|
|
Posted by John Seidts [96.244.168.181] on Saturday, November 26, 2011 at 23:37:46 :
In Reply to: Re: ot cancer treatment posted by John Seidts [96.244.168.181] on Saturday, November 26, 2011 at 23:25:54 :
Cancer is a horrible disease. Like every other disease, it has it’s history of quacks and charlatans. O2 levels at cellular levels? There’s a lot of science that’s been done on this due to its relationship with shock and trauma medicine. Lacking O2 at a cellular level could be a proximate cause to some of the cellular damage that may lead to certain types of cancer, but reversing it is like closing the barn doors after the livestock runs out- the damage that set cancer in motion is already done, and further oxygenating the cells won’t reverse the course the cells are on. I vote for quackery on this one. But if there’s a real study done that is reproducible, I’ll believe it.
Some things are counter-intuitive when it comes to medical therapies, and laypersons are quick to jump on something that gets their attention. It’s not bad to talk about this, but there’s a whole lot of science behind what is done today to help out cancer victims. There is a lot more therapy on the way- incredible things that are only in the early stages of research.
D Sherman is right on about being a supportive friend. If you ever get cancer, you will know who your true friends are; most people treat their friends like they are already dead and walk away. Awkward is the only word for relationships continuing after this type of treatment from supposed friends. But it’s also tough for someone who is just learning about their mortality to get a sudden cure-all from somebody who’s been practicing medicine by looking at Wikipedia. Make sure you know what you are talking about before throwing more confusion into the mix. Let the experts do their job, and help the person through it as best as you can.