science blogger on alternative treat

Why are you posting a link like this in the alternative section?  Was this where you intended it to be?  This author sounds about as open minded as Rush Limbaugh.

I thought it was a very interesting article, and I found the author quite thoughtful.  I thought his comment that there isn't "alternative" medicine--only medicine that works and medicine that doesn't--was right on.  I don't think he was trying to exclude anything, but rather stating that when any "alternative" or new treatment is found to work--then it will be part of the medical arsenal--not something off on the side.  He stated that he would welcome any treatments which he believes would help his patients, and he seemed sincere in that sentiment.

Rose, thanks for posting this.

I think we all sometimes need to be reminded that this is the Alternative, Complementary and Holistic Treatment forum and, as Otter says, doesn't it behoove us all to be open-minded?

Linda

Mr. Orac is talking about ".....evidence-based medical care that could still possibly save her life." In being so affirmative, he is doing much better than most of our oncologists : they dream not of "saving" lives, as they keep on talking in terms of "life-extension," get wildly excited by "tumor-shrinkage" (which has nothing to do with overall survival), etc...

Congratulations to Mr. Orac, whoever that is.

As for the "evidence-based" part, if it is so "evidence-based," how come it took them 20 years to realize that Tamoxifen actually fuels HER+ tumors (instead of shrinking those, as they thought, thus happily feeding it to all for all that time). And how come this wonderful "evidence-based medicine" just discovered that chemotherapy does NOTHING (that is: NOTHING) for ER+, PR+, HER- tumors, thus resulting in much more harm than good in its applications to millions and millionss of women in the past 20 years also......before they finally resolved to discontinue it for those tumors.... But I suppose all this cannot be consider as harmful, since these huge blunders are curtesy of "conventional" medicine.

And perhaps Mr. Orac did not visit our very sad "Recurrence-Metastatic" thread here. Otherwise, he would have seen the thousands and thousands of women who landed in that category after doing ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING they were told.

Yes, we have been discussing these issues in the threads below, and in many others as well.

http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/79/topic/728689?page=2#post_1250478

http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/79/topic/729900?page=1#post_1249980

Actually, this was revealed about 3 years ago, with numerous press articles (such as the ones below) being published on that issue, and was pushed forward by none other than Dennis Slamon (the inventor of HERCEPTIN).

http://www.mdanderson.org/departments/newsroom/display.cfm?id=4B78FBD8-AFF7-469B-AC06BBE3C1A7B32F&method=displayFull&pn=9cd50d60-76be-11d4-aec300508bdcce3a

http://www.docguide.com/news/content.nsf/news/852571020057CCF68525714E0066D3EC?OpenDocument&c=&count=10&id=48dde4a73e09a969852568880078c249

This is just a few of the articles that were published on that.

Indeed, Twa: you are the voice of reason: one should ALWAYS be able to trust one's doctor (s). Except that in my case, for instance, my doctor had not EVEN provided me with either my Onco-DX results (low risk); or my PHISH test (no lymph nodes). Only she knows why. I personally suspect that she knows that if she would have told me about those on the outset, I might have questioned her chemo treatment. So she just said nothing.

After 5 out of 6 rounds, I decided to take a second opinion from one of the top oncologists in my area here, and that's when I found out (unlike my first oncologist, who did what she had decided to do surreptitiously in the background, this onc had been consulting with 2 other very prominent oncs in my area).

I mean: a second opinion, and even a third one (if one can afford those, of course) could not hurt, I think. After all: chemo is not just an innocent little treatment: that's why we are all required to sign a form stating that we clearly understand the 3% lifetime leukemia risk associated with it).

Also: the annieappleseedproject website is maintained by Ann Fonfa, a woman against cancer for women against cancer. Her site is, therefore, written in plain English (albeit by independent researchers). Ann has survived about 5 recurrences and is currently considered cancer-free.She must have been doing something right somewhere in her extensive research........................................

Floridalady, it is not the same tumor after recurrence. It is not even necessarily the same tumor, within the same tumor. These cells are highly unstable. They mutate even after being mutations themselves. This is why chemo can stop working even in the course of treatments. The same tumor can develop resistance to chemo after it is started.

And don't presume to tell me what I don't want to hear. You know nothing of me.

Yazmin, anyone who does not understand what their doctor is saying should question it until they reach satisfaction. Anyone who has any doubt about what their doctor says should seek a second and even third opinion. Why didn't you question your doctor? Instead you seem to malign doctors in general because you did not question your own and later came to believe their judgment was in error.

TWA,

How many biopsies have you had? I see your new on the site, with know dx info, and come straight to this section to attack. You obviously do not speak from experience. I've had eight different biopsies since my dx. AND EVERYONE ONE WAS THE SAME TUMOR.  Rarely does a tumor change to completely different receptor. It does happen but very rare.

Yes, sometime tumor's can change slightly after being exposed to different chemos. That why bc tumor are resistant to chemo this is a negative not a positive to show chemo is the fix all for bc.  I've been told my disease has stayed the same only very little changes after nine chemos.  Bottomline you have a recurrence no matter what your tumor is or has become with today tx options, they very rarely can get us back into remission. The tumor does not matter if the chemo's don't work. Nine chemo proved this to me time and time again, as for my other stage iv sisters we know chemo is not what will bring us back to cancer free or even stable disease. This is also why most the the research going on now is not about chemo but inhibitors. This is also why so many hormone positive ladies have a better prognoses.  They can be treated with something besides chemo.

As Deirdre noted...yes ask your doctor and get another opinion. Be prepared with knowledgable question that will let your doctor know he/his can talk to you and understand what he/she wants to discuss.  But do your own research on anything you will be doing too your body.  Check on any thread on this site and see there are many approaches to treatment.  This is by no means a exact science on how to treat any of us. Know the true advantages and risk with any treatment options. Most of us try and find a balance between both.  That why CAM medicine is becoming so popular with America's. That what we dicuss in this section.

Flalady

You just repeated what I already said in my post. 

As for changing cells in tumors.  Who the hell cares bottom line is it untreatable with chemo! Chemo is a band aid for short term life extension so what if the tumor changes.  Does not help your overall treatment options.  Treatment does not change because of tumor changes they still treat the receptor and not the tumor. This is the big problem with conventional medicine.

Flalady

Still want to know if you have/had breast cancer and treatment you were given.

There is only 20-25% chance chemo may work or delay recurrence.  There is NO cure for cancer. Ask your doctor.

Flalady

Hi Rose,

This piece was a good read.  Thanks.  However, I'd be selective of other contributors on that blog...I guess that's true anywhere though. Their anxiety over patient care put me in mind to similar issues such as refusal of blood transfusions or transplants or critical care unit decisions. 

The studies were especially interesting and the timeline added a dimension to the advances made by cancer research as well as their limits.

The efforts made by the researchers in Eugene Oregon were also appreciated.  If I'm not mistaken, Oregon has excellent holistic health centers.  I looked into some of them many years ago.  In my opinion, they strike a good balance.

I usually find that all good doctors are looking toward the same good outcomes, regardless of their philosophies. 

I've my feet in both camps.  

I find the term Alternative Medicine misleading and polarizing.  It's not an either/or decision to me as much as a complimentary and supportive decision.  

Many of "Alternative" therapies are built on centuries old knowledge of plants used for both food and medicine by societies that implemented these practices as part of their daily life.  I think this lifestyle of healthy diet and exercise makes a big difference.  Whether it's food or mental attitude, the body can adapt to change over time, but not so to trauma and shock (recall post traumatic stress syndrome).

Benefits of a healthy lifestyle are unarguable in any field of science.  Many of the medicines of "Traditional" medicine are founded in the same chemistry...often copies of nature.  Hospital zones request 'quiet'.....patients seek, peaceful places to rest and recover......not the opposite.  So in this fact there is also a recognition of the medical benefits of peace (yoga, ti chi, ci gong, meditation, reiki).

I think too that the word 'cure' gets thrown around to easily sometimes.  It's semantics.  Cure in the sense of heal without recurrence of disease and without further treatment?  or...Cure in the sense of remission for extended periods of time?    

If there is discourse, it is usually in the measure....how "much"...and the absence of verifiable results through clinical studies....the 'proof'.   Although it's not hard to see researchers have begun to look harder at vitamins and minerals as evidenced by the Vitamin D theories of late....probably because of the close proximity to the DNA studies that are abounding.

Western medicine is not all that old a science in the scheme of things.  Someone recently told me it was in the 1800s that they were still letting blood.  I worked in a the first hospital of the country and the original operating arena is preserved, along with the tools and surgeon's notes.  Talk about interesting!  ..... and crude.

My feel, especially after the crash course in cancer, is that I'll live longer thanks to surgeons who cut out the tumors and checked the nodes, radiated, and gave me that damn Arimidex.  I'll live longer too for eating healthy, exercising and not taking life too seriously every minute.  And I'll die one day because we all do.  I'd like that time to be as peaceful as possible...whenever it is.

Soprano -- I really like yours too.  Please say hello to your mom for me and wish her well.