TORONTO — A London, Ont., hospital says 26 more cancer patients received watered-down chemotherapy drugs, in addition to the more than 1,100 patients in Ontario and New Brunswick.
That brings the total number of patients affected at the hospital to 691 — 651 adults and 40 children.
London Health Sciences Centre says it believes 117 of the adult patients have died, but the deaths can’t be directly attributed to the diluted drugs.
It says they can’t be 100 per cent certain of the number of deaths, since they’re not always notified when a patient has died after treatment.
The additional 26 patients were identified after conducting a second, more thorough assessment of its files.
The hospital says it has already contacted all the patients.
There is another case where a Doctor forced three operations on a patient, patient died.
Corporates mean profit, Profit means Sales ‘Targets”
This evil can be eradicated only by patients going to Doctors who thorough checks you up physically,does not prescribe a battery of Tests , who listens to your problem , most importantly does not work in a Corporate run Hospital, and who does not have a Fancy Title or Degree.
Ray Law, 60, died of complications two days after his prostate cancer operation at Lincoln County Hospital in February 2010.
On the day he died, a senior doctor raised serious concerns about the incident in an internal memo, saying the targets were putting patients at risk and putting “enormous and unsustainable pressure” on surgeons.
“Envita utilizes a molecular profiling test to examine the genetic and molecular changes unique to a patient’s tumor so that treatment options may be matched to the tumor’s molecular profile. This differs fundamentally from the current model used to treat cancer in cancer centers and hospitals known as “germ theory.” The germ theory approach focuses on destroying foreign cancer cells like an infection by using an aggressive regimen of chemotherapy that not been typed to the patient.”
To put this English, normal body cells are not destroyed in this procedure.
The site which offers this information seems to be a good one.
One may refer it and follow this in consultation with the Oncologist.
No other illness has been talked as much as Cancer.
Often we come across statements that the Cancer causing agent/Carcinogens have been identified, cell Biology unearthed and a medication/vaccine is under way.
But till date I am yet to find any one who is completely cured of cancer.
The recovery stories often tell us how one fought cancer for a few years and it strikes again.
Cancer is unregulated proliferation of Cells , not obeying any known Laws of Biology.
Despite latest technological Advancements, Cancer Diagnosis and treatment is mostly done by the Instinct and experience of the Doctors.
As one who had to bear with the processes of detecting and treating Cancer for my closest relative, I was constantly interacting with the Physician(Oncology) and Surgeon-Oncology of a reputed Multi speciality Hospital.
The process of diagnosis is mostly by elimination and depends very much on the correct course of series of Tests to be undertaken.
If you are lucky, you will be following the correct series of tests , other wise your investigation process will be delayed.
Now, coming to treatment as such, the Doctors have these options.
1.Treatment through Drugs-Chemotherapy.
This process has side effects and there is no guarantee that the Cancer will be arrested.
Maximum exposure is 4 -5 times.
While undergoing Chemotherapy,one loses hair and has other side effects like fever .
2.Radium Therapy.
This is also unproven as Chemotherapy.
It is painful and has side effects.
Doctors will tell you it is painless.
I have seen people screaming.
More important is that Doctors use this option to make money.
Here the removal of the part afflicted is believed to remove Cancer.
But the rider is Cancer may surface in any other part of the Body.
Taking all these facts together. I feel that Cancer is dealt best if no treatment is taken.
Refers to;
I recently read an article about how to respond when someone tells you he has cancer.
The gist of the article was simple. Be a good listener. Be supportive. Don’t give advice.
I’ve been on both sides of the “I have cancer” conversation. And I would agree with all three of those guidelines.
But that third one can be tough. You want to help. And you may actually have good advice. But new cancer patients are overwhelmed with advice. So it’s usually best to hold off.
And yet, today I’m going to offer some advice to Warren Buffett.
Warren, you really need to get a second opinion. And don’t worry about the money. Your insurance company should cover it.
Billion–dollar advice
You may have heard that multi-billionaire Warren Buffett has prostate cancer. That’s the bad news.
As for good news, there’s a lot, actually.
Buffett’s cancer is stage one — the two words you most want to hear when diagnosed with cancer.
His doctors have also determined that his cancer hasn’t spread, and he’s otherwise in very good health. In addition, most prostate cancers are slow growing. So Buffett, who’s 81, is very unlikely to die of this disease.
In a public statement, Buffett said his “condition is not remotely life-threatening or even debilitating in any meaningful way.”
Clearly, his cancer will probably have very little impact on his wellbeing (or on his ability to run Berkshire Hathaway…which is the underlying question no reporters are really asking).
I wish I could say the same about his treatment. In mid-July, Buffett plans to begin two months of radiation therapy, five days each week.
Now, every cancer case is different. And only Buffett’s doctors know the complete details about his condition. But given what we do know, it strikes me as sheer madness for him to undergo any radiation at all. Much less two months of it!
The day Buffett announced he had cancer, I saw a CNN report that included several commentators chatting about Buffett’s options. One of them described “watchful waiting” as the “crazy” option.
Watchful waiting is the opposite of crazy. It’s prudent and protects patients. It requires regular testing, so it’s not a walk in the park. But watchful waiting is almost always the best option for a man of Buffett’s age with stage one prostate cancer.
The truly crazy option is a long round of radiation. It’s like hunting a housefly with a cannon.
Potential side effects of prostate radiation include fatigue, with a risk of urinary and bowel problems. And you never know how radiation will affect a patient. Those “problems” could easily become severe.
One radiation oncologist told the Associated Press that undergoing radiation is like kindergarten — “The hardest part is showing up.”
That’s outrageous! Showing up is the EASIEST part. Coping with urinary and bowel problems is unquestionably the hardest part — especially for a man in his 80s.
I hope someone will get through to Buffett and explain the wisdom of watching and waiting. But more importantly, if he does choose radiation, I hope other men his age will not follow his lead.
Let’s call it the Brand New Buffett Rule: Watch. Wait. Don’t radiate.
Sources:
“Warren Buffett Says He Has Early Prostate Cancer” Josh Funk, Associated Press, 4/18/12, ap.org
As one who has seen close relatives, including my mother , die of Cancer, I am of the opinion that Cancer treatment is a myth which helps none but the purse of the Doctor/labs.
Of course the patient is kept pain free , thanks to pain killers including morphine.
Same is the case with lot of Neurological disorders.
As Bernard Shaw said’ Nature cures,Doctors collect the fees’
The difference between earlier generation and us is that we die hearing some names and paying heavily to medicine while they died blissfully unaware.
Story:
An internationally-recognized gynecologic oncologist at St. Joseph’s Hospital and Medical Center in Phoenix, Arizona is warning that the results from a long-awaited global study of ovarian cancer should be viewed cautiously.
Published in The Lancet last month, the study reported that women who received early chemotherapy for a recurrence of ovarian cancer did not live longer than those whose treatment is delayed.
“While this study is a bold challenge to the assumption of early treatment, there are several significant problems with the findings,” says Bradley Monk, MD, and a leader in developing new approaches to cancer treatments. “Our focus should no longer be on standard chemotherapy, but on targeted genetics-based treatments.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.