Sometimes you're lucky, sometimes not.
That's the thing about cancer - it often lurks somewhere in the background even after you've been pronounced clear. Prognoses are normally based on 5 year survival rates - in other words, what percentage of cancerees will still be alive after 5 years. Obviously a 50% and above chance is great. For advanced ovarian cancer, it is more often projected at around 25%.
But, this means that one has to decide during those 5 yearswhether you're going to have follow-up treatments if required, or not.
There is such sadness in friends being told that there is nothing further conventional medical practice can do for them except for palliative care, mainly pain management. Two friends this week. That's when all the 'alternative' advisors jump out of the woodwork. At least 60% of my acquaintances suggested alternative practices, mainly diet and supplement based. A couple recommended hope-inspiring reading.
[Haha-ha - is that what I'm doing here? No, I don't think so.]
I'm trying to sort out thoughts about what to do when you're told, sorry, there's nothing further we can do. Let me tell about two different people.
A - throat cancer identified in a rather lonely person who lived a solitary life on a solitary farm. She refused conventional treatment and surgery despite a positive prognosis, opting instead for health supplements, pure water and fruit. She passed away about 5 or 6 months after initial diagnosis.
B - a stage 4 lung cancer is identified, prognosis negative, and the man is informed that conventional medicine can only offer palliative care. Surgery is not an option because the lung fluid contains cancer. Patient still in a state of shock - this news takes weeks to work through. Decisions not yet made. One's whole perspective on life is shaken.
So, some people offer love, comfort and support, others offer advice, mainly about fighting, never giving up, taking alternative wonder cures (like a diet totally made up of prunes) and supplements.
Which one would you be? What would you do if told that chemotherapy would improve your prognosis, but would leave you tired and (as I found) lacking in creativity and determination. Meaning that quality of life and ability to work creatively would be negatively impacted.
Would you you accept that, knowing that you'll live longer; or would you rush after a couple of the multitude of wonder cures (believe me, there are hundreds!) that often work slowly (often too slowly as with the woman above) and leave you out of pocket; or would you sit back, draw your family near (symbolically), and enjoy and appreciate as much as you can while you can?
Religious people have their own take on this. I'm not one of them. But, where religion is often based on fear of death, or 'life' after death, agnostics and atheists are not concerned about that, possibly allowing for a fearless exit.
I'm not against alternative practise per se, but prefer clearly outlined treatment, and then I can follow up with supplements once the cancer is under control.
My feeling is - if doing research and enveloping yourself in the hope provided by alternatives keeps you positively occupied, go for it. I personally believe my oncologist - an avid researcher and a person who still treats patients, not clients - would be super-delighted to use any alternative, as long as she knew it worked. Thusfar, she has not found one where the 'proof' is compelling or even slightly convincing.
As for me - at present my treatment has had exceptionally good results and I feel great. Can start to rebuild muscle tissue that was eaten up by chemotherapy. And I eat and drink whatever I feel like, except I avoid sugar where I can. Did that anyway BC (before cancer) because it made me feel bad.
I occasionally feel twinges that don't bode too well, but then, I knew from the start that my stage three level three cancer has a poor prognosis seen on a five year survival rate. But five years can be a long time of you're in your sixties anyway. I'm going to make the most of it ---- big smile!
That's the thing about cancer - it often lurks somewhere in the background even after you've been pronounced clear. Prognoses are normally based on 5 year survival rates - in other words, what percentage of cancerees will still be alive after 5 years. Obviously a 50% and above chance is great. For advanced ovarian cancer, it is more often projected at around 25%.
But, this means that one has to decide during those 5 yearswhether you're going to have follow-up treatments if required, or not.
There is such sadness in friends being told that there is nothing further conventional medical practice can do for them except for palliative care, mainly pain management. Two friends this week. That's when all the 'alternative' advisors jump out of the woodwork. At least 60% of my acquaintances suggested alternative practices, mainly diet and supplement based. A couple recommended hope-inspiring reading.
[Haha-ha - is that what I'm doing here? No, I don't think so.]
I'm trying to sort out thoughts about what to do when you're told, sorry, there's nothing further we can do. Let me tell about two different people.
A - throat cancer identified in a rather lonely person who lived a solitary life on a solitary farm. She refused conventional treatment and surgery despite a positive prognosis, opting instead for health supplements, pure water and fruit. She passed away about 5 or 6 months after initial diagnosis.
B - a stage 4 lung cancer is identified, prognosis negative, and the man is informed that conventional medicine can only offer palliative care. Surgery is not an option because the lung fluid contains cancer. Patient still in a state of shock - this news takes weeks to work through. Decisions not yet made. One's whole perspective on life is shaken.
So, some people offer love, comfort and support, others offer advice, mainly about fighting, never giving up, taking alternative wonder cures (like a diet totally made up of prunes) and supplements.
Which one would you be? What would you do if told that chemotherapy would improve your prognosis, but would leave you tired and (as I found) lacking in creativity and determination. Meaning that quality of life and ability to work creatively would be negatively impacted.
Would you you accept that, knowing that you'll live longer; or would you rush after a couple of the multitude of wonder cures (believe me, there are hundreds!) that often work slowly (often too slowly as with the woman above) and leave you out of pocket; or would you sit back, draw your family near (symbolically), and enjoy and appreciate as much as you can while you can?
Religious people have their own take on this. I'm not one of them. But, where religion is often based on fear of death, or 'life' after death, agnostics and atheists are not concerned about that, possibly allowing for a fearless exit.
I'm not against alternative practise per se, but prefer clearly outlined treatment, and then I can follow up with supplements once the cancer is under control.
My feeling is - if doing research and enveloping yourself in the hope provided by alternatives keeps you positively occupied, go for it. I personally believe my oncologist - an avid researcher and a person who still treats patients, not clients - would be super-delighted to use any alternative, as long as she knew it worked. Thusfar, she has not found one where the 'proof' is compelling or even slightly convincing.
As for me - at present my treatment has had exceptionally good results and I feel great. Can start to rebuild muscle tissue that was eaten up by chemotherapy. And I eat and drink whatever I feel like, except I avoid sugar where I can. Did that anyway BC (before cancer) because it made me feel bad.
 |
| Young and having fun |
