Trying to impress Hillary? 
Well, you both are full of dog do-do.
Posted on 04/07/2005 1:52:05 PM PDT by Hillary's Lovely Legs
Peter Jennings' lung cancer, which he disclosed Tuesday on ABC World News Tonight, may be in an advanced stage, a local expert on the disease says.
Most patients don't have their conditions diagnosed until the cancer is "so advanced that it can't be cured by surgery, and the patient has a poor chance of long-term survival," says Rita Axelrod of Thomas Jefferson University Hospital's Kimmel Center.
Details of Jennings' condition haven't been disclosed, but his hoarse voice and the fact that he isn't having surgery immediately "suggests he could be in at least stage III" of lung cancer, says Axelrod, director of pulmonary medical oncology.
In stage III, life expectancy for lung-cancer patients is 12 to 18 months, with less than 9 percent living for five years after their diagnosis, according to Axelrod.
Jennings, 66, World News anchor since 1983, shocked his ABC colleagues - and the broadcast world - by revealing in a staff e-mail Tuesday morning that the cancer had been diagnosed the previous day.
He said that he would begin outpatient chemotherapy next week, and that he would anchor when his health permits. Good Morning America's Charlie Gibson and Elizabeth Vargas of 20/20, among others, will fill in.
Jennings had planned to anchor World News Tuesday, but changed his mind late in the day due to a weak voice. Looking thin, he told viewers his news in a taped segment at the end of the broadcast.
Lung cancer is the leading cancer killer in the United States, with roughly four out of five people who have the disease dying within five years, Axelrod says.
The five leading causes: "Smoking, smoking, smoking, smoking and smoking."
Jennings, once described by a colleague as a "relentless smoker," says he quit 20 years ago but started again during the 9/11 terrorist attacks.
Nightline's Ted Koppel "was always goading Peter to quit," says Bob Zelnick, chairman of Boston University's journalism department and an ABC correspondent from '77 to '98.
"Sometimes Peter was like a kid, smoking in the bathroom or stealing a cigarette in the hallway," Zelnick says. "At one point, he went to a hypnotist to try to get control of it."
The traditional course of chemo for lung cancer is in cycles of three to four weeks, Axelrod says.
Some people "actually do very well. They're able to work and enjoy life... . They only need to take a few days off at a time."
Meanwhile, the abcnews.com message board has been flooded with good wishes for Jennings, ABC News' Jeffrey Schneider says.
Jennings joined Wednesday in World News' daily 9 a.m. editorial conference call and spoke throughout the day with exec producer Jon Banner, but he didn't anchor last night.
In the wings. Though ABC has no succession plan in place for Jennings, news division chief David Westin has the luxury of a deep bench.
Gibson, 62, and Vargas, 42, already designated subs, would be on any short list. Vargas is considered a fast-tracker at the network.
Other possibilities: chief White House correspondent Terry Moran and World News Saturday anchor Bob Woodruff.
If ABC decides to go with network evening news' first solo woman, GMA's Diane Sawyer, 59, is the logical choice, says CBS Evening News interim anchor Bob Schieffer.
"I have no idea whether she would want to leave GMA, but she's always been the one I would have thought was the strongest woman anchor right now in television, and she works for ABC."
Since Tom Brokaw stepped down Dec. 1, Jennings has brought World News close to the top-rated NBC Nightly News in the Nielsen wars. (CBS Evening News remains a distant third.)
With CBS's Dan Rather having stepped down March 9, ABC is perfectly poised to make a move. Its promo for Jennings says it all: "Trust is earned."
I figured as much. I've been called a Nazi for real (on other smoking threads) and it "felt" different from your reply :-).
That's exactly what I'm talking about. Spoken like a true friend. Very supportive.
That ping was unleashing the bowels of hell.
However, I'd like to see the anti-smoking argument applied consistently. I've two relatives on my dad's side who died from colorectal cancer. For consistency we would need to have actors begging people to abstain from red meat (which we don't need to live, and which is a documented risk factor for this disease).
My wife has an aunt who is wheelchair-bound because of diabetes. In her case, self-inflicted, from years of neglect of her own body.
My only point is something is going to kill ya, and I should be allowed to enjoy something that gives me pleasure AND decide for myself on risks I'm willing to accept. When I go to meet my Maker, I am ready for that day because of Christ's condescending love to an unworthy sinner.
You are free to disagree.
You are not free to jump down people's throats. You're the disruptor on this thread.
We are not targeting anybody.
Trying to impress Hillary?
Well, you both are full of dog do-do.
I'm not a smoker but I do think the anti smoking legislation has gone to far. Neither really affects that much so I don't have a dog in this fight.
My point was that pointing out that an 80 year old man died because of smoking isn't going to be very compelling or moving. If the anti-smoking groups want to get anyone's attention, they need to point out the 30, 40 and 50 year olds that die from smoking.
I will say, however, that it seems that the anti-smoking lobby is starting to act similar to the environmentalist movement. Both started off with good intentions but have morphed into some sort of quasi-religion that seek to appeal to emotions - facts and good science don't really matter all that much.
Just like any scientist that says that the link between man and global warming is weak will be ignored and considered to be on someone's payroll, any scientist that says that the anti-smoking lobby is overreacting will be considered a quack and biased.
Smoking is not a weakness. It's an intentional habit. People quit smoking every day; some here have related their stories.
You're another that's very defensive. Nobody's belittling anybody. You smokers seem to want to shut down discussion about the link between smoking and lung cancer.
You're not going to do it.
If you derive pleasure from smoking, light up, to the glory of God. If you like a Martini before bed, that's fine - who am I to judge in matters indifferent?
L8R
You're the disruptor on this thread.
I am not a disruptor. But I refuse to take the lies and insinuations from some of you. None of you will listen to anything and none of you want to even READ links that are provided. Even the WHO has said that smoking does not cause Lung Cancer.
I didn't write it. The World HEALTH Organization wrote it after many years of research and study.
So now I am not allowed to come in and voice my opinion? The rest of you sure feel free to come into our smoking threads to voice YOURS!
Gotta have somebody to throw bombs at!!
Seriously, I'll keep you in my thoughts and pray that you realize you're worth a place on this earth for as long as you can occupy it.
the nose-pickers and gassers always pick on smokers.
You have a very interesting view of the world, sink. You've been around here for a very long time, and I respect that. But you show a great deal of insensitivity on this issue. Defensiveness does not exist in my posts, but you choose to see it. You and I are done on this subject. I hope your holier-than-thou attitude doesn't spill into other aspects of your life. It can be awfully lonely out there.
Oh how I wish I had been a nagging B!tch now that it is too late. Like you said and I believe It "He will take them when He's ready"
johnb838, I will wish/pray you and my Ralph a big old case of the will to quit! Remember: I can't He can I think I'll let Him!
My "quitter" story was easy---I never had a desire to start. As for alcohol, my dad gave me a "Pabst Blue Ribbon" when I was about 7. I spit it out and said, "That tastes like horse pee." Never drank, either.
I quit smoking a long time ago.
And smoking is an unnatural and dangerous activity, which may well some day be the death of me even though I quit.
Still, tobacco is wonderful stuff.
Too bad it is unhealthy.
If you're expecting someone to take the cigarettes away from you, you're going to be smoking for a very long time.
How should I support you? Be quiet about what smoking causes?
Not a chance.
See? You can't hold a decent debate without attacking me. You need a spell checker to boot.
I'm old? hehe
Filthy habit? Like I said Hillary: I bet even YOU have habits that "I" would find disgusting.
You take the cake Sis. I bet you are a real hoot over on the Yahoo smoking boards.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.