Posted on 09/07/2016 3:33:50 PM PDT by MarchonDC09122009
The timing is incredible. NHS was in the news just a few days ago for announcing that “routine” surgeries will now be denied anyone who is deemed to be overweight or a smoker. Now, after decades of providing Chemo, suddenly they are “concerned” about the outcomes.
I hate Chemo as much as the next guy, and pray for the day a more civilized treatment regimen is available. But the timing? The overseers are ready to begin their planned Euthanasia.
Life is fatal. No one gets out alive.
It's not *if*.
It's *when* and *how*.
That’s a wonderful story. Not many people may know this but chemotherapy may become obsolete in 5-10 years. Immunotherapy is the future and the early results from clinical trials are spectacular. For example, Jimmuh Carter’s melanoma had spread to his brain (assuming he had one), lungs and liver and normally he would have months to live. But thanks to a checkpoint inhibitor (immunotherapeutic) drug called Keytruda, today he is walking around cancer free. This is nothing short of a miracle.
My mother had chemo for her pancreatic cancer. The chemo she was taking had a complete drug facts insert. Part of the information was a chart detailing the mortality rate of users.
By 14 months the mortality rate was 100%
Cancer sucks. Chemo prolongs the suck.
When I was diagnosed with lung cancer, I went through a period of obsessing over “how long do I have?” I scoured the Internet for information about prognosis. Over and over, I turned up stories about people dying from their first dose of chemo. And every time I was able to discover where this happened, it was in the UK. I don’t think they know how to properly administer the drugs. They seem to still be in the trial and error phase.
Cancer treatment is very complicated. If you’re diagnosed, do your homework and find professionals who know what they’re doing.
Yup, It surely was.
Now, after decades of providing Chemo, suddenly they are “concerned” about the outcomes.
Yup. The concern is that 50% survive the first month and cost the government millions for extended care...
I agree. You would have to rub it in. “:^)
Bingo.
When doctors get cancer, they don’t take chemo. They let nature take it course.
And it’s also where you end up going that’s the most important part.
Sorry. Had to get the last word in. I shouldn’t have forgotten that part.
Aren’t these cancer patients in the UK system put on hold for months if not years before treatment is even approved and can be started?
Don’t skip chemo!
I can testify to that with the effects it had on me.
There you go, being right again.
“:^(
“:^)
Since this is NHS, I wonder what impact the delay in beginning treatment has on this study?
Spot on, my thoughts exactly.
My Father was diagnosed with bladder cancer in the muscle wall at age 87. He underwent chemo and radiation. The chemo never produced nausea or hair loss. The cancer metastasized into his lung and finally into his brain. He died at 89. I was surprised that he had no side effects. It made me wonder if he was given bogus chemo drugs, or was seriously under-doped.
It happens on occasion.
:)
Two considerations for the data set. Are these hospitals seeing 50% deaths within 30 days treating people that would not survive, no matter the treatment? Therefore artificially inflating the data? Other hospitals may not even treat these patients to begin with.
How long after cancer onset/diagnosis are these patients getting treatment? We hear the “horror” stories of waiting lists. That can also be a contributor.
You’re right. It takes a lot to get through cancer. Choosing the right hospital is very important.
“:^)
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.