How can we make this truly safe, supportive, judgement-free?

Now that we are discussing rights, laws, may I briefly digress to the topic of rules?

Rules by BCO. The terms and conditions read, in part:

You acknowledge that all members are permitted only one verified member identification, and that operating multiple accounts, even with unique email addresses, or a unique computer, is not permitted.  If a user is banned from the Discussion Boards, s/he is prohibited from creating a different account. 

For more on the community rules, go here:

http://community.breastcancer.org/help/rules

athena, are you meaning me? I changed my pic because when i was writing to chillipaddi i felt that my pic of my daughter and i laughing on the beach in bikinis was inappropriate. I dont have any pics of me that are nice, i look sick and tired, so im hard pressed to find one that suits. edited to add: only have one membership!

Not aimed at you at all, that's-life.

Glad impositive is ok.....now if only we could hear back from chilli.

Not sure if this thread is going anywhere. Shall we just close the thread?

Momine: I really want to question all the alt therapies too! I have wanted to for 2 years, get our teeth stuck into dissecting the studies, share any successes or failures without fear of 'i told you so's'...but most of our PRECIOUS time has been spent defending the right to discuss them!..I have been driven into a quiet corner, sometimes i try to open discussion on a study, or a therapy, but only a couple of members are willing to openly discuss these alt therapies. You will see that many, many people read the information, or posts, all hoping (as they say) to find info that may help, but not many get involved in the discussion. It can be isolating to be branded an 'alt' person. Its crazy, because so far i have done the conventional route. Much time has been wasted. I admire chillipaddi greatly, for standing tall, loving us all enough to share her journey despite probable ridicule. I wish people would understand that conventional therapy doesnt offer us much and we need to discuss helping ourselves as much as possible. How to get the message across that this forum is not a threat to conventional wisdom, but a potential help for our health, is the million dollar question.

Mods: closing threads merely leads to new ones. Better get it all out here, IMO. These topics/issues are longstanding and won't just go away. Closing a thread is childish and does not solve anything. It just leads to more bad feelings and unresolved issues. The adult thing is to work through this.

I am out of this thread as stated before, unless someone addresses me personally. I will then have the courtesy to reply as I did yesterday

Here's an excerpt from Ralph Marston ~ The Daily Motivator.  I thought we could all use it

Stop waiting for everything to be perfect. Start making good and meaningful use of all you have.

Let yourself be driven forward by your highest dreams. Feel the fears and learn from them, but don't let yourself be held back by them.

Let go of your need to control those around you. Experience the power and effectiveness that come from controlling and disciplining yourself.

Live intentionally, on purpose, with the utmost sincerity and authenticity. Live this day and every day with the excellence you know you deserve.

Ralph Marston - The Daily Motivator

I think as long as the people who participate in a discussion are interested in the issue at hand and in being supportive without ulterior motives or handles, this can be productive. I think this thread has already been helpful.

I am very science-based in my medical decisions. I prefer to phrase it thus than to say "conventional" or "alt." I think science-based is the best way I can describe myself especially in the world of cancer. The problem is that I doubt the science of some conventional bc therapies (so do researchers - so I am not alone), and believe that some approaches which are alt. do have some science, although it remains unstudied.

However, my personal alt. choices wouldn't really involve what is discussed (such as herbs and diet, or yoga or prayer). I tend to think of things like immunotherapy, hyperthermia and other procedures whose efficacy for bc is still unknown as alt. measures I would consider if I reached stage IV.

I consider exercise complementary for me - not alt. I don't follow any dietary plan. I do take supplements (Vit. D3, co-enzyme Q 10).

My main therapy for cancer consisted of (1) surgery (very conventional), (2) hormone therapy as far as I was able to tolerate it -which was not very far because I almost lost my life thanks to Tamox. and Lupron- and (3) stopping smoking. There is great science to the benefits surgery for bc. There is less science available tying smoking and BC, but stopping smoking has a lot of science to recommend it generally. 

I thin the black/white distinction between what is "conventional" and what is not is slowly disappearing.

Most people use "alt." therapies including prayer (as defined by researchers, that is one alt. therapy - and we should remember that all treatment is partly belief-based) along with conventional. I think the definition of alt. being INSTEAD of conventional needs to be seriously revised. Most people, when faced with deadly illnesses, will try to have their fingers in as many pots as possible, using a complex set of algorithms. For some, it goes like this: "I will have chemo and if that fails, I will pray." For others, "I will do the Budwig protocol and, if that fails, surgery."

I challenge anyone here to say they don't have "Plan B" that is somewhat "alt." That is human, understandable, and it's what we are all doing. Hey, I resigned from a recent job partly because I was afraid the immense stress would cause my cancer to come back! Where's the science in that? I don't know, but it resonated with me nonetheless.

Hi everyone, I think whatever treatment or "alt " you have if you don't believe it will work it won't. Call me stupid but I believe our mind plays a big part in what happen's to our body.

I'm not saying the mind can cure Cancer but it plays a big part in it. Many times I have read people giving up and others fighting for many years.

A doctor told me " never give up hope that's when shit happens"

Yes you could. Any treatment modality that requires you to submit to a drug induced 'state of not being' while people, albeit skilled, remove large amounts of your tissue, cauterize, stitch or staple you closed and then requires you to take Rx analgesics is probably reasonably construed as dangerous. The first risk, while remote, is not regaining consciousness, either dead or vegetative, the second is damage to you larynx because of the induction of the anesthesia and intubation, sometimes anesthesia doesn't work. There are apocryphal stories of those who wake up during surgery, but because they are incubated and sedated cannot cry out. Then there is surgeon skill levels. They did not all graduate at the top of their classes. You have had surgery or thought about it. You could probably figure out many more risks, some of them are as horrific as what Chillipadi has had to go through.

My point is all contemplated treatmentsfor CANCER carry both risks and benefits. The natural history of the disease, untreated, quite often is worse than the treatments. But not always, sometimes the best course for an individual is no treatment. Each one of us has to determine what kinds of risks for what benefit we are willing to take.

Yes you could. Any treatment modality that requires you to submit to a drug induced 'state of not being' while people, albeit skilled, remove large amounts of your tissue, cauterize, stitch or staple you closed and then requires you to take Rx analgesics is probably reasonably construed as dangerous. The first risk, while remote, is not regaining consciousness, either dead or vegetative, the second is damage to you larynx because of the induction of the anesthesia and intubation, sometimes anesthesia doesn't work. There are apocryphal stories of those who wake up during surgery, but because they are incubated and sedated cannot cry out. Then there is surgeon skill levels. They did not all graduate at the top of their classes. You have had surgery or thought about it. You could probably figure out many more risks, some of them are as horrific as what Chillipadi has had to go through.

My point is all contemplated treatmentsfor CANCER carry both risks and benefits. The natural history of the disease, untreated, quite often is worse than the treatments. But not always, sometimes the best course for an individual is no treatment. Each one of us has to determine what kinds of risks for what benefit we are willing to take.

Kay, I so agree with you about not all surgeons graduating at the top of their class. Thank gawd I have a family doctor that is in the know about who's a good surgeon and who's not. When my son needed hand surgery, he advised we would have to wait a while for the best, but highly recommended we do. I was willing to wait "for the best". Nobody's touching me or any member of my family who got a "C" in medical school. Lots of horrible surgeons and anesthesiologists out there. One must be careful in their choices.

Ed for sp