Research, Oncologists and ‘CAM’ – why is living well seen as an odd choice?

By

Further thoughts on the oncologists’ perspective, addressing the issue of research and CAM and oncologists.

My starting point may be different from those who are also party to this discussion, as I have been assisting those whose lives have changed due to cancer diagnosis, treatment or exposure through their lived ones.

Often people find me in a mess as once all the hoohah of the intense ‘kill the cancer’ stage is through, there is nothing except wait to see if it pays a return visit – and no indication of changing one’s habits to ensure it does not  .

In looking into the research question to ask for the next assignment, I find myself becoming more pedantic.

  • ‘the oncologist’s perspective – is this generic both ‘oncologist’ and the ‘perceptive’ they may have?
  • what information is needed (for what purpose)?
  • how to get it and what role research would play (what is ‘research’ – but could be argued what gives the result the searcher is looking for – what is truth?

Whilst this is about the oncologist, s/he is not the patient and the entire issue is surely about their quality (as well as length) of life?

  • Is formal research even what a patient  (who ultimately is the one in charge of what they do and their own healing) would do?
  • Is this where the oncologist will find what they have – and what they are maybe following in the hope of helping themselves?

In my first post of this discussion I outlined when an oncologist may be looking to research CAM.

Of the four stages, here I am presuming that most who are posting here are starting from the assumption that the oncologist is set to start oncology treatments and wants to know what else is going on with the patient.

My comment is that they are restricting what is ‘happening’ into what they believe is a factor. Even then, missing what could be crucial if seen outside a medical viewpoint and into the whole person’s life.

Rather than assuming only my medicine is the only one of benefit, as an oncologist, I may wonder perhaps the person is more well than otherwise would be presenting now, because of their CAM interventions – and to stop what has got them to here may be counterproductive?

  • How would I gauge this?
  • Would I let the patient make this call, as they are the ones who must undergo what I am about to do to their body and soul?

The ingestion of substances is not the only consideration.

  • Is what created the problem (cancer taking hold) still happening?
  • If so, then all the good work I may do may have no effect.
  • Are they living over a disturbed leyline occurrence?
  • Are they living under a huge electrical transformer?

Modern medicine looks to the micro, when it may well be the macro environment that is creating the body unable to work well and so to even the cancer’s presence.

Another obvious issue (for this particular oncologist) is the role of emotional assault prior to the cancer forming.

Perhaps this could be a question asked by me as the oncologist, as possibly the causative factor may need to be also alleviated – as well as the body’s response – the cancer we are so diligently about to try to eradicate?  – http://www.newmedicine.ca/german-new-medicine.php I am starting with a thinking ‘out of the box’ oncologist – and there must be some who are seeing not the results they would like.

Perhaps they realize that the standard spots to find information in this case may be incomplete, and they look to the research as a patient would.

This oncologist may also have had brilliant results for their children or other family members – or themselves – using any number of non medical interventions – and may then be more questioning and less looking for harm. Maybe then looking to CAM with an open heart and mind.

‘Curing cancer’.  I doubt as an oncologist I would use that word.  With only 2.3% of solid cancer patients having a better chance at 5 year remission from the disease more than without my ministrations, http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/oncologists-criticize-chemotherapy.html

I would be mindful of the gap between the ‘search and destroy’ focus of oncology and what else may be there.

I may be too aware that all I am doing is hopefully buying them time.

If I wanted to look to what patients were looking at although the (I feel very outdated) Crystal reference stated that 3% of patients searched the internet, I would know that that would be the first port of call for most.

I may, as mentioned before look to ‘causes of cancer’ – understanding that the non medical folk may think that getting rid of cancer is not as simple as being reactive but ceasing what caused then to have their tissue start behaving badly.

As mentioned in the previous post – Wikipaedia is there. Not possibly a reasoned person’s place to start, but patients are desperate and have a tribe of those who want to help and someone is going to go there.

It does state ‘toxins’ (see my post above).  To ‘cure’ what they (or think they) have, some may find http://www.cancersolutions.org/

An alert oncologist may start to question what I am trying to do – give them MORE toxins.  They may have a point.

The ‘war against cancer’ in the States that started out 28 years ago, has not worked.

Our best minds doing more of the same have not improved either the rate of its appearance, or in removing it.

Further consideration of thinking differently may happen as one of my patients (this is a real case from my ‘other hat on’ – acupuncture clinic) has an unlikely and totally astounding liver function improvement – into normal – as he lay dying. The renal failure from the cancer drugs was expected. Chemo was only palliative and he knew that. He may have had another year if the chemo did not kill him – as it did.

The pneumonia that was masked by the steroid administered to help the side effects of the toxic drugs is usual, but his lung’s inability to rally (as the site of the cancer) meant he went out from organ failure.
Except NOT the liver function.

Daily thorough blood tests showed his dying body with a liver function still increasing into the high normal range.

His daughter, (an intensive care nurse) I find has been plying him with Agari Gold – a mix of naturally occurring substances specifically for cancer – including Reishi mushroom and Silymarin – a liver tonic herb. She has also been making sure he takes liquid activated zeolites  to unload his body of toxins, all unbeknownst to me.  Maybe this is the reason he had such phenomenal liver function revival in the midst of all other organ failure?

He may have died, but no one has ever had the liver function return.  This did enable a longer time on chemo for him. None of the oncology team has ever seen this before.  The hospital coffee room was abuzz.

Maybe it was considered as a random effect – but I (as his oncologist) could start looking elsewhere for verification – out of the medical journals and into where patients find answers.  This shook me up. If that helped him – what about the less terminal people I see?

I could start researching on the net as patients do, and maybe be initially horrified at the trial and error nature of it all – like darts in the dark. Except that I keep finding more ‘wrong’ results – people healing unexpectedly.

Since the publication of a meta analysis of the success of my oncology work – http://www.curenaturalicancro.com/oncologists-criticize-chemotherapy.html I am open to anything that may help the drugs work better.

The CAM answers even if just to calm the person so they are not so fearful, can sleep and digest sustenance can only help. I could look to yoga – Reiki, prayer and acupuncture.  All are not ingestible.

It seems those who use these are ‘healed’ of what ails them – maybe not the cancer, but the horror of their diagnosis and the treatments I have been forcing upon them.

I could start looking for CAM help for nausea and find ‘there is no evidence of harm’ coming up when I look to herbal treatments. That is weird. Why not? Maybe working with not against the body has benefits.

From here I could maybe have a more tolerant stance when desperate people come to ask about what else they can do.  I could tell them to look further – and outside the conventional medical ‘breakdown’ model.

I could start looking to help those with debilitating side effects. In killing the cancer (fast growing cells) we with the drugs watch on as patients have diabolically altered lives. Both on the drugs and after them.

Maybe the depleting of the essential nutrients is part of this and no doubt would weaken them for life post cancer.

I could start with Dr Igor Trabizian’s work. http://www.tarabookshop.com/category49_1.htm

He, as a general practitioner, wondered that would happen if he adjusted all the minerals and vitamins within the middle of the range of normal in blood tests and discovered when this happened – the disease disappeared.

  • Why is there no physiological interest in nutritional medicine?
  • Why is are the expected side effects not mitigated by replenishing the minerals and vitamins that the symptoms are deficiency warnings of?

‘Curing’ cancer? It seems as though I need to look elsewhere – where there is no ‘research ‘ that drugs have, that I am used to just seeing the results as patchy and inconclusive, but happily for those that try – often resulting in cancer free lives, and for some (the 4.4% would do not avail themselves for appropriate therapy). I know we need to study what combination of what they did as something else is happening out there.

Looking further, one of my patients may think I need educating and has brought me in an article a distant relation sent them. As the small child was magically healed. The magic of nature curing cancer – HEMP OIL
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1383240/Boy-brain-cancer-cured-secretly-fed-medical-marijuana-father.html  Medical marijuana?

I could look on the medical search sites and feel vindicated about the foolishness of smoking it.  Then I could remember it wasn’t being smoked but when used on a small apparently terminal case of brain tumour, it was in the stomach tube as hemp oil. I look further into hemp oil. http://kaabi.hubpages.com/hub/Hemp-Oil-Cancer-Cure

If some research (RCT) is done on this and it is as good as it seems attacks the cancer cells and leaves the whole ones alone – then at least for some, this may be a wonder drug. Except that they can make it at home; how would we be sure of the potency? I could then imagine that if it got my baby son better I would not care.  I know what would have been his oncology outcome death. I could really start to ponder what ‘success’ measures.

  • What is the average patient after?
  • Will research as medicine sees it answer this?

I think of the unmet needs of the patients I see. Perhaps there is space in the healing team for those who deal with the bits I do not?

References