hehe! :)
Don't bother. These militant smokers are too busy lecturing everyone else how we're all going to die anyway.
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."
Dear johnb838,
"I hope I don't get a smokers disease because the i told you so's are likely to be worse than the disease itself."
My mother was diagnosed with lung cancer in September, 2003. They told her maybe she had 3 - 6 months. She was one of the luckier ones.
She was dead 28 days later.
It wasn't a fun-filled four weeks.
The "I told you sos" aren't worse than the disease.
sitetest
I wasn't talking about the article. I was talking about the FReeper's comments. They would be better served where the FReeper smokers (at least the ones that admit they smoke) congregate. As for what I think, it's your own choice. You know what will probably happen, and you are the best arbiter of that decision.
hehe! :)
Don't bother. These militant smokers are too busy lecturing everyone else how we're all going to die anyway.
Ok. I will become a forking obnoxious drunk then. How's that? Want to pass me on the highway while I am three tanks to the wind?
I don't THINK so!
Cancer is truly one of the worst ways to go. Probably the only thing worse than cancer is chemotherapy.
Hey a good news "quitter" story!
I smoked 2-3 packs a day from 1966-1989. I went to a group hypnotist session ($38.50) on May 24, 1989 and have never wanted another cigarette. A buddy who went also, has never smoked again.
We wanted to quit and this worked for us. Whatever works, give it a try, the benefits are worth it.
I get a lung x-ray every year and so far, so good.
Dear cspackler,
"I quit using Zyban, 6 years and have 0 desire to smoke."
That's really wonderful. :-)
sitetest
I enjoy smoking. Always have. My dad used to tell me that ex-smokers were worse then ex-whores who found religion. Both groups do nothing but try and show everyone the evil of their ways. :-)
The doctor who authored that article must be a smoker.
He was not. He quit smoking in 1989 but started again briefly after 9-11.
My late Grandfather died of lung cancer back in 1967. He did not smoke, but worked with plastics which is what we think was the cause of his illness. He went from a very fit athletic man to a skeleton in less than 2 years. Very very sad.
Preaching and screaming doesn't help. Encouragement and relating stories of smokers who have won the battle they fight can help.
And they are right. My father-in-law died at 87, smoked two packs a day since 10 years old, chased by a min of a 12 pack of beer and a couple shots of scotch, 24-7.
Must be hell for the perfect health nut types to one day find they are dying, from nothing.
:) Good for you! :)
Thank you very much. Perhaps some others around here can take the hint.
Being overweight is also a social stigma. Many overweight children and adolescents are scarred for life due to being overweight - this might not be "fair" but it is reality.
In high school and college, being a smoker isn't going to reduce a the size of person's dating pool all that much, but being overweight pretty much eliminates the dating pool altogether.
Being overweight also reduces quality of life. Again, overweight individuals may prefer to rationalize this away, but its stark reality.
Both smoking and being overweight are very unhealthy conditions, but being overweight carries with it much more of social disadvantage. Best to avoid both of them.
Hillary? I don't know about your legs, but your attitude towards FReepers who smoke is intolerable.
WE NEVER SAID THAT. AND I WANT YOU TO DIG OUT A THREAD THAT STATES THAT FACT. PROOF PLEASE.
With the attitude YOU have, you would fit right IN with the nazi's, believe me.
And Hillary? I BET YOU HAVE HABITS THAT "I" WOULD FIND DISGUSTING!
Agreed. That was my mom's age when lung cancer got her. She smoked like the proverbial chimney right up to her last day on earth.
The problem lies in people stigmatizing one particular behavior to the occusion of others - equally harmless. If smoking gives you pleasure, you implicitly accept the risks as you would for any other pleasure - including the 15% you will get lung cancer, and the 12% chance you will die from lung cancer. There is nothing wrong with smoking morally, just as there is nothing wrong with consuming prime rib.
We're not preaching at anybody. If you'll meander up the thread, you'll notice it was the smokers who came on the thread and told the rest of us we're full of it for saying that cigarettes cause lung cancer.
The smokers seem to be awfully defensive when a group of people simply mention that Jennings was a heavy smoker and that's what caused his lung cancer. If they think they're being picked on (nobody was mentioned by name), then go to another thread.
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.
