Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

I personally find the commercials for "Cancer Centers of
America"offensive. It seems to be sending the message that unless you
are going to them you are not doing all you can for those with
cancer. That only there will you find compassion; that only there
will you beat this disease. And I feel the ads imply that if you do
go there you will beat cancer.
As the widow of a victim of this horrible disease, I feel I have to
speak.
Franzi could not have had better care anywhere in the world, or no
matter how much money was available. Second thoughts...sure. If
only in Germany colonoscopys were routine for over 50. Or if I had
pushed that instead of PSA. (Just a couple of the "if onlys.)

I agree with you 100%.. my husband was diagnoised with stage 4 bladder
cancer and I too feel the same way about those commercials. I feel we
are doing the very best possible for my husband . I have had some
people say to me you should go to one of those cancer centers (like
thats a cure ) and I'm not sure if they realize when they say that, They
make me feel like i'm not doing enough.

I think they are a lot of balogna and hoo ha. When I called them they
were pretty darn clear RIGHT UP FRONT that they were all about money and
NOTHNG else. They said they would not accept my HMO, that I of course
could cacel it and use medicare alone in which case they be happy to
treat me with chemo Standard medicare approved treatments) alone bu I'd
be responsible for the 20% medicare would not pay. When I asked about
all the other stuff they crow about in their ads like alternative
medicines or treatments, meditation, holistic stuff. All the stuff hey
say they combine with tradditional chemo for a more rounded treatment.
Well that stuff only kicks in if you got deep pockets and are paying ash
money or have an insurance company gulible enough to pay it. I was
extremely disapointed in my talk with them as their commercials and
lierature make them out to be a cutting edge, super caring place when in
reality they are just a bunch of greedy money grabbing thieves just like
all he others who claim to want to help us.

Nearly 1/2 of this nation is employed in the cancer industry either
directly or indirectly from the drugmakers on down to the truck drivers,
clericals, counselors, suppliers. If yu seriously account for every
industry from the smallest up that is dependant in some way on cancer,
you begin to ralize that there is no frigging way they will ever cure
this bastard of a disease. There are just too many peoples lives who
depend on it and too much money to be mae on managing the symptoms to
death. They may show small decreases in death rates each year to passify
us but don't you beleive for one minute that anybody in any position of
power in any way wishes to cure this disease. It would be disastrous.
There would be 1000s of companys bankrupt and millions of people out of
work. No person in any position of powe wants that finger pointed at
them.

Until the citizens of the world stoplistening to the PR spun bullshit
and start demanding deent and equal healthcare for all and demand these
billionaire tyrants who run the medical industryto disclose all and be
accountable for their actions you will never see any major disease
cured. I have no doubt in my mind that a cue for cancer already exists
but I'm equaly sure it's locked away safe from ever beingdiscovered and
the guy who invented it is most likely an intregal part of a building or
freeway. They are making billions of dollars hand over fist of us poor
saps, why would they want to cure us, wake up.

On Feb 21, 8:23 am, jonbo...@webtv.net (J W) wrote:
> I think they are a lot of balogna and hoo ha. When I called them they
> were pretty darn clear RIGHT UP FRONT that they were all about money and
> NOTHNG else. They said they would not accept my HMO, that I of course
> could cacel it and use medicare alone in which case they be happy to
> treat me with chemo Standard medicare approved treatments) alone bu I'd
> be responsible for the 20% medicare would not pay. When I asked about
> all the other stuff they crow about in their ads like alternative
> medicines or treatments, meditation, holistic stuff. All the stuff hey
> say they combine with tradditional chemo for a more rounded treatment.
> Well that stuff only kicks in if you got deep pockets and are paying ash
> money or have an insurance company gulible enough to pay it. I was
> extremely disapointed in my talk with them as their commercials and
> lierature make them out to be a cutting edge, super caring place when in
> reality they are just a bunch of greedy money grabbing thieves just like
> all he others who claim to want to help us.
>
> Nearly 1/2 of this nation is employed in the cancer industry either
> directly or indirectly from the drugmakers on down to the truck drivers,
> clericals, counselors, suppliers. If yu seriously account for every
> industry from the smallest up that is dependant in some way on cancer,
> you begin to ralize that there is no frigging way they will ever cure
> this bastard of a disease. There are just too many peoples lives who
> depend on it and too much money to be mae on managing the symptoms to
> death. They may show small decreases in death rates each year to passify
> us but don't you beleive for one minute that anybody in any position of
> power in any way wishes to cure this disease. It would be disastrous.
> There would be 1000s of companys bankrupt and millions of people out of
> work. No person in any position of powe wants that finger pointed at
> them.
>
> Until the citizens of the world stoplistening to the PR spun bullshit
> and start demanding deent and equal healthcare for all and demand these
> billionaire tyrants who run the medical industryto disclose all and be
> accountable for their actions you will never see any major disease
> cured. I have no doubt in my mind that a cue for cancer already exists
> but I'm equaly sure it's locked away safe from ever beingdiscovered and
> the guy who invented it is most likely an intregal part of a building or
> freeway. They are making billions of dollars hand over fist of us poor
> saps, why would they want to cure us, wake up.

JW,

I am so sorry for your experience & I'm sure there's a lot of truth in
what you say.

I do know that as business practices have come under greater scrutiny,
some of the more blatant practices have failed to pass the smell test
& are less prevalent. For one, Docs used to own, often in
partnership, clinics, hospitals, etc that they could then send their
patients to. There were probably some who thought they could deliver
better medicine to their patrients by controlling the whole system,
but the potential for abuse & greed were too much. There is far less
of this now.

Which brings to mind... dentists. They used to be busy filling teeth.
Now, with dental advances, there are fewer cavities, etc (unless you
have MY mouth) & the airwaves are full of dentists crowing about how
they are 'smile' specialists. Cosmetic dentistry, tooth whitening,
etc. I don't know how oncs would reinvent themselves. But now
there's a vaccine for cervical cancer. Hopefully, more are in the
wings. Maybe docs specializing in such will change specialties.

We do have some separation between practicing docs & scientists in the
research labs, although docs do get involved in clinical trials. And
drug companies fund a lot of the research. But they have a strong
financial incentive to produce medicine that cures cancer. The pure
research scientists I know, such as my nephew, are not so money-
motivated. They could take their Ph.D.s elsewhere & earn far more.
They publish; they collaborate; they compete. They are scientists
first & foremost.

I really don't think there's a conspiracy out there withholding
information. But some of the advertising & commercialism around
cancer is disgusting & tasteless. At least we have free choice & can
avoid these.

Meanwhile, I hope you can put this upsetting business out of your mind
& enjoy living!

Fig

I ave no doubt that the people in the trenches doing the grunt work
beleive in what they are doing and beleive a cure will come but the
reality is those people do not make the rues and they are not in
control. Let e try an analogy here. Shaquel Oneal is rich, he and many
sports figures like him practice their craft in earnest and are a
positive influence on many people. The guy who signs Oneal's paycheck is
WEALTHY he makes the rues, he breaks the rules , he is the rules. Those
are the people who really control things and in the end make all the
decisions. They have armies of lobbyists and bottomless pockets to
influence our govt.. They have armies of paid lawyers and mercenary
goons to bury, dicredit, cause things to go wrong and silence any and
all things that are not in their best interests. You have no idea of the
power some individuals hold. monsanto makes theseeds with the suicide
genes, geneticaly altered grains that have pesticides built into them
and herbicides that kill everything and pollute our water and get fed to
our livestock and us, big pharma makes all the antibiotics and steroids
that get pumped into our cattle and poultry. the same folks that make
all this crap that's killing us also conveniently make the ludicrusly
priced drugs that don't cure anything, they just keep you alive long
enough to fleece you. Then it's on to the next customer. It's all about
chemistry man, they rule the world. Why do you think disease is rampant
in 3rd world countries and nobody is doing jack for them? Cause they
aint got no money and they aint got nothing we want. All they got is
kids to work in factoies for a quarter a day and those are a dime a
dozen. Wake up man. The wealthy NOT the rich rule the roost. nothing
short of a evolution will change anything. You coud cure cancer today
but I guarantee you and your cure would be a forgotten memory tomorrow.
The vaccine they are shoving down our throats for cervical cancer is
being done largely to make up for the viox losses and that vaccine has
been poorly tested. I'm sure once everyoe has gotten it we'll have a new
revalation that it causes some new and exotic cancer. As long as their
are billions to be made off us poor sick saps they will keep pumping out
the almost cured it drugs that the prices of are the very reason medical
insurance costs keep spiraling. I have to pay nearly $500.00 a month for
my wife's medical insurance because she is notsick and can't qualify for
any aid. Then I got my chemo to deal with is insane because they've told
me from day one it won't cure me. If it won't cure me then why the hell
is it so expensive. They'll never let moneymaking diseases like ths be
cured, do you have any idea how many people are involved in this
industry. Think outside the box man it aint just oncologists and
research workers. You got the people who make the drugs, who make the
instruments used to give the drugs, who makes the drugs to control the
side effects of the drugs, people who make hospital supplies,, medical
equipment, cooks, sheets beds mattresses, chemo chairs, counselors,
advisors, countless peple in support organizations, lawyers, clerks,
truck drivers, wharehousemen, on and on and on and on, get the picture?
a third of the country works for cancer in one way or another and would
be ut of a job if they cured it. What do you hink the odds of that
happening are? We'd prolly have another friggin depression if they cured
aids and cancer at the same time.


Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Feb 21, 2007, 12:46pm (EST-3) From:
figtoes@yahoo.com (Figgertoes)
On Feb 21, 8:23 am, jonbo...@webtv.net (J W) wrote:
I think they are a lot of balogna and hoo ha. When I called them they
were pretty darn clear RIGHT UP FRONT that they were all about money and
NOTHNG else. They said they would not accept my HMO, that I of course
could cacel it and use medicare alone in which case they be happy to
treat me with chemo Standard medicare approved treatments) alone bu I'd
be responsible for the 20% medicare would not pay. When I asked about
all the other stuff they crow about in their ads like alternative
medicines or treatments, meditation, holistic stuff. All the stuff hey
say they combine with tradditional chemo for a more rounded treatment.
Well that stuff only kicks in if you got deep pockets and are paying ash
money or have an insurance company gulible enough to pay it. I was
extremely disapointed in my talk with them as their commercials and
lierature make them out to be a cutting edge, super caring place when in
reality they are just a bunch of greedy money grabbing thieves just like
all he others who claim to want to help us.
Nearly 1/2 of this nation is employed in the cancer industry either
directly or indirectly from the drugmakers on down to the truck drivers,
clericals, counselors, suppliers. If yu seriously account for every
industry from the smallest up that is dependant in some way on cancer,
you begin to ralize that there is no frigging way they will ever cure
this bastard of a disease. There are just too many peoples lives who
depend on it and too much money to be mae on managing the symptoms to
death. They may show small decreases in death rates each year to passify
us but don't you beleive for one minute that anybody in any position of
power in any way wishes to cure this disease. It would be disastrous.
There would be 1000s of companys bankrupt and millions of people out of
work. No person in any position of powe wants that finger pointed at
them.
Until the citizens of the world stoplistening to the PR spun bullshit
and start demanding deent and equal healthcare for all and demand these
billionaire tyrants who run the medical industryto disclose all and be
accountable for their actions you will never see any major disease
cured. I have no doubt in my mind that a cue for cancer already exists
but I'm equaly sure it's locked away safe from ever beingdiscovered and
the guy who invented it is most likely an intregal part of a building or
freeway. They are making billions of dollars hand over fist of us poor
saps, why would they want to cure us, wake up.
JW,
I am so sorry for your experience & I'm sure there's a lot of truth in
what you say.
I do know that as business practices have come under greater scrutiny,
some of the more blatant practices have failed to pass the smell test &
are less prevalent. For one, Docs used to own, often in partnership,
clinics, hospitals, etc that they could then send their patients to.
There were probably some who thought they could deliver better medicine
to their patrients by controlling the whole system, but the potential
for abuse & greed were too much. There is far less of this now.
Which brings to mind... dentists. They used to be busy filling teeth.
Now, with dental advances, there are fewer cavities, etc (unless you
have MY mouth) & the airwaves are full of dentists crowing about how
they are 'smile' specialists. Cosmetic dentistry, tooth whitening, etc.
I don't know how oncs would reinvent themselves. But now there's a
vaccine for cervical cancer. Hopefully, more are in the wings. Maybe
docs specializing in such will change specialties.
We do have some separation between practicing docs & scientists in the
research labs, although docs do get involved in clinical trials. And
drug companies fund a lot of the research. But they have a strong
financial incentive to produce medicine that cures cancer. The pure
research scientists I know, such as my nephew, are not so money-
motivated. They could take their Ph.D.s elsewhere & earn far more. They
publish; they collaborate; they compete. They are scientists first &
foremost.
I really don't think there's a conspiracy out there withholding
information. But some of the advertising & commercialism around cancer
is disgusting & tasteless. At least we have free choice & can avoid
these.
Meanwhile, I hope you can put this upsetting business out of your mind &
enjoy living!
Fig

turtletrot1 wrote:
> I personally find the commercials for "Cancer Centers of
> America"offensive. It seems to be sending the message that unless you
> are going to them you are not doing all you can for those with
> cancer. That only there will you find compassion; that only there
> will you beat this disease. And I feel the ads imply that if you do
> go there you will beat cancer.
> As the widow of a victim of this horrible disease, I feel I have to
> speak.
> Franzi could not have had better care anywhere in the world, or no
> matter how much money was available. Second thoughts...sure. If
> only in Germany colonoscopys were routine for over 50. Or if I had
> pushed that instead of PSA. (Just a couple of the "if onlys.)
>

I have the same feelings when I see those commercials. It probably means
that the ad agency did a good job <g>

Please don't dwell on the second thoughts. I'm not even angry at the 3
dentists and two doctors who were in my mouth and failed to see the
cancer. Stuff happens and we do the best we can with the hand we're dealt.

Hugs,
Janet

--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

"J W" <jonboy42@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:7926-45DD0102-80@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net...
>I ave no doubt that the people in the trenches doing the grunt work
> beleive in what they are doing and beleive a cure will come

The cure is already here for 65% of people

I find all advertisements for healthcare, and lawyers to be offensive. Here
in Canada, the only healthcare advertisements we see are the support the
Heart and Lung, or Cancer Associations, and that is fine. But the legal
commercials all trying to get someone who has had a ______ experience is
reprehensible.
So are the hospitals that claim when all else fails WE are your solution.
Illness and injury are big business thats for sure.
my 2 cents worth
Cindy

"turtletrot1" <turtletrot1@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
news:1172066921.331549.50610@m58g2000cwm.googlegro ups.com...
>I personally find the commercials for "Cancer Centers of
> America"offensive. It seems to be sending the message that unless you
> are going to them you are not doing all you can for those with
> cancer. That only there will you find compassion; that only there
> will you beat this disease. And I feel the ads imply that if you do
> go there you will beat cancer.
> As the widow of a victim of this horrible disease, I feel I have to
> speak.
> Franzi could not have had better care anywhere in the world, or no
> matter how much money was available. Second thoughts...sure. If
> only in Germany colonoscopys were routine for over 50. Or if I had
> pushed that instead of PSA. (Just a couple of the "if onlys.)
>

On Feb 21, 10:46 pm, "Cindy" <adrean...@mts.net> wrote:
> I find all advertisements for healthcare, and lawyers to be offensive. Here
> in Canada, the only healthcare advertisements we see are the support the
> Heart and Lung, or Cancer Associations, and that is fine. But the legal
> commercials all trying to get someone who has had a ______ experience is
> reprehensible.
> So are the hospitals that claim when all else fails WE are your solution.
> Illness and injury are big business thats for sure.
> my 2 cents worth
> Cindy
>
> "turtletrot1" <turtletr...@bellsouth.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1172066921.331549.50610@m58g2000cwm.googlegro ups.com...
>
> >I personally find the commercials for "Cancer Centers of
> > America"offensive. It seems to be sending the message that unless you
> > are going to them you are not doing all you can for those with
> > cancer. That only there will you find compassion; that only there
> > will you beat this disease. And I feel the ads imply that if you do
> > go there you will beat cancer.
> > As the widow of a victim of this horrible disease, I feel I have to
> > speak.
> > Franzi could not have had better care anywhere in the world, or no
> > matter how much money was available. Second thoughts...sure. If
> > only in Germany colonoscopys were routine for over 50. Or if I had
> > pushed that instead of PSA. (Just a couple of the "if onlys.)

On Feb 21, 10:46 pm, "Cindy" <adrean...@mts.net> wrote:
But the legal
> "commercials all trying to get someone who has had a ______ experience is
> reprehensible."
>
> my 2 cents worth
> Cindy

But you have to admit it makes one laugh when they tell us if we have
died from XXXXX to call their office !

Then why is it that 100% of the people I've known with cancer have died
if 65% are cured? I think you are living in dreamland my friend. You
prolly beleive all them doctored up stats about death rates dropping for
past two years too. They aren't dropping, they are just catching the
cancers earlier so the people are statisticaly living longer, they still
die.


Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 3:59am (EST+5) From:
steph@vancouvers.island (Steph)
"J W" <jonboy42@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:7926-45DD0102-80@storefull-3252.bay.webtv.net...
I ave no doubt that the people in the trenches doing the grunt work
beleive in what they are doing and beleive a cure will come
The cure is already here for 65% of people

"J W" <jonboy42@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:26575-45DDB66A-215@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net...
> Then why is it that 100% of the people I've known with cancer have died
> if 65% are cured? I think you are living in dreamland my friend. You
> prolly beleive all them doctored up stats about death rates dropping for
> past two years too. They aren't dropping, they are just catching the
> cancers earlier so the people are statisticaly living longer, they still
> die.
>



First of all, you probably know many people who have had cancer, and you
don't know it.
And the 65% is based on the stats from the best cancer registries in the
world -US, UK, Canada, Australia, and concerns the commonest 20 adult
cancers, which constitute about 95% of cancers.
And that 65% excludes non-melanoma skin cancer, for which the cure rate is
95%.

So wherever you're getting your getting your "facts" from is dreamland

On Feb 22, 9:11 am, "Steph" <s...@vancouvers.island> wrote:
> "J W" <jonbo...@webtv.net> wrote in message
>
> news:26575-45DDB66A-215@storefull-3251.bay.webtv.net...
>
> > Then why is it that 100% of the people I've known with cancer have died
> > if 65% are cured?

I find that hard to believe. This would mean that you don't know
*anyone* currently alive who has (to your knowledge) had cancer.
Surely you recognize that some pople who post to this group have
cancer, or used to, and yet are still alive. My doctors tell me I no
longer have cancer, but I most certainly did at one time, and they
could be wrong---I could still have traces of it that will come back
to haunt me. But I'm still alive, and don't plan to let cancer be my
cause of death. My grandfather had cancer, and died of a heart attack
years later. That was some time ago, and things are getting better,
not worse.

> I think you are living in dreamland my friend. You
> > prolly beleive all them doctored up stats about death rates dropping for
> > past two years too. They aren't dropping, they are just catching the
> > cancers earlier so the people are statisticaly living longer, they still
> > die.
>
> First of all, you probably know many people who have had cancer, and you
> don't know it.

After my dx, I was surprised to learn of others I knew who'd had
cancer. People who otherwise don't talk about it tend to open up more
with a fellow traveller. Others won't ever tell you about it. They
got cancer, survived it, and moved on with their lives.

> And the 65% is based on the stats from the best cancer registries in the
> world -US, UK, Canada, Australia, and concerns the commonest 20 adult
> cancers, which constitute about 95% of cancers.
> And that 65% excludes non-melanoma skin cancer, for which the cure rate is
> 95%.
>
> So wherever you're getting your getting your "facts" from is dreamland

My guess is that he's using anecdotal data to develop a hypothesis.

---
CSM

J W wrote:
> Then why is it that 100% of the people I've known with cancer have died
> if 65% are cured? I think you are living in dreamland my friend. You
> prolly beleive all them doctored up stats about death rates dropping for
> past two years too. They aren't dropping, they are just catching the
> cancers earlier so the people are statisticaly living longer, they still
> die.

100% of all people die, unless they are vampires. Whom do you know that
is immortal?


--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

I just do not beleive 65% o people with cancer arebeing cured. Chemo
only works in about 3% of people who get it and in most cases unless the
cancer is caught at a very early stage chemo is only palliative.

I've been very active in cancer groups and functions in my area since my
diagnosis 13 months ago. I've met an awful lot of people with cancer.
Yes I have met some long term survivors and have met a handful who claim
to be cured. Most of these were due to some clinical trial and not
standard care. I used to keep a prayer list of all the cancer patients
I'd met but stopped it because t was just too darn depressing. I was
crossing out names every week that died. Cancer has killed nearly
everyone in my family. My neigbors on all sides lost spouses last year
from cancer. My wife's family has been desimated by it. The town I grew
up in is eat up with it. Every week in my church someone else has died
from cancer. My main cancer support group lost several last year. So I
don't beleive the BS about 65% cured or the rates going down because I
still see a lot of people dying and it makes me mad as hell. I hate this
disease and it mocks me becasue every week I'm crossing out another name
from my list and thanking God my name is still on it. We've got money
coming out the ears to piss away in countries that would just as soon we
didn't exist, policing and feeding countless countries that never have
and never will do a thing for us but we can't afford decent medical
care, food and shelter for our own damn citizens. We got 7.5 mllion
dollars per hour that it costs to keep the occupation in Iraq going but
we can't afford to fund cancer and aids research. Sorry I don't buy into
the let's pull some numbers out of our hats to pacify em and dazzle em
with when I see the reality in my own family and neighborhood. They
should be ashamed for telling such lies. They aren't any closer to
curing this thing than they were in the 70s when Nixon declared war on
it. They got a bunch of drugs that will keep you alive a while longer
(at least as long as you got money to pay the theives) and if you are
lucky won't create another disease. If they can catch you in stage 1 or
2 and you are lucky you may get remission or even cured but the reality
is cancer is not usually found in stage 1 or 2 and stage 3 or 4 have
pretty piss poor odds I don't care what kind of ribbons they tie on it,
it's still a pig and there's a whole bunch of shameless evil people
riding that gravy train. sickness and death are the two most lucrative
businsses going today boy. When you ride down the road and see
billboards, get blasted on radio, TV and newspapers for cancer centers
and funeral parlors you know something stinks.


Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 6:09pm (EST-1) From:
kelliepoodle@yahoo.com (Janet*Wilder)
J W wrote:
Then why is it that 100% of the people I've known with cancer have died
if 65% are cured? I think you are living in dreamland my friend. You
prolly beleive all them doctored up stats about death rates dropping for
past two years too. They aren't dropping, they are just catching the
cancers earlier so the people are statisticaly living longer, they still
die.
100% of all people die, unless they are vampires. Whom do you know that
is immortal?
--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

Hell I even get phone solicitations from funeral homes. It's just un
freaking beleivable. you don't think everybody in this nation is on the
sicko gravy train? It aint just the clinicaly approved officially
sanctioned folks that gt their hands in your pockets, peruse these
newsgroups and take note of how every body and their brothers and
cousins to boot have just the snake oil that'll cure guaranteed, Why
them doctors don't know what the heck they're talking about. If you buy
$1.000.00 worth of this crap I got a month or come to our clinic, give
us oh say 3-4 grand up front and 2-3 grand a month, drink this garbage I
wouldn't give a dog, take some coffe enemas, let me hook yo up to my
electromagnetic prestdigitator, throw in some acupunture and maybe some
meditaion, buy his 5 hundred dollar juicer to juice these fruits and
veggies that were hydrophorganicamysticaly grown by elves that I'll sell
to you for an incredible price. Give me a break. is there nothing
humankind will not stoop to for a dollar? How many cancer patients in
here can honestly say they never tried or at least thought about trying
any of these so called herbs or alternative treatments. If you say you
haven't you are a liar. there isn't one among us that wouldn't eat
wolflips if someone could convince you it would cure you. Sick people in
this nation are being fleeced and the sicker you are the more they
squeeze you or yor insurance company. What's the first thing you do when
you go to a new doctor? It fer sure aint telling them what's wrong with
you now is it? The first thing you do is fill out that form stating
who's gonna be paying for this little chat then depending on how much
they figure you re good for is how good a care you'll get. I know down
here you not only fill out that form but you pays yer copay too before
anybody will even take yer blood pressure. It's all about the benjamans
man nothing more. Until they take megaprofit out of medicine people will
keep needlessly dying and that's a fact. My onclogist is constantly
crying the money blues. H won't even stock the chemo he gives you. We
gotta take a prescription, get it filled and take itback to him. He
lives in a 5000 sq foot home on several acres, drives a luxury car,
wears top notch clothes, sends a shipping container full of stuff to his
home country every month yet I gotta schlep my own drugs and he's crying
the blues because the insurnce companiies don't pay him immediately. I
haven't met but two doctors in all the ones I've seen since this journey
began that I thought really cared if I lived or died as long as they got
paid. Oe of them has actually seen me a couple of times free of charge
becuse my HMO doesn't cover him anymore, they cut their surgeons in this
area down to one and he has even prayed with me. He was the surgeon that
debulked me 13 months ago. The rest of em I wouldn't give you a plug
nickel for.


Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Thu, Feb 22, 2007, 6:09pm (EST-1) From:
kelliepoodle@yahoo.com (Janet*Wilder)
J W wrote:
Then why is it that 100% of the people I've known with cancer have died
if 65% are cured? I think you are living in dreamland my friend. You
prolly beleive all them doctored up stats about death rates dropping for
past two years too. They aren't dropping, they are just catching the
cancers earlier so the people are statisticaly living longer, they still
die.
100% of all people die, unless they are vampires. Whom do you know that
is immortal?
--
Janet Wilder
Bad spelling. Bad punctuation
Good Friends. Good Life

>Whom do you know that is immortal?



Jesus? <g>



Maryanne---ducking and running in Atlanta

J W wrote:

> I just do not beleive 65% o people with cancer arebeing cured. Chemo
> only works in about 3% of people who get it and in most cases unless the
> cancer is caught at a very early stage chemo is only palliative.

Then why are you taking chemo?
There's nothing to palliate.
J

I'm actually taking it against my better judgement due to pressure from
others to try everything before tossing in the towel. after the sickness
I endured with the first regimen that failed I had decided it was not
worth the sickness for the few months it may add. I have told them up
front that if after 3-4 cycles don't see any improvement or the side
effects become to intense I will stop it. I was sick as a dog and still
have neuropathy and blood/liver problems from the folfox I was on 6
months ago and have nothing positive to show for it, My CEA is over 200
and they say the cancer is in the lymph system now.


Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Fri, Feb 23, 2007, 1:56am From:
nexsw@nvalid (J)
J W wrote:
I just do not beleive 65% o people with cancer arebeing cured. Chemo
only works in about 3% of people who get it and in most cases unless the
cancer is caught at a very early stage chemo is only palliative.

Then why are you taking chemo?
There's nothing to palliate.
J

J W wrote:

> I'm actually taking it against my better judgement due to pressure from
> others to try everything before tossing in the towel. after the sickness
> I endured with the first regimen that failed I had decided it was not
> worth the sickness for the few months it may add. I have told them up
> front that if after 3-4 cycles don't see any improvement or the side
> effects become to intense I will stop it. I was sick as a dog and still
> have neuropathy and blood/liver problems from the folfox I was on 6
> months ago and have nothing positive to show for it, My CEA is over 200
> and they say the cancer is in the lymph system now.

Well, if you use it now, your cancer might be resistant when you need it to
shrink a tumor (later).
Unless you went to a combo or stronger (more toxic).
If they lowered the dose, it's less effective.
(although RT might be possible at that point depending on location)

I think Steph and I (and someone else here and some of the doctors you
consulted) tried to tell you that for months (that there was nothing to
treat at the moment).

Too late now.
See how it goes; you'll know if (or when) it's best to stop for the time
being.

Family putting pressure on you? When one's cancer isn't curable, it's best
to have a treatment plan, when to treat and when to not.
J

"J W" <jonboy42@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1576-45DF05BD-60@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net...
> I'm actually taking it against my better judgement due to pressure from
> others to try everything before tossing in the towel. after the sickness
> I endured with the first regimen that failed I had decided it was not
> worth the sickness for the few months it may add. I have told them up
> front that if after 3-4 cycles don't see any improvement or the side
> effects become to intense I will stop it. I was sick as a dog and still
> have neuropathy and blood/liver problems from the folfox I was on 6
> months ago and have nothing positive to show for it, My CEA is over 200
> and they say the cancer is in the lymph system now.
>

JW, I am wondering if the chemo had some effect due to the fact when you
went to Baltimore the nodes where not present.

Also, it should be your choice not your friends or family.....but it sounds
like you have a plan 3-4 cycles see how it goes.
>

Back when my CEA was in the 40s I was nervos but OK with it for the most
part, butin two months tie it has jumped to over 200 so now me and
everyone else are real nervous. I had a PET scan back i late Dec. and
the retrocrural lymph nodes lit up brightly yet tey said they appeared
normal size on CT scan. The Oncs had been saying to wait for a tumor to
show up before using the chemo but once they saw the lymph nodes
lighting and saw the CEA doubling every month they started croaking to
get chemo fast before it spread to all lymph nodes. One onc wanted to
use CPT-11, xeloda & erbitix all at once to hit t with everything and
knock it out. The other onc said totry them one at a time and add one as
needed. I didn't knw who to liste to, I chose the one that said add them
one at a time. The folks at NCI bethesda don't seem to think much about
the lymph nodes lighting up or the high and climbing CEA. They say the
nodes could mean nothing and CEA is not considered for clinical trials.
So I hope I didn't make yet another bad decision. I was OK with waiting
for a tumor to show before doing anymore chemo but when the CEA went
from 47 to 235 in a little less than two months I freaked out and so did
everyone else. I prolly screwed up again and when I finaly do get a
tumor they won't have anything to give me.



Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America

Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Sat, Feb 24, 2007, 3:10pm From:
alex@noemail.com (alex)
"J W" <jonboy42@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:1576-45DF05BD-60@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net...
I'm actually taking it against my better judgement due to pressure from
others to try everything before tossing in the towel. after the sickness
I endured with the first regimen that failed I had decided it was not
worth the sickness for the few months it may add. I have told them up
front that if after 3-4 cycles don't see any improvement or the side
effects become to intense I will stop it. I was sick as a dog and still
have neuropathy and blood/liver problems from the folfox I was on 6
months ago and have nothing positive to show for it, My CEA is over 200
and they say the cancer is in the lymph system now.
JW, I am wondering if the chemo had some effect due to the fact when you
went to Baltimore the nodes where not present.
Also, it should be your choice not your friends or family.....but it
sounds
like you have a plan 3-4 cycles see how it goes.

On Feb 24, 4:48 pm, jonbo...@webtv.net (J W) wrote:
> Back when my CEA was in the 40s I was nervos but OK with it for the most
> part, butin two months tie it has jumped to over 200 so now me and
> everyone else are real nervous. I had a PET scan back i late Dec. and
> the retrocrural lymph nodes lit up brightly yet tey said they appeared
> normal size on CT scan. The Oncs had been saying to wait for a tumor to
> show up before using the chemo but once they saw the lymph nodes
> lighting and saw the CEA doubling every month they started croaking to
> get chemo fast before it spread to all lymph nodes. One onc wanted to
> use CPT-11, xeloda & erbitix all at once to hit t with everything and
> knock it out. The other onc said totry them one at a time and add one as
> needed. I didn't knw who to liste to, I chose the one that said add them
> one at a time. The folks at NCI bethesda don't seem to think much about
> the lymph nodes lighting up or the high and climbing CEA. They say the
> nodes could mean nothing and CEA is not considered for clinical trials.
> So I hope I didn't make yet another bad decision. I was OK with waiting
> for a tumor to show before doing anymore chemo but when the CEA went
> from 47 to 235 in a little less than two months I freaked out and so did
> everyone else. I prolly screwed up again and when I finaly do get a
> tumor they won't have anything to give me.
>
> Re: Offensive or not ?? Commercials for Cancer Centers of America
>
> Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Sat, Feb 24, 2007, 3:10pm From:
> a...@noemail.com (alex)"J W" <jonbo...@webtv.net> wrote in message
>
> news:1576-45DF05BD-60@storefull-3255.bay.webtv.net...
> I'm actually taking it against my better judgement due to pressure from
> others to try everything before tossing in the towel. after the sickness
> I endured with the first regimen that failed I had decided it was not
> worth the sickness for the few months it may add. I have told them up
> front that if after 3-4 cycles don't see any improvement or the side
> effects become to intense I will stop it. I was sick as a dog and still
> have neuropathy and blood/liver problems from the folfox I was on 6
> months ago and have nothing positive to show for it, My CEA is over 200
> and they say the cancer is in the lymph system now.
> JW, I am wondering if the chemo had some effect due to the fact when you
> went to Baltimore the nodes where not present.
> Also, it should be your choice not your friends or family.....but it
> sounds
> like you have a plan 3-4 cycles see how it goes.


FWIW, my doctors paid no attention to CEA. I had the test before the
primary tumor was removed, and it indicated that I was cancer free.
Apparently, CEA isn't a very reliable test, as the tumor was
substantial, nearly blocking the sigmoid. I don't know if false
positives are as common as false negatives. J mentioned false
positives on PET being a problem, so maybe the lit nodes weren't
really indicative. I don't know one way or the other, but I wonder
what the actual state of your cancer is, and what test are reliable
indicators for it. Good luck.

---
CSM

In most cases CEA is not considered a very reliable marker. Even chemo
tself can cause rises in CEA. I have been told by several doctors that
in my case however in the absence of visible tumor it is a very reliable
indicator for the followig reasons.

Pre surgery it was high 92. When tumor (size of two fists) on right
colon and mets to omentum and peritoneum were removed it dropped by 50%
at first and then dopped down to completely normal (2.5) where t stayed
until chemo began failing. When avastin was added it began to drop again
and was heading back to normal until chemo toxicity issues began and
chemo dose was reduced, after that it bagan gradually climbing again.
Then as long as I was on chemo and for a month or two after ending chemo
it continued rising gradually. Once the chemo was pretty much out of my
system (December about 3 mnths since chemo ended) the CEA began to take
large leaps. From 17 in Nov. to 47 beginning of Dec. to 87 beginning of
jan. to 235 when checked pre laprascopy in mid jan. by different lab to
215 when checked by regular lab in mid Feb. so it was high when tumor
was present, it normalized when tumor was removed. It began rising when
chemo bagan failing, itreversed temorarily when new chemo was added and
has steadily increased since being off chemo. So it appears to be a
reliable marker. Problem is other than retroperitoneal lymph node chain
lighting up on PET scan and a lymph node in retrocrural area of right
lung that has grown steadily but only slightly from 1.06cm to 1.26cm in
6 months, no tumr has thus far been found on standard CT, MRI,
ulterrasound or bone scans. The one Onc says that in my case the
cancer is measurable by the CEA. Unfortunately NCI doesn't agree with
him as far as qualifying for clinical trials is concerned. The other onc
said to wait until we see tumor before using chemo but he changed his
mind when he saw PET scan and 200+ CEA, they both say because the lymph
nodes lit up that it's in the lymph nodes now. The ignet ring cell part
of my cancer is known to attack the peritoneum. Since they removed the
front peritoneum I'm wondering if what is lighting up on PET scan is not
lymph nodes but is the ring cell attacking the rear peritoneum. That
would explain why they don't show on CT or MRI as they would nt be large
enough. If it were in lymph nodes I'd think they'd be enlarged and would
show abnormal on CT or MRI. I have a bad and painful inflamation of my
tailbone (it's been checked, no cancer). and I was told by doctor who
did explorator laproscopy that have liver disease cirrosis (spelling?)
though he did not take samples to determine the extent. Both of these
coditions could contribute to an elavated CEA but it's doubtful that
would account for a steady increase or such a high number (235). I don't
know what to beleive. I will monitor the CEA over 3-4 doses o chemo and
if I don't see positive results I will discontinue it and hopefully
still be able to save it for an eventual tumor.

On Feb 26, 10:12 am, jonbo...@webtv.net (J W) wrote:
> In most cases CEA is not considered a very reliable marker. Even chemo
> tself can cause rises in CEA. I have been told by several doctors that
> in my case however in the absence of visible tumor it is a very reliable
> indicator for the followig reasons.
>
> Pre surgery it was high 92. When tumor (size of two fists) on right
> colon and mets to omentum and peritoneum were removed it dropped by 50%
> at first and then dopped down to completely normal (2.5) where t stayed
> until chemo began failing. When avastin was added it began to drop again
> and was heading back to normal until chemo toxicity issues began and
> chemo dose was reduced, after that it bagan gradually climbing again.
> Then as long as I was on chemo and for a month or two after ending chemo
> it continued rising gradually. Once the chemo was pretty much out of my
> system (December about 3 mnths since chemo ended) the CEA began to take
> large leaps. From 17 in Nov. to 47 beginning of Dec. to 87 beginning of
> jan. to 235 when checked pre laprascopy in mid jan. by different lab to
> 215 when checked by regular lab in mid Feb. so it was high when tumor
> was present, it normalized when tumor was removed. It began rising when
> chemo bagan failing, itreversed temorarily when new chemo was added and
> has steadily increased since being off chemo. So it appears to be a
> reliable marker. Problem is other than retroperitoneal lymph node chain
> lighting up on PET scan and a lymph node in retrocrural area of right
> lung that has grown steadily but only slightly from 1.06cm to 1.26cm in
> 6 months, no tumr has thus far been found on standard CT, MRI,
> ulterrasound or bone scans. The one Onc says that in my case the
> cancer is measurable by the CEA. Unfortunately NCI doesn't agree with
> him as far as qualifying for clinical trials is concerned. The other onc
> said to wait until we see tumor before using chemo but he changed his
> mind when he saw PET scan and 200+ CEA, they both say because the lymph
> nodes lit up that it's in the lymph nodes now. The ignet ring cell part
> of my cancer is known to attack the peritoneum. Since they removed the
> front peritoneum I'm wondering if what is lighting up on PET scan is not
> lymph nodes but is the ring cell attacking the rear peritoneum. That
> would explain why they don't show on CT or MRI as they would nt be large
> enough. If it were in lymph nodes I'd think they'd be enlarged and would
> show abnormal on CT or MRI. I have a bad and painful inflamation of my
> tailbone (it's been checked, no cancer). and I was told by doctor who
> did explorator laproscopy that have liver disease cirrosis (spelling?)
> though he did not take samples to determine the extent. Both of these
> coditions could contribute to an elavated CEA but it's doubtful that
> would account for a steady increase or such a high number (235). I don't
> know what to beleive. I will monitor the CEA over 3-4 doses o chemo and
> if I don't see positive results I will discontinue it and hopefully
> still be able to save it for an eventual tumor.

You're right---it sounds like your cancer is well indicatedby the
CEA. I'm sorry to hear that, as I had hoped it might be just a false
positive indicator. My scans (PET/CT & bone) have been clean, but I
know that doesn't mean I don't still have mets. They can be all over
the place, and just too small to show up on the scan. This stuff is
scary. Once you've been diagnosed, you can never be really sure
you're clean. I had a friend with breast cancer who passed her 5 year
clean mark, only to have it recur after 6 years. All we can do is get
the best care we know of, make decisions based on insufficient
information, and hope for the best; all the while trying to live as
well as we can. I really hope things improve for you.

---
CSM

I truly hope thngs get better too. I've been pretty disgusted with the
system so far. I don't really know how much faith to put in the PET scan
because almost every scan that's been done on me in the past 14 months
has shown something completely different each time that they say may be
suspicious but it is not there in the next scan. Even when they flew me
to Baltimore for the big surgery that didn't happen. The doc said when
he went in my belly laproscopicoly he saw 8-10 small nodules, he said he
took 4 of them for biopsy and they came back no cancer. I said then why
the heck didn't you just snip them all off since you were in there
anyway and that way we wouldn't worry about them becoming cancerous
later on DUH. My whole dilema since going of chemo in sept. 06 was aside
from some moferate neuropathy from the chemo, ears ringing, short term
memory kinda fuzzy and lingering diahrea issues (not really frequency
just consistancy and urgency when they come) which will probably always
be the case because part of my colon is gone. Aside from those issues
and the usual phantom aches and pains I've been feeling great. So making
the decision to go back on chemo was troublesome because I don't feel
like I'm supposed to be dead in 4-6 months. In fact if it weren't for
CEA jumpng from 87 to 235 in less than a month I'd be a hard case to
convince that I even had cancer. I really didn't want to go back on it
but I don't want to die either so what is one to do. Where are them easy
buttons from the TV commercials when you need them.

My regular primary care doctor is very much into alternative stuff and
thinks I'm insane to use chemo. She s considered a heretic by my HMO and
they are constantly trying to get rid of her before her contract is up.
She says she wouldn't put that stuff in her body. But then again there
are no athiests in foxholes, right? I imagine that tune would change if
she were in my shoes. Besides I've tried a number of those so called
alternative things and I honestly can't say they've done any good. They
haven't cured me but then again, I am still alive. I contribute that
fact to God in fact I give him all the credit and glory for this whole
ordeal. I don't wish I'd gotten this disease but it did put the brakes
on my decadent lifestyle and brought me to the lord real fast. Prior to
this I was about as far from him as one could get. Now I can't get
enough of him. If I do beat this thing there is no question in my mind
that he did it because every doctor I've seen has said there was no
hope. That should be illegal for a doctor to say to a patient because as
long as the heart is beating, the lungs are working, the spirit is on
fire for life and the soul is stirring there is hope.

I personaly beleive all diseases are viral and we have yet to approach
them correctly. We are walking talking living computers, we get viruses,
we in fact are a virus ourselves to our own world as we seem to be
hellbent on destroying it. Perhaps things like cancer are simply nature
fighting back. The original inhabitants of this country didn't have very
much disease to deal with and they also didn't harm their environment,
think about it. The agrichemical companies like monsanto have geneticaly
altered almost everything we and our food chain consume Livestock, fish
& poultry are all farmed and fed geneticaly altered food and injected
with steroids and antibiotics. Our produce is geneticaly altered to have
pesticidal and antidisease functions built into it and on top of that
it's planted in cheicaly soaked dirt, sprayed with god knows what and
much of it is irradiated. Our grains are all engineered now to have a
suicide gene in them which means the seed the grain produces will not
reproduce hence the farmer must purchase new seed every year. Great for
the big companies and they say it's not harmful in certain levels but
what do you suppose that suicde gene might do to humans say 5-10
generations down the road once it gets into our DNA. Same with chlorine
and flouride in the water, they say at certain levels it's safe but what
does multigenerational exposure do over time. Why cannot mankind accept
the fact that if there was a better way to make things God would have
made them that way, We have absolutely no idea what we are doing with
all this DNA altering. We are our own worst enemy, we don't need a
predator to keep us in check. We're doing a fine job of killing
ourselves without any help.

Our approach to curing disease is exactly the same as our approach to
everything we did not understand throughout history, "kill it" Bomb it,
cut it, poison it, nuke it, just kill it by any means. We must learn
that not every problem can be solved by bashing it to death with a
hammer. All things resonate and vibrate, each has it's own perfect
harmony or frequency. when that harmony is altered the makeup of that
thing is changed. looking at it in the proper perspective, all cells
vibrate or modulate all creation functions in a synergistic symphony.
one big orchestra if you will. The music of the lord, music is
mathimatics and everything can be defined mathimaticaly. When the
ancients spoke of harmony and balance that is what they meant. There
must be a way to rebalance that modulation or vibration back to it's
original frequency and in doing so rid the being of it's diseases.




Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Mon, Feb 26, 2007, 1:59pm (EST-3) From:
csm7532@hotmail.com Wrote:

**You're right---it sounds like your cancer is well indicatedby the
CEA. I'm sorry to hear that, as I had hoped it might be just a false
positive indicator. My scans (PET/CT & bone) have been clean, but I know
that doesn't mean I don't still have mets. They can be all over the
place, and just too small to show up on the scan. This stuff is scary.
Once you've been diagnosed, you can never be really sure you're clean. I
had a friend with breast cancer who passed her 5 year clean mark, only
to have it recur after 6 years. All we can do is get the best care we
know of, make decisions based on insufficient information, and hope for
the best; all the while trying to live as well as we can. I really hope
things improve for you.
---
CSM

turtletrot1 wrote:


> I personally find the commercials for "Cancer Centers of
> America"offensive. It seems to be sending the message that unless you
> are going to them you are not doing all you can for those with
> cancer.


I agree. These sleazy ads are done along the lines of weight loss or
even "YOU DON'T NEED CREDIT TO BUY OUR USED CAR" ads...

These ads are a recent thing...is there no more regulation of them
than for contact lens, etc. joints...???

They prey on the hopeless...and in a very bad way.


--
Best
Greg