Hey guys (and gals).  Your knowledge base when I was diagnosed with PCa at the age of 37 in late June 2005 was invaluable.  I come to you now with another request…. We found out Friday (11/18) that my Mother (age 66) has "Sebaceous Carcinoma" around her left eye.  I’ve done the obligatory google searches, etc… after reading the initial pathology report, but figured I’d come here and see if anyone has other info/resources that will help my family and specifically my Mom make the right decisions. I understand that this type of cancer is very aggressive and can become metastatic quickly. Your help/information is appreciated in advance! Wes

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hey guys (and gals).  Your knowledge base when I was diagnosed with PCa at the age of 37 in late June 2005 was invaluable.  I come to you now with another request…. We found out Friday (11/18) that my Mother (age 66) has "Sebaceous Carcinoma" around her left eye.  I’ve done the obligatory google searches, etc… after reading the initial pathology report, but figured I’d come here and see if anyone has other info/resources that will help my family and specifically my Mom make the right decisions. I understand that this type of cancer is very aggressive and can become metastatic quickly. Your help/information is appreciated in advance! Wes

Your best bet is to post to alt.support.cancer to get info of this type. Ed Friedman

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 1. What are the other treatment options? Right now, the doctor continues to give me Tamoxifen and put me on amg-162 trial for my bone. There is a drug called Herceptin which specifically targets HER2+. Unfortunately I can’t tell you how it works because the explanation is over my head.  Tamoxifen blocks estrogen so it only works on ER+.  But do ask your doctor if you’re a candidate for Herceptin.

Here’s how it works.  HER2 is a receptor protein which is formed on the cell walls to make the cell respond to a growth-factor hormone.  One of the ways cancer cells can circumvent the normal controls on growth is to make extra copies of this receptor (or the one for another hormone such as estrogen).  This is referred to as overexpression.  The pathologists refer to a tissue as being HER2+ when the amount of overexpression is enough that Herceptin might work. Herceptin is an artificial antibody which targets the HER2 protein, prompting the immune system to attack cells which have a lot of it. Herceptin can in some people have serious long term side effects such as heart damage, so it is only recommended for metastatic disease, although it is used for appropriate severe early-stage cancers in clinical trials and off-label prescription.  While it doesn’t work for patients who are not HER+, is does not always work for those who are either.  For a minority it can be dramatically effective. Other treatment options for metastatic disease are mostly aimed at symptom control.  Further chemotherapy is an option, but generally not very effective against bone mets, so most oncologist will want to hold that in reserve for a time when it can have more benefit.  The main treatment for bone mets is local radiotherapy, which is very effective at stopping (but not totally destroying) individual tumours, it typically sets back their growth by about two years.  This is usually prescribed as a pain control treatment, again, you get the most benefit by saving the attack for tumours which are causing problems. — Tim Jackson -Who needs to pay Microsoft?  Free Open Source Software- www.mozilla.org       FIREFOX Web Browser,  THUNDERBIRD Email/News www.openoffice.org      Office Suite

Response:

Hi all: I was diagnoised feb 2004 at stage 2 with one positive lymph node. I went through chemo. Barely a year passed, they found it in my bone. I have two questions: 1. What are the other treatment options? Right now, the doctor continues to give me Tamoxifen and put me on amg-162 trial for my bone. 2. What is the difference between HER2 positive and HER2 overexpress? If there is a difference, should the doctor continues to use Tamoxifen only to treat the disease? Thanks! WM

Response:

Hi all: Does anybody know the difference between HER2 positive and HER2 overexpress. I don’t quite understand these terminology. Thanks WM

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi all: I was diagnoised feb 2004 at stage 2 with one positive lymph node. I went through chemo. Barely a year passed, they found it in my bone. I have two questions: 1. What are the other treatment options? Right now, the doctor continues to give me Tamoxifen and put me on amg-162 trial for my bone. 2. What is the difference between HER2 positive and HER2 overexpress? If there is a difference, should the doctor continues to use Tamoxifen only to treat the disease? Thanks! WM

HER2 is a gene that may be expressed (i.e., it makes a characteristic protein) to a small degree in all tumors.  Sometimes it it much more active, and that is associated with increased risk of spread or recurrence.  I do not know the cutoff point, but above some concentration of HER2/NEU products on stained slides, it is regarded as HER2 positive.

Response:

1. What are the other treatment options? Right now, the doctor continues to give me Tamoxifen and put me on amg-162 trial for my bone.

There is a drug called Herceptin which specifically targets HER2+. Unfortunately I can’t tell you how it works because the explanation is over my head.  Tamoxifen blocks estrogen so it only works on ER+.  But do ask your doctor if you’re a candidate for Herceptin. Eva

Response:

Hi, My (47 year old) wife underwent lumpectomy for 1.5cm ductal invasive grade 2 tumor.  While doing surgery they removed a nearby suspicious cyst which proved to be a small ductal in situ.  All margins were found to be clear and both sentinal nodes and axillary dissection lymph nodes also proved clear. All her other tests proved clear.  ER+   PR+ and Her2Nu Negative  I think basically good stuff considering the situation. We visited two oncologists and are ready to begin chemo.  The way they look at the tumor size is to take the distance from the end of the invasive to the end of the in situ and add together to get 2.5cm and treat based on that size. One oncologist said 4 cycles of AC and then radiation and tamoxefin.  The other oncologist said 6 cycles of FEC and then radiation and tamoxefin. My question is what is the difference between 4 X AC and 6 X FEC?  Is one more potentially harmful than the other?  Is one really better?  Also, any comments on how they figure tumor size?  I would think the In Situ would be considered totally gone after surgery so there would be no need to add it’s location dimension to figure tumor size. Nervous Husband

Response:

FEC?  Is one more potentially harmful than the other?  Is one really better? The irony is that I don’t believe that a direct comparison between those drugs and cycles has  been done.  I am not one to comment on which is better and I don’t recall all the details—but the way 4 AC treatnebts was adopted was based on comparing 6 CMF with 6 FAC.  The 6 FAC was better.  I recall reading that the decision of 4 cycles was based on convenience and um can’t recall off the top of my head but it was another word that started with "c"  I renember now–compromise.  I saved that reference somewhere but am not sure I can still get to it.  The last time I tried to find that reference I was told that the page was no longer available (if in fact that was the ‘right’ page–which I am pretty sure it was, although not 100% certain).  If I ever come across the article/report I willl post that again.  Anyway, I do remember reading that not all those involved or who gave input agreed with the decision.   That does not mean it isn’t as good or even better than 6 FEC though.  I just recall reading about the comparison between AC and CMF and how they decided on the 4 cycles in relation to only the above combination of drugs.  I know that isn’t the question you asked but thought it might help lead you to find out more as to whether any comparison between FEC and AC has been done…

Response:

The way they look at the tumor size is to take the distance from the end of the invasive to the end of the in situ and add together to get 2.5cm and treat based on that size.

Is that really the way the AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) says to do it? Not that the AJCC has the last say on matters of risk. Does anyone with a large body of evidence recommend this? My understanding of DCIS (ductal carcinoma insitu) is that it is often multifocal and so measuring the size of invasive cancer by the entire length from one end of an invasive tumor to the most distant end of DCIS seems excessive. This strategy would result in a large number of women being upstaged. — David "just asking" Winsemius If the statistics are boring, then you’ve got the wrong numbers.                           -Edward Tufte

Response:

The way they look at the tumor size is to take the distance from the end of the invasive to the end of the in situ and add together to get 2.5cm and treat based on that size. Is that really the way the AJCC (American Joint Committee on Cancer) says to do it? Not that the AJCC has the last say on matters of risk. Does anyone with a large body of evidence recommend this? My understanding of DCIS (ductal carcinoma insitu) is that it is often multifocal and so measuring the size of invasive cancer by the entire length from one end of an invasive tumor to the most distant end of DCIS seems excessive. This strategy would result in a large number of women being upstaged.

I does seem a bit odd.  I haven’t seen any consistent rules for sizing multifocal cancers, and oncologists seem to vary.  Generally taking the size of the largest tumour will give only a fairly small underestimate of the total volume and probably a better measure of metastasis.  I can’t see the logic in measuring the extent of the DCIS for staging purposes, as staging is primarily about assessing the amount and range of metastasis and DCIS is supposed to be non-metastatic and so shouldn’t contribute. Tim Jackson

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I typed "Coley’s toxins" into PubMed and found 17 articles. Of these, only two appeared to be anything resembling actual clinical trials (and they dated back to 1962–unfortunately, no abstracts were available to help me decide if they were any good, and they’re too old to be available online for quick retrieval). One was an animal study in the Golden Hamster. One was a case report on a single patient. The rest were all either review articles or commentaries. The more I look into quack cures the more I see efficacy for their use and the more I see them being ignored. Really? Based on what evidence? Based on clinical evidence like Coley’s Clinical evidence that was not replicated.

Really can you show me a double blind/randomised study that demonstrates that Coley’s toxins are no better than a placebo? – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The facts are Coley’s was effective, _is_ effective and that’s why it’s being used in quack clinics. It is quite questionable whether Coley’s toxins are effective, and even if they were somewhat effective they have been supplanted by more specific approaches. In any case, as far as I know, no other investigators were able to replicate Coley’s results. Coley is mainly remembered as a pioneer in developing the concept of immunotherapy more than as someone who actually got immunotherapy to work. There isn’t just one study on Coley’s – a quick scan of medline will provide quite a few.

I typed "Coley’s toxins" into PubMed and found 17 articles. Of these, only two appeared to be anything resembling actual clinical trials (and they dated back to 1962–unfortunately, no abstracts were available to help me decide if they were any good, and they’re too old to be available online for quick retrieval). One was an animal study in the Golden Hamster. One was a case report on a single patient. The rest were all either review articles or commentaries. The more I look into quack cures the more I see efficacy for their use and the more I see them being ignored. Really? Based on what evidence? Based on clinical evidence like Coley’s

Clinical evidence that was not replicated. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

I think part of the problem here is the altie tradition of never abandoning a "cure" regardless of its track record.

Indeed. Once alties latch onto an "alternative therapy," it’s all but impossible to persuade them to abandon it. Coley’s therapy would probably no longer be used by mainstream medicine even if it had been accepted as a first-line treatment. There must be many modalities in medicine that "worked," but have been supplanted by methods with better risk-benefit profiles.

Oncology is replete with examples of therapies that worked at the time they were developed (and may even have been used for many years) but are no longer used because they were ultimately supplanted by newer therapies that either (1) worked better or (2) worked as well with less toxicity and complications. Examples include both surgical therapies and chemotherapies. In the case of Coley’s toxins, injecting bacterial lipopolysaccharide is a fairly toxic way to stimulate an immune reaction, and the immune reaction that is stimulated is rather nonspecific. In contrast, vaccines targeted to specific tumor proteins are much more specific and potentially much less toxic. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

The facts are Coley’s was effective, _is_ effective and that’s why it’s being used in quack clinics. It is quite questionable whether Coley’s toxins are effective, and even if they were somewhat effective they have been supplanted by more specific approaches. In any case, as far as I know, no other investigators were able to replicate Coley’s results. Coley is mainly remembered as a pioneer in developing the concept of immunotherapy more than as someone who actually got immunotherapy to work.

There isn’t just one study on Coley’s – a quick scan of medline will provide quite a few. The more I look into quack cures the more I see efficacy for their use and the more I see them being ignored. Really? Based on what evidence?

Based on clinical evidence like Coley’s Anth – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The facts are Coley’s was effective, _is_ effective and that’s why it’s being used in quack clinics. It is quite questionable whether Coley’s toxins are effective, and even if they were somewhat effective they have been supplanted by more specific approaches. In any case, as far as I know, no other investigators were able to replicate Coley’s results. Coley is mainly remembered as a pioneer in developing the concept of immunotherapy more than as someone who actually got immunotherapy to work. The more I look into quack cures the more I see efficacy for their use and the more I see them being ignored. Really? Based on what evidence? — Orac

I think part of the problem here is the altie tradition of never abandoning a "cure" regardless of its track record. Coley’s therapy would probably no longer be used by mainstream medicine even if it had been accepted as a first-line treatment. There must be many modalities in medicine that "worked," but have been supplanted by methods with better risk-benefit profiles. –Rich

Response:

The facts are Coley’s was effective, _is_ effective and that’s why it’s being used in quack clinics.

It is quite questionable whether Coley’s toxins are effective, and even if they were somewhat effective they have been supplanted by more specific approaches. In any case, as far as I know, no other investigators were able to replicate Coley’s results. Coley is mainly remembered as a pioneer in developing the concept of immunotherapy more than as someone who actually got immunotherapy to work. The more I look into quack cures the more I see efficacy for their use and the more I see them being ignored.

Really? Based on what evidence? — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

http://www.annieappleseedproject.org/colvirininli.html "STANFORD, Calif. – Researchers at Stanford University Medical Center have been spreading colds to cancer patients, all in the hope of curing a deadly disease." BL "As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed.  There is a hologram of the rock within the wave that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there’s a reflected wave back."   Ralph Abraham   "I’d like to learn to windsurf."  BL

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective. Unfortuantely, other researchers could not reproduce his results. One small double-blind trial is not usually enough. I’d go so far as to say "never enough."  The history of drug development is littered with wonderfully promising pilot studies of things that didn’t work in larger studies.

Indeed, but sometimes there are single studies that are large enough to answer a clinical question pretty definitively. Usually they are cooperative group studies, as from ECOG or NSABP. But you are correct, most studies don’t reach that level of numbers. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

The facts are Coley’s was effective, _is_ effective and that’s why it’s being used in quack clinics. The more I look into quack cures the more I see efficacy for their use and the more I see them being ignored. Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective. Unfortuantely, other researchers could not reproduce his results. One small double-blind trial is not usually enough. Shame really, because people with end stage metastatic cancer with no other options could benefit from them. There are many other things that end stage metastatic cancer patients might benefit from that are offered in Phase I studies. Some are cancer vaccines and immunotherapy based on the concepts pioneered by Coley. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

The double blind study used a fever inducing placebo, so they compared hyperthermia to Coley’s. I too doubt that a cabinet would induce remission in cancer. IMO Coley’s Toxins _isn’t_ TNF or hyperthermia. Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The hyperthermia that is necessary to have an effect on cancer requires increasing the body temperature from its normal 37 deg C to 40-41 deg C. That large an increase in bodily temperature is quite dangerous, which is why hyperthermia is usually only used on isolate parts of the body. (Raising the temperature of the whole body to that extent for the time needed would not be safe, particularly for the brain.) For instance, for extremity melanomas that have metastasized all over a limb, it is possible to get good responses with hyperthermic limb perfusion. In this technique, the surgeon isolates the blood vessels to the limb, cannulates them so that the circulation of the limb is completely cut off from that of the body, then infuses hyperthermic chemotherapy solution (usually tumor necrosis factor-alpha and Melphalan) at a high concentration into the limb for a couple of hours. Circulation is then restored. There can sometimes be quite dramatic shrinkage of skin tumors from this. This technique is also sometimes used for extremity sarcomas. Another area where hyperthermia is sometimes used is for disseminated intrabominal carcinoma. Through a peritoneal dialysis catheter, the abdomen is perfused with hyperthermic chemotherapy. This technique is less accepted than isolated limb perfusion and is generally done only in research settings, as it is not clear that it offers much, if any, advantage over more conventional treatments. I highly doubt that the hyperthermia cabinets being sold would increase the body temperature enough to make a difference. Even if they could increase body temperature sufficiently, in untrained hands they would be quite dangerous to use. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective.

When, by whom, and where is the data published?   Tsu Dho Nimh — When businesses invoke the "protection of consumers," it’s a lot like politicians invoking morality and children – grab your wallet and/or your kid and run for your life.

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective. Shame really, because people with end stage metastatic cancer with no other options could benefit from them. Show me the money, Anth.

(I’d scan the pages from the Moss The Cancer Industry but my scanner isn’t working) Here’s some info from the net. In 1962, Dr. Barbara Johnston, M.D. published a double blind study on Coley’s toxins. This study was conducted at New York University-Bellevue Hospital. The results were clear-cut. In the control group treated with fever inducing placebo, only one patient of 37 showed any signs of improvement. Of the 34 patients treated with Coley’s toxins, 18 showed no improvement, 7 noted decreased pain while 9 showed such benefits as tumor necrosis, apparent inhibition of metastases, shrinkage of lymph nodes, and disappearance of tumors [12]. [12] Johnston, Barbara, "Clinical Effects of Coley’s Toxin. 1. Controlled Study. 2. A Seven-Year Study." Cancer Chemotherapy Reports 21:19-68, August 1962. In 1982 at the conference held in Cologne, Germany, Mrs. Nauts reported the first results of randomized trials of MBV (Coley’s toxins) begun in 1976 at Memorial Sloan-Kettering: Advanced non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma patients receiving MBV had a 93 percent remission rate as opposed to 29 percent for controls who received chemotherapy alone [13]. [13] Nauts, Helen Coley, Bacterial Products in the Treatment of Cancer: Past, Present and Future. Paper read at the International Colloqium on Bacteriology and Cancer, Clogne, Federal Republic of Germany, March 16-18, 1982. http://www.cancerguide.org/coley.html 1. As I have said, this kind of trial was virtually unknown in the days when Coley’s toxins were widely used.

[12] was conducted in the 60’s. 2. Double-blind studies are not usually needed anyway, in assessing a cancer treatment as it is easy to tell if a cancer is shrinking and whether a person is alive or dead.   The only circumstance where they may be needed is when symptomatic treatments are being tested.

I’m not sure there’s a clear relationship between between shrinking a tumour and life expectancy? For instance in the Oasis clinic, the Laetrile therapy does not usally remove the tumour, but there’s reports of greater quality of life and life extension. 3. A double-blind trial incolves randomising patients and blinding both patient and doctor as to whether the patients is receiving the active treatment or not.   How does one blind the patient and doctor with Coley’s toxins, where treatment had to be adjusted until a high body temperature was achieved?

Agreed, they used a fever inducing placebo and randomisation. This casts a doubt in my eyes over the quacks who use devices to induce hyperthermia. They compared a fever placebo vs Coley’s which also induced a fever.   4.  None of the quacks who are still using Coley’s toxins ever publish anything.

Maybe they do, who knows what’s blocked by ‘the biased facists in medicine’? 5. I am certain the only evidence you will find is a few case series, which will have been done in the days when cancer diagnosis, grading and follow-up were much less accurate than is possible today and which cannot be compared with contemporary treatments.

There have been other studies on Coley’s toxins in conjuntion with chemo etc. a quick google search will get you them. 6.  I am sure that the  mainstream doctors who were using them gave them up because the results were not good enough to justify the medical and patient resources expended upon them.  It was an arduous and difficult treatment. I suspect the true cure rate was close to nil, and the temporary remission rate scarcely worthwhile.  Are you aware that even chemotherapy treatments that sometimes work are abandoned if  they cannot produce a reasonable remission rate?

I think the results speak for themselves. Coley’s was on a whole eclipsed with the radium boom. As a mainstream doctor yourself I think you would rapidly be scorned at and called a quack for using them I suppose you can make a case for patients being entitled to try it out at their own expense, but I’ll bet the quacks don’t offer such patients a realistic view of their chances.

It is up to the person to try it, but if they are not aware of it then they never know. When the usual ’slash and burn’ fails, then what? (Please note that Coley’s isn’t TNF or hyperthermia) Anth N.B. Coley’s is really cheap to manufacture, it is that quacks who charge stupid amounts of money for a $2 injection at 1000x markup. I’d _love_ to get hold of those papers in non abstract, if you find a whole net reference to it, then let me know.

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective.

Unfortuantely, other researchers could not reproduce his results. One small double-blind trial is not usually enough. Shame really, because people with end stage metastatic cancer with no other options could benefit from them.

There are many other things that end stage metastatic cancer patients might benefit from that are offered in Phase I studies. Some are cancer vaccines and immunotherapy based on the concepts pioneered by Coley. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective. Unfortuantely, other researchers could not reproduce his results. One small double-blind trial is not usually enough.

I’d go so far as to say "never enough."  The history of drug development is littered with wonderfully promising pilot studies of things that didn’t work in larger studies.   — David Wright :: alphabeta at prodigy.net      These are my opinions only, but they’re almost always correct.        "If I have not seen as far as others, it is because giants            were standing on my shoulders."  (Hal Abelson, MIT)

Response:

 Thanks for the further information. Peter

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – In article .au, Why not take saunas?  I don’t have cancer but am intrigued with infrared sauna for heart problems… Anyway, the toxin thing doesn’t surprise me at all, what with pinworms possibly helping autoimmune disease, the hygiene hypothesis, etc.   But maybe saunas could do the same thing.  Pinworms don’t cause fever, but maybe they stir up the same cytokines, etc. that fever does. Who knows?  Not many funders for studies on infrared saunas or pinworms. Hyperthermia does seem to affect some cancers, but I am not sure that saunas will produce the required rise in body temperature without considerable risk.   Does anyone know?  Hyperthermia cabinets are being sold to cancer patients on the pretence that they offer effective treatment of cancer, but I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised. The hyperthermia that is necessary to have an effect on cancer requires increasing the body temperature from its normal 37 deg C to 40-41 deg C. That large an increase in bodily temperature is quite dangerous, which is why hyperthermia is usually only used on isolate parts of the body. (Raising the temperature of the whole body to that extent for the time needed would not be safe, particularly for the brain.) For instance, for extremity melanomas that have metastasized all over a limb, it is possible to get good responses with hyperthermic limb perfusion. In this technique, the surgeon isolates the blood vessels to the limb, cannulates them so that the circulation of the limb is completely cut off from that of the body, then infuses hyperthermic chemotherapy solution (usually tumor necrosis factor-alpha and Melphalan) at a high concentration into the limb for a couple of hours. Circulation is then restored. There can sometimes be quite dramatic shrinkage of skin tumors from this. This technique is also sometimes used for extremity sarcomas. Another area where hyperthermia is sometimes used is for disseminated intrabominal carcinoma. Through a peritoneal dialysis catheter, the abdomen is perfused with hyperthermic chemotherapy. This technique is less accepted than isolated limb perfusion and is generally done only in research settings, as it is not clear that it offers much, if any, advantage over more conventional treatments. I highly doubt that the hyperthermia cabinets being sold would increase the body temperature enough to make a difference. Even if they could increase body temperature sufficiently, in untrained hands they would be quite dangerous to use. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective. Shame really, because people with end stage metastatic cancer with no other options could benefit from them.

Show me the money, Anth. 1. As I have said, this kind of trial was virtually unknown in the days when Coley’s toxins were widely used. 2. Double-blind studies are not usually needed anyway, in assessing a cancer treatment as it is easy to tell if a cancer is shrinking and whether a person is alive or dead.   The only circumstance where they may be needed is when symptomatic treatments are being tested. 3. A double-blind trial incolves randomising patients and blinding both patient and doctor as to whether the patients is receiving the active treatment or not.   How does one blind the patient and doctor with Coley’s toxins, where treatment had to be adjusted until a high body temperature was achieved? 4.  None of the quacks who are still using Coley’s toxins ever publish anything. 5. I am certain the only evidence you will find is a few case series, which will have been done in the days when cancer diagnosis, grading and follow-up were much less accurate than is possible today and which cannot be compared with contemporary treatments. 6.  I am sure that the  mainstream doctors who were using them gave them up because the results were not good enough to justify the medical and patient resources expended upon them.  It was an arduous and difficult treatment. I suspect the true cure rate was close to nil, and the temporary remission rate scarcely worthwhile.  Are you aware that even chemotherapy treatments that sometimes work are abandoned if  they cannot produce a reasonable remission rate? I suppose you can make a case for patients being entitled to try it out at their own expense, but I’ll bet the quacks don’t offer such patients a realistic view of their chances. Peter Moran – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Anth I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised. Peter Moran You may be right.  Somebody needs to do some controlled experiments.  I know an oncologist here in the USA that uses hyperthermia quite a bit but has given up on getting things related to what he does approved by the FDA– not enough money in it to run the required experiments. But it *is* probably one of those things that can be misused.  I don’t have cancer though, so I doubt if I can misuse it. BL "As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed.  There is a hologram of the rock within the wave that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there’s a reflected wave back."   Ralph Abraham "I’d like to learn to windsurf."  BL

Response:

In article .au, – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why not take saunas?  I don’t have cancer but am intrigued with infrared sauna heart problems… Anyway, the toxin thing doesn’t surprise me at all, what with pinworms possibly helping autoimmune disease, the hygiene hypothesis, etc.   But maybe saunas could do the same thing.  Pinworms don’t cause fever, but maybe they stir up the same cytokines, etc. that fever does. Who knows?  Not many funders for studies on infrared saunas or pinworms. Hyperthermia does seem to affect some cancers, but I am not sure that saunas will produce the required rise in body temperature without considerable risk.   Does anyone know?  Hyperthermia cabinets are being sold to cancer patients on the pretence that they offer effective treatment of cancer, but I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised.

The hyperthermia that is necessary to have an effect on cancer requires increasing the body temperature from its normal 37 deg C to 40-41 deg C. That large an increase in bodily temperature is quite dangerous, which is why hyperthermia is usually only used on isolate parts of the body. (Raising the temperature of the whole body to that extent for the time needed would not be safe, particularly for the brain.) For instance, for extremity melanomas that have metastasized all over a limb, it is possible to get good responses with hyperthermic limb perfusion. In this technique, the surgeon isolates the blood vessels to the limb, cannulates them so that the circulation of the limb is completely cut off from that of the body, then infuses hyperthermic chemotherapy solution (usually tumor necrosis factor-alpha and Melphalan) at a high concentration into the limb for a couple of hours. Circulation is then restored. There can sometimes be quite dramatic shrinkage of skin tumors from this. This technique is also sometimes used for extremity sarcomas. Another area where hyperthermia is sometimes used is for disseminated intrabominal carcinoma. Through a peritoneal dialysis catheter, the abdomen is perfused with hyperthermic chemotherapy. This technique is less accepted than isolated limb perfusion and is generally done only in research settings, as it is not clear that it offers much, if any, advantage over more conventional treatments. I highly doubt that the hyperthermia cabinets being sold would increase the body temperature enough to make a difference. Even if they could increase body temperature sufficiently, in untrained hands they would be quite dangerous to use. — Orac        |"A statement of fact cannot be insolent."             |             |"If you cannot listen to the answers, why do you             | inconvenience me with questions?"

Response:

I suppose you can make a case for patients being entitled to try it out at their own expense, but I’ll bet the quacks don’t offer such patients a realistic view of their chances.

I’d also be very interested to see how the quacks apply them.  I’ll bet it is nothing like the authentic version.  The patients will eb given the odd jab and told that they are getting Coley’s Toxins.  In Tijuana they rarely hang onto any patient for more than a three weeks, as that is when the money is runnning  out and the cancers are often starting to show they are worsening depite the treatment. Perter Moran

Response:

Coley’s Toxins went through double blind trials and are not used in mainstream despite the fact they were shown to be effective. Shame really, because people with end stage metastatic cancer with no other options could benefit from them. Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised. Peter Moran You may be right.  Somebody needs to do some controlled experiments.  I know an oncologist here in the USA that uses hyperthermia quite a bit but has given up on getting things related to what he does approved by the FDA– not enough money in it to run the required experiments. But it *is* probably one of those things that can be misused.  I don’t have cancer though, so I doubt if I can misuse it. BL "As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed.  There is a hologram of the rock within the wave that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there’s a reflected wave back."   Ralph Abraham "I’d like to learn to windsurf."  BL

Response:

I doubt a sauna would raise the body temp as much as a fever from a strep infection. Surely they would be classed as dangerous if they did? Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Why not take saunas?  I don’t have cancer but am intrigued with infrared sauna heart problems… Anyway, the toxin thing doesn’t surprise me at all, what with pinworms possibly helping autoimmune disease, the hygiene hypothesis, etc.   But maybe saunas could do the same thing.  Pinworms don’t cause fever, but maybe they stir up the same cytokines, etc. that fever does. Who knows?  Not many funders for studies on infrared saunas or pinworms. Hyperthermia does seem to affect some cancers, but I am not sure that saunas will produce the required rise in body temperature without considerable risk.   Does anyone know?  Hyperthermia cabinets are being sold to cancer patients on the pretence that they offer effective treatment of cancer, but I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised. Peter Moran

Response:

Why not take saunas?  I don’t have cancer but am intrigued with infrared sauna heart problems… Anyway, the toxin thing doesn’t surprise me at all, what with pinworms possibly helping autoimmune disease, the hygiene hypothesis, etc.   But maybe saunas could do the same thing.  Pinworms don’t cause fever, but maybe they stir up the same cytokines, etc. that fever does. Who knows?  Not many funders for studies on infrared saunas or pinworms.

Hyperthermia does seem to affect some cancers, but I am not sure that saunas will produce the required rise in body temperature without considerable risk.   Does anyone know?  Hyperthermia cabinets are being sold to cancer patients on the pretence that they offer effective treatment of cancer, but I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised. Peter Moran – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –

Response:

I understand they passed double blind clinical trials, and are effective against metastatic cancer, the question is how? Any ideas? Anth

Response:

I understand they passed double blind clinical trials, and are effective against metastatic cancer, the question is how? Any ideas? Anth

Coley published in 1890 and possibly the early 1900s and the first double blind clinical trials were not done until at least half  a century later. Well-designed research was unknown in those days, and cancer diagnosis and means of follow-up were primitive.   So far as I know he had only isolated cases of cancer remission.   Such remissions had also been observed occasionally after severe infections. He used mainly streprococcal toxins that can induce hyperthermia, could have a cytotoxic effect on cancer, or might stir up the immune system in one of several ways. Peter Moran

Response:

Why not take saunas?  I don’t have cancer but am intrigued with infrared sauna problems… Anyway, the toxin thing doesn’t surprise me at all, what with pinworms possibly helping autoimmune disease, the hygiene hypothesis, etc.   But maybe saunas could do the same thing.  Pinworms don’t cause fever, but maybe they stir up the same cytokines, etc. that fever does. Who knows?  Not many funders for studies on infrared saunas or pinworms. BL "As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed.  There is a hologram of the rock within the wave that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there’s a reflected wave back."   Ralph Abraham   "I’d like to learn to windsurf."  BL

Response:

I suspect that these have as much potential for harm as good if used unsupervised. Peter Moran

You may be right.  Somebody needs to do some controlled experiments.  I know an oncologist here in the USA that uses hyperthermia quite a bit but has given up on getting things related to what he does approved by the FDA– not enough money in it to run the required experiments. But it *is* probably one of those things that can be misused.  I don’t have cancer though, so I doubt if I can misuse it. BL "As the waves pass the rock, their shape is changed.  There is a hologram of the rock within the wave that comes forward and crashes on the beach, then there’s a reflected wave back."   Ralph Abraham   "I’d like to learn to windsurf."  BL

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – The test used to diagnose bone mets is bone scan since that was clear I would tend not to worry since that was fine. The MRI was ordered to diagnosis your back pain and the mri would show any nerve impingement. Your oncologist will have  a more definitive answer. Let us know how you make out with your oncologist, Alex " Thanks to everyone who responded.  I am going for a Pet Scan on Monday.  I should get the results on Wednesday.  I always insist on having a copy of my reports faxed to me.  Afterall, the report is about me and patients have the right to receive a copy.  Usually I get a copy after the doctor has reviewed it.  Someone dropped the ball with the MRI of my spine, and just faxed it to me.  I was home agonizing while waiting for the test results so it’s just as well that I received the results.  It doesn’t change the outcome. I did have a bone scan apprx. 3 weeks ago which didn’t show anything on the spine but I had back pain so the doctor ordered an MRI which brings me to the present.  I will post and let everyone know how the Pet Scan turns out.  I’m nervous about having it done as it scans the entire body for cancer. Bye, Barbara

they got me ready for an mri but come the time I wouldn’t quite fit in that hole thing.

Response:

they got me ready for an mri but come the time I wouldn’t quite fit in that hole thing.

People who are too large for the traditional MRI should automatically be referred to the closest "open"  MRI,  which is a table with a scanner thingie above it.  If you are not claustrophobic and you just barely don’t fit, see if the techs can swaddle you very tightly, like a burrito.  Being swaddled like that considerably reduces one’s diameter.  However, you have to be pretty damn calm to do it. — Aloha, Catharine titubant sed non decidunt wiblia

Response:

AFAIK in the US healthcare records are the property of the provider, not the patient. Some states have laws requiring healthcare providers to provide copies of records on request – and they may charge a small fee for copying but in other states there is no obligation to provide records to a patient at all.  Everyone’s mileage may vary on this one, though – but in almost all cases ownership of a record belongs to the organization that created the record.

Response:

AFAIK in the US healthcare records are the property of the provider, not the patient. Some states have laws requiring healthcare providers to provide copies of records on request – and they may charge a small fee for copying but in other states there is no obligation to provide records to a patient at all.  Everyone’s mileage may vary on this one, though – but in almost all cases ownership of a record belongs to the organization that created the record.

With the passing of the HIPAA laws in the last 3 years, the patient is entitled to get a copy of all of their records. A small copying fee may be charged, but the patient still has a right to them.

Response:

"Images reveal the thoracic vertebral bodies to be maintained.  There is some minimal abnormal signal noted within the posterior vertebral bodies as well as pedicles of T6 and T7 vertebral on the left side. These appear to slightly diminished in signal on the T1 weighted sequences and slightly increased in signal on the T2 weighted sequences.  Metastatic disease in not excluded."

Could be osteoarthritis.  They look the same on many tests, including MRIs. Only a bone biopsy will let you know for sure, and that is somewhat unpleasant.  Ask your oncologist if it makes sense to get this radiated even though you’re not sure what it is. — Aloha, Catharine titubant sed non decidunt wiblia

Response:

Yes, I did have a bone scan two weeks ago which came back clear.  My onc went ahead and ordered the MRI because of back pain.  I might add that the back pain I complained about is not in the same area that the MRI indicated possible bone mets.

Oh, phew phew phew.  What a relief.  It sounds like a previous injury to the bone that has been long healed, or a metastatic site that got "killed" by your chemotherapy.  If it didn’t show up on the bone scan, I’ll bet you do not have active metastasis. — Aloha, Catharine titubant sed non decidunt wiblia

Response:

The test used to diagnose bone mets is bone scan since that was clear I would tend not to worry since that was fine. The MRI was ordered to diagnosis your back pain and the mri would show any nerve impingement. Your oncologist will have  a more definitive answer. Let us know how you make out with your oncologist, Alex "

Thanks to everyone who responded.  I am going for a Pet Scan on Monday.  I should get the results on Wednesday.  I always insist on having a copy of my reports faxed to me.  Afterall, the report is about me and patients have the right to receive a copy.  Usually I get a copy after the doctor has reviewed it.  Someone dropped the ball with the MRI of my spine, and just faxed it to me.  I was home agonizing while waiting for the test results so it’s just as well that I received the results.  It doesn’t change the outcome. I did have a bone scan apprx. 3 weeks ago which didn’t show anything on the spine but I had back pain so the doctor ordered an MRI which brings me to the present.  I will post and let everyone know how the Pet Scan turns out.  I’m nervous about having it done as it scans the entire body for cancer. Bye, Barbara

Response:

UK medical records are usually sent directly from professional to professional without going through the hands of the patient. . . . I am not sure exactly what the legal rights are today, but certainly the practice is that you can get copies of your records if you have a good reason to need them.

I have to admit that I haven’t tried to verify this except in the most superficial way, but my impression is that in the U.S., one’s health care records technically belong to oneself, not to the health care provider that compiled them.  This doesn’t mean that they must be issued to you automatically, but I gather that they must be made available on request under reasonable terms, whether you have a good reason or are just curious. I know that under HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act), providers are held to very high standards of protection for any personally-identifiable health information, including explicitly getting the subject’s permission in most cases where they are to be shown to someone outside the provider organization.  Regrettably, some providers seem still to be asking us to sign *very* sweeping permissions up front. I always ask for copies of crucial test results.  It takes some study to figure out what they mean in a lot of cases, but it’s definately helped me understand my own situation better.  My medical providers do summarize the results to me, but often leave out things that are interesting if perhaps not vital for me to know.   Given a choice between getting a poor or no explanation of the results *with* a copy of the results, vs. a good explanation & no copy, I’d take the former every time.  Naturally, I’d prefer a *good* explanation *plus* a copy <g . . . . Ann T.

Response:

I work in a hospital, in the care coordination department, If you didn’t have the patient sign one waiver…you would be spending most of you time tracking done the patient for their signature……But we are held to a very high standard of sending information. And I believe the medical records belong to the institution….but you can get access at any time. Alex – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – UK medical records are usually sent directly from professional to professional without going through the hands of the patient. . . . I am not sure exactly what the legal rights are today, but certainly the practice is that you can get copies of your records if you have a good reason to need them. I have to admit that I haven’t tried to verify this except in the most superficial way, but my impression is that in the U.S., one’s health care records technically belong to oneself, not to the health care provider that compiled them.  This doesn’t mean that they must be issued to you automatically, but I gather that they must be made available on request under reasonable terms, whether you have a good reason or are just curious. I know that under HIPAA (Health Insurance Portability & Accountability Act), providers are held to very high standards of protection for any personally-identifiable health information, including explicitly getting the subject’s permission in most cases where they are to be shown to someone outside the provider organization.  Regrettably, some providers seem still to be asking us to sign *very* sweeping permissions up front. I always ask for copies of crucial test results.  It takes some study to figure out what they mean in a lot of cases, but it’s definately helped me understand my own situation better.  My medical providers do summarize the results to me, but often leave out things that are interesting if perhaps not vital for me to know. Given a choice between getting a poor or no explanation of the results *with* a copy of the results, vs. a good explanation & no copy, I’d take the former every time.  Naturally, I’d prefer a *good* explanation *plus* a copy <g . . . . Ann T.

Response:

The test used to diagnose bone mets is bone scan since that was clear I would tend not to worry since that was fine. The MRI was ordered to diagnosis your back pain and the mri would show any nerve impingement. Your oncologist will have  a more definitive answer. Let us know how you make out with your oncologist, Alex "

Response:

Are you saying in England you can’t get a copy of your own report? What happens if you choose to change doctors you can’t bring a copy of your medical record. Techinically in the US most places reserve the right to only release your record when a person, ( a doctor, nurse, medical record adminstrator)  is there to review it in person with you to explain the results. Barbara mentioned in her message she got the report on a Saturday and was probably released by a clerk who doesn’t understand the rules. The way it should have went for Barbara is that the person releasing the record would have  made sure that a professional had reviewed the results and reviewed the record with Barbara before she got a copy of her record. In theory you medical record should have no surprises. Alex

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – I understand why here in UK they don’t give you the reports to read unless there is a compelling reason.  As you see they are written is a jargon which is hard to decipher and strangely gives rise to unfounded fears.  There is nothing more frightening than your imagination.  On the other hand some doctors are overprotective of their information and omit details that are rather important to you the patient.

Response:

No I’m not saying that, I’m saying that you don’t routinely get one, for exactly the reasons you give. You get to discuss the report with a consultant, but in most cases the consultant would read the report and explain the salient factors to you, rather than show you the paper.  We have had a few people coming here with technical reports they don’t understand, the handing out of ‘naked’ reports seems to be fairly commonplace over there, although clearly we all agree that the practice you describe is most desirable. UK medical records are usually sent directly from professional to professional without going through the hands of the patient.  Admittedly this system does lead to more cases of records going astray than is really desirable, and I am sure some patients would take better care of them, although certainly not all. I am not sure exactly what the legal rights are today, but certainly the practice is that you can get copies of your records if you have a good reason to need them.  We have had an entire set copied for a legal case on the request of our solicitor, and an individual report copied for transmission by us to an overseas specialist.  The release had to be approved by the consultant holding the records.  We did also have one classic case where a young registrar apparently couldn’t face giving bad news and tried to hide what was in the report and put a positive ’spin’ on it, while I was reading it upside down at 2m distance on her desk despite her attempts to conceal it. That ended in a row and my wife being transferred to another consultant. While I strongly advocate full disclosure, I would whole heartedly agree that the handing out of technical reports to patients without explanation or support is bad practice and worth complaining about. Tim

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Are you saying in England you can’t get a copy of your own report? What happens if you choose to change doctors you can’t bring a copy of your medical record. Techinically in the US most places reserve the right to only release your record when a person, ( a doctor, nurse, medical record adminstrator)  is there to review it in person with you to explain the results. Barbara mentioned in her message she got the report on a Saturday and was probably released by a clerk who doesn’t understand the rules. The way it should have went for Barbara is that the person releasing the record would have  made sure that a professional had reviewed the results and reviewed the record with Barbara before she got a copy of her record. In theory you medical record should have no surprises. Alex I understand why here in UK they don’t give you the reports to read unless there is a compelling reason.  As you see they are written is a jargon which is hard to decipher and strangely gives rise to unfounded fears.  There is nothing more frightening than your imagination.  On the other hand some doctors are overprotective of their information and omit details that are rather important to you the patient.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Metastatic disease in not excluded…. may also mean that it could be another disease process such as osteoporosis……Did you have bone scan? Good Luck….alex Hi,  I posted here a couple of days ago about insensitive people.  I want to thank all of you for your responses. Today I received a fax report of a MRI I had done this past Sunday.  I have an appointment tomorrow morning with my oncologist and will bring the films with me for him to review. In the mean time, I’m falling apart with anxiety and worry. Perhaps someone is knowledgable in deciphering what this report means.  I will quote what I received. "Images reveal the thoracic vertebral bodies to be maintained.  There is some minimal abnormal signal noted within the posterior vertebral bodies as well as pedicles of T6 and T7 vertebral on the left side. These appear to slightly diminished in signal on the T1 weighted sequences and slightly increased in signal on the T2 weighted sequences.  Metastatic disease in not excluded." If anyone can help me or has had a similar report, please talk to me! What else besides bone mets could it mean?  What is the next step? I know I need to speak with my Onc, and I will tomorrow morning, but right now my husband and I are both mental wrecks. Any input will be gratefully appreciated. Barbara

Yes, I did have a bone scan two weeks ago which came back clear.  My onc went ahead and ordered the MRI because of back pain.  I might add that the back pain I complained about is not in the same area that the MRI indicated possible bone mets.  Needless to say, I’m worried sick and know that I probably will have to go through even more tests, more waiting and more anxiety before I get a definitive answer. Thank you for your input. Barbara

Response:

I understand why here in UK they don’t give you the reports to read unless there is a compelling reason.  As you see they are written is a jargon which is hard to decipher and strangely gives rise to unfounded fears.  There is nothing more frightening than your imagination.  On the other hand some doctors are overprotective of their information and omit details that are rather important to you the patient. It sounds like there is no sign of damage and no solid evidence of any cancer, but the images do not completely exclude it either.  I am not sure about the details but it sounds like there is some variation in bone density visible in the lower rib vertebrae (T6 & T7).  I suppose these might also be due to osteoporosis or osteo-arthritis.  The T1/T2 weighting stuff gives an indication of what sort of tissue or fluid is present in the ‘gaps’, but I don’t know what it implies. The (radiation) oncologist would read this report in conjunction with the bone scan: if that did not show any thoracic hotspots then I doubt if this is a cause for concern (the writer of this report will not have seen the bone scan).  You said the bone scan showed a right tibia hot spot, and that was the area you were having scanned, but this MRI report refers to a scan of your upper back.  ?.  Did the bone scan report mention vertebrae at all? Did the MRI scan your tibia? Tim Jackson

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi,  I posted here a couple of days ago about insensitive people.  I want to thank all of you for your responses. Today I received a fax report of a MRI I had done this past Sunday.  I have an appointment tomorrow morning with my oncologist and will bring the films with me for him to review. In the mean time, I’m falling apart with anxiety and worry. Perhaps someone is knowledgable in deciphering what this report means.  I will quote what I received. "Images reveal the thoracic vertebral bodies to be maintained.  There is some minimal abnormal signal noted within the posterior vertebral bodies as well as pedicles of T6 and T7 vertebral on the left side. These appear to slightly diminished in signal on the T1 weighted sequences and slightly increased in signal on the T2 weighted sequences.  Metastatic disease in not excluded." If anyone can help me or has had a similar report, please talk to me! What else besides bone mets could it mean?  What is the next step? I know I need to speak with my Onc, and I will tomorrow morning, but right now my husband and I are both mental wrecks. Any input will be gratefully appreciated. Barbara

Response:

Metastatic disease in not excluded…. may also mean that it could be another disease process such as osteoporosis……Did you have bone scan? Good Luck….alex

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Hi,  I posted here a couple of days ago about insensitive people.  I want to thank all of you for your responses. Today I received a fax report of a MRI I had done this past Sunday.  I have an appointment tomorrow morning with my oncologist and will bring the films with me for him to review. In the mean time, I’m falling apart with anxiety and worry. Perhaps someone is knowledgable in deciphering what this report means.  I will quote what I received. "Images reveal the thoracic vertebral bodies to be maintained.  There is some minimal abnormal signal noted within the posterior vertebral bodies as well as pedicles of T6 and T7 vertebral on the left side. These appear to slightly diminished in signal on the T1 weighted sequences and slightly increased in signal on the T2 weighted sequences.  Metastatic disease in not excluded." If anyone can help me or has had a similar report, please talk to me! What else besides bone mets could it mean?  What is the next step? I know I need to speak with my Onc, and I will tomorrow morning, but right now my husband and I are both mental wrecks. Any input will be gratefully appreciated. Barbara

Response:

Hi,  I posted here a couple of days ago about insensitive people.  I want to thank all of you for your responses. Today I received a fax report of a MRI I had done this past Sunday.  I have an appointment tomorrow morning with my oncologist and will bring the films with me for him to review. In the mean time, I’m falling apart with anxiety and worry. Perhaps someone is knowledgable in deciphering what this report means.  I will quote what I received. "Images reveal the thoracic vertebral bodies to be maintained.  There is some minimal abnormal signal noted within the posterior vertebral bodies as well as pedicles of T6 and T7 vertebral on the left side. These appear to slightly diminished in signal on the T1 weighted sequences and slightly increased in signal on the T2 weighted sequences.  Metastatic disease in not excluded." If anyone can help me or has had a similar report, please talk to me! What else besides bone mets could it mean?  What is the next step? I know I need to speak with my Onc, and I will tomorrow morning, but right now my husband and I are both mental wrecks. Any input will be gratefully appreciated. Barbara

Response:

In the 1950’s would this type of study be considered to reach a valid conclusion?

It would possibly have some local impact, but papers like this in an obscure European journal would probably not be taken too seriously by doctors in the UK and America, if it reached them at all.. Peter

Response:

(The scary thing about this is that nothing can be concluded from this data, so they might as well put up pictures of cars or something) Anyone doing this therapy would have to do it on the basis of trust and hope. I have asked them for details of the double blind study mentioned, hopefully they will produce these (if indeed it was ever done)

Let me know if you find out any more.   I think they are already shown to be untrustworthy through trying to create the impression of high cure rates in advanced metastatic cancer via this old data.   If they were actually doing this right now they would not be able to conceal all the miracle cures. Peter – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Do you know anyone who has contact with John Anderson MD?. Anth [snip]

Response:

In the 1950’s would this type of study be considered to reach a valid conclusion? (If so then maybe all the figures from those eras on cancer would be wrong?) Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Another view of the Issels paper. Hi Peter, It was amusing to read this ancient gem of German medical wisdom and to brush up my knowledge of the German language. The paper dates from 1959 !!!and is a bit long to translate but here is what I found to be important: It starts with reflections on what is cancer, citing studies from 1930ies ,1940ies, 1950ies, and concluding that cancer is a failure of the immune system (what is partially close to the truth) Thus the immunotherapy has to restore the immune system and also bring the body in balance again. The principle of that therapy is the introduction in the body of anti-tumor antibodies (either in an active or a passive way) Passive is the administration of a cancer ant-serum (e.g. Sarvinal = ??? WB : never heard of that one, must be one those patent German wonder medicines that have disappeared since) For active immunization there are several methods: Inta-cutane implantation of a tumor fragment from the patients own tumor But take care! In some experiments with lyophilised own tumor injections, sometimes the cancer started to grow faster if the dose was too high (Kaliis and NewTon 1949) Even experiments with irradiation in the 30ies are explained as immunotherapy. The future is injection with bacterial products to stimulate the immune reponse. (comment WB: this reminds me of experiments in the 50s scratching large parts of the body and rubbing tuberculine in it, some quacks still do this) Then follow some reflections on the role of cortisone and other hormones. (WB : this was written long before we differentiated hormone dependant tumors) Follows a praise of the Coley-Toxine -Therapy (injection with a brew of streptococci and something that sounds like a chicken soup recipe And then the Issels therapy: Some products are prepared in the Dutch institute for tropical medicine in Leiden (serum enzymes and plasmines) 1. a series of injection with a mix of bacteria, some of them are extracted from tumors 2.biological food, care for the soul, positive thinking 3. blood transfusions and blood washing according the Wehrli method (=???) and now the results: They retrospectively selected cases from the files of the Korthof Dutch university clinic in Leiden (all before 1954) Total of 252 selected out of 1800, see table 1 It is a mix of many different malignancies, but all of them had some form of metastasis or recidive and they compared them with the results of similar cases of the Schwager and Rossolec clinics that were treated with the "immunological" Issel therapy., 242 in total To compare uterine tumors the took the data from the work of Dalicho They looked at the 5 year survival of that group and found it to be 16.6%, or 42 out of 242 that was better than the "normal" therapy. My comment: To compare the figures from a mix of totally different cancers and different hospitals is not very convincing, but it is an interesting view like a time capsule, on how research was done 50 years ago. The intentions were good, the confounding factors and bias were not so well known then. To use this study today to promote a cancer therapy is plainly hilarious. Also on that web site: they were praised by a visiting English professor who cautiously proposed to do a controlled study. I did not find the date when this was proposed or if the study was ever done. The most recent study they cite dates from 1970, and smells also fishy because they compare their successes with world averages , whatever that means. No mention of inclusion -exclusion criteria, intention to treat or whatever. If it looks like a quack, sounds like one…..

Response:

(The scary thing about this is that nothing can be concluded from this data, so they might as well put up pictures of cars or something) Anyone doing this therapy would have to do it on the basis of trust and hope. I have asked them for details of the double blind study mentioned, hopefully they will produce these (if indeed it was ever done) Do you know anyone who has contact with John Anderson MD?. Anth [snip]

Response:

Is it likely for a cancer to go into remission (i.e. no sign of the cancer) (I see a lot of Issels cases are pure long term remissions) Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Another view of the Issels paper. Hi Peter, It was amusing to read this ancient gem of German medical wisdom and to brush up my knowledge of the German language. The paper dates from 1959 !!!and is a bit long to translate but here is what I found to be important: It starts with reflections on what is cancer, citing studies from 1930ies ,1940ies, 1950ies, and concluding that cancer is a failure of the immune system (what is partially close to the truth) Thus the immunotherapy has to restore the immune system and also bring the body in balance again. The principle of that therapy is the introduction in the body of anti-tumor antibodies (either in an active or a passive way) Passive is the administration of a cancer ant-serum (e.g. Sarvinal = ??? WB : never heard of that one, must be one those patent German wonder medicines that have disappeared since) For active immunization there are several methods: Inta-cutane implantation of a tumor fragment from the patients own tumor But take care! In some experiments with lyophilised own tumor injections, sometimes the cancer started to grow faster if the dose was too high (Kaliis and NewTon 1949) Even experiments with irradiation in the 30ies are explained as immunotherapy. The future is injection with bacterial products to stimulate the immune reponse. (comment WB: this reminds me of experiments in the 50s scratching large parts of the body and rubbing tuberculine in it, some quacks still do this) Then follow some reflections on the role of cortisone and other hormones. (WB : this was written long before we differentiated hormone dependant tumors) Follows a praise of the Coley-Toxine -Therapy (injection with a brew of streptococci and something that sounds like a chicken soup recipe And then the Issels therapy: Some products are prepared in the Dutch institute for tropical medicine in Leiden (serum enzymes and plasmines) 1. a series of injection with a mix of bacteria, some of them are extracted from tumors 2.biological food, care for the soul, positive thinking 3. blood transfusions and blood washing according the Wehrli method (=???) and now the results: They retrospectively selected cases from the files of the Korthof Dutch university clinic in Leiden (all before 1954) Total of 252 selected out of 1800, see table 1 It is a mix of many different malignancies, but all of them had some form of metastasis or recidive and they compared them with the results of similar cases of the Schwager and Rossolec clinics that were treated with the "immunological" Issel therapy., 242 in total To compare uterine tumors the took the data from the work of Dalicho They looked at the 5 year survival of that group and found it to be 16.6%, or 42 out of 242 that was better than the "normal" therapy. My comment: To compare the figures from a mix of totally different cancers and different hospitals is not very convincing, but it is an interesting view like a time capsule, on how research was done 50 years ago. The intentions were good, the confounding factors and bias were not so well known then. To use this study today to promote a cancer therapy is plainly hilarious. Also on that web site: they were praised by a visiting English professor who cautiously proposed to do a controlled study. I did not find the date when this was proposed or if the study was ever done. The most recent study they cite dates from 1970, and smells also fishy because they compare their successes with world averages , whatever that means. No mention of inclusion -exclusion criteria, intention to treat or whatever. If it looks like a quack, sounds like one…..

Response:

Another view of the Issels paper. Hi Peter, It was amusing to read this ancient gem of German medical wisdom and to brush up my knowledge of the German language. The paper dates from 1959 !!!and is a bit long to translate but here is what I found to be important: It starts with reflections on what is cancer, citing studies from 1930ies ,1940ies, 1950ies, and concluding that cancer is a failure of the immune system (what is partially close to the truth) Thus the immunotherapy has to restore the immune system and also bring the body in balance again. The principle of that therapy is the introduction in the body of anti-tumor antibodies (either in an active or a passive way) Passive is the administration of a cancer ant-serum (e.g. Sarvinal = ??? WB : never heard of that one, must be one those patent German wonder medicines that have disappeared since) For active immunization there are several methods: Inta-cutane implantation of a tumor fragment from the patients own tumor But take care! In some experiments with lyophilised own tumor injections, sometimes the cancer started to grow faster if the dose was too high (Kaliis and NewTon 1949) Even experiments with irradiation in the 30ies are explained as immunotherapy. The future is injection with bacterial products to stimulate the immune reponse. (comment WB: this reminds me of experiments in the 50s scratching large parts of the body and rubbing tuberculine in it, some quacks still do this) Then follow some reflections on the role of cortisone and other hormones. (WB : this was written long before we differentiated hormone dependant tumors) Follows a praise of the Coley-Toxine -Therapy (injection with a brew of streptococci and something that sounds like a chicken soup recipe And then the Issels therapy: Some products are prepared in the Dutch institute for tropical medicine in Leiden (serum enzymes and plasmines) 1. a series of injection with a mix of bacteria, some of them are extracted from tumors 2.biological food, care for the soul, positive thinking 3. blood transfusions and blood washing according the Wehrli method (=???) and now the results: They retrospectively selected cases from the files of the Korthof Dutch university clinic in Leiden (all before 1954) Total of 252 selected out of 1800, see table 1 It is a mix of many different malignancies, but all of them had some form of metastasis or recidive and they compared them with the results of similar cases of the Schwager and Rossolec clinics that were treated with the "immunological" Issel therapy., 242 in total To compare uterine tumors the took the data from the work of Dalicho They looked at the 5 year survival of that group and found it to be 16.6%, or 42 out of 242 that was better than the "normal" therapy. My comment: To compare the figures from a mix of totally different cancers and different hospitals is not very convincing, but it is an interesting view like a time capsule, on how research was done 50 years ago. The intentions were good, the confounding factors and bias were not so well known then. To use this study today to promote a cancer therapy is plainly hilarious. Also on that web site: they were praised by a visiting English professor who cautiously proposed to do a controlled study. I did not find the date when this was proposed or if the study was ever done. The most recent study they cite dates from 1970, and smells also fishy because they compare their successes with world averages , whatever that means. No mention of inclusion -exclusion criteria, intention to treat or whatever. If it looks like a quack, sounds like one…..

Response:

Ok Peter The ‘chicken soup’ thing sounds like they are trying to culture the bacteria inside the blood? The 5 year survival rates for metastasis range from good to abysmal, but since this study has no ‘control’ (in the same hospital) I can see why you can’t draw any conclusions from this. Thanks for looking into this one Appreciated, Anth

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Another view of the Issels paper. Hi Peter, It was amusing to read this ancient gem of German medical wisdom and to brush up my knowledge of the German language. The paper dates from 1959 !!!and is a bit long to translate but here is what I found to be important: It starts with reflections on what is cancer, citing studies from 1930ies ,1940ies, 1950ies, and concluding that cancer is a failure of the immune system (what is partially close to the truth) Thus the immunotherapy has to restore the immune system and also bring the body in balance again. The principle of that therapy is the introduction in the body of anti-tumor antibodies (either in an active or a passive way) Passive is the administration of a cancer ant-serum (e.g. Sarvinal = ??? WB : never heard of that one, must be one those patent German wonder medicines that have disappeared since) For active immunization there are several methods: Inta-cutane implantation of a tumor fragment from the patients own tumor But take care! In some experiments with lyophilised own tumor injections, sometimes the cancer started to grow faster if the dose was too high (Kaliis and NewTon 1949) Even experiments with irradiation in the 30ies are explained as immunotherapy. The future is injection with bacterial products to stimulate the immune reponse. (comment WB: this reminds me of experiments in the 50s scratching large parts of the body and rubbing tuberculine in it, some quacks still do this) Then follow some reflections on the role of cortisone and other hormones. (WB : this was written long before we differentiated hormone dependant tumors) Follows a praise of the Coley-Toxine -Therapy (injection with a brew of streptococci and something that sounds like a chicken soup recipe And then the Issels therapy: Some products are prepared in the Dutch institute for tropical medicine in Leiden (serum enzymes and plasmines) 1. a series of injection with a mix of bacteria, some of them are extracted from tumors 2.biological food, care for the soul, positive thinking 3. blood transfusions and blood washing according the Wehrli method (=???) and now the results: They retrospectively selected cases from the files of the Korthof Dutch university clinic in Leiden (all before 1954) Total of 252 selected out of 1800, see table 1 It is a mix of many different malignancies, but all of them had some form of metastasis or recidive and they compared them with the results of similar cases of the Schwager and Rossolec clinics that were treated with the "immunological" Issel therapy., 242 in total To compare uterine tumors the took the data from the work of Dalicho They looked at the 5 year survival of that group and found it to be 16.6%, or 42 out of 242 that was better than the "normal" therapy. My comment: To compare the figures from a mix of totally different cancers and different hospitals is not very convincing, but it is an interesting view like a time capsule, on how research was done 50 years ago. The intentions were good, the confounding factors and bias were not so well known then. To use this study today to promote a cancer therapy is plainly hilarious. Also on that web site: they were praised by a visiting English professor who cautiously proposed to do a controlled study. I did not find the date when this was proposed or if the study was ever done. The most recent study they cite dates from 1970, and smells also fishy because they compare their successes with world averages , whatever that means. No mention of inclusion -exclusion criteria, intention to treat or whatever. If it looks like a quack, sounds like one…..

Response:

Steph, You have caught me off guard here. I am not sure what to make of this. Why are you calling me a sicko troll? How does my posting an essay on here offend you or anyone else? I never meant to do anything wrong in here, so if you would kindly inform me on what I did wrong, I’d appreciate it. I jsut came here to get advice, some help, and maybe share a few things of myself with others. I’m a little hurt, now that I know what a troll is, and I dont really know how to react to this. I’m sorry for offending you, Steph. I jsut came here to get some help before I die. Shalom and God Bless, Gabby

: So you are just a sicko troll :

:       My Testosterone-Laden Self :       from my weight lifting days : :       I recently bench-pressed 300 pounds at the gym. This isn’t : Earth-shattering, or anything – most gyms have a few guys who can top that : handily. But still, it’s a personal best, and the "300-Club" is relatively : hard to join. : :       My euphoria over this milestone lasted for a few minutes until I : realized that – in real life – it doesn’t matter at all. : : :       I work as a file manager in the Oncology ward at a hospital in : Reykjavik. I can’t really imagine my boss coming in and saying, "Nice work : on the report, Gabe. Oh, by the way, a large boulder has fallen in the : waiting room. When you get the chance, do you mind pushing it out of the : way? Thanks, I knew you were a team player." : : :       I’m 6′2". So, at first, working out served a practical purpose in : that : people are less likely to bother you if you look like a lightly shaven : silverback. High school is a Darwinian experience. As I get older, though, : the threat of actual physical violence doesn’t seem as ever-present. There : aren’t any Office Bullies pushing me into filing cabinets or holding my : face : to the water cooler. Perhaps they’re in a meeting. : : :       Working out can be addictive, almost a reversed-anorexia. "Okay, I : can : pick up exactly X pounds in steel-bar form, maybe, I’ll try five pounds : more : next week. I am a man of brawn!" – that sort of thing. : : :       To be fair (fair to me, that is) society seems to have embraced the : whole "bigger is better" concept in some ridiculous ways. Men’s shirts : sizes : pretty much start at "medium". Even if you’re 5′3 and weigh 130, chances : are, you’re a medium. And, while there are big and tall stores in every : city, I read recently that there are less than 10 stores IN THE ENTIRE : U.S. : that overtly cater to small men. There’s a huge stigma attached to being : small, for men at least. For women, I think the opposite is true – and : this : leads to its own set of troubles. : : :       Ever hear of the Napoleon Complex? It’s the idea that short people : overcompensate by being aggressive (you see, it’s fine to be tall and : aggressive, but if you’re short and aggressive, you have a psychological : problem). I think it’s a tall-person plot. : : :       I won’t even touch on the whole pickup truck/SUVs craze, except to : say : that the usefulness of these things is vastly overrated, except as : alpha-male displays of status. How many people really NEED something that : can tow 9,000 pounds or carry eight people? Are you running an orphanage : in : Northern Vermont? Okay then, my bad! If not, it seems silly to buy : something : that’s a menace to other drivers and gets 14 miles-to-the-gallon just for : the two or three times a year you may want take a bunch of friends skiing : or : transport furniture. : : :       Should you need help loading the furniture, please note that I can : bench 300. : : : : — : Shalom and God Bless, : Gabby : : : :

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Steph, You have caught me off guard here. I am not sure what to make of this. Why are you calling me a sicko troll? How does my posting an essay on here offend you or anyone else? I never meant to do anything wrong in here, so if you would kindly inform me on what I did wrong, I’d appreciate it. I jsut came here to get advice, some help, and maybe share a few things of myself with others. I’m a little hurt, now that I know what a troll is, and I dont really know how to react to this. I’m sorry for offending you, Steph. I jsut came here to get some help before I die. Shalom and God Bless, Gabby

Response:

 Then help me, steph. Or at lease tellme what I did which is so wrong. Please dont single me out like this with out telling me why. i would only be fair to you in this. shalom and godbless, gabby

:

: Steph, : You have caught me off guard here. I am not sure what to make of this. Why : are you calling me a sicko troll? How does my posting an essay on here : offend you or anyone else? I never meant to do anything wrong in here, so : if : you would kindly inform me on what I did wrong, I’d appreciate it. I jsut : came here to get advice, some help, and maybe share a few things of myself : with others. I’m a little hurt, now that I know what a troll is, and I : dont : really know how to react to this. I’m sorry for offending you, Steph. I : jsut : came here to get some help before I die. : : Shalom and God Bless, : Gabby : : : :

Response:

So you are just a sicko troll

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –       My Testosterone-Laden Self       from my weight lifting days       I recently bench-pressed 300 pounds at the gym. This isn’t Earth-shattering, or anything – most gyms have a few guys who can top that handily. But still, it’s a personal best, and the "300-Club" is relatively hard to join.       My euphoria over this milestone lasted for a few minutes until I realized that – in real life – it doesn’t matter at all.       I work as a file manager in the Oncology ward at a hospital in Reykjavik. I can’t really imagine my boss coming in and saying, "Nice work on the report, Gabe. Oh, by the way, a large boulder has fallen in the waiting room. When you get the chance, do you mind pushing it out of the way? Thanks, I knew you were a team player."       I’m 6′2". So, at first, working out served a practical purpose in that people are less likely to bother you if you look like a lightly shaven silverback. High school is a Darwinian experience. As I get older, though, the threat of actual physical violence doesn’t seem as ever-present. There aren’t any Office Bullies pushing me into filing cabinets or holding my face to the water cooler. Perhaps they’re in a meeting.       Working out can be addictive, almost a reversed-anorexia. "Okay, I can pick up exactly X pounds in steel-bar form, maybe, I’ll try five pounds more next week. I am a man of brawn!" – that sort of thing.       To be fair (fair to me, that is) society seems to have embraced the whole "bigger is better" concept in some ridiculous ways. Men’s shirts sizes pretty much start at "medium". Even if you’re 5′3 and weigh 130, chances are, you’re a medium. And, while there are big and tall stores in every city, I read recently that there are less than 10 stores IN THE ENTIRE U.S. that overtly cater to small men. There’s a huge stigma attached to being small, for men at least. For women, I think the opposite is true – and this leads to its own set of troubles.       Ever hear of the Napoleon Complex? It’s the idea that short people overcompensate by being aggressive (you see, it’s fine to be tall and aggressive, but if you’re short and aggressive, you have a psychological problem). I think it’s a tall-person plot.       I won’t even touch on the whole pickup truck/SUVs craze, except to say that the usefulness of these things is vastly overrated, except as alpha-male displays of status. How many people really NEED something that can tow 9,000 pounds or carry eight people? Are you running an orphanage in Northern Vermont? Okay then, my bad! If not, it seems silly to buy something that’s a menace to other drivers and gets 14 miles-to-the-gallon just for the two or three times a year you may want take a bunch of friends skiing or transport furniture.       Should you need help loading the furniture, please note that I can bench 300. — Shalom and God Bless, Gabby

Response:

      My Testosterone-Laden Self       from my weight lifting days       I recently bench-pressed 300 pounds at the gym. This isn’t Earth-shattering, or anything – most gyms have a few guys who can top that handily. But still, it’s a personal best, and the "300-Club" is relatively hard to join.       My euphoria over this milestone lasted for a few minutes until I realized that – in real life – it doesn’t matter at all.       I work as a file manager in the Oncology ward at a hospital in Reykjavik. I can’t really imagine my boss coming in and saying, "Nice work on the report, Gabe. Oh, by the way, a large boulder has fallen in the waiting room. When you get the chance, do you mind pushing it out of the way? Thanks, I knew you were a team player."       I’m 6′2". So, at first, working out served a practical purpose in that people are less likely to bother you if you look like a lightly shaven silverback. High school is a Darwinian experience. As I get older, though, the threat of actual physical violence doesn’t seem as ever-present. There aren’t any Office Bullies pushing me into filing cabinets or holding my face to the water cooler. Perhaps they’re in a meeting.       Working out can be addictive, almost a reversed-anorexia. "Okay, I can pick up exactly X pounds in steel-bar form, maybe, I’ll try five pounds more next week. I am a man of brawn!" – that sort of thing.       To be fair (fair to me, that is) society seems to have embraced the whole "bigger is better" concept in some ridiculous ways. Men’s shirts sizes pretty much start at "medium". Even if you’re 5′3 and weigh 130, chances are, you’re a medium. And, while there are big and tall stores in every city, I read recently that there are less than 10 stores IN THE ENTIRE U.S. that overtly cater to small men. There’s a huge stigma attached to being small, for men at least. For women, I think the opposite is true – and this leads to its own set of troubles.       Ever hear of the Napoleon Complex? It’s the idea that short people overcompensate by being aggressive (you see, it’s fine to be tall and aggressive, but if you’re short and aggressive, you have a psychological problem). I think it’s a tall-person plot.       I won’t even touch on the whole pickup truck/SUVs craze, except to say that the usefulness of these things is vastly overrated, except as alpha-male displays of status. How many people really NEED something that can tow 9,000 pounds or carry eight people? Are you running an orphanage in Northern Vermont? Okay then, my bad! If not, it seems silly to buy something that’s a menace to other drivers and gets 14 miles-to-the-gallon just for the two or three times a year you may want take a bunch of friends skiing or transport furniture.       Should you need help loading the furniture, please note that I can bench 300. — Shalom and God Bless, Gabby

Response:

Do you live in Iceland? New York? Kingston, Jamaica?

Add this one to the list: He is in fact posting from Dallas According to the headers he is posting from NNTP-Posting-Host: 67.30.37.63 [67.30.37.63] has valid reverse DNS of dialup-67.30.37.63.Dial1.Dallas1.Level3.net Jan

Response:

: Does the movie Fight Club sound familiar?  Kathy J : : If you’re saying that we seem like a bunch of idiots fighting for no reason, I totally agree with you. Thank you for pointing that out. gabby

Gabby, you are a lying, heartless, emotionally retarded troll getting your jollies from upsetting people with cancer. So piss off, and now.

Response:

http://members.tripod.com/~ash52/members-list2.html

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Then help me, steph. Or at lease tellme what I did which is so wrong. Please dont single me out like this with out telling me why. i would only be fair to you in this. shalom and godbless, gabby What kind of cancer do you have, Gabby? Exactly what kind? What treatment have you had? Exactly? Do you live in Iceland? New York? Kingston, Jamaica? The internet has a long memory

Response:

http://www.youreable.com/TwoShare/getPage/05Community/01PenPals/PenPa…

Response:

Does the movie Fight Club sound familiar?  Kathy J

Response:

: Does the movie Fight Club sound familiar?  Kathy J : : If you’re saying that we seem like a bunch of idiots fighting for no reason, I totally agree with you. Thank you for pointing that out. gabby

Response:

Steph,  I live in NY. Just moved back from Iceland.

Well, that is consistent with a post elsewhere: Hey everybody! My name is Gabriel; call me Gabe, Gabby, G-man… anything you wanna. lol I’m 20 years old and I just had a really really  bad accident to my spine this April. And it left me paralyzed about waist  down. I’m still trying to cope; lots of depression and anxiety here… but I’ll rock on. I was deaf until 2 and a half years ago when I had surgery. I’m just looking for some one with whom I cant share my feelings and thoughts, preferably a female. PURELY A PLATONIC RELATIONSHIP!!!!!! I just want a buddy with maybe the same disability i now have. I appreciate all of youwho take the time to read this and i greatly thank those of you who respond. god bless. Location: Reykjavik, Iceland Posted: 9 July 2002

I do find the 300 lbs. bench press a stretch given the above, possible, but… I used to have jamaica on my profile because i just wanted to put it there.

Actually, Gabriel, you said you LIVED there… GABRIEL MY NAME IS GABRIEL. I AM A 17 YEAR OLD MALE FROM KINGSTON JAMAICA. I WANT TO CORRESPOND WITH ANOTHER WHEELCHAIR-BOUND PERSON.THIS HAS JUST RECENTLY HAPPENED TO ME AND I WANT TO HAVE SOME ONE TO TALK TO WHO KNOWS WHAT I AM GOING THROUGH. I WOULD APPRECIATE ANY MALE OR FEMALE AROUND MY AGE OR SO.I ALSO LIKE MUSIC, BASKETBALL, AND GETTING TO KNOW NEW PEOPLE. Is that so wrong? can a person put another country on their profile? It was jsut a profile. And as for my treatments, I have had chemo and radiation. The cancer I have is a malignat melanoma that caused metastatic brain tumors. The melanoma was found in my lungs and it grew about my heart.  Steph why are you singling me out and trying to make me feel inferior? Shalom and Godbless, gabby

Perhaps it is because, given the two posts above – you had to have had TWO separate incidents that put you in a wheelchair…at 20 in April of 2002…but you also said you were a wheelie at 17… Not to mention your posts on several teen groups – you are claiming to be 21 now; So, he is, rather, attempting to cut through all the rather obvious discrepancies to see just who is really posting… Care to clear this up? Paul

Response:

Then help me, steph. Or at lease tellme what I did which is so wrong. Please dont single me out like this with out telling me why. i would only be fair to you in this. shalom and godbless, gabby

What kind of cancer do you have, Gabby? Exactly what kind? What treatment have you had? Exactly? Do you live in Iceland? New York? Kingston, Jamaica? The internet has a long memory

Response:

Steph,  I live in NY. Just moved back from Iceland. I used to have jamaica on my profile because i just wanted to put it there. Is that so wrong? can a person put another country on their profile? It was jsut a profile. And as for my treatments, I have had chemo and radiation. The cancer I have is a malignat melanoma that caused metastatic brain tumors. The melanoma was found in my lungs and it grew about my heart.  Steph why are you singling me out and trying to make me feel inferior? Shalom and Godbless, gabby

:

: Then help me, steph. Or at lease tellme what I did which is so wrong. : Please dont single me out like this with out telling me why. i would only : be : fair to you in this. : : shalom and godbless, : gabby : : : What kind of cancer do you have, Gabby? : Exactly what kind? : What treatment have you had? Exactly? : Do you live in Iceland? New York? Kingston, Jamaica? : : The internet has a long memory : :

Response:

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Then help me, steph. Or at lease tellme what I did which is so wrong. Please dont single me out like this with out telling me why. i would only be fair to you in this. shalom and godbless, gabby What kind of cancer do you have, Gabby? Exactly what kind? What treatment have you had? Exactly? Do you live in Iceland? New York? Kingston, Jamaica? The internet has a long memory

Oooops! Busted! *Very* nice pickup. There must be something to eatin’ them loonies at the breakfast table, Herr Doktor. And I hereby retract all those nasty things I’ve said about you in the past . Lowkey – the only labrat known for tipping his hat….

Response:

You guys are have so much sanity and healthy going on up there … Ken Hayes is in political refugee status protected by the Canadian Government for being politically persecuted by Bush for medical marijuana. Over a 1000 plants is a federal death penality … same as assassinating a world leader like a president – death penality. Whoopie do – really stops them with fear for the past 200 years … and they just do not get it. Bush and his burka dick head christians are such a pill making things more ill. When I get a chance to visit Canada again – I will swing on by and have toke with my friends. sumbuddie who cares – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Jump in the car. Head north to Canuckistan. Take a/the Idaho exit into BC, head towards the city of Nelson. Once there you should enquire on the location of the compassion club. Bring your doctors prescrition or proof of medical condition.  If you have no money others will share with you. Peace Utopi

Response:

Please guys … we need help over here in California … Bush has been very harsh and misplaced with abusing cancer and AIDS patients as well as their caregivers who are nursing them into the grave … Please call your Republican Senator and Represenative … have them stop this insanity. Leave Cancer patients alone – some of them are long term survivors and drugs after 20 years run out and your liver shuts down … the only thing left is a bullet (maybe you want to bite it for a while and see how that works) or medical marijuana. White Mans medicine of cut – poison – burn only does so much and to some part of the population this herbal remedy works, and it is not deadly … the Lethal Dose 50 is 1,500 pounds consumed in 15 minutes. sumbuddie asking for help big time … thanks for doing what you can do. malignant and metastatic thyroid cancer 1976, Ukiah Calif. Alan B. Mac Farlane

Response:

Jump in the car. Head north to Canuckistan. Take a/the Idaho exit into BC, head towards the city of Nelson. Once there you should enquire on the location of the compassion club. Bring your doctors prescrition or proof of medical condition.  If you have no money others will share with you. Peace Utopi – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Please guys … we need help over here in California … Bush has been very harsh and misplaced with abusing cancer and AIDS patients as well as their caregivers who are nursing them into the grave … Please call your Republican Senator and Represenative … have them stop this insanity. Leave Cancer patients alone – some of them are long term survivors and drugs after 20 years run out and your liver shuts down … the only thing left is a bullet (maybe you want to bite it for a while and see how that works) or medical marijuana. White Mans medicine of cut – poison – burn only does so much and to some part of the population this herbal remedy works, and it is not deadly … the Lethal Dose 50 is 1,500 pounds consumed in 15 minutes. sumbuddie asking for help big time … thanks for doing what you can do. malignant and metastatic thyroid cancer 1976, Ukiah Calif. Alan B. Mac Farlane

Response:

Hi there ,I live in Calgary Alberta Canada. Today i went for the exam with the camera and the doctor said i had a lot of growth so he is sending me to a specialist in 4 days,worst news of my life. He really didn’t say if the growth was cancer but what else could it be? Does anyone know if this can actually be fixed with surgery?? I’m 41 years old and very worried. Thanks to all replys;

    Rob, don’t be worried until you know what you have, =if= you have cancer. If you need our help =after= you find out what’s what, please give us the "stage" of cancer, and where all your known tumors are. That will enable us to help you so much!     CAT

Response:

Hi there ,I live in Calgary Alberta Canada. Today i went for the exam with the camera and the doctor said i had a lot of growth so he is sending me to a specialist in 4 days,worst news of my life. He really didn’t say if the growth was cancer but what else could it be? Does anyone know if this can actually be fixed with surgery?? I’m 41 years old and very worried.

It’s very possible that the growths are benign, and not cancerous. Lots of people get polyps in their colon and rectum. They can often be removed during a colonoscopy if they’re small enough. If some of the polyps are cancerous, it’s possible that you can be cured by surgery, if the cancer has been caught at an early stage. Have you had any signs of colorectal cancer? Blood in stool, ribbon-like stool? It’s easier said than done, but take things one day at a time; try not to anticipate the worst possible outcome, but the best one. I live in Vancouver and have metastatic rectal cancer. Feel free to e-mail me if you’d like more information, or just to vent. Michele

Response:

Hi there ,I live in Calgary Alberta Canada. Today i went for the exam with the camera and the doctor said i had a lot of growth so he is sending me to a specialist in 4 days,worst news of my life. He really didn’t say if the growth was cancer but what else could it be? Does anyone know if this can actually be fixed with surgery?? I’m 41 years old and very worried. Thanks to all replys; Rob Hi Rob, CAT said in a prevous post: "Not all masses are cancer, not all "cancer" is "malignant"…. It could entirely possibly be a benign growth. Don’t get upset before you are sure you have something to get upset about. Worrying takes years off of your life….    CAT" I think this is advice worth heeding.  Let’s hope for the best….and not worry till you know something for sure.  You’re in my thoughts. Trish

Response:

Hi there ,I live in Calgary Alberta Canada. Today i went for the exam with the camera and the doctor said i had a lot of growth so he is sending me to a specialist in 4 days,worst news of my life. He really didn’t say if the growth was cancer but what else could it be? Does anyone know if this can actually be fixed with surgery?? I’m 41 years old and very worried. Thanks to all replys; Rob

Response:

Ok so remember how I said life was good? Well… take that back. A little history.. thursday afternoon my mom was rushed to the hospital with severe abdominal pains, friday they found a mass and friday night she went into surgery, they removed an ovary, a tube, a mass, and 200cc of fluid.  Saturday morning they told us it was a removed cyst and we were all relieved, at least it wasn’t cancer.  So tonight I went over to visit her at the hospital and she got a phone call from the doctor.. the pathology reports showed a malignancy.. it’s cancer I’m glad I was there with her when she got the call.  We called my dad and brother and they came over right away and we all cried together.  My eyes hurt from crying. Somebody tell me it’s going to be ok? Jen

Response:

((((((((((((((( jennifur ))))))))))))))))) scary shit.  sorry you’re going thru it. azure

– Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ok so remember how I said life was good? Well… take that back. A little history.. thursday afternoon my mom was rushed to the hospital with severe abdominal pains, friday they found a mass and friday night she went into surgery, they removed an ovary, a tube, a mass, and 200cc of fluid. Saturday morning they told us it was a removed cyst and we were all relieved, at least it wasn’t cancer.  So tonight I went over to visit her at the hospital and she got a phone call from the doctor.. the pathology reports showed a malignancy.. it’s cancer I’m glad I was there with her when she got the call.  We called my dad and brother and they came over right away and we all cried together.  My eyes hurt from crying. Somebody tell me it’s going to be ok? Jen

Response:

Hi Jenni … Mom wanna live = she gonna have to change her life. Not a new leaf change – but the whole damm tree gotta be turned over. A massed tumor – likely matted down to the surrounding tissue is worrisome. Mom needs a lot of recovery .. and detoxing – its hard work too. She might be to set in her ways to wake up … so be prepared for the worse – but work for the best. As Kermit the Frog said – Time goes fun when you are having flies. Oh Jenni – I am a malignant and metastatic cancer survivor – since 1976. so I got a little experience with it. sumbuddie who cares – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ok so remember how I said life was good? Well… take that back. A little history.. thursday afternoon my mom was rushed to the hospital with severe abdominal pains, friday they found a mass and friday night she went into surgery, they removed an ovary, a tube, a mass, and 200cc of fluid.  Saturday morning they told us it was a removed cyst and we were all relieved, at least it wasn’t cancer.  So tonight I went over to visit her at the hospital and she got a phone call from the doctor.. the pathology reports showed a malignancy.. it’s cancer I’m glad I was there with her when she got the call.  We called my dad and brother and they came over right away and we all cried together.  My eyes hurt from crying. Somebody tell me it’s going to be ok? Jen

—–= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =—– http://www.newsfeeds.com – The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! —–==  Over 80,000 Newsgroups – 16 Different Servers! =—–

Response:

Hi Jen.  It’s going to be ok.  It will.  They’ll get rid of what they need to and she’ll be fit as a fit fiddle before you know it. – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Ok so remember how I said life was good? Well… take that back. A little history.. thursday afternoon my mom was rushed to the hospital with severe abdominal pains, friday they found a mass and friday night she went into surgery, they removed an ovary, a tube, a mass, and 200cc of fluid.  Saturday morning they told us it was a removed cyst and we were all relieved, at least it wasn’t cancer.  So tonight I went over to visit her at the hospital and she got a phone call from the doctor.. the pathology reports showed a malignancy.. it’s cancer I’m glad I was there with her when she got the call.  We called my dad and brother and they came over right away and we all cried together.  My eyes hurt from crying. Somebody tell me it’s going to be ok? Jen

Response:

Hello, Cancer is not the grim decease it used to be.  There are so many people that survive cancer these days. I believe now that it is caught there is a good chance that all will be well.  My mother has cancer too and she has been doing well.  She told me that today she has been getting stronger every day.  I will keep you mom in my prayers. Romana – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -Ok so remember how I said life was good? Well… take that back. A little history.. thursday afternoon my mom was rushed to the hospital with severe abdominal pains, friday they found a mass and friday night she went into surgery, they removed an ovary, a tube, a mass, and 200cc of fluid.  Saturday morning they told us it was a removed cyst and we were all relieved, at least it wasn’t cancer.  So tonight I went over to visit her at the hospital and she got a phone call from the doctor.. the pathology reports showed a malignancy.. it’s cancer I’m glad I was there with her when she got the call.  We called my dad and brother and they came over right away and we all cried together.  My eyes hurt from crying. Somebody tell me it’s going to be ok? Jen

Response:

Well I called my therapist and I’m going to see her on Monday.  Don’t know how I feel about going back after I had quit, but I just need someone to talk to about this And I still need to know how to get in the chat!!

Response:

Well I called my therapist and I’m going to see her on Monday.  Don’t know how I feel about going back after I had quit, but I just need someone to talk to about this And I still need to know how to get in the chat!!

not sure how to be of help, other than directing you to upload Mirc, go to Sorcery net, and enter the #aar chatroom, or Asarian net and enter #cave. it’s been pretty thin lately and it’s quite possible there won’t be anyone there.  i think the busiest times are around 8-9 PM central time.  sometimes when that happens, and i need to talk, i post a Ping on the ng and quite often some people will see it and enter the chat room. i think lately there have been Sunday scheduled chats on Asarian, around 2 pm Central time, that is the one time you can be sure of finding people there. azure

Response:

Ooooh thank you! Channel names! That’s what I needed! Jen

Response: