/sci/ - Science & Math

>>7592228
I don't know. I have no formation in medicine to have a proper opinion on the matter.

>>7592228
>Honestly its hard for me to imagine that just letting irregular tissue go away on its own is somehow a worse idea than bombarding the body whit radiation and toxins.
it's hard for me to imagine being this dense, but here you are anyway
the very definition of cancer is that "letting irregular tissue go away" DOES NOT WORK ANYMORE
there is no suicide command left to be executed in an actively spreading tumor

what drives cancer patients to chemo/radiation is a dirt simple calculation

option A)
>do nothing
the cancer keeps spreading and mutating until it has damaged enough vital organs to kill you dead

option B)
>get yourself a nice cup of chemo
the chemo starts poisoning your body, with the hope that the cancer dies before you do

option A gives you a 100% chance of death, assuming that the cancer is of the kind that actually requires treatment in the first place
option B gives you a chance of death lower than 100%, because you introduce the possibility of your whole body surviving the treatment longer than the small subcomplex of cancer cells that it houses

>>7592228
Fasting and special (or rather not so special, just old school) diets seem to help a lot.
Same with high blood pressure diabetes and arthritis.

Fakt is that the people who make money with expensive medications will pay for studies that prove their way works and not for studies that try to cheap ways of treatment that can't be sold for the same or more money. So there are nearly no studies.

Isn't the free market wonderful?

>>7592958
Except the vast majority of funding for cancer research comes from the government, not pharmaceuticals. And yes, there are studies on just about everything's effect on cancer. Fucking naturalnews faggot.

>>7592228
My friends' mom thought like this and she died. Of a treatable cancer which was found at an early stage and that she refused to use chemo on because she was convinced that friggin red peppers and tomatoes would be enough. By the time she decided to actually do something real about it it was too late, and the thing had metastasized. It was not pretty to see, particularly as regret and despair started setting in.

Don't be an idiot, anon. Cancer is a shit, and it will kill you painfully and slowly and terrifyingly if you let it.

>>7592989
I don't know about your government, but ours do nearly everything to keep the big companies happy. They don't care if they sell weapons to dictators our manipulate their software to cheat at emission tests. I don't think they place health above money anymore.

Otherwise they could help us prevent such things in the first place and don't let companies advertise overly sugery food aimed at kids like the healthiest thing, they have to know some stupid parents will always believe this.

>>7592228
Honestly its hard for me to imagine that just letting bad germs tissue go away on their own is somehow a worse idea than bombarding the body whit chemicals and toxins.

>>7592228
>overuse of the word literally
>dat double negative
>conflating total lack off treatment with avoiding chemotherapy

way to go, dipshit.. i bet your next post will be about IQ.

>>7593083
>bad germs tissue

>>7593083
I think there's ppl in this thread who don't understand what cancer is.

Here's the cliff notes: Cancer is your own cells gone nuts. Usually cells die and replicate and have a cycle and a function. Cancer cells are cells that just replicate under no reasonable cycle and serve no reasonable function, instead just clumping together in tumors that get in the way of the proper functioning of the rest of your body. Chemo just kills cells faster than they can regenerate, and it does so in the hopes that, since you're a big organism and cancers are smaller than you are, it will kill the cancer cells before you yourself die (and also so that the normal functioning cells can recover some territory there where the cancer was fucking them up). If the tumors don't die, then the hope is that it will at least make them small enough that they can be extracted without leaving a hole in you too big to survive.

So no, just diets won't help, because cancer cells use your own resources to grow. By feeding yourself you also feed your cells, and cancers are your cells as well. Your only hope is to poison them. And you know what's great at poisoning your cells? Chemotherapy. You know what's not? Edible food.

Hopefully that wasn't too terrible an explanation.

>>7593083
It will never go away on it's one, because that's what makes it cancer. It's just that usually your immun system identifies and kills 'bad' cells.
Most alternative methods fokus on boosting the immun system.

Some more invasive treatments that work in a somewhat similar way are deliberate but mostly controlled infections of the said body part and a method to take some of the patients T-cells, 'program' them to attack the cancer, and put them back into the body.
I don't know about the first method but the second one has a good success rate, the only problem is, most of the time it's a live or die situation because sometimes the T-cells also attack some of the healthy cells or the patient dies because the cancer is dissolved too quickly.

>>7593115
>By feeding yourself you also feed your cells
That's why one method to target them is to stop eating for a while. Apparently they can't cope with fasting as well as the rest of your body.
Most people that go through a chemotherapy after fasting for some days will experience fainter side effects.

>>7592228
>2%
http://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/survival

what are you faggots reading that makes you not only show yourselves ignorant, but actually make you talk so much bullshit?

how come do you fear cancer so much that you aren't even able to do some basic research?

I survived hodgkin's lymphoma, a type of cancer that has a high rate of survival, > 85%. chemo was shit, but I'm still alive. treatments are improving FAST these these, there have been lots of (re)discoveries and research

Thinking about the mechanisms of cancer, wouldn't an ideal chemical for treating it be something that
-Can avoid moving around from the spot you inject it in.
-Causes cells to die when they undergo mitosis
-Has a somehow modifiable half life

So you'd have something that kills the fastest growing tissue but decays before it can kill the slower growing, non-infected tissue.

>>7593164
That's too impossible these days.

Only thing we have is chemo, immunotherapy doesn't look too promising.

>>7593149
You're lucky then, knew a guy who died of lymphoma within four years after chemo supposedly got rid of it.

Cancer isn't predictable man.

>>7592274
Now see you're wrong about that 100% death figure for option A.

There are documented cases of cancer receding without chemotherapy. People have genuinely used nothing but healthy living to beat their cancer.

I don't suggest anyone try unless they're cool with dying though.

>>7593209
there are many types of cancer, some are much worse. of course you cannot predict it, but there are therapies for second cancers.
anyway, you should read those statistics: 50% of those who had cancer in the UK survived for at least 10 years

>>7593223
>There are documented cases of cancer receding without chemotherapy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1888599/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunotherapy#Cancer

>>7592228
The way I understand it aggressive cancers that spread fast are probably going to kill you pretty quick no matter what you do. Even with treatment those cases often do not improve. As for slower forms of cancer I have heard some doctors feel we treat them too aggresivly. Prostate cancer for example usually doesn't come up until a man is already old and it usually spreads slow, there's a good chance you'll die of old age before the cancer, so maybe the best approach isn't to tell an 70+ year old man he needs prostate surgery, maybe its better to chill out and wait and see.

All that being said I don't think any sane person has suggested doing nothing is gonna somehow cure your cancer. You do nothing its just gonna keep growing, its just that sometimes we are perhaps putting people through unnecessary shit because they're either screwed anyways or the cancer is killing them so slowly we maybe don't need to treat it so aggressively.

>>7592958
>>7593082
>DA GUBBERMENT AND BIG PHARMA
>>7593083
>BAD CHEMICALS AND TOXIC TOXINS
muh scary words and appeal to nature fags really are the worst

>>7592228
"Doing nothing" is not a treatment. It's the exact opposite of treatment actually.
>Honestly its hard for me to imagine that just letting irregular tissue go away on its own
You have no idea how cancer cells work. HeLa cells are from a cervical cancer and have survived longer than the person they came from.

>>7592231
Quality post, and I wish people were willing to admit this in their day to day lives. 10/10 anon God bless

>>7593880
>You have no idea how cancer cells work.
Most cancers do go away on their own. They get a little way, then the immune system notices them and eats them.

Older detection methods only caught cancers that were quite advanced and unlikely to go away on their own. As our methods get more sophisticated and screenings get more frequent, we catch more and more little baby cancers that are never going to cause problems.

>HeLa cells are from a cervical cancer and have survived longer than the person they came from.
...as a carefully cultured cell line, not being attacked by any immune system or other hazards of a living body.

Overtreatment of cancer is a real problem, acknowledged by the medical mainstream. The current trend is backing away from treating every detected cancer, and often using the option of just keeping an eye on it to see whether it gets better or worse on its own.

Also, some cancers can be treated much more effectively than others. Obviously, if you've got a spot of melanoma on your skin, you cut it off first: this is easy, low-risk, and will often save a life. At the other extreme, there are types of cancer where the best known therapy has such a small chance of having a useful effect that the patient is more likely to be killed than saved by the attempt at treatment.

Between obviously usefulness and obvious uselessness, there is this wide grey area of cancer treatments where it's unclear whether they do more good than harm, which most chemotherapy done falls into.

>doubting the scientific method

Shiggy.

>>7592958

What free market?

>>7594113
>implying doubt isn't a fundamental part of the scientific method

Shiggy diggy.

>>7592228
>What do you think about the rumor going around that the best way to treat most cancers is to literally not do nothing.
lol

>In fact only 2% of cancer patients get better after such treatments.
>2%
lol

man why do people reply to bait threads so much on sci?

>>7592228
>to literally not do nothing
... so that means to do something literally?
Like what, write memoirs?

>>7592228
>what do you think about normie rumours /sci/?

Just let the stupid people remove themselves from the gene pool.

>>7592228

>>7593075
Didn't Steve Jobs do the exact same thing? Why are people so dumb?

>>7595984
He was so terminal when they found it that chemo wouldve reduced his quality of life by making him feel worse.

>>7592228

I Saw many relatives suffer the pain of hell with terapies, and starting to feel very worse using medicines... I don't know what to think actually, I don't want to be an "alternate one" but at the same time my experience was too strong. I think only that if my relatives avoided the cures maybe they would have not suffered like happened. What I fear more of this disease is fact that I have to choiche "trust on cynical medicine" or "Don't do nothing". If someone of you have had experience with a real degency in an hospital, you will know that is an industry, you are only a number and doctors and nurses don't want to spent their precious time to do all the possible with you, when they use medicines on you they use a standard, ignoring the peculiarities of your organism.

Sorry for my bad english, but I wanted to write that because, I had these strong experiences, and I don't know what to trust anymore

>>7593262

I agree, in some situation, like old people do something is another trauma. And maybe also in the fulminating cancers the therapies should be avoided to cause less sufferings, and use instead hospices.

>>7594078

Exactly

>>7595992
That's not true his cancer was so curable it never killed him for 11 years despite all his crystal healing bullshit
>>7596000
Fuck off faggot, just because the medicine feels like shit doesn't mean it's bad, jesus it's hard to believe we are in 2015.
>>7596012
This is the crux of the issue, incurable cancers get lumped in with curable cancers. "chemo was pointless for bob's brain cancer therefore it is also pointless for tim's testicular cancer" That would make sense if it wasn't for the fact that the cure rate for testicular cancer is 90% compared to 10% for brain cancer. Two totally different diseases

>>7596000
>you are only a number and doctors and nurses don't want to spent their precious time to do all the possible with you, when they use medicines on you they use a standard, ignoring the peculiarities of your organism.
>lists a whooping zero alternative cancer treatments that cater towards "the peculariarities of your organism" and are recognized as legit treatment by actual oncologists
mouthbreather

>>7596028
>That would make sense if it wasn't for the fact that the cure rate for testicular cancer is 90% compared to 10% for brain cancer.

Why don't they just chop those bad boys off before the cancer spreads to other organs, surely that would make the cure rate approach 100%.

>>7593199
Immunotherapy doesn't look too promising because the pharma is pushing stuff they can use to make boatloads of money (e.g. checkpoint inhibitors that kinda work but with severe side effects). Cell based (personalized) therapies are coming along nicely, but there is still a lot of work to be done.

>>7596175
>mug big pharma

>>7592228
The reason cancer is a danger is because the mutated cells don't go away on their own, they continue to reproduce until the body dies. It's not true in all cases but it will cause serious damage if not death because the body has a limited capacity to fight and cancer tends to be too much for it to handle since it uses (read: wastes, sabotages) the same resources the immune system needs to produce cells to fight with.

>>7596028
>>7596144

Edgy people like you are the reason why people don't have faith in science.

>>7596830
>implying any amount of evidence will ever suffice someone who thinks that every piece of medical evidence is only sponsored and fudged by BIG SCARY PHARMA with the intent of suppressing "legit, natural and affordable" treatments
I refuse to put my own time and effort into gathering scientific papers as evidence when they'll get handwaved away as corporation propaganda anyway
seriously, fuck these people with a pitchfork