"The End of Illness" Dr David Agus - oncologist of Steve Jobs

I admit I have not verified these passages (book on order) but I want to share..... I can't imagine that anyone hasn't doubts about the efficacy of chemo or radiation. For people who have tumors to shrink, a visible prognosis is possible, but for those who were operated and told to be "NED", I think therapies presented as preventative open more questions of doubts as to necessity. I was told that I need to do both chemo (EC + weekly Taxol), plus radiation, plus hormone therapy. They are throwing all their guns my way and I always said prior to dx that if ever I were do have to do anything of the sort, I wouldn't choose chemo. How ideas can differ once the problem becomes present.

I came across these passages on a site dedicated to holistic healing (and in particular with cannabis). I must read up to see them in the context of the whole book as opposed to extractions but I can't help but wonder....

On my team I have a wonderful holistic oncologist who only became holistic after many years in the classic clinical setting. I asked her what she would do if confronted with a dx and she said she would be very hesitant to do chemo because she believes the "cure" lies elsewhere however, because studies proving differently aren't in existence she would probably go ahead with the chemo.

My gut tells me not to do the chemo but I fear having regrets.

And reading this puts a million more doubts my way.... I'm getting my port on Monday with first chemo to start on Jan 2.

Anyone have thoughts?

"Few excerpts from "The End of Illness" by Dr David Agus, Oncologist who also treated Steve Jobs and Jobs reviewed this book before dying and gave it the title which is just rhetoric to catch readers' attention:

"Making matters worse, when cancer is exposed to chemotherapy, drug-resistant mutants can escape. In other words, just as resistant strains of bacteria can result from antibiotic use, anticancer drugs can produce resistant cancer cells" (Page 37)

"One of the hallmarks of cancer is unstable DNA, so when chemotherapy drugs bind to DNA, they can cause cancer just as radiation can cause cancer by mutating the genome. This helps explains why survivors of breast cancer, for instance, can suffer from leukemia later in life due to the chemotherapy they received to cure their breast cancer. They made a trade of one illness from another but gained more years of qualify life in the interim." (Page 39)

"Let us consider one of the most fundamental clinical trials in cancer, which was published in the New England Journal of Medicine in February of 2009. The researchers ... studied women who were premenopausal with breast cancer. This is a particularly nasty type of breast cancer. The women had what's called hormone-receptor-sensitive breast cancer, which meant that their tumors grew when exposed to the female sex hormone estrogen. Thus,standard treatment often entails anti-hormonal treatment to combat the cancer feeding estrogen. After the surgical removal of their cancer, the researchers then randomly created two groups from the 1,803 women. Twice a year, half were given a placebo (a dummy injection) and antihormonal therapy, and the other half received anti hormonal therapy and a drug called zoledronic acid, which builds bone. Marketed in the United States under the brand name Reclast and Zometa, zoledronic acid is used to treat the bone disease osteoporosis. The result?"

"Those who received the bone-builder experienced a reduction in their recurrence of the cancer by 36 percent. Here is the stunning part: this particular drug doesn't even touch the cancer. This case demonstrates that if you change the soil (breast cancer classically metastasizes to bone), the seed (the breast cancer cell) doesn't grow as well. The drug changed these women's systems, thereby having a marked effect on their cancer. 5 years after diagnosis, more than 98 percent of these breast cancer patients were alive - and the other stunner is that this outcome was achieved without chemotherapy." (Page 84-85)

"Despite chemotherapy's being a widely used treatment for cancer, nobody has ever shown that most chemotherapy actually touches a cancer cell. It's never been proven."

"Chemotherapy clearly benefits cancer patients, yet frequently we can't explain why." (Page 86-87)

"I will give you one more example that epitomizes the complexity of the human body. If I prescribe to women withbreast cancer a drug called paclitaxel (brand name Taxol) every 3 weeks, which is the standard today, about40 percent of them with metastatic cancer will have a great response to the drug. A "great response" here means that those women will show a 50 percent shrinkage in their tumor. The cancer will then come back - the cancer "recurs", and the patient "relapses" - and I'll give those same women paclitaxel every week at a different dosage instead of every 3 weeks. 30 percent will respond. The cancer will return for a 3rd tour, and I'll administer paclitaxel over 96 hours by continuous infusion, and 20 or 30 percent will respond. I cannot tell you that the drug is working by the same mechanism in all the 3 scenarios. It's not. We have no idea of the mechanism. Chemotherapy may be changing the environment in a way that disrupts that complex body system, just as building bone disrupted those women's system and reduced their breast cancer's recurrence. Just as Lance's platinum-based drug reversed his fate." (Page 92-93)"