All cancer patients!!

[L M C]

Theres no money in the cure only in the treatment.

 

My thoughts exaxctly.

 

It's such a shame a Oncologist cannot join in on this thread to give their honest opinion on NHS treatment and alternative therapies away from the Government Guidelines.

[medusa]

I doubt that you'll find any scientist who would agree that the information provided above constitutes enough information to declare that the compound 'cures cancer'.

 

An awful lot more trials are needed before that can be considered, and even then it won't 'cure cancer' because there is no single entity of cancer, but hundreds of different tumours made up of different types of cell.

[Phanerothyme]

Radiotherapy cured me. Radiotherapy and Chemotherapy cured my SO. DCA is unproven.

 

You might as well use cannabis.

[geared]

My thoughts exaxctly.

 

It's such a shame a Oncologist cannot join in on this thread to give their honest opinion on NHS treatment and alternative therapies away from the Government Guidelines.

 

What do you want them to say??

 

Legally an oncologist treating a patient can only give a few different treatments, and they need to talk the treatment options through with the patient as well.

 

They have to be able to demonstrate (in court if required) the efficacy of the treatment they have prescribed.

 

Obviously when it comes to 'alternative' treatments, the genuine options are actually limited.

They have to have been properly assessed, and reported on as being an effective treatment and approved for use.

 

If a Doctor was to approve the use of some odd, un-used treatment based on some dodgy crap off the internet they'd quickly find themselves in court and out of a job.

[kelly4danny]

Do you have any sort of grounding in scientific education L M C?

 

If you do then you will know that the link contains some dreadful terminology and explanation. The mitochondria aren't cells, they are organelles in a cell and they are present in the vast majority of human cells.

 

Another important thing is that it could be completely possible for DCA to kill all sorts of cells in vitro but yet have no ability to do the same in vivo, or for the dosage of DCA needed to be active to be high enough that it was otherwise toxic in humans, and we have no way of knowing any of this without proper trials.

 

The 'cure' cannot be given until it is evaluated and actually found to be effective and safe, so there's no point in asking for it until it has been trialled and the safe, effective dose and method of administration is found.

 

I must disagree with you Medusa, as in the case of a terminally ill patient, there can be no downside to trying this kind of treatment, as the prognosis is bleak at best. There are too many medical guidelines that stop trialled medicines making its way into mainstream treatment, and the only reason for this is red tape, ie; fear of reprisals toward the medical profession.

Evaluation can only ever be carried out by trial, and due to the ferocious nature of some cancers, this revolutionary treatment should be introduced without haste.

[geared]

Yea, but all it takes is for one person to have a bad reaction and the doctor is slapped with a career ruining clinical malpractice suit.

 

Unfortunately thats the world we live in.

[*_ash_*]

I must disagree with you Medusa, as in the case of a terminally ill patient, there can be no downside to trying this kind of treatment, as the prognosis is bleak at best. There are too many medical guidelines that stop trialled medicines making its way into mainstream treatment, and the only reason for this is red tape, ie; fear of reprisals toward the medical profession.

Evaluation can only ever be carried out by trial, and due to the ferocious nature of some cancers, this revolutionary treatment should be introduced without haste.

 

bold, the word 'only' here is a touch naive.

 

In fact, geared almost nailed it here...

 

Yea, but all it takes is for one person to have a bad reaction and the doctor is slapped with a career ruining clinical malpractice suit.

 

Unfortunately that's the world we live in.

 

Bold, yep.

[kelly4danny]

bold, the word 'only' here is a touch naive.

 

In fact, geared almost nailed it here...

 

 

 

Bold, yep.

 

Its also one of the reasons why people from all over the world travel to certain countries that will trial a treatment, as these countries have strict guidelines as to who can be sued, and who cannot.

 

The blame and claim culture is sickening. Designed to protect, but abused by many.

[*_ash_*]

Its also one of the reasons why people from all over the world travel to certain countries that will trial a treatment, as these countries have strict guidelines as to who can be sued, and who cannot.

 

The blame and claim culture is sickening. Designed to protect, but abused by many.

 

Spot on. I read a story in one of those women's rag mags at work last week, and what I read as a heart-felt tragic story left me fuming when the last sentence was, we're trying for another baby, and currently suing the NHS.

 

This is why I couldn't work in it. I would refuse to treat the next one.

[kelly4danny]

Spot on. I read a story in one of those women's rag mags at work last week, and what I read as a heart-felt tragic story left me fuming when the last sentence was, we're trying for another baby, and currently suing the NHS.

 

This is why I couldn't work in it. I would refuse to treat the next one.

 

I do agree, but sadly this is not everyone's stance on the subject. I had a call from a claim company asking me about my accident I had. It was a bit weird, as I cant remember having an accident, but that is exactly as you say. The world we live in.

 

If I was unlucky enough to be afflicted with cancer, I would be the first to shout for any possible treatment that I could get. I'm sure there is a clever lawyer out there who could produce a document that couldn't be challenged by grieving relatives should it not work.