Anyone else out there choosing 100% Alternative?
Comments
-
oh for gods sake.. that poll at McGill was done in 1986!!! yet is quoted in a Aug 2013 article.. speaks for itself really doesnt it0 -
actually, I tracked down more info on the study and will post the info later. It was done with respect to cisplatin, which was a newer drug at the time, and lung cancer. I am sitting outside my classroom. I've locked myself out and am waiting for dd to bring spare car keys
0 -
Juneping, that article begins by saying only 2-4% of cancers respond to chemo. If that were true, chemo as a treatment would have been abandoned decades ago. This whole treatment thing really comes down to risk and reward and educated choices, and you have to read an awful lot before you can sort through all the claims. Some people decide to pass on some of the standard treatment options, but it is important to check out the research on both sides of the issue, in order to separate out what's real, what's theoretical, what's experimental, what's scientifically proven, and what aspects of both sides of every issue are important to you.0 -
that is sooooooo funny Caryn! Sorry...but really funny....😉. Jo0 -
i am very amazed by how knowledgeable you ladies are. i am only starting to read and already felt the information are too overwhelming to me. i honestly didn't read too much into the article i posted. i just thought it's interesting to share.
i just can't wait for my surgery and know about my treatment plan and everything will start from there. i am just browsing around...hope you ladies don't mind me joining the convo.0 -
Jo, the article or me locked out of my classroom? The sun is going down and it's getting cold. At least I had my jacket on
. -caryn0 -
Lol, I did that in the middle of winter with my car, had to knock on a strangers door to call for keys. Hope dd comes very fast!! Jo0 -
Hey Juneping, I know the information overload feeling with BC! Kinda feels like I'm back in college and somebody switched my major to cancer.0 -
fallleaves - lol that's so funny and true.
0 -
SELENA WOLF:
Thank you for the link. The article discussed using inhaled insulin to treat blood sugar and the efficacy of that route of administration in a diabetic who has COPD/asthma. The question is whether or not the inhaled route will have an adverse effect on the diabetic's COPD and if the COPD will affect the absorption of the insulin. The article does NOT discuss inhaled insulin as a potential treatment for COPD/asthma.
0 -
For an alternative treatment thread this sure seems to feel more like a standard treatment thread to me. I am in my second go round with BC and when I had it 12 years ago I was told I had to do chemo or I would die ( I had stage 1 grade 1 cancer). I refused chemo and found my own treatment. I once again have early stage cancer and chemo is once again rec. so for those who keep saying chemo is not pushed or rec for those who don't need it, that is simply not always the case. I believe in science and medicine but I also understand that Dr's have a job to do and will continue to rec. the same standard treatments over and over. I have an honest oncologist who has admitted this to me. He also admitted that 96 percent of his patients just do whatever he recommends and don't educate themselves which I find sad.0 -
hipz,
This is an alt thread but there is also a lot of questioning and challenging, with respect to studies, sources etc., that has gone on here. I think we are all seeking the same thing; a way to beat bc. But whether the tx is conventional or alternative, many of us are looking for more than heresay and we are well aware of the shortcomings of conventional tx. If you are interested in alt tx without questioning. challenging and one where anything goes, including self diagnosis check out the following thread:
http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/121/topic/815203?page=1#top0 -
Juneping, of course you can join in and I agree that it is very difficult in the beginning to take in all the information. i
If you google the exact quote about 75% of doctors etc, you will get a whole bunch of alternative sites. It will take you some time to get an actual source.
This is because the quote is from a very specific context. Here is the explanation:
"It turns out that this survey is over 25 years old and was about a specific kind of chemotherapy, cisplatin for non-small cell lung cancer, which was a new therapy at the time and didn’t have a lot of evidence for it. As Anaximperator describes, a followup survey was conducted in 1997 at a session on the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (NCCN) clinical practice guidelines. Participants were asked to respond to the same question regarding chemotherapy:
You are a 60-year-old oncologist with non-small-cell lung cancer, one liver metastasis, and bone metastases. Your performance status is 1. Would you take chemotherapy? Yes or no?
The results? Let Anaximperator tell the tale:
The overall results of the 1997 follow-up survey show that 64.5% would now take chemotherapy – which is almost a doubling from 34% to 64.5% of those willing to have chemotherapy and radiotherapy and a quadrupling from 17% to 64.5% of those who would take chemotherapy alone.
Anaximperator adds:
The study from 1991, “Oncologists vary in their willingness to undertake anti-cancer therapies,” pertains to many kinds of cancer and cancer stages, from early stage to terminal, as well as to experimental therapies. It shows percentages as high as 98% of doctors willing to undergo chemotherapy, while the remaining 2 % were uncertain, and none answered “definitely no” or “probably no” to chemotherapy. Should another survey be conducted today, there’s a good chance the results would be even higher in favour of chemotherapy, given that over the years chemotherapy has shown enhanced clinical benefit and less side effects." http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2011/09/16/two-percent-gambit-chemotherapy/
As for the doctor with the colon cancer, please read the following article. Not all cancer is the same and what works for colon cancer may not work for BC: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2013/10/15/chris-beat-cancer-he-did-indeed-but-it-wasnt-quackery-that-cured-him/0 -
hjpz, 12 years ago the Oncotype DX test did not exist, to my knowledge. Chemo was the only option doctors had, because as everyone on this board should know, even Stage 1, Grade 1 can metastasize. Since you have provided no further information about your diagnosis, it would be impossible to know why chemo is currently being recommended. Have you had the Oncotype DX test? Are you Her+, etc. If your biopsy indicates you are indeed an early stager you should definitely ask for the Oncotype test. If your doctor refuses, look for another doctor, as the Oncotype test is standard of care in the United States. In case you missed my earlier post, my MO did NOT recommend chemo to me, even though I had 2 positive nodes, due to my low Oncotype DX score. She is at an NCI hospital.0 -
My husband had rectal cancer spread to the lymph nodes too. He had 5FU standard chemo for that type of cancer. 4 years later a CT scan showed mets to the lung (common place for rectal cancer to metastasize). Lung Surgery - more chemo ie FOLFOX - 7 years later he's still kicking, no mets. I sill can't get over the fact he was Stage IV and is now essentially cured.
0 -
Thank you for the article on cancer stem cells, Momine. I've read about half and am rather intrigued. Perhaps this is why a couple of doctors have indicated that although some cancer cells might be backstroking about in our bodies, they might be completely incapable of starting new little colonies. I also spent a little time with a search engine and see that this theory is still controversial. Let's suppose it is correct. Does that mean chemo would eliminate the bulk of any tumors hanging around, but most likely leave the instigators? To tell the truth, that fits very nicely with what we know about chemo's effectiveness.
0 -
To add to Momine...I understand that in those late 1979s/early 1980s, cisplatin was found to send men with testicular cancer, even where there was already mets, into remission. This was pretty miraculous at the time. It took the "cure" rate for testicular cancer from 10% to 85%. The accompanying nausa was terrible as there was not much in the way of anti-nausea drugs then, but I have to wonder what those doctors would have answered in the context of testicular cancer. As a platinum drug, cisplatin is still considered very effective against testicular cancer, ovarian cancer, and a few other cancers. And yes, of course there are risks that need to be considered. There also very certain risks with choosing not to do chemo.
The early 80s was still an incredibly new time in chemotherapy, and there was still a lot of resistance from the "old guard" who were used to horribly disfiguring surgeries under guise that cancer spread in a radial pattern (they initially laughed at those surgeons in Europe who did lumpectomies...not "radical" enough) and there was still very little funding to cancer research. This was a time when there was still very little understanding of cancer cells themselves (there is still a lot to be known there of course). Chemotherapy did not begin with some Big Pharma lab...it was the rogue initiative of various pathologists, chemists, working out of basements or in independently formed groups etc who were desperate to have an option for children and adults being admitted into the horror that were the cancer wards other than "let them die in (painful, delusional) peace". This picture that chemo was the scheme of people trying to make money is just disheartening. I wish that so many of my relatives had had the option of chemo. I am quite positive it, along with Tamoxifen, is the only reason my mother is still NED 8 years out of her Stage IIIc ILC dx 19+ nodes). Who knows what the future holds, but it did buy her years of a full, active, and healthy life so far and for that we are grateful.0 -
Suzie that is absolutely amazing! And how wonderful for you and your husband!0 -
Momine,
Thank you. Your post is exactly what I had found. I was too tired and it had really messed up my day, or what remained of it, when I locked myself out of my classroom so I never did get around to elaborating. Going in early and will have the custodian let me in. Too much to do.
Caryn0 -
Brnx, hope you have a better day today! I have locked myself out of my house and car more times than I want to count. Ugh, that just so sucks.
0 -
Wtf? How does a thread in the alternative section turn into a chemo thread? Seriously, how rude and a serious slap in the face to those of us who've run out of chemo options and those who've tried and failed. How often do you see someone blow into the Stage IV forum and disparage their treatments? So frickin' ignorant.
0 -
Brnx, yes, I figured it was the same thing you had found. Now, you never had chemo, so you can't blame the locking yourself out on that
0 -
Leggo, it is not a chemo thread. The info on chemo was for a new poster who has yet to decide on chemo (and who may not need chemo), who had found a major chemo canard on the internet.0 -
Leggo... a new poster shared some information about alternatives and had a few questions about chemotherapy, because she is new to the boards and is overwhelmed with information. She just wanted to have all her ducks-in-a-row before she went to discuss what her options are for treatment, both conventional and alternative. No disrespect was ever intended and no disparagement took place, and I am amazed that you think there was.
0 -
Momine - thank you. Very interesting to get to the SOURCE of the article, and see how it was distorted into a generalized anti piece.
leggo - a new poster posted a link to an article about the efficacy of chemotherapy, which Momine's post kindly clarified for those of us who had read the posted link, and were looking for the SOURCE of the information.
thank again, Momine. ( and brnx, for finding it too0 -
leggo - I think that you would agree that anybody who makes a decision regarding his or her treatment - alternative or conventional - would want to base that decision on information that is not misleading. There was a new poster here who posted a link to a page that contained some very misleading info - it would be highly irresponsible to not present how that information is misleading. That's why the conversation turned to chemo. It's completely understandable that people who have chosen alternative treatments want their decision to do so to be respected - everybody has their own reasons for their choices. It does seem strange to me, however, that some posters here don't ever want information to be challenged, that's not a condemnation of choice, it's the means of getting accurate information on which to make choices. (I'm not saying that you are one of those people).0 -
Ziggy, agree, but in this case there was not even any challenge. It was only providing the proper context for the statement that was posted.0 -
Momine - maybe I could have picked a better word, but I really don't think there's anything wrong with judging or challenging information and calling it out for what it is, especially when it regards choices about our best chances for survival.0 -
thank you ladies for understanding. I didn't think it would upset ppl. The only reason I was posting because I was thinking if chemo is the best option for me so I looked at other alternatives. And like I said I was looking for that doctors info and found this link and I thought how ironic so I shared. I didn't think it was challenging about this topic at all. I thought we could have a laugh.
I am sorry sometimes I just post without thinking too much.0 -
Ziggy, agreed, just saying that in this case it wasn't even that. It was simply filling in the background to a particular quote.
Juneping, no worries.0
