Simple question?

Thread Rating:

January 24th, 2019 at 3:15:58 PM permalink
petroglyph
Member since: Aug 3, 2014
Threads: 22
Posts: 4473
Quote: rxwine
Depends on what we're talking about. Treatable is the word I used.
That kind of surprised me, I thought you were in the med industry. All cancers are "treatable".
Everyone gets thrown from the plane to maintain altitude
January 24th, 2019 at 6:43:21 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 140
Posts: 8449
St. Jude's is a fairly well-known children's cancer treatment center in the US.

Quote:
Clinical Research - As late as the 1950s, a diagnosis of pediatric cancer was considered an almost-certain death sentence. At the time, survival rates were as low as 4 percent. Due to research conducted since then—at institutions such as St. Jude and elsewhere—survival rates for many types of pediatric cancer have reached highs of 80 percent or more in the United States.



https://www.stjude.org/research/departments-divisions/oncology/cancer-survivorship.html
Vote smart and honest, not Trump the butt plug
January 25th, 2019 at 7:23:00 AM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 11
Posts: 1719
Quote: rxwine
St. Jude's is a fairly well-known children's cancer treatment center in the US.




https://www.stjude.org/research/departments-divisions/oncology/cancer-survivorship.html


Thanks for help making my point rxwine. St. Jude's, as all the cancer industry does, likes to quote the survival rate since it looks so good. The data below is from the National Cancer Institute.

"Between 1999 and 2014, the cancer death rate dropped the most for 1- to-4-year-olds (a 26% drop), followed by that for 15- to 19-year-olds (a 22% drop), 10- to 14-year-olds (a 19% drop), and 5- to 9-year-olds (a 14% drop)"

Now a decrease in the death rate of 20% is great but much different than the spin they put out comparing 4% to 80% which would be 2000%. Everybody has an agenda and spins the data to make their point. All the children's hospital are heavily donor dependent and want to present good news stories for their donors. I am not against good news stories but I don't believe in hiding the truth and I have donated lots to my local children's hospital.
"but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin
January 25th, 2019 at 9:59:25 AM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 140
Posts: 8449
So, according to your original answer, no one should bother seeking treatment? Or what? I don't understand why you answered that way unless you don't believe in any cancer treatment at any stage.
Vote smart and honest, not Trump the butt plug
January 25th, 2019 at 12:53:08 PM permalink
kenarman
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 11
Posts: 1719
Quote: rxwine
So, according to your original answer, no one should bother seeking treatment? Or what? I don't understand why you answered that way unless you don't believe in any cancer treatment at any stage.


My main point is that we are often not given good information by the cancer industry. Once the "experts" have staked their careers on a certain assumption they will not acknowledge that they may have been misinformed when then started their careers. I am not sure that spending large sums of money to delay the inevitable death for 6 months is good use of public funds. If it is your own money fill your boots. When we are fed incorrect information on cure rates that we confuse with survival rates people make different decisions than they would might not with the correct information.

Another example is the PSA test for prostrate cancer which is universally pushed by doctors. For every 1000 tests 1 person is treated and saved (this sounds not bad right) the part that is never mentioned is that 1 person also dies from complications due to treatment from a FALSE POSITIVE RESULT. That means that PSA tests produce no net gain in lives. False positive rate for the test is about 30% but we muddle along thinking anything is better than nothing.

It likely all stems from the s****y job we do with death in North America. We don't want to accept our own mortality which means we can't accept the mortality of family or friends either, so we often end up on tilling at windmills by travelling to Mexico or other countries chasing the latest 'miracle treatment' that our own doctor can't provide. With this attitude we then force our own doctors into providing treatments that they often know are pointless.

To directly answer your original question. No I don't believe all cancer treatments are pointless but I do believe that much of the treatment is either unnecessary or not effective.
"but if you make yourselves sheep, the wolves will eat you." Benjamin Franklin
April 22nd, 2019 at 8:35:20 PM permalink
rxwine
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 140
Posts: 8449
April 23rd, 2019 at 10:19:36 AM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 134
Posts: 19447
Quote: rxwine
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/more-americans-than-ever-are-leaving-the-catholic-church-after-the-sex-abuse-scandal-heres-why/ar-BBWblKW?ocid=spartanntp


"a Gallup poll published in March found that 37% of U.S. Catholics are considering leaving the church because of the sex abuse crisis and the church’s handling of it."

Their conscience gives them little choice.
How can you remain a part of something
so corrupt and rotten to it's core as the
Church. It's bad enough you have priests
violating kids. The kicker is the rest of the
Church pretends it's not happening, that's
why leaving is the only alternative.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
April 23rd, 2019 at 7:38:05 PM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 64
Posts: 6942
Bob the Church is not corrupt and rotten to it's core. The Church is certainly not pretending nothing is happening. Have you been paying attention to all the local, national, and worldwide meetings taking place to address this horrible crisis. I challenge you to show me any institution that has as rigorous process to volunteer as the Catholic Church.
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (
April 23rd, 2019 at 8:44:55 PM permalink
Evenbob
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 134
Posts: 19447
Quote: FrGamble
Bob the Church is not corrupt and rotten to it's core. h.


You think the cover up for decades
of child abuse didn't go all the
way to the Vatican? Of course it
did. The only reason it's in the
open now is because of the press.
It would all still be a deep dark secret
if it hadn't been publicly exposed.
The Church had to be dragged
kicking and screaming into dealing
with it. Hardly a good recommendation
for the Church's ethical character.
If you take a risk, you may lose. If you never take a risk, you will always lose.
April 24th, 2019 at 4:15:26 AM permalink
FrGamble
Member since: Oct 24, 2012
Threads: 64
Posts: 6942
Thank God these things are now in the open. The scourge of child sexual abuse has long festered in society and in the Church and nobody would talk about it. The psychological understanding of these sins was not correct and it was so damn ugly that everyone in the schools, in the Church, and in our families hid it away hoping against hope in the resilience of kids and not realizing the lives destroyed. It is a deep dark thing. Can we both agree that we are glad it is no longer a secret in the Church or society? Can we also agree that we are glad the Church is doing something and we wish more people and institutions would do something as well?
“It is with the smallest brushes that the artist paints the most exquisitely beautiful pictures.” (