Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"? - Hallo friendsUPDATE NEWS AND HOT, In the article you read this time with the title Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"?, We have prepared this article for you to read and retrieve information therein. Hopefully the contents of postings Article ECONOMY, Article GENERAL, Article LATEST, Article POLITICAL, Article TIPS, We write this you can understand. Alright, good read.

Title : Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"?
link : Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"?

Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"?

Prostate tumor mage yielded as part of 3D staging biopsy. This is completed prior to focal cryotherapy treatment. But no promises are made to rid the cancer entirely.

Steve Salerno, in his WSJ article ('In The War On Cancer Truth Becomes The Casualty',  p. A13, April 21-22) is adamant that cancer patients are being sold a bill of goods via phony TV ads where "the multimillion dollar industry appeals to emotion:".  He writes, for example, after seeing an M.D. Anderson ad proclaiming "Come to us and you will beat cancer" with the word  cancer rendered in :red strike through to reinforce the point."

He emphasizes "no asterisks" and "no disclaimers" - viewing the ad as exaggeration to prey on false hopes.  After all, those with cancer are often desperate to get rid of it, get the proverbial cure, so if a promise is made to "bear cancer" that's interpreted as getting the job done. And why not, given "Cancer Inc's denizens will compete for an estimated $207 billion in 2020.."  So "it is less a war on cancer than a war on truth - and on vulnerable consumers."

Salerno continues:

"The most comprehensive study of such advertising, published in the Annals of Internal Medicine in 2014, notes that cancer treatment ads as a class rely on emotional appeals evoking hope or fear, while pointedly eliding useful information. Eighty -eight percent tout treatments and only 18 percent mention screening even though early diagnosis is more critical to survival than the interventions remanticized on TV"

Which is absolutely true.   For example, by the time my youngest brother Mike was diagnosed with stage IV liver cancer in early May - after getting a liver biopsy- , he'd already run out of time for any useful treatments. The  most discriminating screening test - the biopsy -   was just too late.   His oncologist informed him-  soon after the diagnosis that he could provide "palliative" treatment and  keep him alive an "extra few months" by use of radiation plus chemo, "but there would be side effects."  Mike wanted nothing of it, and said flatly 'No!'   He would not be moved to struggle for a further month or two knowing his time was up anyway.

In my case, with prostate cancer, I also know the clock is ticking but I am not sure how fast. Having had high dose radiation in September, 2012 as a first treatment then focal cryotherapy as a salvage treatment last June, all I know is what the further screening tests have disclosed: that is a PSA of 2.7 at the end of April, and free PSA of 4.1 % - which indicates a more than 70 percent probability the cancer is still there - in other words it hasn't been "beaten" yet.

When I  asked the UCHealth NP, Kristen. : Why has it seemed to come back? ' She replied, "Well, it happens!'  Perhaps, but perhaps you guys never had it as much  under control as you assumed!

Even if we adhere to the most judicious diets and avoid all meats, alcohol, smokes etc. there is absolutely no assurance of continued wellness to the point of escaping all diseases such as cancer. Nor, I will add, is there any assurance that ANY prostate cancer treatment - even the radical prostatectomy - can ultimately "beat it".  When one reads the litany of complaints on the "Team Inspire" prostate forum it is totally disheartening. Treatment after treatment, RP, EBRT, HIFU, proton beam - none of them work with finality. Well, let's amend that a bit:  maybe there is a 0.5% success rate. For guys who come away from said treatment and find no resurgence afterward, no more rising PSA, no more low,  low free PSA.

In other words, in the "war on cancer' there are very few ultimate victors. At least with this cancer, and I suspect with many others.  Thus, all the ads bleating  about beating it are mostly fulsome rubbish fed to people desperate to be rid of it. More inundated with false hopes than realistic expectations.

At the center of the hopelessness of fighting the disease is Barbara  Ehrenreich's research on immune cells as a Ph. D. student in the 1960s, specifically on  “macrophages".  Her research led her to drop the  rose tinted glasses of hope and finally grasp these cells originally viewed as friends – frontline defenders against microbial invaders-  had been exposed as traitors. They were "biological double agents" for their role in cancer and autoimmune diseases. Hence, one of her basic "wellness" beliefs was shattered early and with it all the associated hokum and delusionary twaddle. . If one's body can attack itself, then why bother trying to look after it? At least to any assiduous, extreme extent?
 
Much of this was exposed in her new book, Natural Causes: An Epidemic Of Wellness, The Certainty Of Dying, And Killing Ourselves to Live Longer') 

As even Salerno puts it (ibid.):

"The war on cancer is not the place for pep talks and poetic license. We could do with more disclosure, less delusion. "

But the other side that needs less delusion has to do with the covert nexus of the "cancer industry" and its components, agenda.  What is the "cancer industry"? According to Breast Cancer Action, quoted by Lauretta Schwarz -Nobel in her book,  Poisoned Nation, St. Martin's Press, 2007:

"The Cancer industry consists of corporations, organizations, and agencies that diminish or mask the extent of the cancer problem, fail to protect our health or divert attention away from finding the causes of breast cancer...this includes drug companies that, in addition to profiting from cancer treatment drugs, also produce toxic chemicals that may be contributing to the high rates of cancer in this country and increasing rates throughout the world. It also includes the polluting industries that continue to release substances we know or suspect are dangerous to our health, and the public relations firms and public agencies who protect these polluters.

The Cancer industry includes organizations like the ACS that downplay the risk of cancer from pesticides and other environmental factors and which have historically refused to take a stand on environmental regulation".

This take on concealing the extent of the cancer problem, especially in terms of chemical toxins and their effects, was first broached by Devra Davis in her 'Secret History of the War on Cancer'.  She courageously exposed the PR underbelly of the American "Cancer wars" and their beneficiaries (see. e.g. Chapters 1-4), while also naming the American Cancer Society as having conflicts of interest and mixed motives (Chapter 5, 'Fear Sells').

Davis notes that people get told over and over (by the likes of the ACS and their physician apologists) that "too much fat" is causing their cancers - whether of lungs, bladders, prostate gland or breasts - and hence they bear greatest responsibility.  Never mind the evidence from more than 80 years of cumulative data which discloses it's chemicals in the environment that contribute more than fifty times as much.  

By contrast,  Ms. Schwarz -Nobel pulls no similar punches. She not only names environmental toxins and the chemical industry as the biggest culprits in the cancer explosion (she notes breast cancers have increased 300% since the 1960s) but shows in her (named) Chapter 6 that one of the biggest cancer drug producers (Astra Zeneca) ALSO produces one of the most toxic herbicides around, acetochlor. See also my earlier blog on Toxic America: http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2011/10/america-toxic-1.html

I point all this out because this is the major delusion in terms of the cancer wars, imho, not the TV ads blabbering false hope and bunkum.  If we don't know the extent of the agents that are connected to cancer then there is little chance of proactively avoiding them, and the necessity of getting so many screening tests (at the cost of tens of billions of dollars a year) in the first place.

Schwarz -Nobel asks, as every thinking American ought to, how it is that a multinational that manufactures one of the worst known carcinogens (p. 107) can also be manufacturing cancer treatment drugs. How can you basically be causing cancers and treating them at the same time?

Referring to AstraZeneca, the author points out:

"According to Sierra Magazine, 'Its Perry, Ohio chemical plant is the third largest source of potential cancer-causing pollution in the United States releasing 53,000 pounds of recognized carcinogens into the air in 1996". AstraZeneca is also the world's third largest drug concern, valued at $67 billion."

She then goes on to quote a Dr. Samuel Epstein from the same Sierra piece (ibid.):

"This is a conflict of interest unparalleled in the history of American medicine."

And further:

"You've got a company that's a spinoff of one of the world's biggest manufacturers of carcinogenic chemicals and they've got control of breast cancer treatment. They've got control of chemoprevention studies, and now they have control of cancer treatment in eleven centers - which are clearly going to provide the drugs they manufacture."

Clearly, the exposure of these hidden connections is the truth that needs to come out in the ongoing cancer battle, including the funding of treatments. At the end, we should not be funding companies if they are causing cancers at the same time as offering treatments. 

See also:

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2018/07/guarding-against-cancers-in-pruitt.html

Thus Article Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"?

That's an article Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"? This time, hopefully can give benefits to all of you. well, see you in posting other articles.

You are now reading the article Is Truth Really A Casualty In The "War On Cancer"? with the link address https://updated-1news.blogspot.com/2018/07/is-truth-really-casualty-in-war-on.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: