Re: Should we remove a left kidney with a tumor if pulmonary lymph nodes are enlarged?

From: Peter Moran (moringa_at_gil.com.au)
Date: 11/18/04 

Date: Fri, 19 Nov 2004 08:02:06 +1000

"Mary Fisher" <mary.fisher@zetnet.co.uk> wrote in message
news:419bbcc4$0$2650$4c56ba96@master.news.zetnet.net...
>
> "Eva" <EvaDStructionNO@NOverizon.net> wrote in message
> news:EkOmd.12311$tI3.11411@trndny01...
>>
>> "Peter Moran" <moringa@gil.com.au> wrote in message
>> news:419ba622$0$463$61c65585@uq-127creek-reader-03.brisbane.pipenetworks.com.au...
>>>
>>> I don't think "cure" and :"in the clear" are daft, in the right context.
>>> You are to all intents and purposes
>
> What on Earth does 'to all intents and purposes' mean? It's not definite.
>
> To tell someone s/he is cured or clear is cruel. .

I suspect you are referring to a specific context, where this may well be
true.. It would help if you explained further what kind of cancer patient
you have in mind. In medicine everything is about context.

If, on the other hand, you are denying that there is any worthwhile cure
rate of cancer overall, that is even crueller. Good prognosis patients
should not be made to live in constant dread of something that will probably
never happen.

Many "alternative" medical writings promote such pessimism. The reader may
not realise that the authors have in mind metastatic cancer, wherein the
prognosis is indeed very poor for most . You have to go and look at a lot
of data to learn what happens to the 50-60% of patients with non-metastatic
cancer - not likely to happen if you hate doctors, are suspicious of
medicine generally, and (typically) have little comprehension of the subject
matter to begin with.

Unfortunately, excessive pessimism arising from such over-generalisation
discourages the early diagnosis, screening and thorough treatment of
primary cancers. That is the key to success with many. I have previously
posted a somewhat gruesome site showing some of the outcomes of late or
inadequate treatment.

Peter Moran
>
>