thescrappyhomeschooler Posted November 1, 2012 Author Share Posted November 1, 2012 Why is Chemo recommended if it is not effective? That makes no sense to me. It better be darn effective to go through that. . Because they make a buttload of money doing it? That's the only explanation I can think of. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
itsheresomewhere Posted November 1, 2012 Share Posted November 1, 2012 I'm really sorry you are battling this. Why is Chemo recommended if it is not effective? That makes no sense to me. It better be darn effective to go through that. So, unless they wowed me with the explanation, I'd probably decline, but that's me talking from my vantage point here and now. I think no one knows the right thing to do until the person doing it just knows. Praying for peace and a perfect outcome. It is a cover your butt measure. DH refused chemo with the last cancer. It would have been for preventive measure to make sure it wasn't there but with chemo still has a very strong chance of recurrence. Instead he had a CT scan every three months and a yearly PET scan. I would really think on it. Did the doctor seem open to monitoring? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katiebug_1976 Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 :grouphug: Wow, that is a tough question especially since I have never been in a situation like that. I like to think that I would refuse chemo no matter what just because I don't like chemical things and the the side affects that I have seen just seem too severe to me. If it were me, I would start taking esiac (sp?) and do some major research on fighting cancer through diet changes and natural methods. I personall know several people who have had cancer (diff. types/stages) and took esiac regularly and had great success in beating it. But ultimately the decision is up to you. My prayers are with you as you decide what is best for you. :grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
momacacia Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 You might want to have a look at www.chrisbeatcancer.com. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EthiopianFood Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 This is what I would do if I choose not to do chemo. Make sure you connect with a reputable raw food establishment of some sort, so you get all the information on the best way to do this. I will say that they would tell you that the chemo really CAN'T be done with natural treatments effectively, because the chemo kills your body's ability to fight in the first place. Chemo can and does cause future cancer. If time was not of the essence, I would monitor and do hardcore raw, juicing, etc. I'm not associated with any raw food groups, but I know people who are, so send me a message if you want some links. Be aware that these people will be 100% convinced that chemo is not a good idea, whether they have actual experience with it or not. Although gee, if your doctors don't have actual experience/statistics for the most part, I'm not sure they are a much better source of information for this particular situation. :glare: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 30% isn't nothing. :grouphug::grouphug::grouphug: :iagree: Treatments for cancer are added if they take *any* percentage off the chance of recurrence. So if a particular treatment (not just chemo) reduces the rate of recurrence 5%, they will add it to a recommended regime. I am sure the OP knows this, but others may not be cognizant of it: the term recurrence is misleading; it doesn't refer to another tumor at the same level of threat. Having cancer on your ovary is not, in itself, life-threatening. You don't need your ovaries to exist. It's metastasis to an organ that you do need that is life threatening. The point of chemo is to get those free floating cells out there that may hitch on somewhere important and begin to grow and interfere with an organ that you do need to survive. That said, chemo is nothing to snivel at, but your healthy cells usually overcome the impact of chemo and for most people, the effect is temporary. For those for whom side-effects linger, they are often aggravating (like neuropathy), but worth reducing the chance of metastasis. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Because they make a buttload of money doing it? That's the only explanation I can think of. Having been through chemo, my doctors were wonderful, caring, dedicated people. No way would they have recommended something for the $$. But cancer treatment is full of things that cut risk to some degree. You may get through chemo with very few side effects at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle in AL Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I'm a cancer nurse, most people go through chemo with very few side effects. If you have ovarian cancer and there is possible "seeding" or spread into your abdomen, I don't know how it could be controlled without chemo (in this situation I don't think they do radiation, and I've seen worse side effects for radiation to the gut then with chemo). Can you tell us why you are reluctant to get chemo? Feel free to pm me if you'd like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saddlemomma Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 In your situation, I'd have chemo -- thinking better safe than sorry. :grouphug: :grouphug: I'd do alternative therapies as long as there was no risk they interfered with chemo. :grouphug::grouphug::iagree: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michelle in AL Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 :grouphug: I forgot to send hugs on my last post :grouphug: Praying for you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DragonflyAcademy Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I am so sorry that you are going through this.. I voted No chemo.. BUT.. I am not you...If I was faced with this decision.. I would not do chemo.. My mother was diagnosed with a very rare form of cancer 5 years ago.. it had no real treatment options and hardly any studies done on it. She was other wise in good health.. active, mobile.. She chose to do chemo and for whatever reason.. be it either bad luck, the cancer or a combination of both of these.. the resulting neuropathy was debilitating, progressive and permanent. She ended up loosing her mobility which started a whole cascade of health issues.. the unusually progressive nature of the neuropathy puzzled her oncologist and ended up stealing her ability to move at all.. she became completely paralyzed and passed away.. even though her "Cancer numbers" were low and not rising...Given this, I would not do chemo for a cancer that had very little positive results from it....Easy to say for me.. as I am not living your diagnosis... Her cancer was not like yours.. so again.. I cannot say what you should do.. Hugs for you Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescrappyhomeschooler Posted November 2, 2012 Author Share Posted November 2, 2012 First of all, I would love to answer everyone personally. If I didn't quote you, that doesn't mean I didn't read and take into account what you said. I really appreciate everyone's advice. You might want to have a look at www.chrisbeatcancer.com. I came across his site when I was looking up raw food diets. :iagree: Treatments for cancer are added if they take *any* percentage off the chance of recurrence. So if a particular treatment (not just chemo) reduces the rate of recurrence 5%, they will add it to a recommended regime. I am sure the OP knows this, but others may not be cognizant of it: the term recurrence is misleading; it doesn't refer to another tumor at the same level of threat. Having cancer on your ovary is not, in itself, life-threatening. You don't need your ovaries to exist. It's metastasis to an organ that you do need that is life threatening. The point of chemo is to get those free floating cells out there that may hitch on somewhere important and begin to grow and interfere with an organ that you do need to survive. That said, chemo is nothing to snivel at, but your healthy cells usually overcome the impact of chemo and for most people, the effect is temporary. For those for whom side-effects linger, they are often aggravating (like neuropathy), but worth reducing the chance of metastasis. Right, and they took out all my organs where these ovarian cancer cells like to travel, so now where will they go? My liver? My pancreas? Who knows? Having been through chemo, my doctors were wonderful, caring, dedicated people. No way would they have recommended something for the $$. But cancer treatment is full of things that cut risk to some degree. You may get through chemo with very few side effects at all. My actual doctors so far have been less than wonderful. The second one is not a giant @ss like the first one, but I wouldn't go so far as to say he's wonderful. However, ALL of the support staff, nurses, geneticist, etc. have been very nice, compassionate, friendly, etc. I'm not literally saying that my doctor would subject me to chemo even if he didn't think I needed it just to add to his new boat fund, but in all reality, he couldn't tell me that chemo would be really helpful in my situation. And after watching what my best friend went through with breast cancer, and seeing what a huge industry cancer treatment has become, I'm a tad cynical. I'm a cancer nurse, most people go through chemo with very few side effects. If you have ovarian cancer and there is possible "seeding" or spread into your abdomen, I don't know how it could be controlled without chemo (in this situation I don't think they do radiation, and I've seen worse side effects for radiation to the gut then with chemo). Can you tell us why you are reluctant to get chemo? Feel free to pm me if you'd like. They have been very clear that chemo is not particularly effective on the slow-growing tumors like mine. Also, they had me meet with the geneticist, and she took a thorough family history, and she wasn't concerned about all the cancer in my family, but she was terribly concerned about the various heart problems both my parents have had. So, I at least think I should postpone the chemo until I get the heart checked out. It might explain why my feet are constantly swollen. And the reason people have very few side effects now is because they have come up with effective drugs to mitigate them. That doesn't change the fact that your entire body is being ravaged with toxic chemicals that could possibly have permanent side effects. Even with those side effects, I would do the chemo in a heartbeat if they told me it was effective in killing those random cells. Since there are no numbers on women who don't do the chemo in cases like mine, I have to assume that there is the possibility that 30% of them won't have recurrences, either. I am so sorry that you are going through this.. I voted No chemo.. BUT.. I am not you...If I was faced with this decision.. I would not do chemo.. My mother was diagnosed with a very rare form of cancer 5 years ago.. it had no real treatment options and hardly any studies done on it. She was other wise in good health.. active, mobile.. She chose to do chemo and for whatever reason.. be it either bad luck, the cancer or a combination of both of these.. the resulting neuropathy was debilitating, progressive and permanent. She ended up loosing her mobility which started a whole cascade of health issues.. the unusually progressive nature of the neuropathy puzzled her oncologist and ended up stealing her ability to move at all.. she became completely paralyzed and passed away.. even though her "Cancer numbers" were low and not rising...Given this, I would not do chemo for a cancer that had very little positive results from it....Easy to say for me.. as I am not living your diagnosis... Her cancer was not like yours.. so again.. I cannot say what you should do.. Hugs for you I'm sorry you and your mother had to go through this. I've decided that I will at least postpone the chemo, until I can get my heart checked and also consult with a Naturopath to see what she has to say. Thank you again for all your hugs, prayers, comments and concerns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scarlett Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I am not a fan of Chemo being given routinely...my sister had stage 1 breast cancer this summer and they wanted her to have chemo and she declined...I supported her on that because it was such a grey area... But in your case....I hate to say it but I would probably do the chemo. :( I hate it for you but you are very young and you need the very best chance of beating this long term. :grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonshineLearner Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 I've decided that I will at least postpone the chemo, until I can get my heart checked and also consult with a Naturopath to see what she has to say. Thank you again for all your hugs, prayers, comments and concerns. I wanted to make sure that you know there are Naturopaths that specialize in Oncology. You realize this, right? I looked up for one of the other posts, the exact degree I'd suggest you look for. Seriously, my mom has seen more than one and the specific specialization makes all the difference... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mommy22alyns Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 In your situation, I'd have chemo -- thinking better safe than sorry. :grouphug: :grouphug: I'd do alternative therapies as long as there was no risk they interfered with chemo. :iagree::grouphug: Best wishes to you, OP. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Laurie4b Posted November 2, 2012 Share Posted November 2, 2012 Actually, maybe I should recind my vote. I've not seen good outcomes from chemo either. But the folks I know who did it did not move to a whole30 type of diet, which I think matters. I think the diet is key. Everyone I know who has survived cancer has done chemo, most without major side effects. One friend has been at Stage 4 cancer for about 9 years. She is has been doing chemo every 3 weeks since she was diagnosed at Stage 4 and lives a full and active life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ks-sunflower Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 How about a second opinion at the Mayo Clinic - I think they're rated #1 for gynecological cancers? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomandlorih Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 Based on these comments alone...I would not do chemo. But in full disclosure, at this point, I'm more convinced about the efficacy of natural alternatives (drastic diet changes, lowered stress & inflammation, increased immune system) than I am about chemo.... I know if flies in the face of traditional medicine, but I put more confidence in natural alternatives than standard treatment protocol at this point. :grouphug: and prayers to you as you make this decision....mentally & emotionally, you need to be at peace with what you decide- certainly, there is fear & stress involved in any decision like this, but praying for peace & confidence to accompany you on this journey I'm not going to tell you what you should do, just what I would do given the situation you've described. If time is not an issue, I would wait 8 weeks, have markers taken on tumors, etc. During the next 8 weeks I would go SERIOUS gangbusters on juice fasts, raw, immune boosters, detox enemas, etc. This would be hard during the holidays, but I would feel great and no sugar is the new normal. After 8 weeks I would have my markers checked and evaluate the results and then see if chemo was the next step, etc. A LOT of healing can happen in 8 weeks and with a slow growing tumor I would be okay waiting that amount of time readying my body for chemo, if necessary. Also I would need to heal longer after such a massive surgery. :grouphug: :iagree: with these ladies. Hugs and prayers for peace and healing to you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jenL Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 This is such a difficult question, and I honestly do not know how I would answer. What does your gut say? I truly believe our gut responses are not wrong. I hope you find peace with whatever decision you make based upon the information you have available to you. Prayers are with you. :grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Catwoman Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 How about a second opinion at the Mayo Clinic - I think they're rated #1 for gynecological cancers? :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: I know you're already dealing with a very highly ranked hospital, but another opinion may be what you need in order to make the best possible decision, and to be sure that there are no other (better) alternatives to the chemo. This is your life, and chemo is rough, but if it's truly your best possible option, it's worth doing -- because if you don't and heaven forbid you have a recurrence, will you be able to forgive yourself for not trying it? But as I said, I think another opinion from a place like the Mayo Clinic would be worth its weight in gold. Praying for you!!! :grouphug::grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SonshineLearner Posted November 3, 2012 Share Posted November 3, 2012 :iagree::iagree::iagree: :iagree: :iagree: :iagree: I know you're already dealing with a very highly ranked hospital, but another opinion may be what you need in order to make the best possible decision, and to be sure that there are no other (better) alternatives to the chemo. This is your life, and chemo is rough, but if it's truly your best possible option, it's worth doing -- because if you don't and heaven forbid you have a recurrence, will you be able to forgive yourself for not trying it? But as I said, I think another opinion from a place like the Mayo Clinic would be worth its weight in gold. Praying for you!!! :grouphug::grouphug: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thescrappyhomeschooler Posted November 3, 2012 Author Share Posted November 3, 2012 Thanks for all the opinions and advice. I really do appreciate it. I've made the decision not to do chemo. It was really cemented in my mind this morning when I awoke to the sound of my cell phone beeping that I had a new message. It was from my best friend, who has gone through chemo herself. She said that after all the research she has done on her own, she would have to agree with me that it doesn't make sense to do chemo. Every single article, abstract, etc. says that it is not effective on my type of tumor. If I had the money to go to the Mayo Clinic, I'd seriously think about going there. Don't think my crappy insurance would cover it. I don't even have the money to travel there if my insurance did cover it. In any case, I really don't think they could tell me anything different. My type of cancer is called low grade ovarian serous carcinoma. Of the approximately 22,000 women diagnosed with ovarian cancer each year in the US, only about 2,000 have low grade carcinoma. Of the 2,000, only 20 are in an early stage like me. That is why there is almost no research on my situation. I figure either with or without the chemo, my best chances are still only 30% of not having a recurrence. So, I think I'll not pour in the toxins, and try to live as healthily as I can for as long as I can. I know I'm going against the tide here (imagine a homeschool mom doing such a thing! :tongue_smilie:), but I really feel it is the right choice for me. I can't stress enough how much all of your thoughts and prayers have meant to me. You have been a huge part of keeping me going for these past 5 weeks. Thank you. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.