Cancer treatment

[Donut]

Originally posted by Attalus: LOL,*tongue firmly in cheek* Donut, I can tell you that there are a lot of surgeons that disagree with you. For example, chemotherapy and radiation are often necessary to precede successful surgery, sometimes they can take its place or be an alternative method(s). Sometimes, however, surgery is the only way to deal with a problem, and honest oncologists and radiologists will be the first to tell you that their methodologies are helpless in the presence of severe, life threatening malignancies. We call these "9-11" malignancies, dunno why.

mmmm Attalus. I can see we're on the same wavelength here. I agree that sometimes radical surgery is the only way but what would your radical surgeons do if secondaries were appearing thoughout the patient's system? Surely the only possible treatment would be by developing a 'silver bullet' which would cure the cancer?

These silver bullets are not often found lying about. They need to be developed by understanding the causes of cancer. Even if a cure can be found for the patient it may be necessary for him to alter his lifestyle even though this may be anathema to him.

And I seem to be arguing against my original post!

Am I too cynical? Are we talking about Cancer the diseas that kills humans through hijacking cells? or are we using metaphor for terrorism? Either way its an interesting post.

On the chance you are actually talking about cancer the disease and not the war on terrorism, I do recall a year or two ago, two researchers in the DC area had some "Miracle cure" for cancer...a cure for everyone....the medical world was agog, and much as I predicted those two guys have disappeared and nary a word from them or about their cure that was splashed on every newspapers page 1. What happened to them and their cure? did it get covered up by big drug companies who make millions on treatments and stand to loose money if a "cure" is found? Or were they frauds? or was the "cure" just an over hyped new treatment?

'tis the season to be cynical fa la la la la, la la la la

[ 12-02-2002, 10:16 AM: Message edited by: MagiK ]

Originally posted by Donut: They need to be developed by understanding the causes of cancer. Even if a cure can be found for the patient it may be necessary for him to alter his lifestyle even though this may be anathema to him. And I seem to be arguing against my original post!

I disagree, if you eradicate each and every cell prone to the malignancy there is no need to understand anything. Radical sterilization will work just fine.

[WillowIX]

Originally posted by MagiK: Am I too cynical? Are we talking about Cancer the diseas that kills humans through hijacking cells? or are we using metaphor for terrorism? Either way its an interesting post. On the chance you are actually talking about cancer the disease and not the war on terrorism, I do recall a year or two ago, two researchers in the DC area had some "Miracle cure" for cancer...a cure for everyone....the medical world was agog, and much as I predicted those two guys have disappeared and nary a word from them or about their cure that was splashed on every newspapers page 1. What happened to them and their cure? did it get covered up by big drug companies who make millions on treatments and stand to loose money if a "cure" is found? Or were they frauds? or was the "cure" just an over hyped new treatment? 'tis the season to be cynical fa la la la la, la la la la

If it´s the research I´m thinking about it turned out that the placebo was more efficient than their drug. So it never made the 2nd phase of clinical trials. From what I know there are at the moment three different cures that´s being evaluated at the moment. But with todays technology and knowledge it is impossible to cure cancer with a "miracle cure" [img]smile.gif[/img] War on terrorism?!? Nevermind, I don´t want to know

[Donut]

Originally posted by MagiK: I disagree, if you eradicate each and every cell prone to the malignancy there is no need to understand anything. Radical sterilization will work just fine.

Not so I'm afraid. All normal cells are prone to malignancy. It can be triggered by many things. If a patient is cured of smoking related cancer he will need to stop smoking or he may get the disease again. If we understand how carcinogens trigger malignancy we can begin to eradicate the disease.

Of course he has the choice to stop smoking or not. My point (or one of them) is that in the long run these choices will have to be made - even though we detest the idea of doing it.

Originally posted by Donut: Not so I'm afraid. All normal cells are prone to malignancy. It can be triggered by many things. If a patient is cured of smoking related cancer he will need to stop smoking or he may get the disease again. If we understand how carcinogens trigger malignancy we can begin to eradicate the disease. Of course he has the choice to stop smoking or not. My point (or one of them) is that in the long run these choices will have to be made - even though we detest the idea of doing it.

Hmmm this may or may not be. It appears upon cursory examination that the more serious malignancies are pretty much endemic to one particular cell group. While other cells may have deficiencies and may cause health problems, the current groups of cells that are being addressed, if removed from the patient all together would probably leave more than enough free resources to deal in a more humane and gentle fashion with the less severe malignant types.

I see the problem divided into two major groups. Group A being the cells that explode destroying not only themselves but as many other cells that are different from themselves as is possible doing widespread damge to the organism as a whole.

Whereas, Group B do tend to act up but usually in a more defined and directed sort of way. Group B can probably be soothed with ointments and creams without destroying the fabric of the host.

[Attalus]

Originally posted by Donut: mmmm Attalus. I can see we're on the same wavelength here. I agree that sometimes radical surgery is the only way but what would your radical surgeons do if secondaries were appearing thoughout the patient's system? Surely the only possible treatment would be by developing a 'silver bullet' which would cure the cancer? These silver bullets are not often found lying about. They need to be developed by understanding the causes of cancer. Even if a cure can be found for the patient it may be necessary for him to alter his lifestyle even though this may be anathema to him. And I seem to be arguing against my original post!

LOL, at least you admit it! *Sticks tongue into other cheek.* Well, the most successful surgeons of this ilk often remove the primary, regardless of the spread of metastases. In many of these cases, we have seen disappearance of the metastases, or at least shrinkage to the point where they are less trouble to the body politic. Of course, lifestyle changes often prevent the recurrence of this and other tumors, though the patient may object and even not comply.

*Aside to Willow: he's pulling your leg, dear.*

Errr I was not pulling Willow's Leg....I can if she wants but that would require a request from her

[Attalus]

Originally posted by MagiK: Errr I was not pulling Willow's Leg....I can if she wants but that would require a request from her

LOL, I was not referring to you, MagiK, but to our distinguished British friend, Sir Donut, K.C.B. However, if you and Willow want to get into leg-pulling, it's all right with me. [img]tongue.gif[/img]

[Sir Kenyth]

Cancer is nasty, plain and simple. Cell DNA are damaged (more common) or mutate randomly (less common). These damaged cells are now mis-programmed to do nothing of value except multiply rapidly. Your body does not see these cells as enemies because they are not chemically seen as intruders. They are left to run rampant. They hog resources, interfere with vital body processes, and crowd out healthy cells. They may break free and migrate to other areas of the body. Especially if located in the circulatory or lymphatic system. The only defense against these rogue cells is the fact that they are almost always inherently weaker than healthy cells. They succumb to the stresses of the Radio/Chemotherapy while healthy cells are generally just weakened. A horrible way to treat a disease, but the only one known. As far as a cure goes, if our own body can't distinguish between healthy and cancerous cells, it's unlikely we will be able to either with our current technology. Only once our complicated immune system is fully understood will we be able to make great advances in this area of medicine.