Conventional vs. Alternative vs. Complimentary Treatment

ladies,

Let's not devolve into the same arguments. The op asked a question regarding head to head stats for conventional vs. alternative tx. He also made the same post o

June, get that feeling from my onc sometimes. If I am nervous about SEs or if I ask about a certain non-standard treatment he will do this chuckle that sounds like "there you go again, trying to cheat". I want to do VERO radiation in FL and they think may be elligible but just need an MRI to make the final determination. I emailed my onc and his reply was not simply for an experimental treatment and not without speaking with this person who allegedly wants hm to order it. there was more to it than that and it read as though he was really pissed at me! I am used to his attitude towards alt/complimentary and even standard stuff in a dfferent order, but the whole rest of it was just really strange and disappointing. I am still not sure what to think about it.

Sorry that was unrelated but what June said struck a chord and don't think Ben is coming back anyway. just to clarify, have not had that feeling from any of you here, just the dr. 

Perhaps this is true of some oncologists, but not all. The key is to find one who is more open to complementary options. Of course, this is not easy if you live in an area with few choices, so traveling can be worth it. My first mo, would not have strayed even a millimeter from protocol but my current mo is wonderful. Both she and my second opinion mo laid out two tx paths, one with chemo, one without. I was the ultimate decision maker and they patiently answered my questions and provided me with whatever data/stats were pertinent to my situation. My mo knows about the supplements I take without poo pooing them. My medical center offers yoga for cancer patients, nutrition classes, a weekly farmers market etc. So, not all are "good soldiers".

Thanks to Momine for reminding us that, at the heart of Ben's long post, was a request for statistics that show the efficacy of alternative treatment.

Unfortunately there are are no reliable stats because patients whose medical treatment fails end up at alternative practitioners hoping for a cure. And oncologists like mine see new patients regularly who've started with alternative treatments and now require the full oncological regime if they are to have any chance of survival. I'm not aware of a study that examines these common situations.

What is clear is that, depending on our BC types, stages and grades, statistics show that varying percentages of us who go down the medical road will be around in X number of years. These stats can be found on this site.

If someone can point to the statistics on the various alternative treatment efficacy rates, please post them.

I pray one day soon we won't have to make difficult treatment decisions. Chemotherapy/hormone therapy, Radiation, Mastectomy will be history and treatment will be simple and safe. No more statistics and debating.

Thanks Momine, I am lucky I was able to find a holistic doc who is also a peds oncologist and he has helped me to come up with some strategies. I really like him and he explains everything to me and draws pictures to explain how things work, mechanism of action etc. It is self pay but I think it's worth it because my onc is so rigid. They both work for the same hospital so I am not sure yet how that will work out but so far it's ok. I am finding that I have a really hard time making treatment decisions and when I try to get opinions it's extremely frustrating because they are either like my onc where the answer to everything is no, or they are wishy washy and say it's up to me, or they wll say "what do you think?" and then only after  I make the decision will they say "I think that's agood idea". geez it's like pulling teeth and I get s mentally exhausted! I do understand the reason behind it being liabilty but it's not right that a doctor is not even allowed to give you an opinion. When the onc wrote that email reply to mhe copied the holistic doc and the radonc that  I had seen once. saw her yesterday and wanted to see what she thought about the VERO ad she said that even though it would treeat the lesions there is no guarantee that there might not still be cancer cells elsewhere that did not show up yet. OMG NO KIDDING!  I have told them both in person and in reply to the email that I had no intention of stopping the systemic therapy. Complete waste of time. I am finally realizing that wrenn is right, no point talking to them about anything they do not do themselves. I will just have to do my appointments and then research exhaustively.

Well, if we haven't scared Ben away, my advise to him is to be supportive no matter what kind of therapy his girlfriend chooses, to respect her choices-and they have to be and will be her choices, not his, despite his best intentions.

One of the most important things we can do is to believe in our treatment choices and one of the most important things our partners can do is be supportive of our choices.

While it is admirable for Ben to seek advice here and support (our partners need support), his girlfriend will need to do the research on her own, as many of us, those who don't just do whatever the doctor says, have done. He writes his girlfriend is very smart and determined to figure out the best treatments for herself. His job, as I see it, is to support her.

Personally, I think it's a horrible and hard thing to do. I don't envy my spouse for the position he's found himself in since my diagnosis, but I am so grateful for his willingness to support my choices, even when he's not always sure they are the right ones. This is my advice to Ben, support your partner's choices, don't blow holes in them, remind yourself she is smart and competent and the most important thing you can actually DO for her is to be supportive.

Kayb, that does seem to be to the best "evidence" one can hope for in this area: "I can't find anything I think is reliable enough to say it will help, but I don't think it will hurt you so go ahead and try it." This does, of course, pose a problem, because anything that actually does anything is also likely to have some sort of SEs. In other words, if there is no potential harm or downside at all, it is unlikely that the substance, whatever it is, does much of anything.

Kayb, I agree that it is great that your doctor will take the question seriously and do the research. It is also great that you have improved your health and well-being with these approaches.

I do not mean that something HAS to have bad SEs to be useful. I mean that, usually, if a supplement has real action in the body, there is also usually some potential for harm. Vitamin D, for example, can be toxic if you OD, so someone taking large doses should have vit D levels monitored.