Chemotherapy Effectiveness Chart - And the High False Positive Rate of Misdiagnoses of Cancer

Chemotherapy Effectiveness Chart - And the False Positive Rate of Misdiagnoses of Cancer- A disturbing thought.

The below chart is about chemotherapy effectiveness.

The following table was published in the journal Clinical Oncology in December 2004. The results of this study were astonishing, showing that chemotherapy has an average 5-year survival success rate of just over 2 percent for ALL cancers!

www.oasisadvancedwellness.com...

Overall the success rate is 2.1%.

Have a good look at that chart.

2.1 is very low.Almost at the level of noise or error.

However it has come to light that there are very large margins of error in Diagnosis of cancer.In terms of false positives.

.A false positive is when a doctor tells you have cancer when you do not have cancer.

This can vary from 10% to 30% depending on the cancer,the doctor,the equipment,the hospital,the type of test and so and on...



The false positive in one particular cancer type is thought to be 5%.

This brings up a very disturbing thought.Have a look at that chart again.


If the chemotherapy rate is 2.1% and the false positive rate is say 5% then the 2.1% survival rate could mean that the 2.1 % survivors might not actually have had cancer to begin with!


Do you follow me?

In fact you would actually get a net death rate of 2.9% from the chemo.


Maybe the police should be informed.


Think about it.

Remember that was a very conservative false positive rate of only 5% but is thought to average at least 20% for all cancers.Many cancers are not tumors but benign lesions which come and go but diagnosed as a tumor or cancer.


Remember once you are given Chemo you will be given radiation and cancer causing chemicals cocktails which means you develop cancer if you did not have cancer.

I did some research on cancer misdiagnoses and false positives and it is absolutely terrifying the false positive rate.


here is short article on this:-

www.pfnh.org...


and some horror stories:-

campaignfortruth.com...

and some truth about the equipment used.

www.rethinkingcancer.org...

So it seems the success rate of chemo is actually negative due to the high false positives due to misdiagnoses.
Thus they are "treated" with cancer inducing stuff and die a terrible death.

More people are dying more from the chemo than from the cancer.That was a quote from the Lancet a medical journal.




I urge all of you to spread this around and print it out to distribute to your corporate c... s...... "representatives"

Excellent post!
The incidents of misdiagnosis listed at campaignfortruth are very scary It is so hard to know who to trust.
Thanks for the terrifying info OP
S&F

I know some women who have had their cancer cured and that was twenty and thirty years ago. They used chemo and radiation. I myself have just recently been cured. I just don't want people to start freaking out thinking there is no hope when there is. Cancer is very frightening and there are a lot of horror stories, but there are many inspiring stories as well. It is also a very individual thing. Even people with the same kind of cancer may react differently to the same treatments.

Originally posted by nobodysavedme
The following table was published in the journal Clinical Oncology in December 2004. The results of this study were astonishing, showing that chemotherapy has an average 5-year survival success rate of just over 2 percent for ALL cancers!

So compare that to the general survival rate for cancer. And perhaps the wish for cancer sufferers to have those extra years. It's not all just statistics, and we have a lot more cancer survivors on this list that received chemo than had alternatives. Also a statistic to consider.

reply to post by nobodysavedme

I would guess that figure is for lung cancer and it's about right. It is a death sentence when you are diagnosed with lung cancer. Here is Cancer Research's list of 5 year survival rates for various types of cancer. Lung is at the bottom with 6% or something. Pancreatic cancer is 2%
Survival rates after 5 years

If I remember correctly chemotherapy nor radiation has ever been proven to cure cancer.

reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

Chemotherapy drugs are carcinogenic. Radiation causes cancer. Go figure...

Originally posted by LightSpeedDriver
reply to post by LittleBlackEagle

 

Chemotherapy drugs are carcinogenic. Radiation causes cancer. Go figure...

Indeed and I'm fairly certain it has been proven to make the pharmaceutical company's millions which is such a shame for the patients. I lost my mother and father inlaw to cancer. If you really want to see something do a YouTube search for " chasing the cure" a real eye opener.

It sounds sensible.
BUT... I did have a friend at one time who had cancer, and he received chemotherapy and went into remission. As far as I know, he has been fine since, so SOMETHING worked.

I do feel it important to point out that in my opinion chemotherapy should be considered useless and impractical, due to several documented and proven cures.

This is a very interesting alternative being considered here with new findings from Leeds University re Silver instead of Chemo. I've been trying to get to the source perhaps you can research it and understand it better.

members.beforeitsnews.com...

The following table was published in the journal Clinical Oncology in December 2004. The results of this study were astonishing, showing that chemotherapy has an average 5-year survival success rate of just over 2 percent for ALL cancers!

No.
The study does not show the survival rate for chemotherapy. It shows the difference between patients who received chemotherapy and those who received other therapies (primarily radiation). Chemo patients did 2% better than others.

For each malignancy, the absolute number to benefit was the product of (a) the total number of persons with that malignancy; (b) the proportion or subgroup(s) of that malignancy showing a benefit; and (c) the percentage increase in 5-year survival due solely to cytotoxic chemotherapy.

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

In my case, when I was first diagnosed with Hodgkin's Lymphoma I only received radiation therapy. I was in remission for five years but had a reoccurance. I then received only chemotherapy. That was 25 years ago. I am still cancer free. It seems the chemo worked on me much better than the radiation did.

If anyone is interested, here are the actual survival rates.
seer.cancer.gov...

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
If I remember correctly chemotherapy nor radiation has ever been proven to cure cancer.

If I remember correctly, radiation cured my prostate cancer.

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
If I remember correctly chemotherapy nor radiation has ever been proven to cure cancer.

If I remember correctly, radiation cured my prostate cancer.

Or maybe you never had cancer and was misdiagnosed as that is what this thread is about.

The false positive rate is huge of 10% to 30%

reply to post by nobodysavedme

I believe you may be talking about false positives from PSA screening.
Additional testing is done before treatment is recommended.

Originally posted by nobodysavedme

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck

Originally posted by LittleBlackEagle
If I remember correctly chemotherapy nor radiation has ever been proven to cure cancer.

If I remember correctly, radiation cured my prostate cancer.

Or maybe you never had cancer and was misdiagnosed as that is what this thread is about.

Or maybe I showed symptoms to begin with, my PSA was climbing and they confirmed the tumorous tissue through biopsy.

My cancer was pretty obvious because it was a huge brain tumor, no really chance of misdiagnosis. It required surgery, radiotherapy and chemo in 2002. It came back in 2007 where I had more surgery and chemo. So all in all 10 years and I'm still here, I still have a tumor in my head but it has been inactive for over 4 years now thanks to the treatments I've received. I feel pretty healthy 90% of the time so never complain about the treatments I have received. I certainly wouldn't be here today with out the Chemo. I can say the same for many others I have met through this experience.

Like Phage I had Hodgkin's Lymphoma, but I had chemo first and then radiation. I've been in remission for six years (once next Saturday comes around). I still have health problems, but I've also been the person that was always sick, so its nothing new.

Some cancers react to certain treatments better than others. I happened to be lucky (yes, lucky) to have a kind that actually does respond well to chemo and radiation. If I were to go to the doctor tomorrow and find out that I have another kind of cancer (at this point Lymphoma is pretty much ruled out, Leukemia, Breast, and Lung would be the most likely for me), I wouldn't jump on chemo and radiation. I would look into all of my options first, and then decide what to do. Chemo can do wonders for some people, but it can also be more of a curse than a blessing for others. What people have to do is look at all of their options first and then decide what is best for themselves.

Don't get me wrong, chemo especially is a barbaric way of saving someone, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't work for some people.

Chemo worked for me and others here in this thread. I know chemo and radiation can kill, but evidently for rasons I do not understand, it also cures. People often speak of natural treatments with herbs, not realizing that some people can have adverse reactions to them the same way people have with regular medicines.

It is a highly personal choice which method one will choose when they are faced with a diagnosis of cancer. Once again, I want people to know that traditional medicine does work. Many people do not trust doctors and in many cases I can understand why, but there are still some amazing doctors out there who genuinely care about their patients and will do everything in their power to help you.

We have to realize that many people, even when they have symptoms, refuse to go to the doctors. How many deaths could have been prevented had these people gone sooner?

Well it's good to see those of us here who have benefitted from these treatments and are still here to tell the tale.

I think we make more of a statement than any of the anti chemotherapy threads that so often appear on ATS.

It's obviously not perfect, but has a success rate higher than any alternative avenues. I'm not saying we should not explore alternative treatments, but I would hope anyone who gets diagnosed would make an educated decision on the best treatment's available.

reply to post by Night Star


Or maybe you never had cancer and was misdiagnosed as that is what this thread is about.

a success rate of 2% versus a a misdiagnoses rate of at least 10% .I don't know if you went to grade school but the figures suggest something.how can you have a 2% success rate if your starting subjects were 10% were wrongly diagnosed in the first place and never had cancer to start with?

answer us.

think of athletes on a starting line.

It is more likely you are alive because you never had cancer in the first place.

None of these tests are 100% accurate.

even the companies promoting these tests say there is 10% to 30% plus errors by doctors which are also larger.
And also the doctors make mistakes in interpretation too due to a large number of factors and variables.



T
the false positive rate is huge at 10% to 30%...