Cancer Treatment is a Self-Serving Industry

[daylatedollarshort]

Quote:

Originally Posted by razztazz But the take-away here is the "?" at the end of the headline. As usual No diet or regimen has been "proven" to do anything.

The Ornish diet has been proven to reverse heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in the U.S. The Breseden protocol has published papers where hundreds of people have reversed cognitive decline.

If you are at all interested, videos like this really opened my eyes to the benefits of changing my diet: https://nutritionfacts.org/video/how...e-from-cancer/

The book Eat to Beat is also really interesting, and not so hard core vegan as the nutritonfacts guy. But both refer to study after study on the power of different foods to kill cancer cells and combat other Western diseases through diet. I don't see much downside following the latest research diet-wise and best case maybe DH and I can live an extra 10 years and not get dementia.

[Maidensong]

I'm a firm believer in screening for early detection. My mom was diagnosed with breast cancer in 1999 and went through surgery, chemo and radiation. She celebrated her 83rd birthday this month. My dad had prostate cancer in 2003. After surgery and radiation, his numbers were excellent. He'll be 85 this July. And lastly, I was diagnosed with colon cancer (totally asymptomatic--I only had the colonoscopy because and eager beaver resident told me because I was over 50, I deserved a colonoscopy!). They caught it early and I had surgery but no chemo or radiation. No recurrence, thank God, but I'm religious about keeping to my testing schedule.

To each their own, but I'll keep having my mammograms and colonoscopies when recommended.

[Koolau]

While recognizing the limitations of and possible over treatment due to screening, I guess I come down on the side of screening. I mentioned in another thread that my PSA is "normal" which gives me fairly high confidence that I do NOT have prostate cancer (no guarantee, of course.) BUT since so many men (especially at my advance(ing) age) DO have prostate cancer (and the incidence only gets worse with age) I take a certain level of comfort in a low PSA. I'm not sure WHAT I would do if the numbers suddenly increased. I feel pretty confident in my PCP, so would take it a step at a time, I suppose.

My sister had a very treatable cancer (think it was a myeloma). She got a couple of remissions with chemo but for "religious" reasons (don't ask) decided not to continue treatments. She was gone in a few months. She should have lived up to 10 years - during which her kids would have nearly reached adulthood. SO, that's my anecdote FWIW.

Thanks for this enlightening (put a bit depressing) discussion. It's good to think about it before being potentially faced with decisions. YMMV

[braumeister]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort The Ornish diet has been proven to reverse heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in the U.S.

That link is from Ornish's own website, so it might be useful to look at an opposing view, from the Scientific American site:

Why Almost Everything Dean Ornish Says about Nutrition Is Wrong

Nutrition is one of the most complex topics in healthcare, for a variety of reasons, so professional opinions vary all over the map. Best to look at a wide spectrum of sources and make up your own mind.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Koolau While recognizing the limitations of and possible over treatment due to screening, I guess I come down on the side of screening. I mentioned in another thread that my PSA is "normal" which gives me fairly high confidence that I do NOT have prostate cancer (no guarantee, of course.) BUT since so many men (especially at my advance(ing) age) DO have prostate cancer (and the incidence only gets worse with age) I take a certain level of comfort in a low PSA. I'm not sure WHAT I would do if the numbers suddenly increased. I feel pretty confident in my PCP, so would take it a step at a time, I suppose. My sister had a very treatable cancer (think it was a myeloma). She got a couple of remissions with chemo but for "religious" reasons (don't ask) decided not to continue treatments. She was gone in a few months. She should have lived up to 10 years - during which her kids would have nearly reached adulthood. SO, that's my anecdote FWIW. Thanks for this enlightening (put a bit depressing) discussion. It's good to think about it before being potentially faced with decisions. YMMV

I think PSA & prostate cancer are a special case FWIW.

I think the OP article reinforces my bottom line in all this - learn as much as you can about whatever testing and/or illness you’re confronted with and don’t just blindly follow one test or one physician for anything serious. [I can’t imagine not being naturally curious but YMMV] Even an otherwise great doctor may have some areas they don’t know as much about, haven’t stayed current. They’re trying to know something about everything, where the patient can laser focus on his/her unique illness - PSA and prostate cancer for me. I hope my doctor appreciates that I’ve learned all I can from highly credible sources (not anecdotes or strangers online) instead of just wasting his/her time with a hundred questions all over the map.

[daylatedollarshort]

Quote:

Originally Posted by braumeister That link is from Ornish's own website, so it might be useful to look at an opposing view, from the Scientific American site: Why Almost Everything Dean Ornish Says about Nutrition Is Wrong Nutrition is one of the most complex topics in healthcare, for a variety of reasons, so professional opinions vary all over the map. Best to look at a wide spectrum of sources and make up your own mind.

Newsweek ranked his diet #1 for heart disease due in part to "its solid evidence-base": https://health.usnews.com/best-diet/ornish-diet

Another analysis from Harvard Health:
https://www.health.harvard.edu/heart...oil-free-diet-

The Ornish diet may not be the only diet that can reverse heart disease but he has published studies on the subject that his diet has shown to reverse the plaque that causes heart attacks, and Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr. has duplicated his results with a similar plant based diet. Based on more recent research, the Ornish and Essetlyn diets are probably unnecessarily restrictive, but I don't think anyone has proven their diets don't work to actually reverse heart disease. If I had heart disease I would choose one of the diets that studies have proven to help. Most are similar to the diets recommended for longevity, dementia and cancer anyway so personally I don't see a lot of downside and only a potential upside, but YMMV.

[doneat54]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NW-Bound For Stage 4 cancers, they can tell you that your chance is slim such as 1 in a 100, or the best you can hope for is to linger a few more months in misery due to the drug effects. How do they know? It's because many patients before you have gone through the ordeal, and nobody makes it.

Wrong. Your statement is contradictory. If you have a 1% chance of survival, then SOMEONE does make it, right?

I am nearly 12 years past my cancer diagnosis/surgery/chemo. Trust me, I spent a LOT of time study statistics, numbers, survival rates. The whole experience changed me in two ways.

1) I'll put this bluntly, if anyone in front of me says they are going to opt out of a routine cancer screening I will punch them in the face. I was CLUELESS about my diagnosis... right up until the time I was still laying on the imagining center table after the procedure and the tech came in and say "Your doctor is on line one and wants to speak to you". Anyone who has been through that experience will have their life changed forever, regardless of the outcome.

2) Never give up hope. To my point above, you could be diagnosed with something that has a 0.2% survival rate. But who says that you can't be that 0.2%??!! I've seen hope crushed too many times. I have a friend who has survived stage 4 pancreatic cancer for (I think about) 7 years now. I was given the choice to "walk" after surgery with a 3-5% recurrence rate. Or do chemo and get it down to <1%. I chose the chemo.


I too was turned off by the article title. Go to the real cancer statistics institutions and you will see data that shows that 1), very slowly, overall cancer rates are declining and 2) early detection is the key to beating them in almost every case.


As for the "money spent" argument, do this. Offer people a 30% (for example) discount on their healthcare premiums if they complete an aggressive annual multi cancer screening. If they don't do it, they pay the high rates. Then you'd see behavior change.





Happy to be 12 years cancer free this year and was told 2 years ago by my oncologist "Go away, I don't want to see you any more"....

[Rianne]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlitterGirl I am a retired RN who has worked a lot in oncology, oncology research and hospice so I’ve seen a lot of facets of cancer care. A huge problem in discussing any cancer treatments and options is that cancer is not one disease. It is many, many diseases with vastly different treatments and outcomes. Just as we wouldn’t say that all automobiles have the same capabilities and that they should be driven and cared for in the same way; we shouldn’t expect that the broad disease category called cancer will tell us much. Even within one “category” of cancer, for instance breast cancer, there are multiple types that have different treatments and can have a highly variable prognosis. That doesn’t even factor in staging which tells us if the cancer is contained or has spread, along with other indicators.

Just got back from 4 week vacation and saw this thread. Excellent posts, every single one. Personal, scientific links and opinions very valuable. Having cancer DX twice (long story I've posted awhile ago) the above quote is the bottom line. I declined chemo and radiation long before this study came out. Still here and healthy.



"With results of this groundbreaking study, we now can safely avoid chemotherapy in about 70% of patients who are diagnosed with the most common form of breast cancer," said Kathy Albain, MD, a co-author of the study. "For countless women and their doctors, the days of uncertainty are over."


https://www.cancer.org/latest-news/s...motherapy.html

[donheff]

Quote:

Originally Posted by doneat54 . 1) I'll put this bluntly, if anyone in front of me says they are going to opt out of a routine cancer screening I will punch them in the face. I was CLUELESS about my diagnosis... right up until the time I was still laying on the imagining center table after the procedure and the tech came in and say "Your doctor is on line one and wants to speak to you". Anyone who has been through that experience will have their life changed forever, regardless of the outcome. 2) Never give up hope. To my point above, you could be diagnosed with something that has a 0.2% survival rate. But who says that you can't be that 0.2%??!!

You seem awfully eager to impose your views on others, even to the extent of punching them in the face. I, for one, will likely opt for hospice if I get diagnosed with a terminal cancer in my 80s and am told I have a .2% chance of beating it and a 90+% chance of dragging out a painful death.

[JoeWras]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ER Eddie H I have since read up on colonoscopy outcomes, and I'm not impressed. I'm glad that other people (e.g., dave barnes) have had good results from theirs, and I'm sure plenty of others have as well. Personally, though, I had a horrible experience. I get PTSD-like symptoms when I think of it.

I don't blame you for refusing another scoping. You were very unfortunate to have the errors occur.

However, a colonoscopy saved my life. I'd be dead right now if I didn't have mine 7 years ago. And there was little I could do to ignore it, unless I wanted to look at a toilet bowl full of blood after every movement. I was due for a "routine" scoping, but the problems I had took it to the realm of necessary.

Not saying you should get another either. Perhaps the worst of all of this is we all feel like we are losing some control of our own care. That's really the topic at hand in this thread, and it is a huge problem.

[Rustic23]

We have friends who's 13 year old son has leukemia, with a less than 3 month prognosis for life. The child is still battling almost 4 years later. I think I know the answer they would give. As stated, it's a crap shoot.

[Midpack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by doneat54 1) I'll put this bluntly, if anyone in front of me says they are going to opt out of a routine cancer screening I will punch them in the face. I was CLUELESS about my diagnosis... right up until the time I was still laying on the imagining center table after the procedure and the tech came in and say "Your doctor is on line one and wants to speak to you". Anyone who has been through that experience will have their life changed forever, regardless of the outcome. 2) Never give up hope. To my point above, you could be diagnosed with something that has a 0.2% survival rate. Quote: Originally Posted by donheff You seem awfully eager to impose your views on others, even to the extent of punching them in the face. I, for one, will likely opt for hospice if I get diagnosed with a terminal cancer in my 80s and am told I have a .2% chance of beating it and a 90+% chance of dragging out a painful death.

+1. Drawing conclusions as if healthcare is free/affordable for most is another too often ignored factor. We’re already paying much more, twice as much on average as all other developed countries for healthcare. It would be nice if “we” considered we’re increasing the cost to all citizens when we chase after treatment with a 1% or 0.2% chance of success - like it or not that’s a selfish choice (unless you’re paying in full yourself). We’re going to have to come to grips with that, along with other built in costs, sooner or later.

Quote:

In 2015, the Kaiser Family Foundation found that medical bills made 1 million adults declare bankruptcy. Its survey found that 26% of Americans age 18 to 64 struggled to pay medical bills. According to the U.S. Census, that's 52 million adults. The survey found that 2%, or 1 million, said they declared bankruptcy that year. In 2017, Debt.org published that people aged 55 and older account for 20% of total filings. Even with assistance from Medicare, the average 65-year-old couple faces $275,000 in medical bills throughout retirement.

https://www.thebalance.com/medical-b...istics-4154729

[JoeWras]

I can't stop thinking about imoldernu's passing. One of his kids posted that he passed from AML, only 4 weeks from diagnosis.

I'm hoping he didn't go through any ridiculous therapies. My guess is he didn't. He was too grounded, too practical, and he often spoke of his mortality.

RIP imoldernu. You were one of the best here.

[yakers]

As I write this, I just watched my DW being wheeled into surgery, stage 2 lung cancer. Very unusual case (actually a ‘Guinness’ record) recurrence of cervical type (but now located in her lung) 22 years after her first cancer surgery. Three hours from now I’ll know more but Drs say this should work. She declined Chemo & radiation but surgeon thinks this will be enough. DW is 72, if it takes 22 years to come back she’s ok with that.

[Teacher Terry]

Y, I wish her all the best.

[NgineER]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakers As I write this, I just watched my DW being wheeled into surgery, stage 2 lung cancer. Very unusual case (actually a ‘Guinness’ record) recurrence of cervical type (but now located in her lung) 22 years after her first cancer surgery. Three hours from now I’ll know more but Drs say this should work. She declined Chemo & radiation but surgeon thinks this will be enough. DW is 72, if it takes 22 years to come back she’s ok with that.

I'm praying for a good outcome for your wife!

[RAE]

Quote:

Originally Posted by daylatedollarshort The Ornish diet has been proven to reverse heart disease, which is the leading cause of death in the U.S. The Breseden protocol has published papers where hundreds of people have reversed cognitive decline.

Not true. Ornish's results have never been duplicated in any follow-up studies, and many cardiologists are skeptical (to say the least) of his claims, including this one:

https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/s...iologist/80783

I do believe that one's risk for cancer can be reduced through consuming a healthy diet. The traditional Western diet - high in inflammatory oils, sugar, and other carbs - is undoubtedly contributing to cancer incidence. But halting all consumption of red meat and going vegan/vegetarian is not the answer, IMO. You can consume red meat and healthy fats (yes, including saturated fat) and maintain very good health, including good cardio health. Avoiding processed junk foods is WAY more important than avoiding red meat (which is one of the most nutrient-dense foods you can consume). You might want to do a little more reading on this subject, and not just from Ornish's website, and/or from those who follow his diet advice.

[daylatedollarshort]

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAE Not true. Ornish's results have never been duplicated in any follow-up studies, and many cardiologists are skeptical (to say the least) of his claims, including this one: https://www.medpagetoday.com/blogs/s...iologist/80783 I do believe that one's risk for cancer can be reduced through consuming a healthy diet. The traditional Western diet - high in inflammatory oils, sugar, and other carbs - is undoubtedly contributing to cancer incidence. But halting all consumption of red meat and going vegan/vegetarian is not the answer, IMO. You can consume red meat and healthy fats (yes, including saturated fat) and maintain very good health, including good cardio health. Avoiding processed junk foods is WAY more important than avoiding red meat (which is one of the most nutrient-dense foods you can consume). You might want to do a little more reading on this subject, and not just from Ornish's website, and/or from those who follow his diet advice.

If it is okay with you, I would prefer to not exchange snarky comments and instead just continue to post the links I found thought provoking, and maybe even life changing for me. You and others can look at them or ignore them as you choose, and make your own decisions on who to believe and what kind of diet you wish to follow. I've posted links from a variety of sources in addition to the Ornish web site.

CNN made a documentary on the subject called "The Last Heart Attack" that includes an interview with Bill Clinton on the diet changes he made after his emergency bypass surgery.
https://cnnpressroom.blogs.cnn.com/2...sion-possible/

"Heart disease is the biggest killer of American men and women, but Dr. Agatston feels it doesn’t have to be. Though not all doctors agree, Agatston tells Dr. Gupta: “One of the best kept secrets in the country, in medicine, is that doctors who are practicing aggressive prevention are really seeing heart attacks and strokes disappear from their practices – it’s doable.”

From my previous Harvard Health link, "The latest evidence comes from a study published in The Journal of Family Practice last summer led by Dr. Caldwell B. Esselstyn, Jr., another long-time proponent of plant-centric diets. The study, which included 198 people with documented cardiovascular disease, found that 177 were able to stick to the diet for an average of almost four years. During that time, only one person had an event (a stroke) that was deemed a recurrence of the disease. In contrast, 13 of the 21 people who didn't stick to the diet experienced a cardiovascular event....."The best evidence on how diet affects people with heart disease comes from the Lyon Diet Heart Study, which found that a Mediterranean-style diet cut heart attacks and deaths by 70% compared with a traditional American Heart Association diet, says Dr. Willett. The Mediterranean-style diet emphasized fish, poultry, vegetables, beans, olive oil, and nuts and included only minimal amounts of meat, butter, and cream."


Edited to Add:

"The Last Heart Attack" video mentioned above is on youtube

[Calico]

Quote:

Originally Posted by yakers As I write this, I just watched my DW being wheeled into surgery, stage 2 lung cancer. Very unusual case (actually a ‘Guinness’ record) recurrence of cervical type (but now located in her lung) 22 years after her first cancer surgery. Three hours from now I’ll know more but Drs say this should work. She declined Chemo & radiation but surgeon thinks this will be enough. DW is 72, if it takes 22 years to come back she’s ok with that.

I wish for the best possible outcome for your DW, and I hope she has a speedy and comfortable recovery from the surgery.