"Have you ever seen anything from the mainstream media that you didn't uphold as gospel?"
Please disprove the following table for survival rates in the United States because you can't:
But I did. Again these statistics are highly manipulated and do not reflect the rate of success for chemotherapy in any shape, manner or form.
"Patients can always refuse treatment? How weak is that? Patients and their families do what their doctors tell them, as they have been indoctrinated to do for generations now. Just ask your doctor, right?"
Weak???? You have zero understanding of how the medical profession works. Patients with cancer the vast majority of the time are given extensive statistics regarding survival of all the options including doing nothing and the type of treatment is left up to them. The patient still holds control of their treatment. My doctor didn't tell me what to do in relation to my cancer, I took my options as all patients do.
On the other hand I do understand how it works. I worked in mainstream medicine for a very long time including much of that working in oncology. And you are way off base. People are lied to all the time and milked for every last cent. I even saw a patient that was hemorrhaging massive amounts of blood out of his rectum. They were pumping in blood as fast as they could even though they could not save him. Why? So they could pad the bill. I something similar with a patient that was literally head to toe gangrene. Again he could not be saved but when he coded they put in internal pacemakers, external pacemakers and every drug they could think of all to pad the bill. I could sit here all night and give you example, on top of example on top of example of this kind of quackery including three people I knew personally who were told they had cancer when they did not just so the hospital could charge for the operations. The two hospitals I saw so this have both made massive expansions and one even opened a second complete hospital. They were able to do this because they lied to patients and gave them therapies they did not need just to pad the bill.
If you really want to learn what really goes on behind the scenes go to work in the medical field. Otherwise you are just being duped by some real cons!!!
"On the other hand I do
understand how it works. I worked in mainstream medicine for a very long time
including much of that working in oncology. And you are way off base. People are
lied to all the time and milked for every last cent. I even saw a patient that
was hemorrhaging massive amounts of blood out of his rectum. They were pumping
in blood as fast as they could even though they could not save him. Why? So they
could pad the bill. I something similar with a patient that was literally head
to toe gangrene. Again he could not be saved but when he coded they put in
internal pacemakers, external pacemakers and every drug they could think of all
to pad the bill. I could sit here all night and give you example, on top
of example on top of example of this kind of quackery including three people I
knew personally who were told they had cancer when they did not just so the
hospital could charge for the operations. The two hospitals I saw so this have
both made massive expansions and one even opened a second complete hospital.
They were able to do this because they lied to patients and gave them therapies
they did not need just to pad the bill.
If you really want to learn what really goes on behind the scenes go to work in the medical field. Otherwise you are just being duped by some real cons!!!"
The world isn't perfect by any means but in my many dealings with physicians in the past 20 years I've found them to be pretty straight forward. I've always had insurance and/or Medicare plus a supplement so I've never had to worry about cost. I've fired more than one doctor, but I've put a couple of them on pedestals too.
I was in a long-term relationship with an RN who for some strange reason enjoyed working the terminal ward of the hospital. She worked graveyard shift and enjoyed the patients but hated the paper work associated with death. On more than one occasion she came home telling me about the person who was dying and she didn't want to do the paper work so she would keep stuffing their spirit back into their body so that they would die on day shift, and it worked. I know it did and I wouldn't even tell the story except for the fact that I read the same thing about a doctor who worked the emergency room in Los Angeles. He did exactly as she did. Is that somehow wicked? Or is it simply prolonging life/
I've had cancer twice. First was prostate cancer 18 years ago. Was told by the urologist that it had to come out. Didn't even know what an oncologist was at that time, so found one who didn't do surgery and even before the visit had enough information to know that I wasn't going to have surgery. He confirmed it. I never ever went back to that urologist. You have to pick and choose carefully.
Unfortunately physicians are people too. Yet I'd trust my cancer to an MD of any standing long before I'd turn myself over to some of the many alternatives out there. But I do practice alternative therapies for cancer - Essiac and Pau d'Arco to name just a couple. But they haven't worked for me. I cured my prostate cancer with raw garlic which I still use and which will still bring down my PSAs if I remember to eat it. Last PSA was .7.
The world isn't perfect by any means but in my many dealings with physicians in the past 20 years I've found them to be pretty straight forward.
Your name does not happen to be Polyanna is it?
I've always had insurance and/or Medicare plus a supplement so I've never had to worry about cost.
So because you were not being made to pay for unnecessary and ineffective treatments this is somehow alight? instead all of had to pay for this fraud through our taxes. But hey, it still was not out of your personal pocket so why would you care?!!!
I was in a long-term relationship with an RN who for some strange reason enjoyed working the terminal ward of the hospital. She worked graveyard shift and enjoyed the patients but hated the paper work associated with death. On more than one occasion she came home telling me about the person who was dying and she didn't want to do the paper work so she would keep stuffing their spirit back into their body so that they would die on day shift, and it worked. I know it did and I wouldn't even tell the story except for the fact that I read the same thing about a doctor who worked the emergency room in Los Angeles. He did exactly as she did. Is that somehow wicked? Or is it simply prolonging life/
That was pretty damn selfish on her part. Letting the person suffer longer and letting the families suffer longer thinking there is hope just so she did not have to do the paperwork? And on top of that further increasing the patients hospital bill again so she does not have to do the job she was hired for. That puts her lower than slime in my book!!!
I cured my prostate cancer with raw garlic which I still use and which will still bring down my PSAs if I remember to eat it. Last PSA was .7.
PSA counts are a total joke. They are not an accurate indicator of cancer. Even caffeine raises the counts.
"WHoa!!!
They sure have pulled the wool over your eyes !! Baaahhhhh !!!!!
That is a definite distortion. What it says is that if the survival rate is 2
percent without chemo, etc and there is a 50 percent increase, that makes it 3
percent survival. The numbers are skewed to make it look good. Notice that it
says "relative survival rate". Keep looking through those rose colored
glasses.
It is a lot like the inflation numbers that the government uses. Subtract any
major increases such as oil, commodoties, etc to give an artificially small
number (in the case of inflation).
Another trick that they use is to show foreign statistice ( based on US
statistics )."
You've got it backwards. The "study" that folks point to regarding the 2 - 3 % is a hoax and it's pulled the wool over the eyes of many.
Here's a table of cancer survival rates in the USA - all of which are better than what most alternative med people are led to believe.
The table is actually very misleading.
First of all the majority of these cancers are treated with surgery, not chemotherapy. The average survival rate of most cancers with chemotherapy is 2-3%. The exception is leukemias and lymphomas are around 80%, which is even more interesting since these are treated with plant extracts called vincristine and vinblastine derived from Madagascar periwinkle.
The table does not take in to consideration the fact that the chemotherapy drugs are known carcinogens. But when they create secondary cancers these are not counted. Nor are the same cancers if they come back after 5 years. These are just a few of the ways that the cancer survival statistics are manipulated. Very similar to the reports of the drug companies dropping individuals that die or do not respond from the chemotherapy drug trials to make the drugs appear effective when they really are not. This was even reported in JAMA about 20 years ago and yet it still goes on.
There is also no mention of how advanced the cancers were, or what alternatives they used in conjunction to prevent the cancer from coming back. Just so many ways to manipulate the statistics.
"The table is actually very misleading.
First of all the majority of these cancers are treated with surgery, not chemotherapy. The average survival rate of most cancers with chemotherapy is 2-3%"
The table is misleading because you don't wish to believe it.
Every breast cancer that I'm aware of has been treated with either chemotherapy or generally a combination of chemo and surgery, but I'll bet you that 90% of all breast cancer has some form of chemotherapy. I've known several women with breast cancer.
The 2 - 3% is an absolute lie.
http://anaximperator.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/only-3-percent-survive-chemothe...
Of ALL the 150,000+ cancer survivors in that study, you will find that 2 - 3% of the survival to 5 years was attributed to those who received only chemotherapy. That does not say that only 2 - 3% survived. There is a humongous difference. Read the story. Others received other forms of treatment including chemotherapy in combination with other options.
I took a couple of college level statistics courses and somehow I passed them but I did learn one very important thing that was taught in both of them - "Figures don't lie but liars figure" and that's how the myth of the 2 - 3% survival rate came up.
"The table is actually very misleading.
First of all the majority of these cancers are treated with surgery, not chemotherapy. The average survival rate of most cancers with chemotherapy is 2-3%"
The table is misleading because you don't wish to believe it.
No, because I know that it is misleading and I have explained why.
Every breast cancer that I'm aware of has been treated with either chemotherapy or generally a combination of chemo and surgery, but I'll bet you that 90% of all breast cancer has some form of chemotherapy. I've known several women with breast cancer.
Which is what? One or two cases? Care to guess how many cases I have seen? And again I can tell you with 100% certainty you are wrong.
The 2 - 3% is an absolute lie.
http://anaximperator.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/only-3-percent-survive-chemothe...
Oh, someone posted something on the Internet so it must be true. ROTFLMAO!!!!! I have a textbook at home called Cancer that is a training manual for cancer for doctors. According to the book chemotherapy kills 95% of the patients undergoing it primarily due to malnutrition. So how can get these 40, 50 60%....... success rates when 95% of the patients are dying from the therapy? It does not take a rocket scientist to see how the statistics you posted have been manipulated.
Of ALL the 150,000+ cancer survivors in that study, you will find that 2 - 3% of the survival to 5 years was attributed to those who received only chemotherapy. That does not say that only 2 - 3% survived. There is a humongous difference.
Yes, one that proves you wrong so thanks for bringing that up. Note that you said a 5 year survival rate. Just because the person lives 5 years DOES NOT mean they are cancer free. And the 5 year survival rates ONLY address the primary cancer, not metastasized cancers nor secondary cancers caused from the chemotherapy or radiation therapy. So the actual success rate is actually lower than the 5 year survival rate. But your argument was an excellent example of how true survival rates are manipulated to make the chemotherapy drugs appear more effective than they are.
I took a couple of college level statistics courses and somehow I passed them
"Somehow"? LOL!!! Apparently you don't have much faith in your statistics skills. Not surprising since you have no clue how easily and how often statistics are manipulated. Let me give you a great example. Our crime rate here has skyrocketed and yet the police statistics show crime is dropping. So how are they doing that. By claiming criminal matters are civil so they do not get reported on the crime statistics. I have been told by the police that among others theft, grand larceny, breaking and entering, counterfeiting, etc. are all civil matters. Statistics only prove what the person wishes to prove. Did they teach you that fact in class?
"Oh, someone posted something on the Internet so it must be true. ROTFLMAO!!!!!"
Then disprove their analysis. That's not hard.
"And the 5 year survival rates ONLY address the primary cancer, not metastasized cancers nor secondary cancers caused from the chemotherapy or radiation therapy. So the actual success rate is actually lower than the 5 year survival rate. But your argument was an excellent example of how true survival rates are manipulated to make the chemotherapy drugs appear more effective than they are."
Completely unsupported.
""Somehow"? LOL!!! Apparently you don't have much faith in your statistics skills."
How'd you guess. My grades were only an A in one and just a B in the other.
"Our crime rate here has skyrocketed and yet the police statistics show crime is dropping. So how are they doing that. By claiming criminal matters are civil so they do not get reported on the crime statistics. I have been told by the police that among others theft, grand larceny, breaking and entering, counterfeiting, etc. are all civil matters. Statistics only prove what the person wishes to prove. Did they teach you that fact in class?"
Oh dear, the old "they're out to get us" routine. Thank you very much for the post, it explains a lot.
""Somehow"? LOL!!! Apparently you don't have much faith in your statistics skills."
How'd you guess. My grades were only an A in one and just a B in the other. Must have been sleeping with the teacher because you obviously did not learn anything.
I truly appreciate your posts, they say a lot.
By the way, if stuffing a spirit back in their body is prolonging misery - let's get out the death panels. There are literally thousands of individuals who are needlessly suffering at the publics expense and we could save billions of dollars in not only hospital and nursing home care, but in the cost of useless medications as well. Why hasn't someone thought of that?