to the U.S. NCI's SEER study of data from 2001-2007, 98.6% of women with BC "confined to the primary site" are alive in 5 years.
0 -
Emaline needs to be concerned. She needs to be certain that she is doing the right thing. A lot of women regret decisions. And those were not my words as expressed by AnnNYC. Love the way you people need to quickly look anything and everything up to poo poo alternatives. It's not my business if you decide on mastectomies or lumpectomies or lobotomies. But don't become nasty or I'll report you to the moderators, and they will, most likely, whip you with a wet noodle! Lighten up women. You've got enough to deal with.
0 -
mindovermatter, I didn't look something up in order to "poo poo alternatives" -- just to correct a frightening mis-statement.
I think that by posting evidence of 98.6% five-year survival for women with Stage I breast cancer (and even greater for women with DCIS), I've "lightened up" somebody's day!
And I think it might be construed as nasty to post "the majority of people given a clean bill of health from cancer are dead within 5 years" -- particularly when it's not true!
0 -
Again, NOT MY WORDS. If I wish to quote something I've read it's okay. Sorry if I didn't give my source. I didn't think it was mandatory. Hope I won't be confined to a jail cell until I reveal my source. Oh yes, you already did.
0 -
You are plagiarizing when you don't give a source. Did you know that?
0 -
You may also be breaking copyright laws.
0 -
Don't apply unless I'm using it for profit.
Speaking of which, I was just curious about how much money you have all spent on your breast cancer? I had a very large insurance deductible, so I had to put out about 12K. I don't want to do any more surgeries or tests that will cost me more money. I'd much rather use it on something enjoyable.
0 -
The cyber bullies are out in force. Must be full moon.
0 -
Zilcho! But I live in Canada.
0 -
How long did you have to wait to be treated. I hear that in England there's quite a wait. Is it the same in Canada?
0 -
And...you are still stealing someone else's words when you don't quote or give a source.
0 -
I think you should review copyright laws. Profit is not the only criteria. This website is very sloppy about enforcing copyright law, but unless you have permission you should only be copying a few sentences and then linking.
Mollyann, or it could be that the full moon brings out the crazies.
0 -
Everything was done within 2 weeks and radiation started as soon as I was healed.
0 -
Something doesn't smell right here. In no time, mindovermatter went from polite bc patient seeking opinions to highly opinionated, and often rude (in my opinion) provocateur. Ladies, I think we have ourselves another....
0 -
I'm not quite at the 7 year mark, but yes I am an old timer. Does that mean i need no longer concern myself with breast cancer? Even though i am still taking an AI, still going through screening, still at an increased risk of a new primary, still have lymphedema. not to mention that when someone comes on here to say most of you will be dead within five years, its probably helpful to have someone around who isn't.
Not sure why you are so intent on telling people not to post. And since I am an old timer I can say this: in all my years here I have read posts by people who were argumentative, nuts (the guy who said he could cure cancer through handwriting analysis, for example) but you do win for the angriest poster. So much hostility toward everyone -- your doctors who don't call to beg you to come back, your family who doesn't beg you to fight to live, your friends for assuming you are OK (I'm still not sure where you stand on the OK thing, whether you think you are or not), and all of us here for questioning anything you say. Phew. Exhausting.
0 -
"The cyber bullies are out in force. Must be full moon."
Is that why you're here, Mollyann? Sorry, lago isn't around here for you to hound.0 -
Hi:
I am new to this board.
I've had a bi-lateral masectomy in hopes of not having to take any anti-cancer meds, and of course, to not have the fear of cancer showing up in the other breast. I was still prescribed Arimadex because of the "outer areas" of the breast still attached and other parts of the body? I had stage 2, lobular, infiltrated, positive estrogen/progesterone cancer. I've been through chemo for 3 months, no radiation. I took 3 pills of Arimadex and got an upset stomach, nausia, and felt ill. Now I am finding out about D.I.M. and it sounds pretty good. I go to my oncologist tomorrow to discuss about Arimadex, April 27th. I have a feeling he will thumbs down D.I.M. I am looking for emails from anyone who has had breast cancer and has been on D.I.M. and are having good luck with it.
Please email me at CntryDnc22@aol.com
Kathleen0 -
I have to say I love it when "old-timers" like MOC post on here. It gives many of us hope!
I agree with you Beeb75, something's going on . . . .
0 -
Didn't someone suggest...
0 -
What would have been so bad about doing chemo WOM..... you would be half way done by now or at least well on your way.
Amazing how many people will come up with the most fanciful excuses for not doing what they need to and rationalize things when fast action would have been the wiser move. Not just true of cancer treatment, but applies to most things in life.
As for some of the other posts, this thread should be required reading for anyone in oncology. The most amazing examples of pseudo-science and half truths I have ever seen, mixed in with a good dose of psychobabble.
I continue to be appalled......
0 -
You're appalled? That is so shocking.
It really is all about you, isn't it? Not about WOM.
0
