Jump to content



Photo

Amish Girl, Family Flees US to Avoid Chemotherapy

ohio leukemia tumors court battle alternative treatments

  • Please log in to reply
55 replies to this topic

#31 thomastmc

thomastmc

    Unofficial Attorney of Neowin

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Kansas City
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Lumia 928

Posted 30 November 2013 - 03:00

There are various types of Leukemia (childhood and adulthood) and while some have a high number of survival rate(between 85% to 90%, depends on the study age), other don't have such high number. Even so, i prefer medicine to treat something that has a high percentage of cure than alternative unproven, unstudied medicine; we just hear the successful cases, but what we don't hear (because it's not cool to talk about these) is the high number of unsuccessful ones. And yeah, i know what I'm talking about, more than most of the Neowinians.

 
ALL accounts for about 3/4 of cases of childhood leukemia, and has a 90% survival rate.
Chronic myeloid leukemia also has a 90% survival rate.

That covers almost everyone, except very rare cases.




#32 -Razorfold

-Razorfold

    Neowinian Senior

  • 9,767 posts
  • Joined: 16-March 06
  • OS: Windows 8
  • Phone: Nokia Lumia 900 / Oneplus One

Posted 30 November 2013 - 03:34

Pharmaceutical companies can rationalise charging high prices for their drugs because they actually invest 100s of millions if not billions of dollars into research and development (you know ,that thing which makes sure the drug you're selling actually works)? In addition, a lot of them give away millions of dollars worth of vaccines and medicines to poor countries which otherwise couldn't afford them.


Well to be honest, they charge it because they can. They're for profit companies that care about profits. Yes a lot of money goes into research and testing, but they make a ton of money. Most of them have profit margins in excess of 25%. Is that a bad thing? Just depends on the way you look at it.

I don't have problem with western medicine at all, some of the advances made are amazing. I have a problem with doctors who are just around to shove medication down people's throats. Of course not all doctors are like this and some of them are amazing at what they do, but some are just in the business to make money.

I mean take my wife for example. Her cat died when she was 14/15 and so she was sad, school made her go see a psychiatrist who was all "oh god she has major depression, lets prescribe her anti-depressants" so she got prescribed them and took them. They made her an insomniac and when she told her "doctor" about them, what did the good doctor do? Rather than go "let's re-evaluate if you really need them, or let's try changing your meds to one that won't have that side effect on you", he just prescribed her ambien. So now she's completely dependent on sleeping pills and can no longer sleep without them, even if she stays up for nights. Sad thing? She never even really needed those anti-depressants because there's a big difference between being sad and being depressed and well she no longer takes them and she's been feeling a lot better / happier ever since. The sleeping meds however will be a lifelong thing, its just been so long that her doctor thinks that her body has "forgotten" how to naturally sleep. Her doctor has been slowly dosing her off them for over a year now so we'll see if that will help or not.

But that's one of the problems with western healthcare, over-prescription of tons of drugs to people who don't even need it. I think that there was a report a while back that said America consumed more anti-depressants and ADHD medication and just prescription medication in general than the rest of the world...combined.

#33 Praetor

Praetor

    ASCii / ANSi Designer

  • 2,845 posts
  • Joined: 05-June 02
  • Location: Lisbon
  • OS: Windows Eight dot One dot One 1!one

Posted 30 November 2013 - 04:37

 
ALL accounts for about 3/4 of cases of childhood leukemia, and has a 90% survival rate.
Chronic myeloid leukemia also has a 90% survival rate.

That covers almost everyone, except very rare cases.

 

dunno where you pulled those numbers: source? because that's not the reality i see. :/



#34 thomastmc

thomastmc

    Unofficial Attorney of Neowin

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Kansas City
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Lumia 928

Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:20

dunno where you pulled those numbers: source? because that's not the reality i see. :/

 
Maybe your reality is anecdotal :)
 
I did get the second form of leukemia wrong. The form I mentioned does have a 90% survival rate, but AML (acute myeloid, not chronic myeloid) is actually the second most common childhood leukemia. Still, it's survival rate is between 60%-70%, and those statistics are from 2004 (the latest).
 

A new study shows that children with the most common type of childhood cancer, acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have a survival rate of more than 90%. ALL accounts for about 3 out of 4 cases of childhood leukemia.

In the 1960s, the 5-year survival rate was less than 10%.

http://www.cancer.or...e-significantly


AML is the second most common form of leukemia in children, after acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL).

About 500 children in the United States are diagnosed with AML each year. Childhood AML is most common during the first two years of life and during the teenage years.

Overall, the five-year survival rate (the percentage of people who survive at least five years after the cancer is detected, excluding those who die from other diseases) for children with AML is between 60% and 70%. However, the survival rates for AML vary based on the subtype.

http://www.cancer.ne...hood/statistics



#35 blerk

blerk

    Banned User

  • 687 posts
  • Joined: 09-December 10

Posted 30 November 2013 - 05:41

Even with Fast detection and treatment there are no guarantees.  I've had family members pass away due to cancer (after they go into remission and it comes back).  Just because you don't agree with not going with standard medicine.. doesn't mean that it isn't something that can and does work.

Wait, what? Just because modern medicine does not have a 100% success rate, you're going to try the alternate route with an even smaller chance of cure?

 

They don't necessarily work.  More people die from pharmaceutical medications, side effects, alergies, etc than those that go the natural route.   But okay.. let's inject poisons and viri into our bodies because pharmaceutical companies say that we should.

 

I hate to trot out a clichéd response, but the reality is that modern medicine is the best of ye olden natural medicine neatly packaged into reliable and trustworthy forms. And for all the problems which the "natural" treatment inevitably results in death, modern medicine has stepped up and provided solutions that are far superior to death. 

 

I'd happily take the shittiness of a chemotherapy regimen for a chance of survival over bogus treatments peddled by scammers and quack doctors (who are focussed equally as much on profit as those 'evil' pharmaceutical companies.)



#36 thomastmc

thomastmc

    Unofficial Attorney of Neowin

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Kansas City
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Lumia 928

Posted 30 November 2013 - 06:09

Well to be honest, they charge it because they can. They're for profit companies that care about profits. Yes a lot of money goes into research and testing, but they make a ton of money. Most of them have profit margins in excess of 25%. Is that a bad thing? Just depends on the way you look at it.

I don't have problem with western medicine at all, some of the advances made are amazing. I have a problem with doctors who are just around to shove medication down people's throats. Of course not all doctors are like this and some of them are amazing at what they do, but some are just in the business to make money.

I mean take my wife for example. Her cat died when she was 14/15 and so she was sad, school made her go see a psychiatrist who was all "oh god she has major depression, lets prescribe her anti-depressants" so she got prescribed them and took them. They made her an insomniac and when she told her "doctor" about them, what did the good doctor do? Rather than go "let's re-evaluate if you really need them, or let's try changing your meds to one that won't have that side effect on you", he just prescribed her ambien. So now she's completely dependent on sleeping pills and can no longer sleep without them, even if she stays up for nights. Sad thing? She never even really needed those anti-depressants because there's a big difference between being sad and being depressed and well she no longer takes them and she's been feeling a lot better / happier ever since. The sleeping meds however will be a lifelong thing, its just been so long that her doctor thinks that her body has "forgotten" how to naturally sleep. Her doctor has been slowly dosing her off them for over a year now so we'll see if that will help or not.

But that's one of the problems with western healthcare, over-prescription of tons of drugs to people who don't even need it. I think that there was a report a while back that said America consumed more anti-depressants and ADHD medication and just prescription medication in general than the rest of the world...combined.

 

Just like shopping for anything else, you do have to sort of educate yourself before buying into whatever any single doctor says. Most doctors are great, but it's a lot like going to see a mechanic. If they think they can rip you off and sell you something you don't need, some of them will. Still, others might just get it wrong, even with the best of intentions.

 

They always tell you to get a second, or even sometimes a third opinion if it's something serious, but that's just because it's time and money consuming. You should actually have at least a second opinion about anything and everything. Since most people can't do that, first you need to find a doctor that you really trust, and second you should educate yourself a little about any ailments you have. It just takes 10-15 minutes usually, and can benefit you quite a lot.



#37 Athernar

Athernar

    ?

  • 3,001 posts
  • Joined: 15-December 04

Posted 30 November 2013 - 06:11

They don't necessarily work.  More people die from pharmaceutical medications, side effects, alergies, etc than those that go the natural route.   But okay.. let's inject poisons and viri into our bodies because pharmaceutical companies say that we should.

 

Do you actually know what Homeopathy is?

 

Because in case you didn't know, Homeopathy is built on the notion of intentionally harming healthy individuals with various substances, noting the resulting effects, and then using repeated aqueous dilutions of a recorded substance that causes similar symptoms to treat the ones the patient is suffering with. If that wasn't absurd enough for you, the solution is diluted to the point where due to Avogadro's constant, any remote traces of the original substance are long gone.

 

Homeopathy's credibility is as dilute as the solutions they prescribe.



#38 DocM

DocM

    Neowinian Senior

  • 17,755 posts
  • Joined: 31-July 10
  • Location: Michigan

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:02

^ what he said. Homeopathy is junk medicine, period, and childhood leukemia IS very curable. True also is that chemo can make you feel nauseous etc., but it works in a great many cases.

#39 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 21,659 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:11

Well to be honest, they charge it because they can. They're for profit companies that care about profits. Yes a lot of money goes into research and testing, but they make a ton of money. Most of them have profit margins in excess of 25%. Is that a bad thing? Just depends on the way you look at it.

I don't have problem with western medicine at all, some of the advances made are amazing. I have a problem with doctors who are just around to shove medication down people's throats. Of course not all doctors are like this and some of them are amazing at what they do, but some are just in the business to make money.

I mean take my wife for example. Her cat died when she was 14/15 and so she was sad, school made her go see a psychiatrist who was all "oh god she has major depression, lets prescribe her anti-depressants" so she got prescribed them and took them. They made her an insomniac and when she told her "doctor" about them, what did the good doctor do? Rather than go "let's re-evaluate if you really need them, or let's try changing your meds to one that won't have that side effect on you", he just prescribed her ambien. So now she's completely dependent on sleeping pills and can no longer sleep without them, even if she stays up for nights. Sad thing? She never even really needed those anti-depressants because there's a big difference between being sad and being depressed and well she no longer takes them and she's been feeling a lot better / happier ever since. The sleeping meds however will be a lifelong thing, its just been so long that her doctor thinks that her body has "forgotten" how to naturally sleep. Her doctor has been slowly dosing her off them for over a year now so we'll see if that will help or not.

But that's one of the problems with western healthcare, over-prescription of tons of drugs to people who don't even need it. I think that there was a report a while back that said America consumed more anti-depressants and ADHD medication and just prescription medication in general than the rest of the world...combined.

 

What you're describing is a result of the American health system, if you can even call it that. 



#40 thomastmc

thomastmc

    Unofficial Attorney of Neowin

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Kansas City
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Lumia 928

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:14

True also is that chemo can make you feel nauseous etc., but it works in a great many cases.


Cannabis can help with that :)

#41 thomastmc

thomastmc

    Unofficial Attorney of Neowin

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Kansas City
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Lumia 928

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:21

This is an interesting article:

Mom swapped 3 year old son's chemo for cannabis therapy to treat leukemia.
 

Sierra swapped chemotherapy for cannabis therapy and has seen her son return to his old energetic self and his cancer go into remission. Her decision to use medical marijuana as treatment for her son's cancer has raised some eyebrows in the traditional medical community -- so much so, that one Colorado doctor reported Sierra to Human Services for refusing chemotherapy for Landon.

And research from a pair of scientists at California Pacific Medical Center in San Francisco suggests that CBD, the non-toxic, non-psychoactive compound found in the cannabis plant, could actually stop metastasis in many kinds of aggressive cancer.

http://www.huffingto..._n_4017985.html



#42 +_Alexander

_Alexander

    Neowinian

  • 1,187 posts
  • Joined: 21-January 13
  • Location: USA
  • OS: W8.1 u1
  • Phone: Nokia 521

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:25

Certain religious sects are a danger to themselves.

 

That is all that there is to it.



#43 tiagosilva29

tiagosilva29

    Looking for a job in Lisbon

  • 12,213 posts
  • Joined: 08-May 04

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:44

I knew I should have brought my tinfoil hat into this thread.



#44 HawkMan

HawkMan

    Neowinian Senior

  • 21,659 posts
  • Joined: 31-August 04
  • Location: Norway
  • Phone: Noka Lumia 1020

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:52

This is an interesting article:

Mom swapped 3 year old son's chemo for cannabis therapy to treat leukemia.
 

 

Well it's anecdotal evidence at best, a single case among many, he had already started aggressive chemo so most likely chemo was the cure, he was also very young which helps with the treatment and could have been one of the very few who has a body that naturally can cure or help itself cure cancer. 



#45 thomastmc

thomastmc

    Unofficial Attorney of Neowin

  • 1,329 posts
  • Joined: 18-July 12
  • Location: Kansas City
  • OS: Windows 8.1 Pro
  • Phone: Lumia 928

Posted 30 November 2013 - 07:56

Well it's anecdotal evidence at best, a single case among many, he had already started aggressive chemo so most likely chemo was the cure, he was also very young which helps with the treatment and could have been one of the very few who has a body that naturally can cure or help itself cure cancer.


Did you miss the part about scientific research indicating that CBD may actually stop the metastasis of many types of aggressive cancer?

 

Of course, the boy's case is anecdotal. I wouldn't recommend not undergoing chemo. Still, I would recommend some type of cannabis treatment as well. It is obviously even more beneficial than previously thought. And, that isn't anecdotal.