State doesn't let mom make medical decision for daughter with cancer

a reply to: ScepticScot

I am a parent so something else you are wrong on.

Decorum prevents me from stating outright how sorry I feel for your children, then. When my kids were in need of medical attention, my wife and I were right there alongside them, questioning, verifying, and vetting every single procedure. We took the time to help make sure they were not the victim of a human error or were not subjected to treatments that were literally worse than the medical problem that caused them.

I suppose you would just hand the kid over to someone you don't know with instructions to give them back when and if they're cured. Well, you are free to do that. Just step aside when it is my kid and I want to make sure they are safe.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck

I know that your posting as a member and not as a mod

But really, you should know better, so because scepticscot disagrees with you he must be a bad parent just like I must be awful at my job. If anyone disagrees with you, you just launch into personal attacks.

You know you can debate someone with out the personal attacks.

Just feel like someone needs to call you out on that because your treatment of your fellow members on this thread has been shameful.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: JAGStorm

Not to one up you, but my mom told me that she has basically been getting drunk since she was 5 years old.

Hahahaha... I bow to the master!

TheRedneck

Not something she is proud of. She told me how starving she was as a child. They would sneak into a grain processing plant and basically eat the waste. Which was fermented barley husks, thus getting them drunk. Something most Americans can't comprehend. Drunk but at least a full belly. Really sad when you think about it. Smoking was by choice at 13, as she explains it, it's just what every single teenager did at that time. I've yet to meet a man that she couldn't set straight. There is just something about her that is downright scary and demands respect.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
And why do we have that? Because for all of that historical period, people were allowed to make their own medical decisions for themselves and those in their care. If we allow this to continue, we not only preserve freedom from tyranny, we allow medical science to progress even farther.

I think you agree there are limits, I suggested to do both, but like a person who might say hey just rub dirt on it, I can't say has any logical reasoning to it. I'm all for other forms of treatment as my wife is Asian and I have had acupuncture and it has helped, but I'm not going to say acupuncture is all I need, so there are limits such as Christian Scientists who avoid all medical care, leave it in God's hand...is that good, is that true freedom of choice?

Or, we can go the authoritarian route and use the force of law to make medical decisions for people who don't make the decisions they are supposed to make, resulting in no further medical advancement because no one will ever be allowed to try anything not prescribed by a doctor. Forget someone with a terminal illness having the opportunity to at least try something different; no doctor will ever authorize experimental treatments because of the potential for malpractice suits. No insurance company will ever pay for experimental procedures because they see it as another expense.

Holy crap..welcome to universal care...Big Brother will tell you what to do, what to eat, and what care you will have...it's going to happen bro if you like it or not. Too many people see it as a good thing.

But more important to me is the fact that people die every single day from medical mistakes. Every single day. People should at least have the ability to decide whether the risks are worth the rewards for themselves and those they care for. Anything less is pure tyranny.

TheRedneck

There are limits to choice is all I'm saying, or do you feel the Christian Scientists that says God will cure my kid as OK? When you talk cancer we are talking about current medical treatment that can take 100% fatal cancer and turn it into 90% recovery. That is fact...that is true...CBD oil to cure 100% fatal cancer is a pipe dream.

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: ScepticScot

I am a parent so something else you are wrong on.

Decorum prevents me from stating outright how sorry I feel for your children, then. When my kids were in need of medical attention, my wife and I were right there alongside them, questioning, verifying, and vetting every single procedure. We took the time to help make sure they were not the victim of a human error or were not subjected to treatments that were literally worse than the medical problem that caused them.

I suppose you would just hand the kid over to someone you don't know with instructions to give them back when and if they're cured. Well, you are free to do that. Just step aside when it is my kid and I want to make sure they are safe.

TheRedneck

It just shows how poor your position is that you have to resort to personal attacks and out right lies about what someone said. In fact it shows how poor your character is.

Since we are taking ridiculous caricatures of peoples positiion you think it's ok to let a child starve to death. Whose children should people feel sorry for?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Just feel like someone needs to call you out on that because your treatment of your fellow members on this thread has been shameful.

really?

originally posted by: TheRedneck
When my kids were in need of medical attention, my wife and I were right there alongside them, questioning, verifying, and vetting every single procedure. We took the time to help make sure they were not the victim of a human error or were not subjected to treatments that were literally worse than the medical problem that caused them.

And you are an expert on that? Can you give me one situation that you saved your kids from something that was so wrong?

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Just feel like someone needs to call you out on that because your treatment of your fellow members on this thread has been shameful.

really?

Yes really.

Redneck has personally attacked people in this thread. That's poor conduct for any member and deserves to pointed out.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Just feel like someone needs to call you out on that because your treatment of your fellow members on this thread has been shameful.

really?

Yes read over his posts or even try saying you think he is wrong and watch the personal attacks flow. Doesn’t just happen on this thread either.

Literally just said another member was a bad parent because they disagreed.

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: TheRedneck


I am not going to explain this to you again because either your thick or its just a case of Alien in suit bad.

Just because someone does not agree with you does not make them thick..... they simply disagree.
It is allowed..... it is a discussion.

Late nature take its course, not the chemical used in chemo that is purposely put in the body.

a reply to: Xtrozero
Not enough is known about the miracle herb..... yet.

Teressa Mays husband is the largest investor for GW Pharmaceticals.... the worlds largest producer of cannibis.

Kylees mother said that the tumour had reduced by 90%.......however that has not been publicly verified by doctors.

If doctors had verified it then what do you think would happen to cancer industry?

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

so because scepticscot disagrees with you he must be a bad parent

I believe I see comprehension coming into focus!

I stated that ScepticScot must be a bad parent because he disagrees with me... just like you and he both state the woman being discussed is a bad parent because she disagrees with you.

Now do you get it? Finally?

...the hoops I have to jump through sometimes to get my point across...

I'll try one more time to explain my point about your job performance. I know you can "get it" because you almost "got it" in this post, if I can get by your bias. Your attitude about my concerns re medical care would be a serious concern for me if I were under your care, and would cause me to either ask for a different professional or distrust your judgement. You could be the most technically accurate person in the world at your job, but if I am not comfortable with your performance, it does not matter. You do not have some God-given right to assist with someone else's medical treatment.

A quality care provider understands that they must not only be good at what they do, but they must also instill confidence in their charge. You have shown me the opposite in that respect. Now, if you want to consider that a personal insult, so be it. That in itself would reinforce my negative opinion, because you ignore my concerns.

When I was in for my surgery, I had already had the bad experience with metroprolol. A nurse came in with carvedilol, which is also a beta-blocker. I initially had concerns, because I did not want to go through another emotional roller coaster and resisted the medication. That nurse took the time to pull up a medical website for me and show me that carvedilol was not known for having the issues metroprolol has. It took him maybe three minutes, and put my mind at ease enough so I accepted the recommendation. As it turns out, carvedilol does affect me, but to a much lesser extent and was a good substitute for me. That instilled confidence in me and I trusted that nurse's judgement more afterwards. Had he simply told me to take my damn medicine because he knows better than I and he would force it on me if I didn't, I would have had no confidence in his abilities or knowledge and would have fought tooth and nail to not take the carvedilol.

As a professional, you should think about that. Is it all about your patient, or all about your pride?

TheRedneck

a reply to: JAGStorm

Not something she is proud of. She told me how starving she was as a child.

I'm sorry; I misunderstood. I was thinking her drinking was recreational. That is indeed a sad tale, but I am glad she survived it.

Having grown up with that much adversity, you may be right: she may outlive us all.

TheRedneck

a reply to: TheRedneck
This post is off topic but as you are a mod I just want to ask a question.
Why is it that it takes between 20 minutes to 30 minutes, between around 27 minutes past the hour and the hour, for pages to load, on a regular basis on this site ....?

a reply to: Xtrozero

I think you agree there are limits, I suggested to do both, but like a person who might say hey just rub dirt on it, I can't say has any logical reasoning to it. I'm all for other forms of treatment as my wife is Asian and I have had acupuncture and it has helped, but I'm not going to say acupuncture is all I need, so there are limits such as Christian Scientists who avoid all medical care, leave it in God's hand...is that good, is that true freedom of choice?

There are limits, yes. But the question then becomes, who sets those limits?

No cancer is 100% fatal unless in the final stages. Cancer can and has gone into spontaneous remission. That may be rare with certain types, and almost nonexistent after a certain stage, but it does happen. The treatment is also, as touted by a medical professional here, only 50-70% effective, not 90%.

We keep coming back to the issue of what alternate medical treatment is being used, as in "rubbing dirt on it." I understand that is a bit of hyperbole intended to make a point, but there are two treatments that have some scientific support. One is dichloroacetate salts, a medicine use to treat epilepsy. It has few side effects and has been shown to be effective at fighting certain forms of cancer, but it also places a heavy load on the liver and it advised to only be tried while liver function is closely monitored. As such, it is also somewhat ineffective at liver cancer. The other is the Rife Gun, aka electromagnetic therapy, developed by Dr. Raymond Rife some years ago. His experiments were somewhat successful, but were never completed and the plethora of fake apparati available today makes it very hard to duplicate his work.

Dichloroacetate salts do not get any attention because they are unpatentable. The Rife Gun was based on two frequencies and the lack of understanding of electronics at the time made Dr. Rife's original work hard to follow leading to it being ridiculed. I believe both have potential, and if I am ever diagnosed with cancer, I have a printed procedure for creating the dichloroacetate salts in my shop and would attempt to construct a Rife Gun. I would also probably refuse chemo, at least at first, as it does suppress the immune system and could compromise my body's ability to take advantage of the alternate treatments.

Now, are those the same as "rubbing dirt on it"? I say no, but I would estimate the majority of doctors would say yes.

That's the problem with this story. I honestly know precious little about CBD oil; it was only very recently that I discovered the difference between hemp and marijuana. Just not something I have had the inclination to research. There may be something to it; there may not be. But it is the right of any person to decide for themselves the best course of medical treatment for conditions, and that right must extend to those under their care. Do I think the mother is taking the best route for her daughter? I don't know. What I do know, though, is that this is her daughter, the medical treatments thus far had been ineffective, and she at least thinks there is improvement now. That's enough for me.

As for prayer... well, that's a different subject. I believe in prayer, and have used prayer... but in my case I asked not for spontaneous healing, but for a steady hand on the surgeon and enough wisdom to make the right decisions. The right to believe in what one chooses is inherent, though, and no government can justly remove a right so inherent.

There is a difference between living and not dying. Sometimes dying is preferable to not living.

TheRedneck

a reply to: ScepticScot

It just shows how poor your position is that you have to resort to personal attacks and out right lies about what someone said. In fact it shows how poor your character is.

I have made no attacks on you that you have not first made on the woman we are talking about.

TheRedneck

a reply to: Itisnowagain

You have a message. Please click here.

TheRedneck

originally posted by: TheRedneck
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

so because scepticscot disagrees with you he must be a bad parent

I believe I see comprehension coming into focus!

I stated that ScepticScot must be a bad parent because he disagrees with me... just like you and he both state the woman being discussed is a bad parent because she disagrees with you.

Now do you get it? Finally?

...the hoops I have to jump through sometimes to get my point across...

I'll try one more time to explain my point about your job performance. I know you can "get it" because you almost "got it" in this post, if I can get by your bias. Your attitude about my concerns re medical care would be a serious concern for me if I were under your care, and would cause me to either ask for a different professional or distrust your judgement. You could be the most technically accurate person in the world at your job, but if I am not comfortable with your performance, it does not matter. You do not have some God-given right to assist with someone else's medical treatment.

A quality care provider understands that they must not only be good at what they do, but they must also instill confidence in their charge. You have shown me the opposite in that respect. Now, if you want to consider that a personal insult, so be it. That in itself would reinforce my negative opinion, because you ignore my concerns.

When I was in for my surgery, I had already had the bad experience with metroprolol. A nurse came in with carvedilol, which is also a beta-blocker. I initially had concerns, because I did not want to go through another emotional roller coaster and resisted the medication. That nurse took the time to pull up a medical website for me and show me that carvedilol was not known for having the issues metroprolol has. It took him maybe three minutes, and put my mind at ease enough so I accepted the recommendation. As it turns out, carvedilol does affect me, but to a much lesser extent and was a good substitute for me. That instilled confidence in me and I trusted that nurse's judgement more afterwards. Had he simply told me to take my damn medicine because he knows better than I and he would force it on me if I didn't, I would have had no confidence in his abilities or knowledge and would have fought tooth and nail to not take the carvedilol.

As a professional, you should think about that. Is it all about your patient, or all about your pride?

TheRedneck

Firstly I don't believe I did say she was a bad parent. I think it's terrible situation for a parent to be in and the stress of having to deal with a child in pain is just one reason why parents should not have absoloute say on what treatment their child gets.

It also seems very much like post fact rationalisation for your repeated rudeness and personal attacks rather than dealing with points actually being raised.