Why is it that the first thing someone does when diagnosed with cancer. . .?

It depends on which of the hundreds of malignancies you are asking about

and what stage ? "Cancer" is not one disease.

People should be presented options / treatment choices.

For many of my patients, I offered the no chemotherapy option.

Advanced stage non-small cell lung cancers are not likely to be cured with any of our chemotherapy regimens.

Advanced pancreatic carcinomas are not cured with chemotherapy either.

Yet some people insist on treatment with something - refusing to accept the fact that for some of these diseases we do not have good combination chemotherapy regimens.

They feel like we are "giving up" on them if they receive no chemotherapy.

It is very difficult to talk many people out of trying chemotherapy.

I tried many times.

- - - -

I agree the costs of many chemotherapy agents are obscene.

We have over 100 different drugs. Some are ridiculously expensive.

You should know that the vast majority of the expense goes to the drug companies - not to the cancer chemotherapy specialist - the medical oncologist.

I treated many patients at my own expense - people with curable diseases like Hodgkin's lymphoma - who could not pay.

I still had to pay the drug companies for their medicines,

so I donated my services and the services of my nurses and office staff AND paid for their drugs.

- - - -

Also, the argument that chemotherapy is not "natural" therapy does not hold water.

One of our best new drugs - Taxol - comes the bark of the Pacific yew tree.

Many of our chemotherapy agents come from plant sources.

The difference is that they have been scientifically tested and found effective

- unlike herbal / "natural" agents like apricot pits or coffee enemas.

Because we as a society haven't been taught to think that way. We've always been taught to "reach for aspirin", etc. when having a headache, the Motrin for aches and pains and the Tylenol for fevers.

As for cancer patients? I couldn't agree more.

I was diagnosed in 1993 with massive brain tumors, usually benign. We got multiple opinions and made a decision that was less invasive and didn't require 4 brain surgeries, only 1 18-hour brain surgery. I was then told in 1996 that I needed massive amounts of radiation therapy (before Gamma Knife was approved). This radiation, I was told, would burn the edges of the remaining tumors and keep them from spreading. I fought it, kicking and screaming. I didn't want the radiation, the side effects or the medication and side effects from the meds. But the doctors quite firmly told me "if you don't have the radiation and need further treatment, we will not treat you". So I gave in and had the horrendous radiation therapy. The result? The tumors came back and were upgraded to brain cancer, I maxed out on radiation and can never have any more and now my only option is to wait until the benefits of surgery outweigh the risks.

I have learned a lot over the last 17 years. I am an advocate of Quality vs. Quantity. I live with the side effects and know that the radiation treatment, while it was horrible, limited my options for the future.

My hope is that the doctors were able to use what they learned from me to help others who have come after me. I was the 1994 case study for my type of tumor at the Cleveland Clinic. I hope it was not in vain.

When diagnosed with cancer one of the first things a person does is check their life insurance policy. The second is to research everything there is to know about their particular cancer.

Chemo has around 20% response to my cancer - less than placebo - but if I had a high grade cancer I would be the first in line for chemo or radiotherapy, rather than waiting for the anti-angiogenic properties of natural foods to kick in and slow tumor growth. The "natural way" is just too slow. With orthodox medical treatment you have a fighting chance. My guess is that most cancer patients are pretty careful with their diet and use complementary alternative therapies in conjunction with their medical treatment.

Why is it that people who have only rudimentary knowledge of how to use Google think they know more than tens of thousands of scientists and oncologists when it comes to treating deadly illnesses?

The facts...which are unbiased...do not support the use of any so called alternative cancer treatments. The natural way of cancer, is usually to get sick and die.

The facts are that people living today diagnosed with most forms of cancer have a much better chance at cure or longer life than at any time in history.

The facts are that treatments are continually being evaluated and improved to target cancer cells more specifically and minimize side effects.

The "obscene expense"? Well...real treatments do cost real money. In Canada, that is covered with our universal health care, so that individuals don't have to worry. The obscene expense is what happens when they go to an alternative cancer clinic, are billed tens and sometimes hundreds of thousands of dollars for useless placebos. Then sent back to real doctors when it is too late.

Medical science addresses the underlying problem, and tries to help with the symtoms...pain and nausea as well. Do you think severe pain and intolerable nausea from cancer are not worth addressing?

"Trail and error" (sic)....uhm...no. Cancer treatments are based on a combination of lab, animal and human studies with the best understanding of how each individual cancer attacks the victim, and the best ways of interfering with cancer cell growth. Not everyone responds to treatments in the same way, and doses and agents have to be adjusted according to patient response.

Why don't you step back, read some actual science...not just Altie cancer websites, and try blogging about something you actually know about. Because it clearly isn't science or oncology.

First, not everyone diagnosed with cancer is offered chemotherapy, drugs or radiotherapy. They are offered whatever is appropriate for their particular type, stage and grade of cancer - which in several cases is simply surgery.

Secondly, you are underestimating the intelligence of those diagnosed with cancer.

I researched every possible avenue. You can consider me a reformed altie. I was determined to avoid harsh treatments and spent day and night on the computer, convinced that there must be a more 'natural', 'alternative' way.

The result of all my research was this: I found that not one case of cancer, ever, had been successfully treated by 'alternative' methods. I had forked out a great deal of money seeing alternative therapists, and embarking on the Gerson regime under the guidance of a 'nutritionist', before I came to this conclusion.

So I asked my oncologist by what percentage chemotherapy and radiotherapy would improve my survival chances. It was not insignificant so I agreed to go ahead. I know several people through cancer support networks who have asked the same question and, because the percentage was small, decided not to accept chemotherapy. People are not the sheep you assume them to be.

People diagnosed with cancer decide on conventional treatment because, while far from perfect, it saves many lives and prolongs many, many more.

I have been in remission for six years from stage 3 grade 3 cancer.

You are way off base. I have a wonderful Oncologist. The first thing he did with me and my husband present, was present my options. For me, since my family history was so very strong, his first option to me was mastectomy. I was told not to wait to long to make my decision because my tumor was invasive. I didn't opt for chemo the first time, no, not until the second time when a total of 9 more tumors were found. As it turned out, only 1 out of the 10 was the nastiest kind. When I was diagnosed, 5 other women in my family were also diagnosed with breast cancer. You're right about one thing, I couldn't think rationally, All I thought of was "am I going to die?" I never heard another word the doctor said after that. That's not the time to making decisions about your care or forms of treatments. However, if you have a very understanding caring Oncologist, he/she will do all the talking for you. It is not a medical merry-go-round, as you put it. You have no idea what you the patient, becomes to your Dr and his/her medical team. You become like close friends, sometimes even like he's your best friend. No, I can't do anything else but totally disagree with your thinking. You see, it's more than just dealing with symptoms, it's also dealing with the emotional part of the one who has the cancer. I guess you don't know of anyone with cancer. Maybe you do and you're not happy with the decision, either way, To me, it comes down to the Oncologist and the medical team. I'm happy with my choices.

Research apricot seeds(the kernels) it is taken for cancer. look up the video, "A world without cancer" They are like almonds, only bitter. They attack cancer cells. Unlike chemo(its attacks both good & bad cells). Your supposed to eat like how ever many apricots you would normally eat if you were to come upon a tree, like 4. but you must eat them with each meal. For tumors they say to take 20-30 a day, divided up, not all at the same time. Check out that video maybe it will help your cousin, it helped a man who had stage 3 cancer, he began taking them and in a month his cancer went from stage 3 to stage 1, without chemo or radiation.My neighbor also began taking them for his liver cancer, they gave him like a month, he lasted like a year but he stopped taking them. Some people cant take the bitter taste, so they can be crushed and taken with ice cream . gradually increase the amount taken, like start with 4 or 5, 3 times a day, till you can take like 8 -3 times a day, but they are not to be taken too close together. research them and find out all you can about them.

Most people who when diagnosed with cancer want to live, those who want to live choose the treatment option recommended by a qualified oncologist (who is not governed by a pharmaceutical company, not in the UK anyway), they will have been informed of the side effects and the prognosis of their own particular disease.

Obviously some recover with no treatment whatsoever, or bathing in cabbage water, the choice is theirs, I know which I would choose.

If you get cancer, treat the way you want to. Don't tell me what to do.

I am stage IV and the docs have kept me alive the past four years. The cancer is still active but has been manageable.

People have forgotten that there were diseases and treatments going on long before the invention of modern medicine. Because of this, we tend to immediately believe that modern medicine is the one and only treatment for any sort of disease, especially serious ones like cancer.

However, I have known quite a few cancer survivors who did not, in fact, immediately jump to chemotherapy. These particular people did step back, consider all their options, do the necessary research, and then decide that it was in their best interest to proceed in such a direction.

Often times, modern medicine is our best chance. If there is a natural remedy to something like cancer, I'd love to know about it so as to spare the pain of so many people I love. When it comes down to it, expenses, discomfort, and trial and error are small things in comparison to threat of death. The human spirit demands that we attempt to survive through all those terrible things, and that is the reason so many of us turn to chemo, drugs, radiation, and so on.