|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:51 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
What do you care about surgery to your genitals? You already advocate impairing the ability to have an erection and experience sex by avulsing thr foreskin. The National Health Survery of 1994 shows that circumcised men have a higher rate of erectile disfunction; the negative effects of circumcision increase with age.
So, there really is no reason not to happlily submit to the knife, if you can't stand being anatomically complete in any case.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Baniadam on 06:14 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
What do you expect? I think it's (he) a man! :P
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:44 AM September 14th, 2005 EST (#19)
|
|
|
|
|
In my religion, all the men get "inverse circumcisions": the foreskin is left intact, but the penile core is removed.
That reduces penile cancer by 100%, and it obviates any problem with penile shrinkage due to prostate cancer surgery. So you should really go for that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:10 AM September 14th, 2005 EST (#20)
|
|
|
|
|
I should say that in my religion, all the men who don't believe in my god get inverse circumcisions, in which the penile core is removed, but the foreskin remains.
Expression of religious code in these
United States must never be abridged!
And therefore I unto my fellow men
declaim: that God revealed this covenant:
to inverse circumcise the infidels
and apostates who shun the Holy way!
And revelation cannot be denied--
impervious to scientific thought
sufficient in itself, in pride of place
transcending common morals, God's command!
Fanatic though we are, we close our ears
and cite the Holy scripture in defense:
our God commands we inverse circumcise.
To those who disagree: this is God's will!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 09:33 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#11)
|
|
|
|
|
Of course alternative medicine as it was known in the past as normal medicine (you know, before the scientific method, peer review, statistical methods, etc), never was able to get our average life expectancy above 30.
of course, today we think it works well. we like to think that there is a conspiracy around every corner. however, in this case the conspiracy only makes sense to people that dont know better, and dont want to know better (this is about when they will pipe up and throw all kinds of bullshit non peer review (and not conspiracy sanctioned) inforamation).
the truth is that most of this stuff is NOT effective. you would not want to trade all the classical medicine away for "alternative medicine"
by far it hurts and kills many people. like a friend of mine. said he had an ulcer. i told him to get to the doctor and get checked out for H pylori bacter and get a round of antibiotics. oh.. he said, antibiotics hurt "this, this and this". i said, yes, but that that and that heals and what you have doesnt, AND leads to cancer and other conditions. invariably he didnt go. he started working out to reduce the big gut he was getting from having to constantly snack with milks and cheeses... not to mention that he had the great answer from alternative medicine. eat 'good bacteria'. problem was, that i showed him a study in which they just started studying the flora and fauna to see how it all works (which points out that they dont know the good from the bad bacteria! all the health alternative med people were doing were saying there is a lot of it in the gut, and it doestn kill, so it must be the good bacteria. alternatice medicine needs no more in order to invent a new med or use!!!)
i told him and his wife that he should see a doctor before working out since he had a pretty big gut (from acedopholis and cheeses and shit - all the time NOT WANTING MAINSTREAM MEDICINE)
well... his wife kissed him good night and went up to bed while he was walking on a slow mill and listing to his talk radio. when she woke up, he wasnt in bed. you see, a short time after she left him, he had a heart attack, and no one was there to help. she was devastated. she bought him the treadmill. she and he never went to traditional medicine (which would have checked him out - they were wealthy, so there was no issue there other than the ideology of alternative medicine).
its a shame. there was no reason for him to suffer for all that time. there was no reason for him to drop of a heart attack... and i lost two friends that day. that man... and his wife, who could never look at me and not remember that i told them, warned them, and they had all the answers (not that i have all the answers, i dont, but i am not dumb enough to forgoe the very technology that allowed my grandmother to live to 97 and have a good life!)
the funny thing is that your thinking is very faulty. natural does not equal good. in fact there is no such thing as un-natural. everything is natural, or it dont exist. mans constructions are no more unnatural than a beavers dam, a weaver birds nest, or a large termite mound. we know more. that doesnt make it unnatural.
note that those that toute this alternative stuff would not be able to make such an easy living if they actually had to do the work behind it. think about it. 16 years of school is so expensive and messy, and you have all those tests and stuff. you might not make it. wasted money. why not take that tuition. get a pill forming machine or capsule loader. buy bulk plant material. oh, need a cure... well just pull out a bunch of old texts and see what didnt work in the 13th century. claim they 'used it for this' (ignore effacacy), then mix it with lots of other herbs or stuff with active ingredients that may or may not contraindicate (thats science for fuck you up bad because they dont go together). get a catchy label... in fact copy the sterile labeling of real meds (for we know that your ligitimacy is not in question, so you dont really need to look like real meds to get that extra cache of 'working'). you get some lawyers, so they can help write copy to avoid actually making any real claim. oh, and even better! tell people that its way to strong for people with little problems. charge a few 1000 times more than its worth, set them up on subscription. oh, want to expand. great... get a vat of water, maybe 20,000 gallons... and then add one drop of material to it. or do it the official way... put a drop in water, and then double the water till you cant detect it anymore... then claim the negative space and such has active abilities. wow... incredible, you can now charge a lot of money for that water with so little in it that you cant detect it. if thats the case, then i wonder if they actually go through the processes of making it... i mean, how could anyone tell?
you can enjoy your alternatives... though if you put as much effort into understanding current medicine, where it stands, what your roll is in the process, and more... you would get a lot out of our medical system. however, you want (just like the fems), explanations that are pat and neat (regardless of truth), and that go the way you think things should be (regardless of truth). and if you havent noticed, alternative medicine is feminist matriarchal herbal wise woman medicine!!!
make misery, and collect the reward... from feminists, to fema... its the same...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by jenk on 01:33 PM September 12th, 2005 EST (#14)
|
|
|
|
|
Of course if he had used alternative options all along he likely would not have gotten to that point to begin with.
I like both. I try easier on the body remedies first, then go to medicine if it does not work. For yeast infections most of my friends use medication. ANd they get them back every couple of months. I use more natural remedies, and get them once or twice a year. If I had one that would not go away, I would use medicine, but so far I have never had to use it.
All or nothing either way is silly and closeminded. We did not die out before modern medicine, so some of those remedies must have worked in some ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 12:21 PM September 14th, 2005 EST (#21)
|
|
|
|
|
what you are neglecting is your genetics and behavior (not to disparage your friends).
first of all from a genetic view point...
your genetics define your starter immune system, some populations and people will naturally not get infections as much. there are others that are so susceptable that when they dont have one thats unusual.
misatribution is common in alternative medicine.
i am not saying what your saying is false. i am saying that the specific method of determination cant answer that question.
you have no way to measure your particular placebo effect. which is real, causes healing and such.
since your all friends your confidence in alternatives can call in the placebo effect and you get less. other than the dumbo feather as instigator, you did all the work.
your friend may be less confident and so get no added placebo effect.
then there is behavior.. you may have one sexual partner and they may have 4 each.. and dont think that you would ALWAYS know. humans are very good at hiding things from others, its a survival trait.
maybe you wash your hands more...
maybe they work in a worse invironment
maybe you wear pantyhose less
they could have boyfriends or partners that are carrying it and its not effecting them
perhaps your seat at work is a net and airy and theirs is padded and keeps moisture in..
they take the pill and you dont.
they dont wash their toys every time...
they share their toys...
even without the notion and knowledge that you are female because of the type of infection you are talking about..
i knew it by your last logic...
no we did not die before modern medicine..
and the remedies that worked in some way are incorporated into modern medicine!!!
so would you rather make your own extract from foxglove and buy your own gas chromatagraph and chemistry lab so you can make and test the dosages...
or pop a pill of digitalis...
would you like to return to an age where your life expectancy is 25 and you have lost most of your teeth by then?
even accupuncture was found to work.. but there is a catch.. they found out that it dont matter where you stick the needles!!!!!! the needle or puncture causes an increased immune and stress response, and your body heals. what it amounts to is that a little overt injury can get the immune system kick started.. in the wild you would be getting those naturally, in our living zoo we call a society, you rarely get stuck comparatively.
many old remidies that your using only work because you believe they do. which is fine, which is why a doctor will recommend one to someone that has a mild problem, all with the knowledge that they will improve.
your last comment is like taking random gun shots at someone and saying because they aint dead, we can continue.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 12:54 PM September 14th, 2005 EST (#23)
|
|
|
|
|
sorry, forgot to address your first sentence...
he DID do this all along.. this was after more than 10 years of self treatment!!!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Clancy
(long_ponytail@yahoo.com)
on 01:22 PM September 13th, 2005 EST (#17)
|
|
|
|
|
is the first major tenet that prospective MDs must learn. Some surgeons and specialists will not look past their egos to suggest alternatives to what they would do. Case in point was of a 8 year old boy with severe epilepsy. He was given experimental medicines by the bucket full. When all of this failed to help, as the next "logical step", a surgeon was going to "just" remove the top of his skull and do a little poking around. Nothing invasive. All the while, the boys mother took it upon herself to read every book she could get her hands on about epilepsy. In text after text she found records as far back as the 1940's of a DIET called the Ketosis diet (basically, the same thing as the Atkins diet but stringently controlled). She presented this information to the doctor in charge of her son’s care and she refused to try it because all of those studies were “anecdotal”. You see, no one had conducted triple blind studies. The mother wanted to take her son to John’s Hopkins but was barred from removing her own son from this hospital without an attending physician and a plane that had accommodations for oxygen and IV’s. An old friend came to the rescue. He confronted both the attending physician and the surgeon and asked that they show him the triple blind studies for the medications being administered and for the experimental surgery about to be performed. They had no answer. This friend was once a practicing physician but gave it up because of the pervasive attitudes of doctors like the ones he just shamed. However, he kept his license and volunteered to be the boy’s escort. The first step in the diet was a 2 day fast and then a diet of practically all fatty foods had to be carefully followed for the next 2 years. In the first week, his seizures stopped and never returned. Prostate cancer treatment, in my opinion, is treated by the fad of the day. Most, if not all, result in damaging side effects. My father has been chemically castrated for the past 3 years. For a man that enjoyed a healthy sex life for almost 80 years, his penis now serves only to expel urine. Since my father has it, it’s possible that I might also get it. Call me a stupid “man” but I believe I would prefer a slow death. My father is alive. I guess he feels it was a good trade.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 12:37 PM September 14th, 2005 EST (#22)
|
|
|
|
|
i see, so you use the few rare people that arent helped by the main course of treatment to suggest that we all go to the other treatment.
that doctors hands were tied by a greedy population (not lawyers, they dont make money unless WE are greedy), so he cant use a no peer reviewed study for treatment. if the kid dies the mom sues him. in fact he is screwed unless he follows protocol. whos fault is that? the peoples fault for not accepting the limitations of humans and medicine at a particular time, and holding them accountable to this.
this is not to say that this treatment doesnt work. this is to say that given the information the doctor could not determine if this treatment would or would not work, or even harm the patient.
why? because non peer review (which is OFTEN made by people with an agenda - for why bypass peer review?) is used to inject bad information. period!!! there is no other reason to not use it. ALL the suppositions and shit are propaganda (like rice killing birds at weddings.. you can leave bails of rice out and not find any dead birds... what, you think rice farms have no birds near where they store large quantities of grain? you see they couldnt make any money off of a 10 dollar bale of rice, but they can make money off of little plastiv bubble blowers!!)
peer review does not determine whether the science should or shouldnt have been done. only that certain protocols are followed and that ALL the information is there so you can reproduce teh work. this is how you can get studies that seem so weird and still get published.. every question is valid and only methodology is important at this point.
those advocate studies dont have all the information.. so the doctor has NO way of judging the results. he or she is MUCH more critical of the information they use and MUCH more aware than you of horrors that you DONT know about. (like kidney failure being high in high meat diets, ESPECIALLY when you suddenly change!!)
the doctor created the situation where all the risk was put on the mothers shoulders, where it SHOULD be. if you want to do this to your family, fine! but dont hold the doctor responsible later for not stopping you (which is why the law allows him to stop her from getting the kid!!! many people have all kinds of beleifs that kill kids. this is not a fringe thing... thousands die every year because of this behavior.
and the doctor was following the first rule.. do no harm... he couldnt determine safety, efficacy, or side effects. he could not determine specificity of the desease parameters in the patients of the study. etc.
as far as your dad...
when your actually REALLY faced with the REAL choice of dying... your mind may change real fast... when your older and your dick dont work as well.. and you cant pick up ladies.. or you enjoy life with your wife and seldomly use sex because your testosterone is down from where it is in you... then your choice will be very different. as it would be if your father was depressed and suicidal...
also its interesting to note that this story isnt about the meds ignoring a treatment (otherwise why go to johns hopkins another medical place that WOULD try it). its about a doctor who the mother chose, and for whom she lost confidence and had problems.
she was lucky... thats all... there was no real way to determine or even judge the outcome, so her desperation let her play roulette with her childs life. she lucked out. most of the time this happens, they dont luck out. which is why you read the lucky ones in the news, and the unlucky ones in the obits. the unlucky ones arent news, its the common.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Clancy
(long_ponytail@yahoo.com)
on 03:08 PM September 14th, 2005 EST (#24)
|
|
|
|
|
The treatment administered was not standard procedure. It was "this doesn't work, let's try this". The boy was given drug after drug to counteract the effects of the last drugs he'd been given. He lived in a near vegetative state because of them. The mother admitted her son to that particular hospital because they specialized in neurology. She was not allowed to remove her own son from this hospital. If she tried, the attending physician would have intervened and the state would have taken custody. What she found in NUMEROUS medical books was that in case after case, people were being cured by this diet. The success rate was 1 in 3. The alternative, being forced to accept the judgment of a doctor who was clearly fishing in the dark, was too much to bear. You mention that if I were dying from cancer, I might change my mind. If the boy in the hospital was mine and I had just spent months watching him slowly get worse with very good odds that he will die, watched while experimental drugs were administered (one was caustic enough to melt Styrofoam) and then to be told that the top of your sons skull was about to be popped off for an unproven "non invasive" procedure, I can't say I blame her. Maybe it's me but that doesn't sound like First Do No Harm.There were no reported deaths from employing the Ketosis diet. Those for whom it did not work, I can only supposed that it was more of the same as what I described. It is used for a minimum of 2 years. Of major concern was that the mother was not given a choice nor was she informed of the diet alternative though the doctor was fully aware of it. Johns Hopkins was one of the few hospitals that offered the diet as a choice of treatment as opposed to being told that you have no choice. Johns Hopkins is a prestigious medical facility. I don't think they are given to advocating quackery. The situation at the hospital became so desperate the anguished father angrily said that his son might be better off dead (don't know if that is true or from a screenwriter's imagination). I'd have to walk a mile in her moccasins before I condemned her.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by ArtflDgr on 03:28 PM September 15th, 2005 EST (#26)
|
|
|
|
|
What she found in NUMEROUS medical books was that in case after case, people were being cured by this diet.
then the issue was a quack doctor.. NOT medicine.. for if its in medical books, then guess what? they know and recomend this.
the point is that a doctor doesnt make more money or less money on what they tell you to do!!! so the pharma companies and people can make up all the reasons they want... the doctor will still tell you to use a warm compress (which the pharmas make nothing on)...
but each doctor is human.. and their trajectory of information is different after school, just as yours or mine is..
this example was a poor example, in that it wasnt alternative.. it was mainstream (if its in the medical books, peer review and such), and ignored.
the stuff i am refering to is things like bleeding out the eyes because you took gigko biloba every day and an asperin for a headache..
or that while using some herbal extract that has NO effect (echinecia), you dont get treatment for pneumonia, for which echinecia wont do a damn thing for.
or like my friend... not going and using a "cure" that has no basis
you just said its in the MEDICAL books, so thats not the same thing!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:02 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
Of course if this were the same thing concerning BREAST CANCER we'd see it all over our oh-so-objective-media.
But since it is a serious health concern for MEN it'll probably never see the light of day, except for here on MANN.
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:49 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#8)
|
|
|
|
|
This type of crap makes the news all the time. People use it as a justification to cut funding for prostate cancer treatments and so forth. As an example, many insurance companies will refuse to pay for the costs of PSA testing or subsequent treatments. There was also a big dispute about medicare paying or not paying for it in the past; I'm not sure how it was resolved. But let me get this clear. Jerks like this are less concerned about people *choosing* of their own will to undergo an elective surgery, than they are on spending their precious health care dollars on you. It's all about money, not your health.
Read Dr. Henneforth's own biography: "Dr. Hennenfent is also an economist who believes that a well-designed health-care system is more important to the health of a nation’s people than any single physician’s skill and knowledge." I don't know if I'm right, but this sounds like a code word for saying: Don't pay for men's choices to be treated for prostate cancer, because Dr. Henneforth thinks it's a waste of money.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by crescentluna
(evil_maiden @ yahoo.com)
on 08:08 PM September 11th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
That was a lousy article for information. I hope the book at least cites the studies about prostate cancer survival, etc. Because saying 'there was a big study, and then there was this other study, and the slant on another study was refuted' doesn't help much at all. However, if the library picks up this book, I'll read over it. 'Nother 18 months until I might just have to advise people about surgery.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 06:37 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to say, alternative medicine won't to jack crap for prostate cancer.
Also, what the article doesn't say, is that radiation therapy has side effects that are in fact more often worse than the side effects of surgery. There is a lot of damage induced in the prostate and surrounding tissues from radiation therapy - a lot of scar and so forth.
Don't buy whatever crackpot idiotic stuff some retard without an M.D. is trying to sell you. Listen to your urologist.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 07:00 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
Also, read carefully what he is saying about prostatectomies:
http://www.survivingprostatecancerwithoutsurgery.o rg/95.php
He's saying that prostatectomy increases *lifespan* only in abtuo 5 % of cases. What he doesn't emphasize, or give the statistics for, is the ample evidence that prostatectomy reduces disease-free survival time. Which means, in a large percentage of men (he doesn't say) prostatectomy is proven to remove the tumor completely with no evidence of follow up presence of cancer or metastatis to other site.
And while it is true that the cancer is not likely to be the thing that finally kills you, it is also true that the cancer, even if it doesn't kill you, can make your life pretty miserable, arguably much more so than current prostate surgeries will.
If you think it's a bummer to have a prostatectomy, wait until you see what it's like to be placed on estrogens (female hormones) in order to slow the spread of the cancer you could have cut out, but chose not to. It will, among other things, probably make you irritable and cause you to grow bitch tits!
Or, you can always get a pathological fracture of the spine when the cancer metastasizes there. Or, the cancer can overgrow in the area of the prostate, and make it difficult for you to piss away your urine.
Hell, until something far better comes along, in case I get prostate cancer, I'm doing whatever my urologist tells me, favoring getting the damn thing cut out. A 5 % increase in survival time is a lot; if you could do that well by improving your diet, you'd be extremely lucky.
Is this guy even a urologist?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by johnnyp on 07:01 AM September 12th, 2005 EST (#10)
|
|
|
|
|
If you ever get seriously ill, do your own research to validate what your doctor is telling you. I had a serious illness many years ago. My doctor gave me the diagnosis, and recommended a treatment plan. I took that info and researched it in the library, and Internet. The info agreed with the doctor, which gave me confidence in my doctor and my own knowledge.
Online you can find info from the National Institute for Health, The National Cancer Institute, and many other authoritative bodies.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:52 PM September 12th, 2005 EST (#15)
|
|
|
|
|
Be even careful of that, western medicine has huge gaps in what it knows & admits from country to country. In many cases, it will recognize a disease and/or poisoning in one country, and completely fail to recognize it in another due to societal bias, different training, false beliefs, drug bias, industrial bais, governmental coverup, industrial coverup, medical industry rationing/training...etc
Officially, lung damage from asbestos didn't exist. Lung damage from smoking didn't exist. Coal miners lung didn't exist (Ohh, baby, I'm not kidding.) Thalidomide babies don't exist. Gulf war syndrome doesn't exist. Many workers today are finding out back problems don't exist (via the company doctor!) Many diseases we now know to be biologically based didn't exist (MS, Epilepsy as just two!) Fluoride intoxication in aluminum plant workers, phosphate ferilizer workers, nuclear processing workers, copper workers, steel workers, cryolite pesticide workers, people downwind from these, and people harmed by high fluoride water & foods do not exist in the US (..Yeah, affects livestock, kills plants, kills fish - but people are magically immune? BS!) even though total exposure is not that much lower than India where lower grade problems of these are endemic, and some areas have very high grade exposure problems. Manifest as conditons similar to osteo and rheumatoid arthritis, other types of arthritis, thyroid, and neurological problems... Birth defects from pesticides in the children of farmers don't exist either. Prozac & Wellbutrin don't make people have radical personality changes and occasionally kill people or themself either.
People are right to be a bit skeptical about many alternative medicine claims, but they also have to realize much of alternative medicine is very legit, its simply not common knowledge, or not common knowledge anymore. However, it exist in a sea of quackery, so you do have to be careful what you buy into. You also have to beware of even quack debunkers, some things which are very important or would be liabilities for industry (and the medical profession is no different, in particular dentistry) they will go to great lengths to defend to protect from liability. Drug companies are not immune to this either. Pretty much its everyone for themself, the watch dogs in this country have been bought and paid for for a long long time.
I'm going to give you some examples I know to be correct:
Everyone has heard how great soybeans are for you, right? Except the literature about humans just doesn't jive at all with the literature they give to farmers raising livestock. They seem to tell the farmers the truth and tell you the lie. They never talk about l-tyrosine inhibition and cancer causing properties of soybeans when feeding them to humans, or the extreme amounts of processing to eliminate the many toxins (large levels of chemicals similar to estrogen, growth inhibitors, chemicals which make protein metabolism nearly impossible without suppliments, even a few lovelies known to cause cancer)in soybeans. Yet, when the farmer has to decide on feeds, that information is presented clearly and concisely. Do you suppose humans have a magical immunity to these problems? No such luck. Higher soy intake lowers some cancers, but raises others dramatically. Marketing has overcome that. Pick up a loaf of bread, see the protein content? Does it have soy added? You migth as well take that protein number and take it to nearly zero, because even though its there, you wont get the benefit out of it unless they have supplimented it with enough aminos to overcome the inhibiting effects of the soy.
Think fluoride protects teeth? Think again, its an industrial poison. Makes a thin hard outer shell, but a crumbly tooth and bone on the inside. There is no credible evidence of internal fluorides benefiting dental health. In fact, the higher the exposures the worse the dental health.
Think mercury in fillings doesn't leech? It does. Its easy enough to demonstrate. You need only dunk a filling in a cup of warm tea and measure the fumes. Its one of the largest sources of mercury exposure most people get in their lifetime. Yes, you can get it from excessive large fish consumption too, but the exposure from fillings is far higher in most people.
Ever wonder why the American Cancer Society never talks about plastics, even though they know carcenogenic chemicals leech out of plastic containers (in particular #3!)? Check their funding & PR company.
Pick up a pack of lunchmeat, or a pack of bacon: Can you spot the known carcenogen on the label? Though bacon is getting a little better, lunch meat hasn't, its sodium nitrite (You may have heard the term 'nitrosamine' in relation to cigarettes and cancer, bingo! Same ballpark. Scientist actually use this stuff to give mice cancer for studies. Makes you want to chuck the lunchmeat out, its added to preserve color - if it wasn't, the meat would appear dull and grey and your odds of cancer increasing by say 50%, well, that is a small price to pay for pretty looking bacon at the store, right? You would make that deal, right?)
Doctors...: Plenty of flunkies like Sarno out there, who exist purely to deny claims of back injuried.
Doctors: Plenty of doctors that don't know about very common causes of pain, like myofascial pain - and that treatments for them like myofascial release exist. Even less, outside of a few well trained oncologist, know about lymphatic blockage & draining problems causing pain, yet many physical therapist do. These can cause severe crippling levels of pain, and are common to many injuries were there has been a period of immobility or an immune disruption. For some reason they never seem to talk to each other, most doctors don't even acknowlegde the conditions exist, and that people suffering can often be cured from a few physical therapy sessions rather than have to keep coming back for pain killers every month.
Ever hear about the negotiations for a warning label on a class of drugs? A few in the class don't (or so rarely as to not be detectable) cause the problem, a few moderately, and a few severely - but the negotiated warning label covers them all so that all are punished equally and the guilty are obscured? Thousands of examples of this in the handling of the FDA. This way no company can benefit from having a 'safer' product. A for instance: NSAIDS are known to raise blood pressure, but some NSAIDS don't - can your doctor name the ones that don't? The odds are he can't. They are aspirin and sulindac. Try it with your doctor, he will be misinformed as well.
What I am trying to get to is: You are 100% completely on your own. You can't trust the doctors fully, you can't trust the drug companies fully, you can not trust the FDA & EPA fully, you can not trust your employer(s) to do the right thing, you can't trust industries to do the right thing, you can't trust the quack watchers to not have conflicts or be on the payroll of a PR/Indsutrial/Insurance/other company (Even Quackwatch has considerable disinfo tucked in with many legit debunkings). Evaluate to the best of your ability, check out what the stuff - whatever it is - does to animals, what it does to fish, what it does to birds, what it does to plants - it gives you some clues what it will do to you. See what other countries are doing. Whenever anyone, anywhere tells you "something is good for you" don't just go to the source of that claim, go check what else they use it for and you'll likely find out it isn't. If they are spending money to tell you how good something is, there is a high probability it isn't.
At this point, if I had prostate cancer I would probably elect for the radiation beads. They still deliver a hefty dose of radiation, and still have problems, but they tend to spare the widespread damage of other treatments. Unfortunately long term outcomes aren't known yet, but the short term looks a lot better than the other options.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Hunchback on 01:07 PM September 12th, 2005 EST (#12)
|
|
|
|
|
As a prostate cancer survivor (with only 2 years of treatment left, hopefully), I can attest to the efficacy of treatment without the removal of the prostate. (There was a time when radical mastectomy was the treatment of choice for breast cancer.) When given the list of choices and their side effects, I said The hell with surgery.
I opted for radioactive seeding with a five-year monthly hormonal treatment. I also received a two-session radiation treatment for the pecs to avoid growing breasts. To date I'm healthy, horny—though incapable—and the side effects have been mild. There is impotence (somewhat mitigated by Viagra), some genital shrinkage, and those pesky hot flashes; but I look at this as no more than a 5- (or 6-) year sentence and am optimistic.
Unless the cancer is so far gone that it might metasize tomorrow, I do NOT recommend surgery. You might be resigned to permanent impotence, but the prospect of permanent incontinence ought to give anybody pause.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:12 PM September 12th, 2005 EST (#13)
|
|
|
|
|
Hell, compared to what you're goign through, surgery sounds like a cake walk! Irradiate my chest so I don't grow tits?
No thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 01:53 AM September 13th, 2005 EST (#16)
|
|
|
|
|
It's only two sessions, each not much more inconvenient than an X-ray. A one-shot deal. No biggie.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 12:34 PM September 15th, 2005 EST (#25)
|
|
|
|
|
So, what's the big deal about surgery?
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
