What Is The Best Treatment Of Cancer?

[sumonht1990]

First question, is chemotherapy a good treatment for cancer? The second question is what is the best treatment of cancer?

Edited May 18, 2012 by Mukhlesur Rahman

[CraigD]

I think the question “what is the best treatment for cancer?” is like “what is the best way to fix a car that won’t start?” It’s too general.

 

Chemotherapies include many well-developed treatments for cancer of proven efficacy, so are good treatments for some kinds.

 

Because there many different kinds of cancers, an treatment effective for one may not be for another. Also many conditions specific to an individual patient what must be taken into account, as must the stage that the cancer has reached at the time it is detected and treatment begun. So there is, to the best of my knowledge or that of any oncologists I know, no single therapy best for the treatment of all cases of cancer.

 

IMHO, it’s best not to speak of cancer as if it were a single disease. Cancer is a broad group of many diseases with the common characteristic of potentially health-harming abnormal cell growth.

[maddog]

I heard on public radio an outrageous news byte (about a month ago now) that an effective "cure" for "most" Cancers is simply to add lemon juice (extracted from fresh lemons). The person being interviewed had given example of evidence (none of which I can now remember) that may have sounded good then, yet now with what I do remember as not being that rigorous. I don't mean to dismiss this outright, it's just that I am skeptical. Obviously, I would like to this to be true. If it were, there would be no scientist paid by drug companies to corroborate it since their revenue would be derived from proving it false.

 

So I throw this out there, if there is anyone who had heard such a thing (even if it is only a rumor). I think liver cancer and pancreatic cancer are typically the hardest to fight.

 

I am curious. I have been wondering what things that would be in just lemons over other citrus fruits or other vegetables. etc.

 

Michael

[CraigD]

I heard on public radio an outrageous news byte (about a month ago now) that an effective "cure" for "most" Cancers is simply to add lemon juice (extracted from fresh lemons). The person being interviewed had given example of evidence (none of which I can now remember) that may have sounded good then, yet now with what I do remember as not being that rigorous.

I’d not heard of this, but a quick googling of “lemon juice cancer” found several pages concluding that the claim that lemon and other fruit juice can treat cancer is a myth. This one seemed the best written of them. I have fairly regular contact with clinical oncologists, and know that fruit juice or juice extracts aren’t an accepted legitimate cancer treatment.

 

That said, there’s some evidence that flavonoids and limonoids from fruits kill cancer cells in a lab (en vitro) cell cultures. Whether this is significant, and a fruit-based cancer chemotherapy could be developed, appears uncertain.

 

Eating fruit, citrus included, is good for you, but so are many other foods, and good diet in general, so I don’t think eating an unusual amount of lemons or any other fruit or fruit juice is a good idea, especially as lemon and other citrus juice is acidic, and consumed in excess, can cause stomach problems. A good diet can prevent many diseases, including cancer, as can many healthy lifestyle choices. This single most important one, IMHO, is not smoking in excess (which I’d define as more than 50 or so cigs/joint/bowls a year).

 

If it were, there would be no scientist paid by drug companies to corroborate it since their revenue would be derived from proving it false.

A miracle cancer cure using a non-patentable medicine would be bad financial news for pharmaceutical companies, but tremendously good news for HMOs and health insurance companies (of which I know what I speak). Such a cure would make its discoverers famous, celebrated, and likely pretty rich.

 

So I’d not worry much about the suppression of legitimate medical research by big or small pharma. There are many other interested player, financially and more altruistically, in medical science and the profession.

[TAMallick]

Until now chemotherapy is a good treatment for cancer. Just we should remember for cancer that prevention is better than cure.

[belovelife]

i remember hearing of a strain of a stomack flu or something that broke down the cancer cells defence against the immune system, then the body digests it naturally

 

 

also look up the gamma knife

[jannamiltons]

Cancer treatment is impossible for now but maybe in the near future it will not be.

[LJP07]

First question, is chemotherapy a good treatment for cancer? The second question is what is the best treatment of cancer?

 

Yes - chemotherapy is an excellent treatment for cancer. It gives that extra chance of survival that no other form of therapy can currently provide. However, as other posters have pointed out, your questions are too general and vague. It really does depend on what cancer it is. For example, if I were to have a form of Leukemia, then treatment would depend what stage it is at. It's usually split between 4 stages, with the fourth being the worst with not a very positive prognosis. Thus, is chemotherapy a good treatment for this stage? Maybe not, because the patient may want to enjoy the remaining months of his/her life without the nasty side-effects of chemotherapy.

 

That being said, the side-effects are much more manageable than they were previously. Many chemotherapeutic agents have a low threshold of causing nausea and vomiting and often an anti-emetic agent can be provided in situations where the threshold is high. It's also worth noting that when you give chemotherapeutic agents, you are also killing healthy cells as well as malignant cells. Research is ongoing currently to directly target the malignant cells thus reducing adverse effects such as compromising the host's immune system among other effects.

 

As for your second question, it entirely depends on the individual cancer and what stage it's at. Radiotherapy may also be added to the regimen of chemotherapy in some cases, but not in others.

 

If you've any more specific questions, do post. ;-)

Edited July 9, 2012 by LJP07

[mugwande]

I think the question “what is the best treatment for cancer?” is like “what is the best way to fix a car that won’t start?” It’s too general.

 

Chemotherapies include many well-developed treatments for cancer of proven efficacy, so are good treatments for some kinds.

 

Because there many different kinds of cancers, an treatment effective for one may not be for another. Also many conditions specific to an individual patient what must be taken into account, as must the stage that the cancer has reached at the time it is detected and treatment begun. So there is, to the best of my knowledge or that of any oncologists I know, no single therapy best for the treatment of all cases of cancer.

 

IMHO, it’s best not to speak of cancer as if it were a single disease. Cancer is a broad group of many diseases with the common characteristic of potentially health-harming abnormal cell growth.

 

 

I would like to know if piles are also type of cancer? and can they be treated apart from being operated? and if someone has got piles, is there any possibility that that person maybe having other problems attached to it?

 

 

Moderation note: Replies to this post were moved to the thread hemorrhoids, because they discuss a condition other than this thread's topic, cancer

Edited October 12, 2012 by CraigD

[Lancewen]

I think the question “what is the best treatment for cancer?” is like “what is the best way to fix a car that won’t start?” It’s too general.

 

Chemotherapies include many well-developed treatments for cancer of proven efficacy, so are good treatments for some kinds.

 

Because there many different kinds of cancers, an treatment effective for one may not be for another. Also many conditions specific to an individual patient what must be taken into account, as must the stage that the cancer has reached at the time it is detected and treatment begun. So there is, to the best of my knowledge or that of any oncologists I know, no single therapy best for the treatment of all cases of cancer.

 

IMHO, it’s best not to speak of cancer as if it were a single disease. Cancer is a broad group of many diseases with the common characteristic of potentially health-harming abnormal cell growth.

 

I agree with what you said, so I would like to suggest we talk about a single cancer that many men are very concerned about. Prostrate cancer.

 

Researchers estimate that prostrate cancer will attack one out of every six men. And the disease strikes far earlier than you'd ever imagine.

 

Researchers now believe up to 20% of men over 50 already have prostrate cancer. And the older you get , the greater your danger. By age 70, the number of men with prostrate cancer doubles to 40%, and by 85, it soars to 60%.

From Don't Touch My Prostrate by Lee Euler with Susan Clark

 

The question to treat or not to treat, is a very important question. Many men with prostrate cancer live out full, active lives with the disease and then die of something else altogether. Prostrate cancer comes in two types, one is a very slow growing cancer that it's better just to watch and wait and do what you can to improve all aspects of you lifestyle. The other is an aggressive form that can quickly drain the life out of you.

 

I believe knowing which kind of prostrate cancer you have makes a big difference to the choices you might have to work with. There are many treatments for prostrate cancer and surgery and radiation are not good choices as they don't show an overall good result when compared to a control group that does nothing to treat their prostrate cancer.

 

One treatment I read about is High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound - HIFU

 

This treatment uses heat to kill the cancer. The entire HIFU treatment takes about two to three and a half hours, and is done on an outpatient basis. You will under go general anesthesia during the procedure and you'll need a catheter for a week or so after treatment. However most patients usually resume their normal, active lives within two days. I can't say I would look forward to this treatment, but the major alternatives are a lot worse.