The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: What cancer therapies are available?  (Read 38087 times)

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8676
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #75 on: 24/10/2010 09:50:06 »
"Yet aspirin creates a whole new lot of adverse effects.

I dont think i have to explain any further. "
Yes you do.
You need to tell us what those new adverse effects are.
I have been asking you to do this, as clearly as I could, in big letters for some time now and you have refused to answer it.

"and I dont remember him asking that particular question in those words."

These are the exact words, and I like an answer.

WHAT ARE THE BRAND NEW HEALTH RISKS?
« Last Edit: 24/10/2010 14:18:34 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline echochartruse

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 395
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #76 on: 24/10/2010 21:05:01 »
The first mention of Willow bark was by Bored chemist post 325380 2/10/10. without evidence in support of his statement.

Ben V, I asked you in my post 326286 10/10/10 “Has cloves ever been responsible for tumors?” in response to your statement that cloves contain a tumour promoting chemical that the medicalised version would have removed. Your comment came without supporting evidence and without replying to my question.

My statement was  - why synthesise/create a product when we can use the natural form that is freely available?

Bored chemist’s statement “I said that it would make sense to use a purified product rather than the mixture of compounds formed in a plant... The other thing I said was that you can take something from a plant and modify it to make it more effective.”

OK answered in simple terms.

My next question was if the plant is easily available and works without adverse effect why do we need to synthesise it, such as Radium weed and Cloves.
Not once did I say that natural things are good for you as BC assumed.
When i said “then we should be well informed about our choices and the positive effects and negative effects of all natural and synthetic remedies. to make their own informed choice.”

Natural medication should be ‘prime’ I meant that take away the natural component and some medical therapies may not exist.  Natural components which have been proven to be effective should not need to be synthesised. As this synthesisation creates a whole new set of health risks which I have posted here again....(see my previous post 327823)
“Toxic if swallowed. Irritating to eyes, respiratory system and skin.
Potential Health Effects Eye:
Causes eye irritation.
Skin:
Causes skin irritation. May cause dermatitis. May be harmful if absorbed through the skin.
Ingestion: May cause irritation of the digestive tract. May cause liver and kidney damage. Ingestion may cause high blood pressure, labored breathing, unsteady gait, lung edema, and coma. Human systemic effects include acute renal failure, acute tubular necrosis, cough, diarrhea, dyspnea (labored breathing), headache, hypermitility, nausea, vomiting, ulceration or bleeding from stomach.
Toxic if swallowed.
Inhalation:
Causes respiratory tract irritation. Aspiration may lead to pulmonary edema. May be harmful  if inhaled.”

Bored Chemist's quote
Quote
Modern drug design looks at the molecular level at parts of the body- for example the phosphodiesterase enzyme.
Then it produces chemicals (that are entirely synthetic) which will bind to that molecule - for example, the enzyme and inhibit it.
then they check to see if that compound actually does inhibit the enzyme in a chemical assay.
If it does they test it in animals.
If it's not too toxic and it does its job they test it in humans..

Are you saying if it kills aminals then it can be tested on humans? such as Saccharin?

In regard to Aspirin/willow bark.

you are asking me to compare the 2 even though I was not the person who firstly stated Willow bark.

Well I have and it appears to me that all the synthesisation to create the purified product and the modification of the substance to make it more effective has not been proven but Aspirin's toxicity is apparently higher or the same as Willow bark.

unless you can prove different and since BC introduced Willow bark into this forum I think it's his duty to back up his statement not me.

I ask again... If the natural product is no different in effectiveness, toxicity etc, Why do it?
is it just another  'political dogma'?
 

Offline Variola

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1063
  • Everyone should beware of The Pox...
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #77 on: 24/10/2010 21:48:26 »
Quote
I ask again... If the natural product is no different in effectiveness, toxicity etc, Why do it?
is it just another  'political dogma'?

And you have been told why, repeatedly by both BC and myself.

Why do you keep ignoring the answers? Why keep asking the same question over and over to get mileage out of your anti-pharma stance.

This is why you have been accused of trolling Echo.
 

Offline rosy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1018
  • Chemistry
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #78 on: 24/10/2010 22:38:08 »
OK, Echo, please read this summary of the willow bark/aspirin question. It is merely a summary of information other people have posted elsewhere in this thread.

Dried, powdered willow bark has been used for thousands of years to treat pain and fever. Dried, ground-up willow bark was reasonably effective, but since the amount of the active ingredient (in this case salicylic acid) in any plant is very variable, depending on the growing conditions, time of year, etc., it was impossible to know exactly what dose was being administered on any given occasion. (This is a problem with "herbal" medicines generally.)

In the 19th century it became possible to isolate salicylic acid, and accurate doses could be given, but the side effects, notably a tendency to cause gastric bleeding, were a major problem.

It was discovered that salicylic acid could be chemically modified to form acetylsalicylic acid, and that this had similar pain and fever suppressing properties but a markedly improved side effect profile. This acetylsalicylic acid is commonly known as aspirin. Aspirin still has some side effects, most drugs do. We can chose to take them or not (that's what the information leaflet in the packaging is for).

 

Offline rosy

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1018
  • Chemistry
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #79 on: 24/10/2010 22:51:03 »
Quote
If the natural product is no different in effectiveness, toxicity etc, Why do it?

That's one hell of an "if".

Using the ground-up, crude plant material is foolhardy, because one doesn't know from one batch to the next what the concentration of the different ingredients may be. That being so, an overdose, or an insufficient dose, becomes not so much a risk as a likelihood.

Isolating a pure chemical compound from a natural source is certainly sometimes a useful way of obtaining a drug (penicillin, from mould, is a case in point). But once we know the chemical structure of a particular drug molecule, it makes not a shred of difference whether we isolate it from a plant (or whatever) or whether we synthesise it in the lab. So we do whatever is the most efficient (it may not be possibly to harvest sufficient of the plant of interest for example).

Beyond that, modifications to the molecular structure are all aimed at making the drug better, either by improving its efficacy, or reducing its side effects. The advantage of aspirin over salicylic acid is that it has fewer side effects. Many drugs used against bacteria or parasites (for example penicillins antibiotics or artemisinins for malaria are used initially in their natural form, but as the target infectious agents develop resistance chemically modified versions are often used because whereas the original drug is no longer effective, the modified version is.

So no. Not a political dogma. I hope that answers your question.
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8676
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #80 on: 25/10/2010 07:06:02 »
"Are you saying if it kills aminals then it can be tested on humans? such as Saccharin?
"
Yes, of course I am.
All drugs are toxic because all things are toxic.
It's a good idea to have a rough estimate of that toxicity , measured in animals, before giving it to humans.

I don't think I have to say much about willow bark; I only introduced it as an example of an outdated natural remedy. Rosy has described it and its history quite enough.
Now, please answer the question
WHAT ARE THE BRAND NEW HEALTH RISKS?
 

Offline JimBob

  • Global Moderator
  • Neilep Level Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 6564
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Moderator
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #81 on: 27/10/2010 03:39:41 »
Ben, etc.. I would like to point somehting out to Echo.

Echo -

There are no new health risks. In fact, aspirin is safer than willow bark.

"In 1897 Felix Hoffmann created a synthetically altered version of salicin (in his case derived from the Spiraea plant), which caused less digestive upset than pure salicylic acid. The new drug, formally Acetylsalicylic acid, was named Aspirin by Hoffmann's employer Bayer AG. This gave rise to the hugely important class of drugs known as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs)."

Having taken aspirin for a very long time - it is the best drug for my arthritis, I can guarantee that the above statement is absolutely true.

If you wish to argue a point, the least you can do is get the facts correct.

Oh, and the digitalis I take for my heart's arrhythmia is MUCH safer than foxglove - from which the drug came - because the manufactured drug, which is exactly the same chemical as in foxglove - can be given in exact quantities, not the random amount that one gets with a tea made from the dried foxglove. Being random, it can cause death if the dosage is off by only a relatively small amount.

The whole thesis of your argument is scientifically indefensible.

You are polluting this forum which I might remind you is based on science, not hearsay and web myths.
« Last Edit: 27/10/2010 03:50:37 by JimBob »
 

SteveFish

  • Guest
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #82 on: 29/10/2010 01:08:10 »
In my experience there are three kinds of trolls.

1) Ideological trolls have a specific political or business viewpoint that they wish to advance. They drop their line in forums to disturb discussions that oppose their views. They do this by clever questions or responses that rile up the forum and essentially stop any useful discussion. In some instances these folks are paid for this activity.

2) Hobby trolls are the original version of trolling behavior. They just enjoy making others get angry and argue, and get enjoyment from this activity. They often have their own sites where they show off and brag about their accomplishments. They succeed in their hobby, and get the most enjoyment, from the maximum disruption they cause on a forum.

3) Dunning-Kruger trolls (wiki Dunning-Kruger effect if you don't know about the publication). These folks also have a hobby that involves a set of beliefs based on no evidence whatsoever. They are incapable of understanding evidence and the normal logic of argument so that what they say, especially in a science forum, is so outrageous that honest members just can't resist trying to explain. People interested in science are susceptible because they are often born teachers. This is our own Echochartruse.

The best way to deal with these people is to not respond at all, but my experience with myself and others is that this is almost impossible. So my compromise is to write very little. This type of troll is so caught up in their own belief that they often write volumes that we all just have to read if we want to help them. Read just enough to get the gist and only respond with one short point, such as Bored chemist's "what are the new health risks?" Don't say much of anything else and let the troll write his/her silly essays. They eventually realize that they are no longer having any fun. This is the only way to win a troll game.

Steve
« Last Edit: 29/10/2010 14:36:50 by SteveFish »
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8676
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #83 on: 29/10/2010 06:58:09 »
I think you may well be right Steve.
The effect (detailed here)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
is certainly consistent with Echo's behaviour.
I wonder if pointing this out will help him to realise this.
 

Offline Hugh888

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 5
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #84 on: 02/12/2010 06:43:58 »
# Detoxification, the removal of toxins from the body, is considered by  many clinics as a very important part of their treatment.  A variety of approaches are used, including colon cleansing, fasting, chelation, water therapy, heat therapy, and nutritional, herbal, and homeopathic methods. Max Gerson introduced coffee into the enema procedure, which causes the liver to release stored up toxins into the digestive system to be eliminated. Increasing your water intake may be one of the best ways to get rid of toxins in the body.
# Nutritional therapy: Two types or approaches are emerging. One is a specialized combination of nutrients used as a targeted cancer therapy, depending on the individual needs of the patient. The other, which also depends on the needs of the patient, is a more general approach seeking to boost health and strength.
# Psychology and Psychotherapy, although used at most clinics, would be considered an adjunctive therapy. Psychological counseling, support groups and even psychotherapy make up a critically important aspect of therapy in the world's most successful cancer treatment centers. Some doctors have reported that a traumatic psychological event in a person's life may trigger the appearance of cancer one to two years later. Music, meditation, relaxation techniques, and stress reduction have proven to significantly enhance the power of the immune system. Some therapists include emotional and even spiritual counseling, not only for the person's regular life, but in dealing with the trauma of cancer
 

SteveFish

  • Guest
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #85 on: 02/12/2010 15:47:54 »
Hugh888:

Your post is an embarrassing collection of assertions made by charlatans who steal money from the gullible and helplessly ill. With the exception than many real clinics employ counseling to help patients psychologically deal with their illnesses, not to cure an illness (if it isn't psychological in origin), there isn't a single medically correct statement in your post. All you have to do to prove me wrong is provide some credible research to support your points. This is a science site, so don't offer opinions or articles in websites that don't reference their claims for evidence, just provide us with some science. A forlorn hope.

Steve
 

Offline Variola

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1063
  • Everyone should beware of The Pox...
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #86 on: 02/12/2010 20:05:38 »
Steve,

Hugh888 is a spammer, I already flagged him up on another thread  :)
 

SteveFish

  • Guest
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #87 on: 02/12/2010 20:18:03 »
Thank you Variola. I thought he might just be a common troll. Steve
 

BalletGirl

  • Guest
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #88 on: 03/01/2011 14:28:42 »
Hi guys,
I'm new here so please dont start arguments with me if I get something wrong  [:-[]

I think that spending time with family and close friends helps to take your mind off whats going on around you. Most of the time you just need a distraction, because when you are focusing on something else, your brain cant be in two places at once, so the pain subsides for a while.

Anyway, thats just my opinion :)
 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8676
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #89 on: 10/01/2011 06:56:38 »
"if any of you knew anything about health you would know that a healthy human has a ph above 7 and one with cancer has a  acidic ph around 3 or 4 and the way to cure cancer is with an alkalizing lifestyle where only alkalizing food is consumed and only distilled water is drank"

LOL
Normal blood pH is slightly alkaline and will stay that way pretty much whatever fad diet you eat.

[Sorry to have to modify your post BC but the poster you have quoted has now been banned for contravening forum policy - Regards, Mod]
« Last Edit: 10/01/2011 16:53:15 by peppercorn »
 

Offline cancer_war

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #90 on: 23/01/2013 14:32:29 »
Hi,

For certain cure of cancer, cardio, aids etc. i wrote a petition to the US White House.
I need 100000 signature. Please sign it.

We demand $1 trillion/year fund to challenge against cardiovascular disease,cancer and death.
We want the creation of funds,at least $1 trillion/year, against all the diseases, primarily cardiovascular, cancer, diabet, genetic, AIDS, organ failures, that plague mankind.

We want funds for development of certain treatments, biological development of human organs, anti-aging and ultimately aim to stop death for biological reasons.

In addition to US budget, a special tax can be taken for immortality. Also by ensuring participation of the G20 countries, perhaps ensuring other countries this fund can be created.

The results of the researches and investigations must be available to public, In other words, it must be provided that everyone can reach the results.

It should be noted that, the biggest enemy is nature itself. Lets stop it immediately in order to stop the death of people.



newbielink:http://wh.gov/yD9P [nonactive]
« Last Edit: 23/01/2013 14:38:06 by cancer_war »
 

Offline profound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #91 on: 25/01/2013 20:14:51 »
Science has grown so much and is growing is there any medicine found for cancer?

Spam link removed - Mod

only treatment is chemotherapy.


and more chemotherapy.

it will always be the treatment for cancer.

always.just like the last 50 years.

makes a ton of money.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #92 on: 26/01/2013 02:34:06 »
only treatment is chemotherapy.

and more chemotherapy.

it will always be the treatment for cancer.

always.just like the last 50 years.

makes a ton of money.
There are in fact multiple treatments.
Surgery
Radiation Therapy
Chemotherapy.

Often used in conjunction with each other.  Cancer is a systemic disease, and thus best treated with systemic medications.  I.E.  if you cut it out, but miss a few cells that have already migrated from the primary site, the patient is at MUCH greater risk.  So, one generally uses chemotherapy in to augment other treatments.

New treatments on the horizon are viruses targeted to the tumor cells, or injection of immunogenic antigens directly into the tumor cells.  Cancer cells are rapidly growing, and an alternative to surgery is intra-arterial plugging of the arteries feeding the tumors.

 

Offline profound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #93 on: 26/01/2013 13:09:18 »
only treatment is chemotherapy.

and more chemotherapy.

it will always be the treatment for cancer.

always.just like the last 50 years.

makes a ton of money.
There are in fact multiple treatments.
Surgery
Radiation Therapy
Chemotherapy.

Often used in conjunction with each other.  Cancer is a systemic disease, and thus best treated with systemic medications.  I.E.  if you cut it out, but miss a few cells that have already migrated from the primary site, the patient is at MUCH greater risk.  So, one generally uses chemotherapy in to augment other treatments.

New treatments on the horizon are viruses targeted to the tumor cells, or injection of immunogenic antigens directly into the tumor cells.  Cancer cells are rapidly growing, and an alternative to surgery is intra-arterial plugging of the arteries feeding the tumors.




There are in fact multiple treatments.
Surgery
Radiation Therapy
Chemotherapy.

Yes,you are totally right.

Yes these have been around for decades and will continue for decades.Also known as cut/burn/slash.

The advantages from a profit point of view is that any company can make a drug,hire a couple of "reviewers" showing marginal improvement,discard,hide,suppress negative results,milk a few billion out of the drug and then move on to the next one.

Of course these drugs don't work or have horrific side effects and you end up 6 feet under as wormfood but who cares?

They laugh all the way to the bank.

A study of cancer drug research studies found 80% were fraudulent,plagiarized,unrepeatable,had missing data,fudged,messaged,or written by people on the company's payroll or ghost written showing positive effects by "respected" people who had been given $10000 to $100000 to let their name be put on the research.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8134
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #94 on: 26/01/2013 14:42:27 »
A study of cancer drug research studies found 80% were fraudulent ...

Can you post a link to that study ?
 

Offline profound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #95 on: 27/01/2013 16:27:41 »
A study of cancer drug research studies found 80% were fraudulent ...

Can you post a link to that study ?



http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice

This is very good article and shows just bad the situation is and why you should never just believe any study no matter where it comes from.The links are in the article.

And it a shocking indictment of "research" and scientists.Read the whole article.


links are in the article.

"Worse, in medicine, it can delay the development of life-saving treatments or prolong the use of therapies that are ineffective or dangerous. Malpractice comes to light rarely, perhaps because scientific fraud is often easy to perpetrate but hard to uncover..."

more than two-thirds of the biomedical and life sciences papers that have been retracted from the scientific record are due to misconduct by researchers, rather than error...

Those who document misconduct in scientific research talk of a spectrum of bad practices. At the sharp end are plagiarism, fabrication and falsification of research. At the other end are questionable practices such as adding an author's name to a paper when they have not contributed to the work, sloppiness in methods or not disclosing conflicts of interest..


In medicine where the profit motive over rides all ethical considerations the fraud is even more prevalant.Billions rest on the marketing dangerous and ineffective drugs.

Glaxowellcome has been fined not millions but billions over the last 30 years for all sorts of practices.
This is on record.Just google them.You will be shocked.
 

Offline schneebfloob

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 49
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #96 on: 27/01/2013 16:53:19 »
I absolutely despise posts with an agenda, and over the past couple of days I have seen quite a number of them. Post after post of 'beware of the evil big pharma'.

I'm talking about stuff like this:
Quote
The advantages from a profit point of view is that any company can make a drug,hire a couple of "reviewers" showing marginal improvement,discard,hide,suppress negative results,milk a few billion out of the drug and then move on to the next one.

No names named, no proof, pure conjecture. If you know something then you should be taking it to the authorities. I cannot stand this drivel. If you have something to add about cancer research then by all means go ahead. But this is not a forum for discussing conspiracies. Keep them to yourself.
 

Offline peppercorn

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1466
    • View Profile
    • solar
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #97 on: 27/01/2013 19:16:26 »

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice

This is very good article and shows just [how] bad the situation is and why you should never just believe any study no matter where it comes from.
The links are in the article.

Still no mention of a link therein to support your claim that a "study of cancer drug research studies found 80% were fraudulent".
The article, though not painting an exactly rosy picture of some scientists, would seem orders of magnitude off the rash generalisations you are making, and certainly does not support the argument that medical drugs are, in effect, worse than useless; though it would be nice to see more altruistic organisations getting the research investment occasionally.
 

Offline RD

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8134
  • Thanked: 53 times
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #98 on: 27/01/2013 19:18:48 »
A study of cancer drug research studies found 80% were fraudulent ...

Can you post a link to that study ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice


I couldn't find "80%" in that article ...


 
There's dishonesty in all walks of life, but you've yet to provide evidence that it's as high as "80%" in cancer drug research.

If modern cancer therapies were ineffective why do people with cancer survive longer now than in the past ? ...


http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/survival/latestrates/survival-statistics-for-the-most-common-cancers
« Last Edit: 27/01/2013 19:29:14 by RD »
 

Offline profound

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 96
    • View Profile
Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #99 on: 29/01/2013 16:17:11 »
A study of cancer drug research studies found 80% were fraudulent ...

Can you post a link to that study ?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2012/sep/13/scientific-research-fraud-bad-practice


I couldn't find "80%" in that article ...


 
There's dishonesty in all walks of life, but you've yet to provide evidence that it's as high as "80%" in cancer drug research.

If modern cancer therapies were ineffective why do people with cancer survive longer now than in the past ? ...


http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/cancer-info/cancerstats/survival/latestrates/survival-statistics-for-the-most-common-cancers

The article has links in it in a pale blue.Maybe you are using a old black and white monitor and can't see.

The article clearly states more than 2/3 are fraudulent,etc.

2/3 =66%

80% is clearly more than 66% and the article states "at least".

Since big bucks is involved you almost certainly can guarantee the figure is higher because money makes people lie,cheat,steal and kill.Do you agree?
I mean that is what the NEWS is ALL about.Lying,cheating stealing and killing.Do you agree.

Do you watch the News?  And it is mostly about lying,killing,cheating,stealing.


There was anther paper with the an at least 80% figure implying it was more than 80%.

I can't find that at present but I will post when I do.

Now regarding your graph.It is very dodgy and very misleading.I wonder who put it together and what their agenda was.Where did you get it from?

Each year, more than 1 million cancer patients receive outpatient chemotherapy, radiation, or both. On the US National Library of Medicine website (PubMed), - is the news of a study estimating the overall contribution of chemotherapy to 5-year "survival" in adults in the US at a shameful 2.1%. Top this off with 201 side effects listed on the Chemocare website alone. The American Chinese Medicine Association says that "most cancer patients die of chemotherapy." How does this factor into the medical dictum "First Do No Harm"? It is actually misleading to promote chemotherapy for cancer treatment because it permanently damages the body and immune system and causes other cancers to spring


Here is proper graph with actual FIGURES of SURVIVORS  not MISLEADING percentages.

i mean 10000 got treated and 100 are alive or 10 are alive after 5  years.Look at those figures and how different from that misleading graph you posted.

Also a friend of my brother-in law just died of cancer today.He had been treated with chemotherapy "therapy" for the last 2 months.He was only 26.Leaves a wife and child behind.

http://www.oasisadvancedwellness.com/learning/chemotherapy-effectiveness.html



http://articles.mercola.com/ImageServer/public/2008/August/8.5chemo_survival.jpg
« Last Edit: 29/01/2013 16:33:18 by profound »
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: What cancer therapies are available?
« Reply #99 on: 29/01/2013 16:17:11 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums