• Cancer cures/treatments
    51 replies, posted
[QUOTE=Amerigo;32583587]So, I'm actually undergoing chemotherapy right now, for Hodgkin's Lymphoma. Just finished my fifth out of 12 treatments. I'd be happy to answer any questions you guys might have. Or not, as the case may be.[/QUOTE] How has the treatment worked for you so far? And if you wanted to try an alternative (e.g. Hemp oil), would a doctor help you acquire that alternative to test its effectiveness on you?
About two years ago there was this guy who had 6 months to live, he had a lot of tumors in his lungs so he was pretty much fucked. He then went to this once place in the U.S that was expirimenting with a treatment and it stopped the growth of the tumors and even started shrinking them. If I could find the website and the video again I would provide a source.
[QUOTE=Zeke129;32588148]How many treatments before you start noticing physical symptoms like hair loss and such[/QUOTE] Hair loss started after about the third, I think. Chemo treatments are every two weeks, btw. Aside from hair loss, and nausea on the day of, the only other side effect I've noticed is my energy level going down. I get tired a lot more easily, I sleep a lot more, etc etc. Side effects tend to be different for everyone, depending on what cancer they have, and what chemo regimen they're on. Not everyone loses their hair, some people get a lot more sickly, and some lucky few hardly react at all. [editline]2nd October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=livelonger12;32591532]How has the treatment worked for you so far? And if you wanted to try an alternative (e.g. Hemp oil), would a doctor help you acquire that alternative to test its effectiveness on you?[/QUOTE] I had a PET scan the other day which revealed that I'm reacting very well to this treatment. It's reduced the metabolic energy level (or something similar to that, I forgot the exact words) of the cancer to zero. That's hugely good news. As for alternatives, I doubt I would want to try them. I mean, there's a reason we use chemo and radiation, instead of hemp oil and whatever else. So, I'm perfectly happy with chemo, because I know it works. I think you'd also have a pretty hard time finding an oncologist that would be willing to try an alternative, because if it didn't work, they'd have a massive lawsuit on their hands.
[QUOTE=Amerigo;32592546]Hair loss started after about the third, I think. Chemo treatments are every two weeks, btw. Aside from hair loss, and nausea on the day of, the only other side effect I've noticed is my energy level going down. I get tired a lot more easily, I sleep a lot more, etc etc. Side effects tend to be different for everyone, depending on what cancer they have, and what chemo regimen they're on. Not everyone loses their hair, some people get a lot more sickly, and some lucky few hardly react at all. [editline]2nd October 2011[/editline] I had a PET scan the other day which revealed that I'm reacting very well to this treatment. It's reduced the metabolic energy level (or something similar to that, I forgot the exact words) of the cancer to zero. That's hugely good news. As for alternatives, I doubt I would want to try them. I mean, there's a reason we use chemo and radiation, instead of hemp oil and whatever else. So, I'm perfectly happy with chemo, because I know it works. I think you'd also have a pretty hard time finding an oncologist that would be willing to try an alternative, because if it didn't work, they'd have a massive lawsuit on their hands.[/QUOTE] I'm glad to hear that the treatment is working well for you, and all the best with it - hope it cures it. I think it's a bit unfortunate that it would be hard to find a professional willing to help one acquire alternative treatment should they be uncomfortable with using chemo/radio-therapy for treatment.
Hey Amerigo, how old are you if you don't mind my asking?
[QUOTE=livelonger12;32599078]I'm glad to hear that the treatment is working well for you, and all the best with it - hope it cures it. I think it's a bit unfortunate that it would be hard to find a professional willing to help one acquire alternative treatment should they be uncomfortable with using chemo/radio-therapy for treatment.[/QUOTE] Well, thanks for the well-wishing, but I'm not sure I entirely agree with you on your last point. I do understand why some people would be uncomfortable with chemo and radiation (you're literally killing bits of yourself and all that), but I think cancer is a big enough issue that they would need to, for lack of a better term, "suck it up." I have huge faith in our current medical technology and knowledge, and so I think that if the only thing we're using to cure cancer at the moment is chemo and radiation, there's a damn good reason for it, and those who are uncomfortable with it need to recognize that doctors are only trying to help them get better. [editline]2nd October 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=greagaerge;32599325]Hey Amerigo, how old are you if you don't mind my asking?[/QUOTE] 20. Por que?
[QUOTE=Amerigo;32601126]Well, thanks for the well-wishing, but I'm not sure I entirely agree with you on your last point. I do understand why some people would be uncomfortable with chemo and radiation (you're literally killing bits of yourself and all that), but I think cancer is a big enough issue that they would need to, for lack of a better term, "suck it up." I have huge faith in our current medical technology and knowledge, and so I think that if the only thing we're using to cure cancer at the moment is chemo and radiation, there's a damn good reason for it, and those who are uncomfortable with it need to recognize that doctors are only trying to help them get better. [editline]2nd October 2011[/editline] 20. Por que?[/QUOTE] It's okay, and thanks for the response. I see your point, and agree with it to some extent with the exception that trials will ultimately require patients to test the effectiveness of potential solutions; and chemo/radio-therapy may even fail to treat the patient adequately. So, IMO the patient should be granted free access to trials, and trials should be conducted more often if a solution is in a testing phase -- that is, if it's found to be functional with animals, then patients should be granted access to human testing immediately. They should also be given as much information as possible pertaining with each trial, so the patient knows the entirety of potential and known consequences.
Herbal aromas
[QUOTE=livelonger12;32601849]It's okay, and thanks for the response. I see your point, and agree with it to some extent with the exception that trials will ultimately require patients to test the effectiveness of potential solutions; and chemo/radio-therapy may even fail to treat the patient adequately. So, IMO the patient should be granted free access to trials, and trials should be conducted more often if a solution is in a testing phase -- that is, if it's found to be functional with animals, then patients should be granted access to human testing immediately. They should also be given as much information as possible pertaining with each trial, so the patient knows the entirety of potential and known consequences.[/QUOTE] Okay, yes, if we're talking about trials for things, then I agree completely. But if it's just, like, idle curiosity, "hey, I want to see if something other than chemo will cure my cancer," that shit's just dumb. Hell, if my doctor offered to let me try out something experimental, I'd be all over that.
Wait, I'm pretty sure that people often get PAID to undergo clinical trials. [editline]3rd October 2011[/editline] Oh wait, that's just Phase I testing in healthy subjects. Nonetheless, I'm pretty you're not charged.
Plenty of alcohol, prostitutes and a bullet to the head.
[QUOTE=Amerigo;32605044]Okay, yes, if we're talking about trials for things, then I agree completely. But if it's just, like, idle curiosity, "hey, I want to see if something other than chemo will cure my cancer," that shit's just dumb. Hell, if my doctor offered to let me try out something experimental, I'd be all over that.[/QUOTE] I think it'll depend on why they'd want to try something other than chemo (e.g. if it provided the benefits of chemo without the side-effects, or side-effects as strong). But definitely, patients should be updated on information pertaining with trials so they can decide of whether they want to test new potentials for curing the disease.
I havent researched anything on cancer, but I wonder where it came from and when. Is it naturally formed in the body or is it through exposure to things (Sun,gas,shit). If its formed naturally in the body as some cases it might be then we should search where it originated from (Location on the planet and when). Also, how common is cancer in animals? How come they dont get the same kinds of cancers as we do as often? Im 9 dont hait plz
I like how people think they "cure" cancer which is impossible, you can prevent it but not cure it.
[QUOTE=mastfire;32634016]I like how people think they "cure" cancer which is impossible, you can prevent it but not cure it.[/QUOTE] What makes you say that?
[QUOTE=mastfire;32634016]I like how people think they "cure" cancer which is impossible, you can prevent it but not cure it.[/QUOTE] It's the opposite. Most of the time you can't prevent it from happening but if you're lucky you may be able to rid yourself of it and have it never resurface for the rest of your life.
[QUOTE=Amerigo;32634585]What makes you say that?[/QUOTE] In a way that everyone has cancer which is 1%. That one percent is the cell that get messes up the life cycle of a cell. The only way to "cure" cancer is to wipe out humanity.
[QUOTE=mastfire;32634937]In a way that everyone has cancer which is 1%. That one percent is the cell that get messes up the life cycle of a cell. The only way to "cure" cancer is to wipe out humanity.[/QUOTE] That's not what "cure" means. Cure simply means to make healthy again.
A cure is the end of a medical condition; the substance or procedure that ends the medical condition, such as a medication, a surgical operation, a change in lifestyle, or even a philosophical mindset that helps a person suffer. It may also refer to the state of being healed, or cured. A remission is a temporary end to the medical signs and symptoms of an incurable disease. The proportion of people with a disease that are cured by a given treatment, called the cure fraction or cure rate, is determined by comparing disease-free survival of treated people against a matched control group that never had the disease.[1] Inherent in the idea of a cure is the permanent end to the specific instance of the disease.[2][3] When a person has the common cold, and then recovers from it, the person is said to be cured, even though the person might someday catch another cold. Conversely, a person that has successfully managed a disease, such as diabetes mellitus, so that it produces no undesirable symptoms for the moment, but without actually permanently ending it, is not cured. -THANKS WIKIPEDIA! Now that that's settled, back to cancer.
[QUOTE=mastfire;32634937]In a way that everyone has cancer which is 1%. That one percent is the cell that get messes up the life cycle of a cell. The only way to "cure" cancer is to wipe out humanity.[/QUOTE] You're talking about eradicating it, similar to what we did with, say, smallpox. Cures work on a person-by-person basis. The one that is got it right.
Apologies for the bump, but keep this thread going guys. Post anything pertaining with a cure - anything that helps, anything that could be trialed, etc - that's precisely the reason for this thread.
My dad has cancer. He's using loads of alternative treatments, but is also on chemo coz he's not a fool. His tumour went down way faster than the doctors anticipated chemo would do, so maybe they really do help. Surgery's tomorrow... Couldn't specifically say what alternative treatments he used as I'd just sort of see the bags of Blushwood Shrub extracts or whatever lying around and shake my head, assuming it was bullshit.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.