Will our healthcare system ever realize that chemotherapy is a complete joke?
Here's the deal. I've had several loved ones die in my family from cancer. What I realized was there are other countries like Germany and Mexico that do all natural treatments as an alternative to chemo. They seem to have gotten some patients into remission even with the most serious cancers unless the patient was too sick to be taken in. Why is chemotherapy such a money-making machine in this country when it does absolutely nothing for cancer patients except poison them to death? I'm not saying we're the only country running this kind of system, but when my mom was in Germany getting these treatments, she felt better until she got back to the U.S. She ended up buying the necessary products in Germany, and not one nurse would give her the infusions at home because it was illegal. Then...as she got sicker, it was too late. Will we ever learn? Or is money more important than our health? Any thoughts? Although I only see one out of 9 intelligent answers here, none of you have answered my question directly!! Anybody who's in the medical field would greatly be offended by this question because without chemo, there wouldn't be any money to make, and that's the truth!
Cancer - 10 Answers
Random Answers, Critics, Comments, Opinions :
1 :
I'm sorry, but there is absolutely no evidence that alternative treatments have anything more than a placebo effect. Cancer is a very aggressive disease, and it's natural to assume that the treatments don't work. A lot of people have come to the conclusion that chemo and other treatments are scams based on this. This isn't true. Time and time again, double blind tests have shown that chemotherapy and radiotherapy work. Not perfectly, but they do. My great-aunt got through cancer solely on chemotherapy. She's 87, so not exactly the prime example of someone who's going to get through it by herself.
2 :
I don't know why I even bother answering this question. Chemotherapy is not a complete joke, so called "natural treatments" are. Your mother's case, whatever it was, is just one data point in a disease that affects millions of people. Real doctors rely on statistically sound analysis of data from large groups, not from testimonials from individuals who may or may not have a financial stake in the "alternative" therapy.
3 :
well, I doubt its a complete joke, however our health care system is outta date. Im not surprised other countries would rather use alt. remedies than go straight for the high tech remedies. Most ppl dont want to pay for all that or cant.
4 :
It's not uncommon for relatives of people who die from cancer, understandably distraught and looking for explanations, to blame the treatments rather than the disease for the person's death. But almost certainly it is the cancer that killed the person, not the treatment. Like many people, I am in remission following treatment that included chemotherapy. Did it save me? - I don't know. But if I die next month, next year or in five or ten years time, nothing will convince me that it didn't prolong my life. In fact deaths as a result of chemotherapy are extremely rare; in extremely rare cases, chemotherapy can lead to a second cancer, and everyone who undergoes chemotherapy is made aware of this before they agree to the treatment. I live in the UK; we don't pay for our medical treatment, including cancer treatment - the state pays for it. If there was a cheaper, guaranteed cure for cancer, believe me that's what we would get - cancer treatment costs our government billions. As it is, I could be back at any time for more expensive chemo. I'm sorry about your mum. But alternative treatments such as she received have never been tested or proven, and you have no way of knowing if they would have saved your mother's life. Chemotherapy and other conventional treatments are not perfect; I believe that one day they will be looked back on with horror, much as we look back on blood-letting today. But we know, because they have been rigorously tested and proven in double-blind, peer-reviewed clinical trials, that they save some lives, and prolong many, many more. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Edit** Sissy's answer is not her own thoughts or the result of her own knowledge or experience, but is entirely a cut and paste from a site pushing the quack remedy Black Salve: http://blacksalveinfo.com/blog/2007/06/all-chemotherapy-drugs-are-experimental.html I too have had chemotherapy and know that nothing bears those words. Italian Stallion, I think you have a number of intelligent answers here; you may not agree with them, but they are intelligent answers. You say nobody has answered your question directly; you conclude your question ''Any thoughts?'', so everyone has answered - except Sissy, who has not offered any thoughts. I doubt many people in the medical field would be offended by this questiion; they are used to it. And as one cancer registrar who posts on this board has said, if a cure for cancer was found tomorrow she would be the happiest person on the unemployment line. And in my country, medical professionals are salaried; no doctor would make one extra penny if the cancer rates doubled tomorrow and the chemotherapy rates with them. To suggest that cures are being supressed to increase profits is absurd. Any drugs company discovering a cure for cancer would be rich beyond their wildest dreams; doctors, researchers etc and their families develop cancer and die from it at the same rate as the rest of the population - they'd rather die horribly than reveal the secret? And how does America get all the medical professionals in other countries to agree to this conspiracy? Every doctor, every nurse knows the secret but won't tell? Again I'm sorry your mother died from cancer; so did mine, I know how it hurts. But you're blaming the wrong enemy.
5 :
My thoughts? I'm sorry your loved ones have died. If you ever get the diagnosis yourself, I would be interested in seeing if you run off somewhere to get alternative treatment. Many of us who have seen our cancer shrink and/or disappear from chemotherapy are very very happy that it is there and that it is effective. We may feel unwell for a few months, but if that's the price of remission, then it's an easy price to pay. I'm sorry, but your second paragraph sounds like your mother sought "alternative" treatment that did no good, and delayed her conventional treatment to the point that it was too late. How is that the fault of chemotherapy or healthcare in general? It sounds like she made a fatal error in judgment. That's sad, but I have seen it happen too. Again, I'm sorry for your losses, but what you're experiencing is called "displaced anger." Sissy, get a clue. I have been through chemo. I have seen the IV bags. There is no such warning about experimental use. You are repeating the same old lies perpetrated by the peddlers of dangerous alternative treatments. Do you ever watch the news? FDA approves chemo drugs and other treatments ALL THE TIME. The percentages of cancer as a side effect of chemo is around the 1-3% range.
6 :
In the Physicians Desk Reference, available in any library of doctor's office, the top 10 chemotherapy drugs used in the USA all have cancer as a listed side effect. In fact, depending on how you interpret the statistics, more cancer patients die from the chemotherapy than of the cancer. The medical statisticians count these deaths as a success for chemotherapy because the patient did not die of cancer. Few people know how many studies incorporate their success statistics. A select few know that chemotherapy drugs are not FDA approved. They are legally administered under the "Rule of Probable Cause" which states that experimental drugs may be used if the side effect of the drug is no worse than the end effect of the disease. In fact, every chemotherapy bottle is stamped "For Experimental Use Only" and the patient must sign a release before the doctor will prescribe or administer it.
7 :
Read this! http://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/?p=15 That woman went from having a 90+ chance of survival to near zero, because she believed fools like you. Then read this: http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2008/07/hemangiosarcoma_canine_dog.php That blogger is a surgical oncologist ...his specialty is operating on cancer patients. Do you think he would turn down any likely cure.
8 :
I am an example of what chemo can do. I am in remission from the apl form of aml leukemia. There are millions more out there that would not be here if it hadn't been for God and chemo. I went into remission in only 2 months and have stayed there. I died 3 times and still got up and walked out of the hospital in only 3 days after I died for the 3rd time. Chemo can only help if they get it to you early enough(even in stage 3 or 4) .So I don't really know what your beef is with chemo. Sure there are alternatives but they don't always work .Just talk to any cancer survivor and see what they say about chemo. It does make you deathly sick but I bet none of them would say that they weren't glad that chemo was there for them.
9 :
http://www.polymvasurvivors.com/truth_chemo.html http://www.ghchealth.com/chemotherapy-quotes.html
10 :
sorry to disagree but chemotherapy has well documented benefits ,
Read more discussion :
