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."
While you two have your little yukfest at my expense, I called SheLion "the most obnoxious smoker I've seen in all my years online" because:
a) She has identified herself ad nauseum as the veritable (drama) queen of all cigheads, screaming in caps and colored fonts against anyone who dares cross her;
and
(b)Because she inserts herself into a topic where people are discussing the sad impending demise of Peter Jennings, and through multiple strident, shrewish, caustic posts shows her obnoxiousness. Never in all my years online have I seen a tobacco addict so crazed to ram her opinions down people's throats.
No, I like mine cancer-free, thank you very much. And I stand by my original statement.
Hear Hear!
She wasn't addressing the discussion of the "sad impending demise of Peter Jennings". She was addressing the Freepers that think they are such perfect creatures that they could preach on the correct way to live our lives.
I'm always amazed at the fear of facts and counter arguements that Freepers have with regards to this subject. Freepers are a talented bunch in getting to the truth of issues being spouted by big media, except when it comes to smoking, in that case the propoganda has even infiltrated otherwise intelligent and suspicious folks.
On top of that, the posts I read from the anti-smokers were much nastier and attacking than anything I saw the smokers post.
Not that I have to defend myself to anyone, however I do not scream! Caps are for emphasis. My goodness. My very present really sets you off doesn't it? LOL!
Drama Queen of all cigheads. hehe. That's funny. And btw, why do you two just pick on me? Why not the rest on our Puff List in Free Republic? Don't like my face? Maybe it's my name you hate. But you sure have a hard-on for me and it's not the good kind, either.
What's the matter? Do you know I come bearing the truth? Is that why you hate me so?
and
(b)Because she inserts herself into a topic where people are discussing the sad impending demise of Peter Jennings, and through multiple strident, shrewish, caustic posts shows her obnoxiousness. Never in all my years online have I seen a tobacco addict so crazed to ram her opinions down people's throats.
I insert myself into a topic? You have no clue! We had a thread two days ago about Peter. Where were you then? I don't see where you commended me for my statements concerning Peter at that time, right?
My opinions? You are a piece of work. I have my opinions, like everyone else. But I put forth actual links by researchers and thousands of articles disclaiming all of which you want to believe about smoking and smokers. But you do not care to take the time to actually read them. You have been easily swayed and anyone who disagrees with you is the idiot. Well, my friend, what with the knowledge I have and the research I have behind me, all you have is your "opinion." You can't give us links to back up anything you say. Pity.
You say I am obnoxious. Why? Because I won't lay down and take the beating you have tried to give me? Your verbal and written abuse toward me is way over the top. You type a good game in here, but I have a mental image of you and in it you are a very little person.
No, I like mine cancer-free, thank you very much. And I stand by my original statement.
Absolutely. Its relationship to heart disease and other cancers as well makes it a truly "nasty habit" as one of my aunts described it.
Itmust be an awful, awful addiction to not be able to stop in spite of all the knowledge of its dangers
CSM, there was a thread the other day about Peter. I commented sadly about the issue. My prayers are certainly with him and his family. Where were these same people then? I didn't see one of their names over there. Yet now they come down on me for not acknowledging the issue of this thread. I have already responded about Peter. But when I came in here and saw the hate and bashing and how these FReeper Anti's turned Peter's condition into their own agenda to bash smokers, I had to speak up. I do have that right.
I'm always amazed at the fear of facts and counter arguements that Freepers have with regards to this subject. Freepers are a talented bunch in getting to the truth of issues being spouted by big media, except when it comes to smoking, in that case the propoganda has even infiltrated otherwise intelligent and suspicious folks.
On top of that, the posts I read from the anti-smokers were much nastier and attacking than anything I saw the smokers post.
Thank you! But when I stood up to let them know that we were not happy with their remarks, then they unleashed even more venom. See what I mean? And they call themselves Conservative on a Republican forum. No wonder our party is in such a sad state.
Good Grief...............
I don't believe some of these people. But I have some errands to run and do not have the time at the moment to read through this entire thread right now.
SheLion - you and I have locked horns several times over the years of our friendship - but you know I will always have your back when necessary.
Some pretty nasty stuff was posted here----the kind of thing I never expected to see on FR.
Oh my. Thanks for the link.
I rarely see FreeRepublic topics hijacked the way this was.
Why is it so important for some people to argue a clearly personal choice?
Leave it be and pay respect to not only Mr. Jennings but for all the other cancer victims in our world these days.
Disease creates victims - nobody goes running towards illness. Not even with their choices - we like to have hope we are impervious to disease until we become sick.
Whatever - this thread has turned into a catfight.
The good old days are gone now, the Health Utopians are going to save everyone. Though why they care so terribly, terribly much about people they obviously loathe is beyond me.
Remember when everyone wasn't obsessed with sickness and dying? What a nation of joyless ghouls we've become.
A long time friend of my family called us in August 1987. He had been diagnosed with lung cancer. The cancer included his lung and chest wall. Inoperable. Untreatable. He had lived for years with a Japanese bullet in his elbow from service in WWII. He said the pain from the cancer was worse than the bullet wound or the years of pain it caused him. He lasted until November 1987. He was a lifelong smoker. He was in his mid-50's.
My father-in-law was a chain smoker too. He died at 53 from congestive heart failure. He also had emphysema, cirrhosis of the liver and diabetes.
My dad quit smoking in 1965 while serving in Vietnam. He lived to age 73. Mom quit smoking in 1966. She is still living and healthy at 77. Quitting can make a difference.
The good old days are gone now, the Health Utopians are going to save everyone. Though why they care so terribly, terribly much about people they obviously loathe is beyond me.
Remember when everyone wasn't obsessed with sickness and dying? What a nation of joyless ghouls we've become.
I know it. We are to cower in shame and say in very small voices "Oh I knooooooow it. I should quit but I am sooooooo weak. Have pity on me. I am a lowly smoker."
Well, I won't and I will never lower myself to any of them.
I, for one, appreciate your words. Several on this thread has used Peter's condition as an agenda to bash and trash good decent FReepers because we choose to use a legal product.
It never ceases to amaze me how much we are hated by some just because we smoke. They do not take into consideration that we are Christians, Republicans, mothers, fathers, grandparents, soccer moms. But just because we smoke, we are the world's low-life. Just doesn't make sense to me.
I feel like I fell into DU Hell Mears.
It's not right for good decent FReepers to be trashed like this just because we use a legal product. I just shake my head.
That should go without saying, Gabz. :)
I would never desert you. Never.
And that goes for Mears and all those on my Puff List that I have regular contact with over the years. I couldn't make it in here without all of you!
Unfortunately my FRiend it appears civil discourse has disappeared from many topics on FR - not just smoking.
I don't particularly cre for some of the things Peter Jennings has said and done in his tenure as an anchor - but that doesn't mean I would wish him ill. In fact the first post I made in reference to him following the announcement of his illness was extending my prayers to him.
I can be a wicked witch when I want to be - but I'm really a nice person...even when faced with people with whom I disagree or really dislike.
I have yet to figure out why they have so much invested in this topic, emotionally or otherwise. I mean, I can understand it from those being paid to do it - and there are far more of them than will admit to it - but for those who aren't paid, or don't own a business impacted by the issue, what is the big deal?
Cancer is a horrible and insidious disease that I wouldn't wish on my worst enemy, let alone someone I don't know (such as Jennings.) I am horrified by those that when told someone has been diagnosed with cancer their first reaction is "How much did he/she smoke?" as if smoking is the ONLY cause....particularly when modern medicine and science is continually showing that many forms of cancer are virus caused.
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.