children

A few questions:

How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does it kill
your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that you should leave
it before you do? Is it recommended you never do even if you can?

jacques wrote:
> A few questions:
>
> How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does it
> kill your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that you
> should leave it before you do? Is it recommended you never do even if
> you can?

I haven't been tested, but it is very likely that i am sterile
due to being given nitrogen mustard when I was 16. It is
known to cause sterility a fairly high percentage of the time.
I have had radiation to my chest, and MOPP chemo for
Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple doses of I-131 for
thyroid cancer.

I wouldn't want to father any kids if I could, because I have
a lot of different chronic health problems and would never
want to pass this along to a child and have to watch them
go through what I have gone through.

I have seen some people on here say that it would be OK,
but they do not get to make this call for me.

http://www.lymphomainfo.net/therapy/...rapy/mopp.html

"jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
news:OlF4j.19605$CN4.4361@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>A few questions:
>
> How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does it kill
> your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that you should leave
> it before you do? Is it recommended you never do even if you can?

Some forms of chemotherapy do not permanently damage the testes. Radiation
is not sterilising unless it is given to, or near the testes.
Many men who have been cured of testicular cancer have subsequently
fathered.

It's best to let the damaged sperm work through the system, so we advise no
pregnancy until at least 1 year after treatment.
You really need to discuss your own personal details with your oncologist.

Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:

>
> "jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
> news:OlF4j.19605$CN4.4361@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>A few questions:
>>
>> How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does it
>> kill your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that you
>> should leave it before you do? Is it recommended you never do even if
>> you can?
>
> Some forms of chemotherapy do not permanently damage the testes.
> Radiation is not sterilising unless it is given to, or near the
> testes. Many men who have been cured of testicular cancer have
> subsequently fathered.
>
> It's best to let the damaged sperm work through the system, so we
> advise no pregnancy until at least 1 year after treatment.

Thanks.

> You really need to discuss your own personal details with your
> oncologist.

I would, but my oncologist wanted me to give up on life 4 months ago, and
he hasn't forgiven me for not listening to him. He hasn't treated me for
4 months, with a bit of luck I might get some next week. My last appt
lasted about 4 minutes, that's about average.

On Dec 2, 10:17 pm, jacques <n...@anywhere.atall.org> wrote:
> Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
>
>
>
>
> > "jacques" <n...@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
> >news:OlF4j.19605$CN4.4361@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> >>A few questions:
>
> >> How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does it
> >> kill your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that you
> >> should leave it before you do? Is it recommended you never do even if
> >> you can?
>
> > Some forms of chemotherapy do not permanently damage the testes.
> > Radiation is not sterilising unless it is given to, or near the
> > testes. Many men who have been cured of testicular cancer have
> > subsequently fathered.
>
> > It's best to let the damaged sperm work through the system, so we
> > advise no pregnancy until at least 1 year after treatment.
>
> Thanks.
>
> > You really need to discuss your own personal details with your
> > oncologist.
>
> I would, but my oncologist wanted me to give up on life 4 months ago, and
> he hasn't forgiven me for not listening to him. He hasn't treated me for
> 4 months, with a bit of luck I might get some next week. My last appt
> lasted about 4 minutes, that's about average.

It sounds like you need to find another oncologist. Is there any
compelling reason to continue seeing, or trying to see, someone who
doesn't serve your interests? This group is great for support, but
you should have a qualified, interested professional to give advice
and to treat you.

---
CSM

wrote in alt.support.cancer:

> On Dec 2, 10:17 pm, jacques <n...@anywhere.atall.org> wrote:
>> Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > "jacques" <n...@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
>> >news:OlF4j.19605$CN4.4361@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>> >>A few questions:
>>
>> >> How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does
>> >> it kill your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that
>> >> you should leave it before you do? Is it recommended you never do
>> >> even if you can?
>>
>> > Some forms of chemotherapy do not permanently damage the testes.
>> > Radiation is not sterilising unless it is given to, or near the
>> > testes. Many men who have been cured of testicular cancer have
>> > subsequently fathered.
>>
>> > It's best to let the damaged sperm work through the system, so we
>> > advise no pregnancy until at least 1 year after treatment.
>>
>> Thanks.
>>
>> > You really need to discuss your own personal details with your
>> > oncologist.
>>
>> I would, but my oncologist wanted me to give up on life 4 months ago,
>> and he hasn't forgiven me for not listening to him. He hasn't treated
>> me for 4 months, with a bit of luck I might get some next week. My
>> last appt lasted about 4 minutes, that's about average.
>
> It sounds like you need to find another oncologist. Is there any
> compelling reason to continue seeing, or trying to see, someone who
> doesn't serve your interests? This group is great for support, but
> you should have a qualified, interested professional to give advice
> and to treat you.

I went to see someone else. He was even worse. He deferred to the first
onc. Not only did onc2 not give me another opinion he rang onc1 to find
out what opinion he should give me. He then lied to me and told me he had
two trials available. After waiting 3 months to see him he had no trials.
It wasn't because the two trials were finished, it was because he never
had them in the first place. This was confirmed by his clinical trials
nurse. So onc2 deliberately (and probably criminally, I'm not sure)
wasted 3 months of my time. It appears that once one of them makes the
decision to cut you loose that's it. They will pass you round like a
football and lie to you until such time as you give up and go away and
die.

This is probably how socialised cancer treatment works. Instead of
treating you until you decide to give up, they decide when you give up.
And it's usually way too early, while you're still 240 pounds and active
and don't even look sick and everyone tells you they can't believe you've
got cancer.

This is why I'm asking questions here.

>
> ---
> CSM
>

jacques wrote:

> This is probably how socialised cancer treatment works. Instead of
> treating you until you decide to give up, they decide when you give up.
> And it's usually way too early, while you're still 240 pounds and active
> and don't even look sick and everyone tells you they can't believe you've
> got cancer.
>
> This is why I'm asking questions here.

Why would you want to go into treatment right now, then, Jacques ?
If you're feeling so good, why risk infection, pulmonary embolus, nausea,
vomiting, dehydration, hospitalization etc?
Use the chemo when the tumors are causing you more trouble.
I think that shrinking, then it grows, then shrinking with chemo, then it
grows, etc speeds up chemo resistance.
J

J wrote in alt.support.cancer:

> Why would you want to go into treatment right now, then, Jacques ?
> If you're feeling so good, why risk infection, pulmonary embolus,
> nausea, vomiting, dehydration, hospitalization etc?
> Use the chemo when the tumors are causing you more trouble.
> I think that shrinking, then it grows, then shrinking with chemo, then
> it grows, etc speeds up chemo resistance.
> J

This is the same logic onc1 used when he was telling me he was raising the
white flag. But as I said last week my tumours have increased massively in
size over the last 3-4 months, some by over 600%. I am not feeling well. I
am sleeping 12 hours a day. As I said to him 4 months ago when he told me
to give up, no I am not giving up. I want to hit this thing hard, with
everything possible, and if nothing works then I'll give up. There are
still at least 3 common treatments I have not been offered. I have now been
sitting around doing nothing for almost 4 montsh while these arseholes have
passed me around like a football and lied to me.

I know this probably sounds like I'm looking for someone to direct my anger
at beacuse I'm frustrated. Yes, I am frustrated, but not by the illness. I
am frustrated by being lied to for 4 months.

jacques wrote:

> J wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
> > Why would you want to go into treatment right now, then, Jacques ?
> > If you're feeling so good, why risk infection, pulmonary embolus,
> > nausea, vomiting, dehydration, hospitalization etc?
> > Use the chemo when the tumors are causing you more trouble.
> > I think that shrinking, then it grows, then shrinking with chemo, then
> > it grows, etc speeds up chemo resistance.
> > J
>
> This is the same logic onc1 used when he was telling me he was raising the
> white flag. But as I said last week my tumours have increased massively in
> size over the last 3-4 months, some by over 600%. I am not feeling well. I
> am sleeping 12 hours a day. As I said to him 4 months ago when he told me
> to give up, no I am not giving up. I want to hit this thing hard, with
> everything possible, and if nothing works then I'll give up. There are
> still at least 3 common treatments I have not been offered. I have now been
> sitting around doing nothing for almost 4 montsh while these arseholes have
> passed me around like a football and lied to me.
>
> I know this probably sounds like I'm looking for someone to direct my anger
> at beacuse I'm frustrated. Yes, I am frustrated, but not by the illness. I
> am frustrated by being lied to for 4 months.

I don't know if the chemo combo will help you sleep less (or more?) - maybe if
they shrink lung tumors?
Or steroids might keep you awake more?

This is special access for drugs for Australa
http://www.tga.gov.au/docs/html/orphand2.htm
Drug: aldesleukin (PROLEUKIN)
Sponsor: CSL
Date of designation: 16 October 1998
Indication: to treat metastatic melanoma

There's others for melanoma there.

The implication at Medline is that there's multiple names and/or generic names
for the same product?
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/d...r/a692009.html
Aldesleukin is in a class of drugs known as cytokines
Brand names

* Proleukin®
Other names
* IL-2
* Interleukin-2
* r-serHuIL

Australia Special access scheme
http://www.tga.gov.au/docs/html/sasinfo.htm

Start looking into that? Read up on what's there, what's requrired to push it
through, get forms and fill them out...or if you're certain going with
chemo/combo, talk to onco nurse about a date to install port and date for
bloodwork. Work around the onc, so he doesn't have more excuses?

I don't want to encourage you to have something that might harm you; just
advising what I find.
No time to look for clinical trial results, at this time.
J

"jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
news:OlF4j.19605$CN4.4361@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
|A few questions:
|
| How possible is it to have children after chemo & radiation? Does it kill
| your chances forever? If not, is there a time period that you should leave
| it before you do? Is it recommended you never do even if you can?

I often hear of people banking their eggs or sperm or embryos prior to
treatment in case sterilization or other bad effects occur.

It kind of seems unfair to the potential kids to have them if your outlook
is bleak, unless it is something your spouse really wants and can handle.

"jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
news:2p_4j.19919$CN4.1377@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> This is probably how socialised cancer treatment works. Instead of
> treating you until you decide to give up, they decide when you give up.
> And it's usually way too early, while you're still 240 pounds and active
> and don't even look sick and everyone tells you they can't believe you've
> got cancer.
>

Without getting into your specific details, you really don't want an
oncologist who is "treating you until you decide to give up." You want an
oncologist who has your best interests front and foremost and "treating you
until you decide to give up" isn't the same thing.

"jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
news:hh05j.19958$CN4.15992@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>J wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
>> Why would you want to go into treatment right now, then, Jacques ?
>> If you're feeling so good, why risk infection, pulmonary embolus,
>> nausea, vomiting, dehydration, hospitalization etc?
>> Use the chemo when the tumors are causing you more trouble.
>> I think that shrinking, then it grows, then shrinking with chemo, then
>> it grows, etc speeds up chemo resistance.
>> J
>
> This is the same logic onc1 used when he was telling me he was raising the
> white flag. But as I said last week my tumours have increased massively in
> size over the last 3-4 months, some by over 600%. I am not feeling well. I
> am sleeping 12 hours a day. As I said to him 4 months ago when he told me
> to give up, no I am not giving up. I want to hit this thing hard, with
> everything possible, and if nothing works then I'll give up. There are
> still at least 3 common treatments I have not been offered. I have now
> been
> sitting around doing nothing for almost 4 montsh while these arseholes
> have
> passed me around like a football and lied to me.
>
> I know this probably sounds like I'm looking for someone to direct my
> anger
> at beacuse I'm frustrated. Yes, I am frustrated, but not by the illness. I
> am frustrated by being lied to for 4 months.

Did he lie to you? Maybe he thought that more treatment was only going to be
counter productive. Sometimes the best treatment is no treatment.

Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:

>
> "jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
> news:2p_4j.19919$CN4.1377@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> This is probably how socialised cancer treatment works. Instead of
>> treating you until you decide to give up, they decide when you give
>> up. And it's usually way too early, while you're still 240 pounds and
>> active and don't even look sick and everyone tells you they can't
>> believe you've got cancer.
>>
>
> Without getting into your specific details, you really don't want an
> oncologist who is "treating you until you decide to give up." You want
> an oncologist who has your best interests front and foremost and
> "treating you until you decide to give up" isn't the same thing.

In that case we have a disagreement on my treatment. But why wouldn't you
tell someone that instead of passing them around to other doctors and being
dishonest to them? All I know is I spent yesterday afternoon at the
hospital because I lost all feeling in my leg. Some of my mets are 7x the
size they were 3 months ago. It doesn't seem normal to me to allow someone
to decline so far before you decide to treat them. Don't get me wrong, I
know it's unlikely I'm going to be here this time next year for instance.
It doesn't matter what they do. It's the bs that gets to me.

Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:

> Did he lie to you? Maybe he thought that more treatment was only going
> to be counter productive. Sometimes the best treatment is no
> treatment.

So why didn't he tell me that, instead of promising two trials that never
existed?

jacques wrote:

> Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
> > Did he lie to you? Maybe he thought that more treatment was only going
> > to be counter productive. Sometimes the best treatment is no
> > treatment.
>
> So why didn't he tell me that, instead of promising two trials that never
> existed?

Stringing you along so he can bill your insurance for appointments?
J

jacques wrote:

> In that case we have a disagreement on my treatment. But why wouldn't you
> tell someone that instead of passing them around to other doctors and being
> dishonest to them? All I know is I spent yesterday afternoon at the
> hospital because I lost all feeling in my leg. Some of my mets are 7x the
> size they were 3 months ago. It doesn't seem normal to me to allow someone
> to decline so far before you decide to treat them.

What are they going to do about your leg ?
Sounds like RT might be helpful.
Have you seen one before and can you get back to him or her?
J

J wrote in alt.support.cancer:

> jacques wrote:
>
>> Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>>
>> > Did he lie to you? Maybe he thought that more treatment was only
>> > going to be counter productive. Sometimes the best treatment is no
>> > treatment.
>>
>> So why didn't he tell me that, instead of promising two trials that
>> never existed?
>
> Stringing you along so he can bill your insurance for appointments?
> J

Doubt it. It's socialised medicine. I think he works for the govt. He'd be
on a salary. More likely either 1) saving the govt money; 2) not wanting to
waste his time on people he feels can't be cured; or 3) not willing to
disagree with his colleague who has already told me he was raising the
white flag.

In all 3 cases there are ways to broach the subject with a patient rather
than promise things that you can't deliver.

J wrote in alt.support.cancer:

> jacques wrote:
>
>> In that case we have a disagreement on my treatment. But why wouldn't
>> you tell someone that instead of passing them around to other doctors
>> and being dishonest to them? All I know is I spent yesterday
>> afternoon at the hospital because I lost all feeling in my leg. Some
>> of my mets are 7x the size they were 3 months ago. It doesn't seem
>> normal to me to allow someone to decline so far before you decide to
>> treat them.
>
> What are they going to do about your leg ?
> Sounds like RT might be helpful.
> Have you seen one before and can you get back to him or her?
> J

I had a week of RT on the leg in June. I'm starting chemo next Friday. I
think the idea is to leave the leg alone. It will tell them whether the
chemo is working and give them an excuse to stop the chemo early when/if it
doesn't work.

"jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
news:SME5j.20691$CN4.12702@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
>> Did he lie to you? Maybe he thought that more treatment was only going
>> to be counter productive. Sometimes the best treatment is no
>> treatment.
>
> So why didn't he tell me that, instead of promising two trials that never
> existed?

You'd have to ask him......

"jacques" <not@anywhere.atall.org> wrote in message
news:LuF5j.20718$CN4.18468@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>J wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
>> jacques wrote:
>>
>>> Steph wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>>>
>>> > Did he lie to you? Maybe he thought that more treatment was only
>>> > going to be counter productive. Sometimes the best treatment is no
>>> > treatment.
>>>
>>> So why didn't he tell me that, instead of promising two trials that
>>> never existed?
>>
>> Stringing you along so he can bill your insurance for appointments?
>> J
>
> Doubt it. It's socialised medicine. I think he works for the govt. He'd be
> on a salary. More likely either 1) saving the govt money; 2) not wanting
> to
> waste his time on people he feels can't be cured; or 3) not willing to
> disagree with his colleague who has already told me he was raising the
> white flag.
>
> In all 3 cases there are ways to broach the subject with a patient rather
> than promise things that you can't deliver.

I think you should be careful not to let your anger and frustration at the
disease fall on the shoulders of someone who is trying to help you

jacques wrote:

> J wrote in alt.support.cancer:
>
> > jacques wrote:
> >
> >> In that case we have a disagreement on my treatment. But why wouldn't
> >> you tell someone that instead of passing them around to other doctors
> >> and being dishonest to them? All I know is I spent yesterday
> >> afternoon at the hospital because I lost all feeling in my leg. Some
> >> of my mets are 7x the size they were 3 months ago. It doesn't seem
> >> normal to me to allow someone to decline so far before you decide to
> >> treat them.
> >
> > What are they going to do about your leg ?
> > Sounds like RT might be helpful.
> > Have you seen one before and can you get back to him or her?
> > J
>
> I had a week of RT on the leg in June. I'm starting chemo next Friday. I
> think the idea is to leave the leg alone. It will tell them whether the
> chemo is working and give them an excuse to stop the chemo early when/if it
> doesn't work.

Oh, the date is set. I didn't realize. Good luck with that.
Another idea is if it's not working, ask which of the 2 chemos potentiate RT,
then continue on, with that one, while having RT.
Whatever will keep you moving and not having that leg give out on you. Someone
would have to determine that it is indeed those tumors, or one of them, causing
that and not something in the spine or elsewhere. Sounds like a compressed
nerve?

Take care. Keep in touch, jacques.
J