No because you had cancerous cells to begin with and were on a specific treatment regimen, you never touched or inhaled the chemicals in their unmixed concentrated state. However, these pharmacists and nurses were exposed to concentrated chemotherapy chemicals for hours a day, I'm sure the pharmacists at designated cancer centers are mixing these agents for 8-12 hours a day, 3-4 days a week for years on end. Therefore over their lifetime they are exposed to thousands of times more chemo agents that you were.

Chemo is like a lot of things, good in small doses for small amounts of time, extremely hazardous when someone is exposed for prolonged periods of time.

For some very interesting information regarding the treatment of cancer, go to Google Video and watch: "Run From The Cure - The Rick Simpson Story".

Prepare to be astounded.

Not to drag you down or anything, but I hope your Oncologist told you that over the course of your lifetime you are at much higher risk of developing cancer elsewhere in your body simply because you have had cancer once already. Stay strong, and never miss a check up.

(I am an Oncology-Certified Nurse)

yes, you definately do have a high risk of developing secondary cancers due to chemo and radiations that are used to fight the primary cancer. Read World without cancer and Alive and well and find out the truth about chemo and radiation therapies. Chemo is a carcinogen period. I have been diagnosed with terminal cancer that started as colon cancer. I did 3 complete rounds of chemo, five surgeries and radiation over a 3 year period, the cancer came back and spread to the liver, spleen and lung. I have started nutritional therapy along with B17 and have had no progression since January, this is my only hope since traditional therapies have stopped working. You do not realize what is happening to you since all you really want to here is what you have to do to cure it, the oncologists do not tell you the HAZARDS of the chemo and radiation and that you have an increased risk of dying from a secondary cancer from taking these. If you asked me 3 years ago about doing some alternative therapy I would have laughed too, it's not until you have nothing left or get sick and tired of being sick and tired that you will look and realize that there are alternatives.

Shelley- I am sure you had your chemo agents explained to you.I had mine explained to me.The percentages you received, versus years of exposure by choice of a different profession,put these folks at risk.Your cocktail mine as well,included anti-emetics(so you were not ill,) because these drugs were a poison.Call cancercare, have someone put your mind at rest over your chances versus that of these workers.And like all news articles, has a tendency to inflame.Don't worry,and congratulations on your care, and wellbeing

You are more likely to get a secondary cancer - however, this probably is because you are genetically predisposed to cancer to start with.

Having said that, 1 in 4 Americans will be diagnosed with cancer at some time in their lives. So, you certainly aren't alone in this.

There is some probability that your treatment will cause other cancers (you are basically exposing your body to chemicals and radiation designed to destroy living tissue); however, when you compare survivability rates without treatment to treatment, those numbers become relatively meaningless.

Enjoy the fact that you finished recieving chemo and do not worry about things that are out of your control.

My sister was saved by Chemo but I had no idea others were risking their health mixing this poison.....I hope those that are ill have a fast recovery and those that are mixing the drugs are taking special precautions...My real issue is that I would think this dread disease could be cured with the $40 billion spent studying it. I think curing cancer would bankrupt many treatment facilities and cause high health care unemployment. There is mega bucks in treating it but like Sulk vaccine...not much money in preventing or curing it. I hope I am wrong but greed does many bad things! Drug companies have questionable ethics from what I have witnessed anyway.

They do use a shotgun approach when dealing with cancer and many other diseases, this is why chemo makes people so sick, they are killing good cells along with the cancerous cells. Perhaps this is why they call it "practicing" medicine, the medical field is ever changing. It's changed quite a bit in the 3 years I've been a nurse.

Cancer isn't 1 disease like polio.

Not only do cancers of different tissues respond completely differently to different treatment regimens, but also, different cancers among those of the same tissue will respond differently, too.

Until the DNA of the cancer can be sequenced to determine exactly which genes are mutated, there will be no chance at treating cancer the way we treat things like staph infections.

serious - quite true. Additionally there are the multiple theories such as 'field cancerization' which postulates, and is likely valid, that various 'fields' in the body have been bombarded with carcinogens (for instance the mouth and delicate oral tissues of a man who has smoked for 30 years). THIS patient, after having been radiated and having undergone, chemo and a radical neck dissection will have multiple recurrences even after clean margins because the field is 'cancerized'. It's a horrible fact of oncogenic tumors that their virulence is unlike anything we see in other fields of treatment and care. As the age expectancy continues to rise, cancer is being diagnosed more often and fortunately Cancer research is very well funded (though some typesmore than others),

While it is true that Chemo/targeted therapy like omaya catheters and radioactive seed implants are harsh and devastating regimes, the trend now is to direct even electron beam tx to the tumor and only the tumor. It is the trend in drug R&D in GENERAL to stop giving oral therapy which must pass tax hepatic and renal systems (already stressed from the disease process itself) if a heavy gun shot to the site of the primary tumor itself can be brought to bear. Ice caps prevent some hair loss and popsicles DO lower the oral temperature thus offering SOME hope that apthous ulcers can be mimimized but often it seems like a desperate shell game. The horror of salvage protocols can be beyond the patient, and the patient's family to endure but hope cannot be turned off by anyone BUT the patient. Only he and or she and the physicians in charge of the care should manage these cases.

Ultimately - the quest in general is to bring the body and its systems to the brink of total annihiliation (death) and then, at the moment at which nothing more seems possible, yank it back from the jaws of the grim reaper hoping for a reprieve.

If there is ANY disease which has touched and or will touch each and every one of us it is Cancer. When advances are made in the field - everyone is jubilant. The neoplasm IS the enemy and killing it is the goal. The other current approach to CA is treating it like a chronic DZ similar to asthma. Trying to keep it controlled when total obliteration is not possible - is the choice of some patients and their families. It is a battle fought by many, many brave people. Our parents, ourselves, all of our loved ones, and the most horrendous of nature's assaults, when it strikes our CHILDREN. We must fight the good fight when called upon and remember to ENJOY our GOOD HEALTH when we are bless with it. Realizing how fragile like is, and how it can turn on a DIME.

You people seem informed but I still can't believe the motivation is as great to cure or prevent it as it is to TREAT it! Greed is evil.

I think investment is probably a big reason, after all pharmacists aren't cheap. But your wife and I are in the same boat, I'm also an RN and have been told by various hospitals that if I didn't like the way they were running things, I was free to leave, there were always new grad RNs who would do my job and cheaper.

Dacarls, I am in the HVAC business and have worked with hoods in restaurants, medical institutes and some hospital situations. I can't imagine not using 100% air exchange hoods in any of these situations. How could Government regulations overlook this kind of standard while taking the time to worry about what color extension cord is used on construction sites? For all who read this please understand I'm just making an ironic comparison here because I do feel like OSHA in general definately takes their work very seriously. I just can't believe they could miss this.

Decarls, I know exactly what you are saying - but be honest, you also know organic chemists who washed their hands with benzene.

People who are most exposed to toxic chemicals are more likely to become innured to the risks and to become cavalier with them.

This all happens because we are sheeple who are "naive and stupid," always thinking it is the gov`ts responsibility to fix the problem (well, unless it is regulating something you want) or trusting that corporate America will somehow do something for the common good. I look at the responding personnel to the BP gusher..... no one is wearing protective clothing, using respirators or taking any precautions. We already hear of people getting sick. Remember the Exxon Valdez? Half of those people are sick today. Remember Ground Zero from 9/11....... no protective gear, no respirators, and most are sick today. And collectively we just shrug our shoulders saying something should be done but not demanding that anything be done. Unless it affects us personally we just turn our eyes away. When I first read this story I was in no way surprised and that is just using my basic college biology and chemistry. I`m not the trained professionals as these people are.

have you ever been tested for idiots disease? if not you really need to be.

Did you read the article? They were putting these drugs out to the population without emphasizing the toxicity of them. They were told that there was minimal risk, and didn't even know that it could be airborne. It's a reality that can be changed. Life does have consequences. I think you should be the one mixing up the chemicals for our cancer patients, since you are so at peace with it, and willing to let the cards fall where they may.

I disagree that this is a risk that I have chosen to take as a nurse. I believe that this is why studies are conducted and updates to policies and procedures are made. Facilities recieve these studies and some ignore them citing cost containment-would you accept this risk?

Yes, we as nurses and hospital staff walk into situations where we may be exposed to many different pathogens (HIV, TB, MRSA, Hanta), or into potentially volitile situations with patients, but there is a trust that procedures and safe guards are in place to expose us to as little harm as possible.

I agree with knoman....did you take your idiot pill today Wilberta??

And I also agree with Jen-well said.

I am a nurse as well-one that has worked in oncology and with chemo agents. Yes, we run the risk of exposure everyday but that "isn't the chance we take". We are there to help people and fortunately, there have been huge improvements in the past decade that have reduced the risk. I had to follow very strict guidelines to minimize exposure. My previous and current employers have been very diligent in keeping up with OSHA training...

I did worry about chemo exposure while I worked in oncology-esp since I was trying to conceive at the time. And yes, accidents do happen but if you follow guidelines, it is relatively safe.

I think this article shows experiences before many of the current OHSA guidelines were put in place. It is extremely unfortunate that this woman, and others, went through what she did. I am glad she was able to share her story. It just reassures the need for ongoing safety practices and protection for workers.

I wish her peace....

I would think a person like you would love to purchase a car that was totally safe for you to drive and the company knew it wasnt...Sound familiar? But.....you drive it anyway. You are taking that risk anyway with the knowledge that you may be hurt or killed in that car because of negligence of the company you purchased it from. health care workers depend on good communication between their bosses and OSHA to keep them abreast of things that are just not safe . To protect ourselves. Yes, we chose this profession to help sick people recover and go home again, not to become sick ourselves and not be able to do our job taking care of possibly YOU in the hospital. Think about what you say in the future. You depend on us for good care, not understaffed, always calling out, sickly staff hanging over you hardly able to do their jobs.

Wilberta-

You are an idiot!!!!!!!!!!

Diana, pharmacists know MORE about the drugs they are working with than do the doctors who prescribe them. If anyone should have known the drugs were dangerous to work with, it was the pharmacists.

I am sure they knew they were dangerous - which is why they wore lab coats and gloves.

Working with them every day, though, makes you cavalier about these things.

The "I didn't know routine, doesn't fly." If they didn't know, they should have. After all, we all know what mustard gas did.

No not really.

Serious,

Where are these pharmacists? Most pharmas do not know anything about the drugs the prescribe.

If you have any meds talk to them about it. All they know how to do is read the card that is printed with your meds.

Endo- Unfortunate to say but the pharmacists at the chain-store pharmacies are generally not the best because they are usually so overwhelmed. That being said I'm a pharmacist student and we are REQUIRED by Federal Law to counsel every new prescription that goes through the pharmacy. However for older pharmacists it can be difficult to keep up with the constant new drugs on the market, so if you are on a new therapy give them a chance to look into it. Also it gets a bit old working 10 hour days counseling patients who do not care about their medications or what we have to say. The key here: ask questions! Take responsibility for your own health. Pharmacists DO know the most about the drugs, they devote 4 years of schooling to just drugs, compared to physicians who typically have 1 course throughout their entire education!!

As for the chemo hood objections- back in the day they didn't realize the cumulative effects of small exposure but the pharmacy industry has worked very hard to fix this! Look into the USP 797 guidelines, they are extensive and expensive to implement however you will find most hospitals are doing most if not all of the requirements, even if it means remodeling.

The only person I rely on for my drug information is myself (and chemical studies on medications). Although, unlike most people, I have taken many graduate level chemistry classes. I can understand organic chemistry, aquatic chemistry, pharmokinetics, metabolic pathways, and most other things important to understanding what chemicals do in your body.

Even young new pharmacists cannot keep up with the thousands of chemicals out there. On top of that, not all medications are prescribed for what they were designed for. You throw in the fact that depending on the person a medication can have opposite to no effect, and it is impossible for a pharmacist to know even a fraction of what is going on (let alone everything).

1 in 4 Americans will be diagnosed with cancer in their lifetimes.

How do you propose we determine which cancer patients would not have developed cancer regardless of what they ate, worked with, drank, breathed in, etc???

I have been making chemo for 30 years as a pharmacy technician. Although the exposure is far less than it used to be, we are still always exposed. In my 30 years though, I have NEVER seen a Phamacist make a chemo. Pharmacy technicians as a rule do all mixing in major hospitals and this article makes me want to push the hospital I am currently at to do urine and blood tests on all of us. Prior to getting a proper hood, many of us had miscarriages and now I honestly wonder what else will happen to us.

Milkshake & Pat - check with your employee health department about monitoring. I just found out this year (after 6 years in the system...) that my hospital offers bloodwork monitoring yearly for employees handling chemo.

Are you seriously that ignorant? Frankly, we shouldn't be giving chemo to people in their 80s and 90s. It's harder on them than the disease and will provide very little benefit.

Nothing surprises me these days. Given that our health care system is financially broke, some bureaucrat will do a report on the costs of administering chemo and will see a cost savings.

After all, Obama said his health care bill will save 148 billion over 10 years.

148 billion. We spend that much in 3 weeks.

A lot of elderly persons don't want chemo and will refuse it.. My mother didn't want chemo, she was scared to death (she was 79) but she wasn't ready to die either. The gyn/oncl team really did the old soft cell. " Smaller, weekly doses, generally tolerated well, chemo has come such a long way in the last 10 yrs blah blah blah." When I grilled the doctor after her death , 4 mos into treatment he made a strange comment about how in the UK they won't give you a ventilator if you're over 60 yrs old.. I guess his point was we should be grateful they condescended to "Treat" my elderly mother....I think if they were more open and honest to people about the horrible SE vs. the minimal benefits for advanced cancer, a lot more people would refuse chemo regardless of any HC reform.

I am 57 years old and in perfect health. I am an atheist and unafraid to die, unlike most Christians. At my age, I would not endure chemo. Old people who hang on to the very last molecule of oxygen they can get through whatever tube are simply cowards and an embarrassment to their species. Man up and die, sometime.

denverrocks:

I agree, this headline should read;

Life extending cancer drugs may put workers' lives at risk

I don't think these drugs should be used at all, regardless of age.

They may seem to work in the short term but, the cancer always returns.

Plus there are many nasty side effects.

I watched my wife tortured by the medical professions with these drugs and told she was in remission several times before she died of Leukemia

She was only 50.

Your Doctor was talking through the back of his head about the UK! Of course patients here in the UK over 60 get venitaltors if they need them. All my elderly relatives have all been offered a wide variety of treatment appropriate to their various illnesses. The end stage of their lives have been handled with care, sensitivity and appropriate medical interventions!

Haven't you noticed? There is no Obamacare! We didn't get single payer health coverage, or even a public option. All we got was more business for the already bloated insurance industry. It's time you turned off Fox News and gave your brain some air.

really: you need to have your head examined...

Really= hope that you are wrong, as I believe EVERYONE gets to imake their choices on when they meet their maker and if Obamacare holds help back, or denies care- that is tragic, and grist to the mil of malpractice carriers/lawyers

Many are already denied these drugs because of lack of coverage.

denverrocks

"Are you seriously that ignorant? Frankly, we shouldn't be giving chemo to people in their 80s and 90s. It's harder on them than the disease and will provide very little benefit."

I know a lady who has had cancer for 20 years and is now in her 90's and very much alive, thanks in part to chemo. She still drives. I'm sure she is glad it is not your choice to throw her under a bus because you think she is too old.

Regarding school science labs, I know for a fact that back in the mid 80's high schools had students run experiments with a variety of rocks and minerals in their earth science classes. They'd be given a series of minerals and be instructed on how to test each one for hardness. Methods used were as simple as how easily the sample could be scratched with a fingernail, or how easily it broke up when dragged across a rough porcelain dish. One of the many samples passed out in abundance for each student to experiment with was raw asbestos. It amazed me how ignorant the administration and teaching staff were regarding the hazards of asbestos exposure. Students were allowed to flake and powder up asbestos samples and then excused to go to their next class or to lunch with these minute fibers all over them. Look at the number of asbestosis and mesothelioma cases coming to light now-a-days. It's unreal.

When I was a kid in grade school in the 1960's, we used a powdered asbestos mixture as a modeling medium in art class. The teacher asked for kids to volunteer to mix the powder up with water. We mixed in in a big tub with our bare hands. I was "lucky" enough to have done this twice. I shuddered thinking back on this in the 1970's when the dangers of asbestos insulation were made public and it became required by law to remove it from all buildings.

Scary stuff but I've made it to 55 with no apparent illness. I can't help but wonder how my old classmates are doing though,...

Let me tell you from personal experience. If you were diagnosed with cancer, you would do ANYTHING to live. My husband has had cancer twice. So I have been through the chemo, radiation and surgeries not once, but twice with him. During this time I have seen a 38 year old mother fight to live for her small children. I have watched women and men with lung cancer trying to live another 6 months. It was humbling and devastating to watch.

You don't KNOW what you will do until you get cancer. And let me tell you...the will to live is very strong. Even if you are only buying a little time.

I was diagnosed with colon cancer in January 2006 and underwent the cancer trifecta -- surgergy, chemo, radiation and even more chemo. They threw the kitchen sink at me and sometimes I wondered if the cure was worse than the disease.

However, Mrs. Peach is right -- once you are diagnosed with a life threatening disease like cancer you will do anything to live. Getting treated for cancer is unpleasant at best and there were times when I felt terrible. However, I was determined to do whatever it took to give myself the best chance to survive.

I am now 4 1/2 years out from my initial diagnosis and while my life is not the same as before I was treated for cancer I try to make the best of it and am thankful I am still alive at age 57.

Exactly. If it's design can be absorbed through the skin and air doesn't that mean that the people who get chemo therapy expose their loved ones to the chemicals through touch and expelling air from the lungs? I would feel like a living time bomb.

there is some risk-but precautions are taught to minimize it....

And thank you for your comment....have you hugged a nurse today???

Diana--the risk runs from a patient's blood and body fluids....NOT air and skin

Diana, Thank you. That is the same thing my Dr. told me when I asked.

Correction-OhioMom, Thank you. I put the wrong name on my previous post #13.4

OhioMom -

there is some risk - but precautions are taught to minimize it....

Somehow, I suspect I wasn't the only one that fell through the cracks when those precautions were being taught.

yah it seems that the blood cancers respond well to these things..vs other types.

That's awesome!

OK Jimmy and best to MOM

So glad Mom, is doing good. cancer is rampant in my family, Mother and brother died of Pancreatic, and other bro died of throat cancer. So I think my chances are not so good that I won't get it, I am reading every post and getting an education. Thanks to all for the info, and may God's blessings continue to be showered on your mother.....

Oh, God Bless to Mom and you! Jimmy, what a great story! Even those who have lost so much (I lost my mom @ 61 to AML in less than a year) cheer those who make it!

Jester, I am going through Pancreatic cancer right now. When I told one of my oncologists that my father & my aunt on my mothers' side both died of adenocarcinoma she told me that it is definately hereditary related & that if I have any brothers or sisters they need to be checked as often as possible & that insurance will pay for endoscopic ultrasound every so often. In my case I felt pain that finally led to a CT scan that caught it. This rearly causes pain early enough to catch it in time for a good outcome. I am one of the few lucky ones and feel it my duty to spread the info to make others aware. Be checked as often as possible when you know you are high risk and be aware of any new pain in the pancreas area you have never felt before.

PS When I say I am lucky I don't mean I have beat it because I still have tests and another chemo to go as standard procedure. What I mean is lucky to have had early diagnosis of The Silent Killer.

James, I understand what you are saying. It was something I would have written myself. In my world I watch people give up all their will to the health care profs after a diagnosis of cancer. The profs say we've got to do this, and they just go along with it, because the people look at this diagnosis the way a prisoner reacts to a court room death sentence....they immediately want to do anything they can to avoid it, and our health care system holds out the "hope" of escaping the sentence. It's the quietest type of desperation I have ever witnessed. All of us talking here today could go on and on about this, and it is very important to continue discussing it.

There are much safer treatments available for cancer which are not even considered by the medical profession. Believe it or not doctors get their education on current treatments from the big pharmaceutical corporations and not from their medical school training. If they step outside the box of "accepted treatments" they can lose their license to practice medicine. Thus they, like the patient, are restricted to the status quo. There are alternative treatments that one rarely hears about.

For some very interesting information regarding the treatment of cancer, go to Google Video and watch: "Run From The Cure - The Rick Simpson Story".

Prepare to be astounded.

Jherek, are you a doctor? Your info is completely wrong....

No Jherek, medical doctors do not receive their education from pharm companies. Did you go to medical school? I did.

I doubt you know what you are talking about when you speak of "safer treatments" for cancer. What are they then? If I'm correct, that Rick Simpson story you speak of advocates using marijuana to treat cancer. In most studies, this is not the case. It seems that you are selectively picking studies to back you own theory, rather than the general consensus of most studies that conclude that marijuana use will most likely increase cancer risks.

And to someone below who speaks of Suzanne Sommer's alternative treatments, that is probably the most uninformed, dangerous person you could listen to about your health. She is an actress, not a medical professional.

Thank you rayray

hey from prior posts-Jherek is not the sharpest knife in the drawer.Anyone throwing out quotes- watch out, misrepresenting videos are mean

Well naysayers, if you develop cancer feel free to have pieces chopped out of your body and be dosed with radiation and hideously toxic drugs until you are hairless, puking pain wracked spectre; who then dies anyway.

If I develop cancer I will use the treatments that I feel will take care of the disease. If I die anyway, at least I will not have gone through the agonies that you will suffer. Each to their own.

And RayRay, if you can't admit as a physician that you find out about current drug treatments from the big pharmaceutical corporations via their salespeople, then you are a damned liar. You also know full well that if you step outside the box of "accepted treatments" you can lose your license to practice medicine.

RayRay also says, "If I'm correct, that Rick Simpson story you speak of advocates using marijuana to treat cancer."

"If"? "If"? YOU DIDN'T EVEN WATCH THE VIDEO!!! You don't even have the courage to LOOK at the information and yet you spread your vile propaganda to protect the billion dollar a year cancer "treatment" industry and your own income that comes in part from peddling toxic drugs to sick people, only to see them die in hopeless misery. You are a sad and pathetic human being.

For those who have the courage to look for themselves, investigate the matter fully and form their own opinions, go to Google Video and watch: "Run From The Cure - The Rick Simpson Story".

As for Joan: Like many on Newsvine you present an argument ad hominem abusive; that is, belittling one's opponent in an attempt to invalidate their argument. This tactic is logically fallacious because insults and even true negative facts about the opponent's personal character have nothing to do with the logical merits of the opponent's arguments or assertions or whether what they state is factual or not.

If Albert Einstein says the grass is red and a drivelling idiot with an IQ of 55 says the grass is green, it is irrelevant that Einstein is a genius and the idiot is an idiot. The grass is either red or it is green.

Thos who have the courage and the wit to look at the facts will do so and will thereby determine the truth. Those who wish to listen to "authorities", lies and propaganda will be led down the garden path.

By the way, I have been a member of Mensa since I was 15 years old. I won membership by scoring 176 on an IQ test, which puts me in the top 1% of the population by the measure on the intelligence quotient. So even your argument ad hominem is fallacious per its own logical standard.

Jherek Carnelian, it is nice to know you have an IQ of 176. Mine is 135, not as high as yours, and yet I too could belong to Mensa if I desired. Having an IQ that high does not make you any smarter better than anyone else. It only means you have the ability to learn more and retain it better than some.

I watched my father die with lung cancer in 1965, at the age of 49. He was still a young man in my opinion. I had the great fortune to have been working as a sheet metal worker for a contractor in the hospital where he was and eventually died. He was there for two weeks. I am sure that if you had ever watched someone as close to you as my father and I were that you would feel differently. My youngest brother was in the Air Force at the time and stationed in the Philippines. The gov would not let him come home before his scheduled departure date. The day he arrived home my three brothers and I went to the hospital to see him. As we left they all said he would not live until the morning. They were right. If there is anything or any treatment that will help a person survive that terrible disease I believe they should be allowed to do it. I do not believe in a lot of these studies that say that marijuana is the cure all for so many diseases. It is just another idiots excuse for being able to get stoned. There are however promising studies at many major universities around the world that show promise for some cures from natural substances such as turcumin. They have not been tested and researched to the satisfaction of the FDA to warrant the claim of a cure. I will say this that if after having watched my father die. That if there was an approved cure for cancer from eating moon dust. I would if I had to fly to the moon with out aid of a space ship or suit to get the cure. I also watched a friend die of prostrate cancer before I came to China. He refused to take chemo.

Love Sonnet, my sympathies for your losses. Both my father and mother died from intestinal cancer, so I can certainly relate to the pain of losing a loved one from that horrible disease. I currently have an brother who has had one of his lungs removed due to cancer and is currently undergoing chemotherapy. I sent him a letter advising him that there are alternative treatments but didn't even receive a response. That's his choice.

The "accepted treatments" for cancer are extremely painful and damaging to the body. They are also not particularly successful. It is my opinion that a person has a right to select their own treatments, whether others think those treatments are foolish pipe dreams or not. If surgery, radiation and chemotherapy were the only treatments available for cancer and I contracted cancer, I personally would still not use them. I would rather spend the rest of my short life on a morphine drip until I expired.

I have the peculiar idea that this life is not all their is and that we are all immortal spiritual beings who pass on to another existence. My body is merely a vessel for myself as a spiritual entity at present and I do not worship a mere body so much that I wish to experience the end of its life suffering chemical torture. The happy haze of morphine intoxication appeals more to me. Perhaps others would think differently; but again, that is their choice.

I do not however use cannabis as an intoxicant. It does not interest me in the least. if you actually watch the video I recommended, you will learn that the therapeutic dose of the cannabis extract is an orally administered quantity about the size of a grain of rice, daily for three months. This is not a psychoactive quantity of THC. You sound like an intelligent person, so please do not make the error made by the less than bright of leaping to conclusions before you have fully understood all the information.

There are indeed natural treatments available for many illnesses that are far more effective than the "orthodox" treatments sold my the pahrmaceutical companies and the medical profession.

Having a high IQ does make one smarter than others. That's what "IQ" is: Intelligence Quotient or a measure of the level of intelligence. An IQ of 135 or higher puts one in the top 2% of the population. Intelligence is more than the ability to learn and retain information, it is also the ability to think with information and draw valid conclusions.

Does a high IQ make one "better" than others? It depends what one means by "better". The higher the IQ, the better one can think but it doesn't necessarily make one more moral, musically gifted, charming, or have more of other useful human talents.

I can state, without being vain, that I can think better than most people I have met. Part of being able to think better is seeking out, understanding and applying information based on the value of the information itself without regard to the bias of others. I personally don't care what a doctor thinks or what the FDA think or what my accountant or what the dude that collects my trash thinks. I evaluate information for myself and apply what I believe to be useful. If I make an error, then it is on my head and I can blame no-one but myself.

As far as I am concerned, a person who does not think for themselves but who takes their cues from some "expert" is simply a fool.

The video is called "Run From The Cure - The Rick Simpson Story". Watch it, understand it and then either use the information or not. That's your choice.

Here are two other extremely effective natural treatments for debilitating diseases:

Serrapeptase, an inexpensive orally administered enzyme that will control asthma. No side effects have been observed from using serrapeptase.

For more information go to: http://www.serrapeptase.info/

Feverfew is a herb that can help prevent or lessen the symptoms of migraine headaches. It can have side effects.

See: http://www.holistichealthtools.com/headache.html

These natural remedies do not appeal to the drug companies because they cannot be patented and therefore cannot produce income for them. Pharmaceutical companies, like any business exist to earn profits first. The health of their customers is of secondary important to those companies. Always bear this in mid when you consider information provided by a pharmaceutical company.

Just curious, has anyone here read about "alkaline diet", "body pH", or the avoidance of acidic foods? I read a couple of good articles about it recently.

Basically it is saying most diseases (including cancer) are caused by human body's tissues being too acidic.

many things 'cause' cancer and many theories abound. The fact is that cancer is complex and the most important theory is that WE ALL 'have' Cancer, but it's a matter of WHEN our bodies decide to let cancer 'in'. Immunity and genetics are both massively significant - as are the myriad carcinogens which bombard us daily. Trying to simplify (@Simplify 3000) with the pH as the causative agent is just not enough.

Do you know anyone who has developed cancer? Do you know anyone who has died from cancer? Think of family, co-workers, neighbors, friends,... the list is getting long isn’t it?

So you ask why there is an epidemic of cancer in the USA? Well, one reason is that one hundred years ago, there was no federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to regulate the disposal of hazardous waste and few people knew how toxic chemicals might affect the environment, and more importantly, the health of those living nearby. You know, the EPA that wants to study every mine and dam and power plant and chemical factory before we build it.

So back in the good old days, before that "nuisance" called the EPA came along, tons of industrial manufacturing byproducts were dumped into pits, rivers, or the ocean. It collected in back lots of factories, in the dark basements of warehouses and in dumps and landfills all over America. At some of the worst places, it leached into the ground and contaminated drinking water. Places like these are called "Superfund" sites, and they contain some of the most toxic real estate in America.

Cleaning up these Superfund sites will take trillions of dollars, and perhaps 100 years or more. And this generation - and subsequent ones - will have to pony up the cash to pay for it.

Love Canal, once envisioned to be a 1910 turn-of-the-century model community near Niagara Falls, is perhaps the most famous example of a dream turned into a horrible environmental nightmare.

These toxic chemicals - that seeped into dozens of backyards - increased levels of birth defects, cancer and other diseases, prompting then President Jimmy Carter to offer federal assistance to relocate residents and demolish homes and a school.

Back in January 1979, Eckardt C. Beck, then an EPA administrator, wrote: "Love Canal is one of the most appalling environmental tragedies in American history. We suspect that there are hundreds of such chemical dump sites across this nation.

However, Beck was way off on his estimates: There are tens of thousands of toxic Superfund sites in the United States, and many have already affected the lives of nearby residents and ecosystems that surround them. Sadly, the United States has the dubious honor of having more toxicity than any other country in the world - although China and India are hot on America’s heels.

On the website of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), you can browse a map of the 1,305 worst sites in the United States*. You might be surprised to learn how close you are to one: Eleven million people live less than one mile from a Superfund site.

* Note that the EPA website link is:

www.epa.gov/superfund/sites/index.htm

Shannon, I would like to take this time to THANK you and all others in the medical field who are compassionate enough to make a patient like myself feel like I have been treated as if I am your family. I had Whipple Procedure on 3/30/10 and my treatment and handling from surgeons, nurses, and everyone else in the hospital and at Moffit for chemo and radiation has been so outstanding it puts tears in my eyes when I think about the kind of outstanding care I have been blessed with.

P.S. I was very early diagnosis of adenocarcinoma (I think I spelled that right) and fully expect to be one of the few survivors. Again, Thanks for all of you that care this much during the hardest time a person can go through!!! Keep up the good work.

Shannon, Thank you ever so much for your words of wisdom in the midst of all the silliness I've read regarding this issue. I am a cancer survivor of eleven years. Diagnosed at age 34 with an aggressive type breast cancer, with two little girls ages one and two and a wonderful husband, I took traditional chemo treatment. When I look at my beautiful pre-teen girls and celebrate 25 years with my faithful husband, I am ever so glad I took the treatment. The fact of the matter is that no one knows what tomorrow holds. For now, God has made a way for people like myself to receive treatment that will offer an extended life. Is it the best or right way? I don't know, but until viable alternatives are discovered I am grateful every day that chemo is available. Like a lot of other things, the long-term effects are unknown. Until the effects are known and corrections can be made in policy and procedure, my deepest thanks goes to God for His infinite wisdom and to people like you who have answered His call to care for the sick, sometimes at your own risk. This is love at its best.

More like seek and you will not live long -so take the advice of some of these quacks.

Suzanne Somers is another one of those idiots. Her type of breast cancer was a "cake walk." She made it sound like she was on her "last legs." Not hardly the case.

Yoga- maybe you ,personally will be responsible for downward arrows , thank you

Read my post above.

No one's talking about the effects of chemo? Then why did you not elaborate on the alternatives to chemo?

I agree. Name some. How about shark cartilage? People thought it could cure cancer because nobody saw a shark with cancer. Studies were done... IT DID NOT WORK! Just being a Ph D in Pharmacology does not mean a thing if you are not involved in the research

D,Saurora- unless their doctor is an idiot and a quack- they know their exposure and what might happen

Old Bohemian has lots of interesting points to make both in his post above and in replies to other posts. Cancer treatment is currently barbaric. I may not have a M.D. degree but I have worked in a Health Sciences Center/medical school conducting research for the last 18 years. I have seen the curriculum for the medical students. There is little to no information about nutrition to keep our bodies healthy; they are taught to prescribe a drug and move the patient out of the office as quickly as possible. For your information, medical schools get much of their funding from the government which funnels it through NIH and FDA. Both of those (and all of your congresspeople) are beholden to lobbyists paid by big Pharma.

Shark cartilage is something that was looked at many years ago. No it didn't work, but having proper diet to restore immune function, proper sleep patterns (not 6 hours but 8-9 hours per night), acupuncture and natural products (not man made toxic chemicals) that allow the body to heal itself do work. Every study that has looked at these types of treatments has shown better results, but they can't get published because they don't have enough people in them to satisfy FDA requirements. It is a circular problem. They won't approve the treatments because there aren't enough studies, but there is no funding for the studies because the pharmaceutical companies can't patent natural ingredients. Additionally, many doctors who try to find alternatives to conventional chemotherapy are prosecuted for "prescribing non-FDA approved drugs" and have their medical licenses taken away. I do mean prosecuted, not persecuted even though that happens as well. Not many are brave enough to risk their livelihood to fight against the current system.

I salute all those who have survived cancer. My best friend is currently fighting liver cancer for the second time. For those who have never seen a loved one suffer through the debilitating side effects of chemo, it is something you will never forget. I hope you never have to go through it, but I firmly believe that there is a better way.

Read my post #15.2

OF COURSE future generations will be able to say that the treatments we use today are barbaric. Surgical instruments look like instruments of torture, but last century anesthesia was invented and now people do not have to be held down to undergo surgery.

Syphillis used to be treated with milk injections that cause high fever that may not have cured the disease, but delayed its progress. Polio was once treated with hot packs. Now it is prevented by vaccine.

The things you mention, such as proper diet, exercise, avoiding carcinogens, etc. prevent cancer, but they will not cure it except maybe in the rarest of circumstances. Treatments for cancer now include monoclonal antibodies and targeted therapy such as tyrosine kinase inhibitors that will put cancer in remission with less toxicity than the older chemotherapy drugs, but they still have side effects. I doubt we will ever be able to avoid side effects. They are part of life.

You are very right about one thing. If pharma cannot make money off of a treatment they will not market it and they really may try to keep it from being marketed. Know who was in the room when the Health Care Bill was passed this year? Big Pharma, big insurance companies and the Senators they were lobbying. Doctors were removed in handcuffs to keep them from being involved. You can go to Frontline, just google it, and see who is really making the money and making the Health Care laws.

well written commonsense....and congrats on your survival! I wish you well...

congratulations

See my post #15.2

Where the heck does he work so I can make sure to stay away...

I am fortunate to have one of the world's best Cancer treatment hospitals here in my city....do they know everything? No, that's why there is ongoing research. But to say they misdiagnose just to have "cure rates" is ridiculous. I am not saying this never happens anywhere-but for most reputable hospitals, they do everything they can to diagnose and treat. Chemo is not always first choice....surgery is not always first choice....some choose not to treat. It's all a patient's personal choice. They are given the information to make an informed decision. Second, even third opinions are always encouraged. If you are ever diagnosed with any disease, get educated, get second opinions, and do what is best for you and your family....

I agree. What does he do, empty the garbage can? When you find a lump or have and abnormal blood test or x-ray then let's see if you feel the same way.

sorry people but the Old Bohemian has a very good point. i said once before and i'll say it again, cancer is a money maker.a relative of mine is taking the pill form of chemo, and her exact words are the medicine is going to to kill me before the cancer.

i believe they have got to come up with more alternatives besides chemo. that garbage is 50 or 60 yrs. old.i know it supposedly saves lives but how many times the cancer comes back again any way and they have to go through all over again.

i'm sick of the chemo routine. there's got to be something better,or they should come up with something better. time to ditch the chemo.

no offense to anyone on chemo that's your call.do what you think is best.

i agree with the Old Bohemian

OhioMom;

He works in back east.

Where did you get your medical degree?

Until you've seen some someone treated and die from cancer, there is no way you could understand.

Jack;

He is a Oncologist, not the janitor.

Just remember, doesn't matter if you live or die, the doctor and hospital still get paid.

And, the worse the disease, the more they make.

Gloria;

Thank You

Old..I have been a registered nurse for 18 years-many of which were spend working in oncology...now I am a hospice nurse (have been for 8 years) and see people dying from cancer everyday.

Any other questions on my "qualifications" to answer these questions????

OhioMom:

Being a member of the medical profession you are unable or unwilling to see the problems.

You have a right to express your opinion.

However, I don't have to agree with it.

Having a loved one die in you arms is not the same as a patient dying.

Old Bohemian i'm sorry for your loss.both of you have see and saw death in two different ways.your right sir you are both entitled to your opinion. again my sympathy sir.

Old Bohemian, you are a synic of the highest order. Your brother in law is worse, if he is in fact an oncologist. There are Tumor Boards, Ethics Committees, malpractice lawyer, licensure boards, malpractice insurance committees and national commissions (such as the Joint Commission for Accreditation of Hospitals) that would intervene in any doctors practice if he were treating cancers that were never proven. Pathologists go to great lengths to prove that tissue contains cancer. They do special stains, tumor markers, flow cytometry and chromasome analysis to determine what is and is not cancer. This usually occurs with the patient's family doctor, a surgeon and an oncologist involved before the biopsy is even done.

Usually, but not always, the doctors and nurses get paid wheather you live of die but if there are too many deaths the same people I mentioned above intervene, which means loss of licensure or even prosecution for a felony. The undertaker gets paid too, and don't forget taxes.

Of course no one feels as much pain as an immediate family member. That does not mean that the nurses and doctors do not have compassion or that they do not grieve over the death of a patient.

Jack,

There is always the probability of a false positive or false negative. However, I do not agree with the term "most" that old is using. In fact, I will go so far as to say it is very rare. The probability of an abnormal growth is relatively high. The probability of a malignancy is relatively low.