Cancer and chemo

originally posted by: JohnnyCanuck

originally posted by: Murgatroid
Chemo has a 97% fatality rate and 9 out of 10 oncologists will not even touch it themselves.
Cancer patients that refuse chemo live four times longer.
Nearly everything that conventional medicine is telling us is fiction.

The odds, quite unfortunately, are very good that either you or somebody that you hold very dear to you will end up with cancer at some point. When that happens, please let us know what your treatment choices are, and how they eventually work out.
Until then, not only are your opinions worthless, they are actually dangerous as somebody might actually die from you having to encouraged them to squander their treatment window with ineffectual nostrums. Shame on you!

A friend of mine was given 3 to 6 months to live and wasn't expected to see this past Xmas - bowel cancer had shipped its cousins up to the large intestine. He's maudlin by nature and takes little pleasure in life, but he's still loved by family and friends. He didn't care much which way it would go.

He went on the chemo program and has worn (on and off) an IV that pumps in medication. The regimen has worked superbly and he's in full remission. Statistically, he's a fraction of a percent of people successfully recovering from his level and type of cancer.

I'm just saying this anecdote for a couple of reasons. Firstly, I'm still buzzing that he's recovered when we all thought it was over. Secondly, it will always be better to take the holistic treatment option above just saying prayers, lighting smudges or high-dosing on Vit C.

It's like the old saying of there being 'no atheists in a lifeboat.' In this case, I'd argue there are no conspiracy theorists abstaining from treatment for cancer.

a reply to: Kandinsky

A close friend was diagnosed with squamous cell cancer far enough advanced so his prognosis was poor.
I think it's going on 7 years since his last round of treatment. Cancer free.

a reply to: meremortal

Sent you a pm

Please read it

Important

Will all the people who have advised not having the recommended chemotherapy and using their alternative therapies please post their names and addresses so when they don't work either the OP or their families can speak to you in person?

If you're happy to give advice then you should be happy to accept the responsibility that comes with that.

a reply to: Pardon?

And what if chemotherapy will not work? Who do we contact then?

a reply to: meremortal

Even Steve Jobs regretted trying to 'cure' his cancer the natural way. No kind of tea / tincture / extract / organic diet can get rid of cancerous cells, there is no evidence of them working at all, only charlatans online who want to make money out of people's desperation.

I know chemo will be a rough ride, and that's because it is impossible to kill cancer cells without killing non-cancer cells, but in recent years chemo has become less toxic and it doesn't make all patients really sick. Only last month I met a patient going through chemo and she is fine, she hasn't been as sick as she imagined, the only temporary downside is that she has lost her hair, but hair regrows when treatment stops.

I know you are the only one who can decide which way to go, but please don't do like others have done, like Steve Jobs, don't leave it too late to agree to conventional treatment.... because then it may be too late to save your life.

But whatever you decide, I wish you all the best.

originally posted by: meremortal
a reply to: Mahler

that sounds like a lot of sugar to me, sugar is one thing i cut out completely!

Yes anyone whom tells you sugar is anything of a cancer remedy is flat wrong. Cancer feeds on sugar.

originally posted by: saadad
a reply to: Pardon?

And what if chemotherapy will not work? Who do we contact then?

Erm, the oncologist who prescribed it?
You know, the one that consulted with you and understood your full medical history prior to offering anything.
You know, the one who talks you through the relative risks and benefits and what the expected outcome will be.
You know, the one who will only prescribe it if the risk is less than the benefit.

Do you get that from random internet advice?
No.
Never.

It's easy to give advice over the Internet as there's no come-back.
If the OP or anyone else dies because of nonsensical information they've read and gone through with then you won't hear from them again will you?
It's their fault for taking that advice isn't it...?

No.
No it's not their fault at all.
People turn to desperate measures in desperate times and look for an easy way out.

Chemo's horrible.
But I can assure you that cancer is far, far worse.

originally posted by: Lil Drummerboy

originally posted by: meremortal
a reply to: Mahler

that sounds like a lot of sugar to me, sugar is one thing i cut out completely!

Yes anyone whom tells you sugar is anything of a cancer remedy is flat wrong. Cancer feeds on sugar.

So does every other cell in the body.
Cancer cells just grow faster so in comparison to normal cells they use more sugar.
They would still grow as fast if you deprived yourself of sugar as the body has other ways of producing sugars than just from food.

a reply to: meremortal

Hello,
My ex girlfriend was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2012, she had a double mastectomy and two nodes removed in her left side. She worked in the local memorial hospital in oncology and pain management departments for 10 years. She saw what patients went through and the often less than satisfactory success rates of the many that went through chemo treatments. She vowed to never go through Chemo because of her experience. Now as someone mentioned earlier, chemo is said to have come a long way and yes that is true, there is a program called called Cyberknife which is said to be capable of a pin point attack to cancer cells. Now even with all that said, My ex girlfriend is thus far cancer free and no chemo. Proper diet and physical activity has been her successor so far. I have read that in some cases Chemo will actually cause tumors and cancer growth, It has been a while since reading that article but none the less, My advice..get multiple opinions and start reading and researching both ends of the cures, holistic and medicinal. Good luck. LD.

a reply to: Lil Drummerboy

Cancer feeds on sugar.

More exact to say it feed on glucose, most cancer have a hard time without it.

The second most used fuel is glutamine.

@pardon?

So does every other cell in the body.

WRONG...

Most other healthy cell can use other metabolic fuel like amino acids, fatty acids, ketone bodies...

Only brain and couple other cell "lines" have some minimal absolute glucose requirement.

Before giving to anybody your "wise" medical advise, it would be a great idea to educate yourself on the subject...

originally posted by: Lil Drummerboy
a reply to: meremortal

Hello,
My ex girlfriend was diagnosed with breast cancer in 2012, she had a double mastectomy and two nodes removed in her left side. She worked in the local memorial hospital in oncology and pain management departments for 10 years. She saw what patients went through and the often less than satisfactory success rates of the many that went through chemo treatments. She vowed to never go through Chemo because of her experience. Now as someone mentioned earlier, chemo is said to have come a long way and yes that is true, there is a program called called Cyberknife which is said to be capable of a pin point attack to cancer cells. Now even with all that said, My ex girlfriend is thus far cancer free and no chemo. Proper diet and physical activity has been her successor so far. I have read that in some cases Chemo will actually cause tumors and cancer growth, It has been a while since reading that article but none the less, My advice..get multiple opinions and start reading and researching both ends of the cures, holistic and medicinal. Good luck. LD.

Which do you consider to be the cause of her remission, the surgery or the health regime?

Chemo, post surgery, is used as adjunctive therapy just in case any of the localised cancer has spread. It's used as a "belt & braces" approach.
If the cancer has been completely removed by the surgery then the chemo is superfluous but still recommended.
Many patients undergo surgery and refuse chemo and are fine.
However more who patients undergo surgery and refuse chemo aren't fine.

Healthy lifestyles can possible help prevent some cancers from occurring however a healthy lifestyle cannot cure an already present cancer.

originally posted by: PeterMcFly
a reply to: Lil Drummerboy

Cancer feeds on sugar.

More exact to say it feed on glucose, most cancer have a hard time without it.

The second most used fuel is glutathione.

@pardon?

So does every other cell in the body.

WRONG...

Most other healthy cell can use other metabolic fuel like amino acids, fatty acids, ketone bodies...

Only brain and couple other cell "lines" have some minimal absolute glucose requirement.

Before giving to anybody your "wise" medical advise, it would be a great idea to educate yourself on the subject...

Glucose is the primary and preferred fuel for cell metabolism.
Some cells, as you've said, can in the absence of glucose metabolise other chemicals, for instance in some chronic illnesses or severe starvation etc.
Cancer can still metabolise in the absence of glucose, in fact, they're better than normal cells at doing it.
beaker.sbpdiscovery.org...

a reply to: Pardon?

originally posted by: Lil Drummerboy
Yes anyone whom tells you sugar is anything of a cancer remedy is flat wrong. Cancer feeds on sugar.

So does every other cell in the body.

Your answer imply that most cell in the body REQUIRE glucose.

Some cells, as you've said, can in the absence of glucose metabolise other chemicals...

My answer is not that SOME cells can in the absence of glucose metabolise other chemicals but MOST cells.

a reply to: Pardon?

Cancer can still metabolise in the absence of glucose, in fact, they're better than normal cells at doing it.

At doing what? What can they do so much better by having their mitochondria taken offline?

Also do you think there is a link as most cancer cell exhibit an inverted nucleus to cytoplasm ratio versus normal healthy cell of the same lines? Have you ever observed cancerous cells under a microscope?

Also nice study you have posted, but exception does not make the rule, the study here talk about a couple more cancer types:

Unbound MEDLINE _ The inhibition of malignant cell growth by ketone bodie

I was under the impression that ATS was a conspiracy and alternative site.

AboveTopSecret.com is the Internet's largest and most popular discussion board community dedicated to the intelligent exchange of ideas and debate on a wide range of "alternative topics" such as conspiracies, UFO's, paranormal, secret societies, political scandals, new world order, terrorism, and dozens of related topics on current events, politics, and government wrong-doing with poignant commentary from a diverse mix of users from all over the world.

By reading response to OP, seem there is a lot of messages promoting conventional treatment, not that I'm against it but by re-reading the OP:

i have read and researched and quite frankly i do not think i could go through with it, i am thinking of the natural route of healing, plant based diet which i have already started.

It seem a request of what we think about ALTERNATIVE way of treatment!

a reply to: PeterMcFly

I was under the impression that ATS was a conspiracy and alternative site.

Here's another quote for you:

The simple yet effective motto of our membership is "deny ignorance", which signifies an effort to apply the principals of critical thought and peer review to the provocative topics covered within

www.abovetopsecret.com...

a reply to: Phage

So to speak phage, talking on an alternative standpoint of a subject is ignorance?

Talking about ignorance phage, I remember someone talking about cancerous cell NOT being immortal. Have you since then denied ignorance?

a reply to: PeterMcFly

So to speak phage, talking on an alternative standpoint of a subject is ignorance?

You'll have to ask the management about that. It's not my statement.

I remember someone talking about cancerous cell NOT being immortal. Have you since then denied ignorance?

If you mean have I been shown evidence that an individual cancer cell will not die, no. Not sufficiently to change my position. I have acknowledged however, that unlike normal cells, there is no limit to their reproduction.

a reply to: Phage

If you mean have I been shown evidence that an individual cancer cell will not die, no. Not sufficiently to change my position. I have acknowledged however, that unlike normal cells, there is no limit to their reproduction.

Stop trying to play me on word! A cell that divide indefinitely is in fact immortal.

Ever heard of HeLa line of cells?

HeLa - Wiki

Deny ignorance!