It's a fact
No its not a fact at all. I am not saying chemotherapy is harmless but cancer is no longer the automatic death sentence it was precisely because of chemotherapy. I have a foot in both camps being a pharmacist and a holistic therapist. I work professionally both as a pharmacist and as a holistic therapist with patients having chemotherapy. So I know what I am talking about. I can remember when cancer WAS a death sentence......before chemotherapy.
I am as anti-drug as the next person in some situations. But I believe my holistic skills sit very happily alongside the best conventional medical treatment. I have had abuse from some of my fellow pharmacists because I don't condemn holistic therapies. I think some of them feel I should be struck off the register. I expect abuse from some on here because I don't automatically condemn drug therapy. And do you know? I am happy with that. I have foot in both camps for a reason.
So I will continue to challenge my fellow pharmacists who see me as a charlatan. And I WILL challenge articles like this that have no basis in fact.
Vulnerable people with cancer have really hard decisions to take about their treatment options. They need to make them on the basis of fact......not scaremongering and I would be in breach of the code of ethics of all my professional bodies if I didn't challenge this sort of thing posted on a forum where such vulnerable people may well be looking for guidance.
No its not a fact at all. I am not saying chemotherapy is harmless but cancer is no longer the automatic death sentence it was precisely because of chemotherapy. I have a foot in both camps being a pharmacist and a holistic therapist. I work professionally both as a pharmacist and as a holistic therapist with patients having chemotherapy. So I know what I am talking about. I can remember when cancer WAS a death sentence......before chemotherapy.
I am as anti-drug as the next person in some situations. But I believe my holistic skills sit very happily alongside the best conventional medical treatment. I have had abuse from some of my fellow pharmacists because I don't condemn holistic therapies. I think some of them feel I should be struck off the register. I expect abuse from some on here because I don't automatically condemn drug therapy. And do you know? I am happy with that. I have foot in both camps for a reason.
So I will continue to challenge my fellow pharmacists who see me as a charlatan. And I WILL challenge articles like this that have no basis in fact.
Vulnerable people with cancer have really hard decisions to take about their treatment options. They need to make them on the basis of fact......not scaremongering and I would be in breach of the code of ethics of all my professional bodies if I didn't challenge this sort of thing posted on a forum where such vulnerable people may well be looking for guidance.
I predicted you would challenge this! Whilst you have knowledge on this subject, you are not directly addressing the findings of this article and just labelling it as scaremongering.
The research comes from the Public Health England and Cancer Research UK, i.e. not some sensationalist rantings of a newspaper.
How do you square this finding for instance?
Deaths of lung cancer patients from chemotherapy were also far higher than the national average in Blackpool, Coventry, Derby, South Tyneside and Surrey and Sussex, according to the research.
Deaths of lung cancer patients from chemotherapy were also far higher than the national average in Blackpool, Coventry, Derby, South Tyneside and Surrey and Sussex, according to the research.
I have read the article a couple of times, and the writer is quite good at quoting numbers, however it seems that the chemo was being given to this group of lung cancer patients in a palliative setting. They were going to die of cancer.
I had chemo in 2001. Still ticking! A good friend died on Friday, who had chemo 22 years ago following a bi-lateral mastectomy. Just before Christmas, she felt a bit 'off' so went to the GP, who referred her to oncology. They did a scan, and recommended a brand new chemo to try to alleviate mets that developed very suddenly in her liver. The fortnightly infusions gave her 6 extra months of almost normal life. She walked her youngest grandson to his first day at school last Monday. I don't think she would agree with the sensational banner 'Chemotherapy kills'.
I have read the article a couple of times, and the writer is quite good at quoting numbers, however it seems that the chemo was being given to this group of lung cancer patients in a palliative setting. They were going to die of cancer.
I had chemo in 2001. Still ticking! A good friend died on Friday, who had chemo 22 years ago following a bi-lateral mastectomy. Just before Christmas, she felt a bit 'off' so went to the GP, who referred her to oncology. They did a scan, and recommended a brand new chemo to try to alleviate mets that developed very suddenly in her liver. The fortnightly infusions gave her 6 extra months of almost normal life. She walked her youngest grandson to his first day at school last Monday. I don't think she would agree with the sensational banner 'Chemotherapy kills'.
Sorry for the title of the thread but I was alarmed by what I read. However, the article was far from scaremongering I think you will find. It dealt in hard facts. I realise this is a complex issue since it does not involve healthy patients to begin with. I am pleased to hear that you were successfully treated with chemo but, also, hope you understand that the article is highlighting new reservations for chemo (that had not been previously noticed).
So there is a new form of chemo then? I think it highly likely that the research (in the link I gave) refers to the usual, established form of chemo.
Hi Amy,
So there is a new form of chemo then? I think it highly likely that the research (in the link I gave) refers to the usual, established form of chemo.
There's *lots* of different chemo drugs, administered orally and intravenously, depending on the type of cancer. Sometimes it goes into a vein in the arm, sometimes into the chest, sometimes into the spine. This will be given alongside chemo in tablet form and a host of tablets to tackle side-effects. Often, there'll be 2 or three drugs taken per cycle, with a break between each cycle. Different treatment plans will have different lengths of and different numbers of cycles. Not all chemo drugs make your hair fall out. Side effects vary greatly for different drugs and different patients.
Yes, chemo can kill; the patient has to be monitored with blood tests and scans, etc., as it massively depletes the immune system and blood cells. It can also actually cause cancer. It can damage organs and nerve endings. This is what patients should be told at the beginning of treatment.
Having read the article, firstly, it deals only with breast and lung cancers. Secondly, the deaths were hastened by poor medication management in 'some hospitals'. That's why this article is so misleading.
Take childhood leukaemia as an example. For young children, the survival rate is pretty good these days, something like 90%, possibly higher. Without chemotherapy, these children would die. Speaking from personal experience, I know a child whose organs were beginning to fail after going undiagnosed with leukaemia. Conventional medicine saved her life. Her treatment is brutal and heartbreaking to witness, but it's probably her best chance of survival.
'Chemotherapy' is the blanket name given to all drug-based medical cancer treatment. That's why you can't generalise by coming to the conclusion that it's either 'good' or 'bad'. It depends on the cancer type, the stage of the cancer and the patient.
There'll be frightened people trawling the internet for information right now, so I thought it was important to post a reply. I know how exactly how that fear feels. I decided to go with chemo, but since finishing I've been taking a supplement to hopefully support my immune system and I try to be aware of my diet.
I hope this post has been helpful xx
TigerLily - thank you for sharing your extensive knowledge on this subject and pointing out all the variables involved.
Of course the article could not cover all cancers. However, breast and lung cancer are two of the most common types causing death, as I am sure you know. By your own admission, chemo CAN kill and hence there is some truth in the article! It seems to be a new finding so that is why I made the thread.
I must apologise because I have not read the article, and don't intend to as so many "scientific facts " are open to interpretation, but addressing the statement that "Chemotherapy kills".
Is someone saying that chemotherapy was given to a healthy person and that person died. In that case it seems probable that the Chemotherapy did indeed cause their death.
Or if the statement saying that Chemotherapy was given to some one who had an illness, and they died because of the Chemotherapy treatment.
If it is the first case then the statement may be true.
If it is the second case then unless it can be shown that every person with similar symptoms as the person who died also died after Chemotherapy treatment, and all would have lived if given an alternate treatment, then the statement that Chemotherapy can kill is in my opinion misleading.
I must apologise because I have not read the article, and don't intend to as so many "scientific facts " are open to interpretation, but addressing the statement that "Chemotherapy kills".
Is someone saying that chemotherapy was given to a healthy person and that person died. In that case it seems probable that the Chemotherapy did indeed cause their death.
Or if the statement saying that Chemotherapy was given to some one who had an illness, and they died because of the Chemotherapy treatment.
If it is the first case then the statement may be true.
If it is the second case then unless it can be shown that every person with similar symptoms as the person who died also died after Chemotherapy treatment, and all would have lived if given an alternate treatment, then the statement that Chemotherapy can kill is in my opinion misleading.
Well, you are groping in the dark not to have read the link that you choose to comment on!
It was the study of not just one person (this would not make news) but of a number of patients having cancer. The incidence of cancer deaths was higher than average in 6 counties which is what brought about the study by the Public Health England and Cancer Research UK.
The role of chemotherapy was not undermined in cancer treatment but the reason for this article is that it highlights the increased risk of death due to chemotherapy and, thus, serves as a warning.
The role of chemotherapy was not undermined in cancer treatment but the reason for this article is that it highlights the increased risk of death due to chemotherapy and, thus, serves as a warning.
Well to be honest even that statement seems illogical.
To warn someone who is facing certain death that the treatment itself carries a risk is just creating an extra fear for the patient.
In fact if you apply "Thought Treatment Logic" you could be actually causing the Chemotherapy to fail as the patient may subconsciously lose faith in the outcome, and be mentally undoing the repair function of the Chemotherapy treatment itself..
Where an alternative treatment may be available for a cancerous condition then yes certainly make the patient aware of any risks involved so that they can make a rational decision as to which course of treatment to undergo, but I would think that Chemotherapy is the last resort for many terminal cancerous conditions.
Well to be honest even that statement seems illogical.
To warn someone who is facing certain death that the treatment itself carries a risk is just creating an extra fear for the patient.In fact if you apply "Thought Treatment Logic" you could be actually causing the Chemotherapy to fail as the patient may subconsciously lose faith in the outcome, and be mentally undoing the repair function of the Chemotherapy treatment itself..
Where an alternative treatment may be available for a cancerous condition then yes certainly make the patient aware of any risks involved so that they can make a rational decision as to which course of treatment to undergo, but I would think that Chemotherapy is the last resort for many terminal cancerous conditions.
Having chemotherapy increases the risk of death, i.e. those given do NOT face certain death. Did you read Jabba The Hut's post above (# 5)?
I was chatting with my grandson just now and he related a story that he had come across of the daughter of an American police officer who had a rare kind of brain cancer. The medical profession had tried all kinds of radiation and Chemotherapy treatments on her but had finally given up, saying that they could do no more.
Her father researched alternate treatments, decided on vitamin C and gave her high doses.
Unfortunately his daughter died but they could find no trace of cancer in her. It appears that her brain was destroyed by all the conventional treatments that she had previously received.
The problem is that maybe the story is an exaggeration, and could vitamin C actually cure all cancers. It would be disastrous if someone rejected conventional treatment in favour of alternative medicine and that failed. It would put alternative treatments back years.
I was chatting with my grandson just now and he related a story that he had come across of the daughter of an American police officer who had a rare kind of brain cancer. The medical profession had tried all kinds of radiation and Chemotherapy treatments on her but had finally given up, saying that they could do no more.
Her father researched alternate treatments, decided on vitamin C and gave her high doses.
Unfortunately his daughter died but they could find no trace of cancer in her. It appears that her brain was destroyed by all the conventional treatments that she had previously received.
The problem is that maybe the story is an exaggeration, and could vitamin C actually cure all cancers. It would be disastrous if someone rejected conventional treatment in favour of alternative medicine and that failed. It would put alternative treatments back years.
I was not suggesting shunning conventional treatments in favour of alternative medicine. The link I gave highlighted a new, pertinent finding regarding chemotherapy but obviously you are no wiser since, by your own admission, you haven't even read it have you?
but obviously you are no wiser since, by your own admission, you haven't even read it have you?
Nope ! 😉
I was chatting with my grandson just now and he related a story that he had come across of the daughter of an American police officer who had a rare kind of brain cancer. The medical profession had tried all kinds of radiation and Chemotherapy treatments on her but had finally given up, saying that they could do no more.
Her father researched alternate treatments, decided on vitamin C and gave her high doses.
Unfortunately his daughter died but they could find no trace of cancer in her. It appears that her brain was destroyed by all the conventional treatments that she had previously received.
The problem is that maybe the story is an exaggeration, and could vitamin C actually cure all cancers. It would be disastrous if someone rejected conventional treatment in favour of alternative medicine and that failed. It would put alternative treatments back years.
Interesting bit of news...and even more interesting observation that. " it would be disastrous if some one rejected...it would put alternative treatment years back"
Yet conventional treatments such as chemo and radio can help a very small percentage of cancer patients and finish off the rest rather savagely and yet holds credibility. This is the Power of "normal". What is normal has a certain credibility, no matter how warped, dysfunctiona it might be....also Power in numbers. More believe in it, so it must be better choice...All because of inherent monopoly of prevailing beliefs. If more and more people choose self doctoring....that will become the norm. Although the organized medical care has a derogatory attitude towards it, if more and more people did it, the trend will buckle
Ultimately, it is a very personal choice....people chose what is perceived as normal course of action rather than stand alone because fear of standing alone is also a huge factor why most people opt for conventional treatment, until the doctors tell them there is no more they can do for them. Then sometimes self help is too late.
Attitudes within the society need changing. Fear rules the choices that people make whether conventional, or alternate, due to narrative within the modern medical system
We need to be our own doctors, and medical system should ideally act as the support system rather than the sole executioner of treatment plan from start to finish.
Yet conventional treatments such as chemo and radio can help a very small percentage of cancer patients and finish off the rest rather savagely and yet holds credibility.
Is that really the case. I am not a follower of statistics but I would have thought that those who received chemotherapy and survived would far outnumber those who received chemotherapy and died.
I don't know all the different types of cancers but would have thought that the medical profession would try the least harmful treatment first and chemotherapy was reserved as a last resort treatment for a patient who's illness would eventually result in death.
Alternate treatments seem to vary depending upon who is advocating it. What seems to work on one may not necessarily work with someone else. Modern medicine usually has some form of checks and balances to monitor the progress or lack of progress of the patient. Can alternative medicine make this claim.
Ofcourse it does.
WOW !!! Lots of familiar names here......I joined the Forum in 2006, I believe....rumors of my passing have been great exaggerated. FYI-I had been diagnosed with prostate cancer in Feb. 2005 with a Gleason score of 8......still alive and kicking with natural and herbal supplements ONLY......no chemo.....no radiation.......have lost two of my best friends to cancer and chemo......never wanted to trust ANYTHING whose roots were in Mustard Gas......strictly my opinion......May you all have a journey that leads ypu to health !!!
kcat
I predicted you would challenge this! Whilst you have knowledge on this subject, you are not directly addressing the findings of this article and just labelling it as scaremongering.
The research comes from the Public Health England and Cancer Research UK, i.e. not some sensationalist rantings of a newspaper.
How do you square this finding for instance?
Deaths of lung cancer patients from chemotherapy were also far higher than the national average in Blackpool, Coventry, Derby, South Tyneside and Surrey and Sussex, according to the research.
I would square that finding by saying that death rates reveal very little unless you know what the overall population groups are. The hospital where I used to work had higher death rates in some specialities(not just chemo here) than the national average becasue they took on more complex and sicker patients than another hospital would. But it was a tertiary referral centre that takes on patients other hospitals don't have the expertise to offer help or hope to. Inevitably not all can be helped
This is specifically about palliative chemo though, when there is only one possible outcome.
This is specifically about palliative chemo though, when there is only one possible outcome.
Yes it DOES say this!
My son was called Peter he died at 49 he was a drug addict, he spent a long time in the mortuary before they buried him, they froze his body, I don't even remember how long he was frozen, probably three months, during that time I had a dream of him, and he complained he was cold, it was so real.
I remember when I read something on the tv about somebody who had cancer, and had died of it, died they were frozen awaiting in the hope that acure it would be found and they could be revived in the future,and cary on living.
If I remember rightly, it, has been done before it is not a new thing. I am slow at everything because I have had a stroke and I can only converse through dragon speech, up to this time it has taken me to be three quarters of an hour to type this. Hopefully you get the picture together, and get the message that I am trying to explain, I don't believe in death, we only go to another level, or plain. I get frustrated all the time, by trying to explain what I mean. I keep making so many mistakes. I believe in God. God doesn't give us anything we can't handle.