This was an occupational cancer back then. I know where this story is going. I tend to choose things when they are best, most cost effective or cheapest. After a while, he was declared free of the illness. Cancers that used to be fatal. Over 20,000 people die each day from cancer. I have no intention to dance with your brain.
When people give testimonies that are so similar about how they beat cancer with over the top consumption of vegetables, Laetrile, cannabis oil and more, a reasonable brain without agenda recognizes the pattern. I think they believed their extremely left of center influence would be strong enough to withstand all that religious indoctrination. In terms of defining a usable rule it is necessary to pick a specific age, or something else which is easy to identify as we do with driving licences, rather than a set of characteristics but this objection does show that there should be some provision to appeal against a person being treated as if they lacked these characteristics when in fact they have already developed them. Just spewing venom is rude and unproductive. How much does an 18 yr old know though? However, given the high chance of success despite the unpleasantness of the treatment and the certainty of an unpleasant death without any intervention the choice to intervene was, in this case, the right one. It is insulting to a person's intelligence.
What percentage of folks receiving alternative treatments? And if they couldn't cure me at 85, I don't have any hope that they could do it for anything lower with chemotherapy. They promise unconditional success and deliver none. That said, there are private-sector hospitals for people who are impatient, or are determined to spend money. Sorry I can't fulfill your specs better. They have already drunk the kool-aid and if you have not you are enemy number 1, or if religion is tossed into the mix, an agent of the devil besides. That is what really distinguishes them from the people on Ty Bollinger's laundry list. Cancer is harmful enough to your body.
Facts do not depend upon anyone's worldview. Plus there are hybrids and amalgams of various of these therapies. What do you gain from this? At least she is finally getting potentially life-saving treatment again. I feel really sorry for her because her delusions will probably cause her a lot of misery and an early death. In such cases, the chances of the child's death increase dramatically.
This can occur for a number of reasons including fear, denial or religious and personal beliefs. That's why anecdotes are more persuasive to patients. He got better eventually but had to be operated upon because of the aneurysm which was quite traumatic and a long lasting impediment to his activity but he survived that too. Small sample size, but I've noticed the same thing. That's why in Cassandra's case I really, really hope that there is no residual disease visible on her followup scans.
I am a patient not a number. An ethical conundrum Regular readers know that I very predictably come down—and come down very strongly—on the side of making sure that children in these situations obtain treatment. I have had breast cancer on both sides and follicular non-hodgkin's lymphoma. Also, the fact that Cassandra had run away after having promised under oath to be treated was taken as evidence of immaturity. The doctors aren't sure what it is. The natural history of diseases and of injuries inside the abdomen, chest, and skull were fairly well known and understood, but tools and techniques had not evolved to the point where success in any procedure in those areas was virtually a given, unlike today, when a Denton Cooley can grind out fifty coronary bypasses in a day. In actuality, though, her relapse was an indication of bad disease with a bad prognosis.
Sorry, but you cannot legislate common sense or live other people's lives for them, and hiding behind the letter of the law when its intent is clear is the coward's dodge. Cassandra's had her best shot at surviving her cancer, thanks to science and conventional medicine. Ugh, I guess you're right. When nearly every line in their ad contains a falsehood, fabrication, exaggeration, weasel-wording, or outright lie, I can only conclude that they are either ignorant or hucksters of the worst kind. Refusing to intervene ensures that they die immediately, while intervening extends their period of distress but also makes it almost certain that they will soon be back to living a life which they think is worth living. There will be individual distinguishing features in every case and these can make all the difference.
It took no less than 12 workers to strap her wrists and ankles to the bed and control her while the nurse stuck a needle in her neck to sedate her. Also not surprisingly, it was cancer quackery promoter Ty Bollinger who interviewed her for the the quack website The Truth About Cancer under the predictably histrionic title. He uses evidence and good arguments to back up his statements. Another group has riders that often are exhorbitantly expensive, prefunctory and insufferable in their often obsolete and incomplete attentions. I have lost faith in traditional medicine after the lies I have listened to and the garbage treatments I have witnessed.
I had an 85% survival and that won't be the same if I have to do it a second time. Most woo-pushers, unfortunately, are smart enough to avoid attracting that kind of attention, and for every one that isn't and manages to be convicted, there is at least one more waiting in the wings. Just drill one root out of the four, and don't bother filling it. Yep, best way to reinforce a lie you tell yourself is to get others believing in it too. This young woman's response to her diagnosis is absolutely irrational and not proactive, but she's not just believing that her cancer will go away by magic - she's scared, and frozen. On a more serious not, the reason this case is so ambiguous is because Cassandra was almost old enough to choose for herself to refuse treatment. When my patients have bad outcomes I always wonder if I could have done something better.