A friend of mine has been diagnosed with cancer and given a year to live.
I have a few questions if you'd be willing to answer.
A friend of mine has been diagnosed with cancer and given a year to live.
I have a few questions if you'd be willing to answer.
Oh bugger .
Put on a damn big smile and make the most of the time , they havn't got a lot of it left , but you can give up plenty of yours for them .
These guys http://www.webmd.com/a_to_z_guide/default.htm have a pretty good, layman-understandable "A to Z" guide,if you want to do some independent research.
Sorry about your friend.
Be well. Do good. Keep in touch.
Tribesman: sadly that won't be possible due to unfurling drama but it would be nice.
Kukri: cheers but I'm really looking for answers to a couple of specific questions.
Which I'll list here:
1. I have heard that smoking whilst suffering from cancer reduces your chances of recovery; does being around a chainsmoker most of the time do the same.
2. Is chemotherapy given to sufferers who are not expected to survive?
Is it a signal of faint hope or is just, say, to shrink any tumour that is causing discomfort?
Yes.1. I have heard that smoking whilst suffering from cancer reduces your chances of recovery; does being around a chainsmoker most of the time do the same.
It can make the person survive longer. There is always hope, and the state of mind of the person is always very important.2. Is chemotherapy given to sufferers who are not expected to survive?
Is it a signal of faint hope or is just, say, to shrink any tumour that is causing discomfort?
Last edited by Grey_Fox; 12-16-2005 at 00:40.
cheers Grey Fox,
I need to go yell at a heavy smoker now.
Cigarettes are carcinogenic, meaning it increases the risk of cancer so, yes.Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff
There's always hope. But remember, cancer are simply cells dividing out of control. Once it spreads all over the body, it will be hard to recover from it.2. Is chemotherapy given to sufferers who are not expected to survive?
Is it a signal of faint hope or is just, say, to shrink any tumour that is causing discomfort?
Bob Marley | Burning Spear | Robots In Disguise | Esperanza Spalding
Sue Denim (Robots In Disguise) | Sue Denim (2)
"Can you explain why blue looks blue?" - Francis Crick
I'm going through Qu 2 at the moment with my mum, who has advanced bowel cancer.
I'm not a medic, but I've been learning fast. My impression is everyone's disease is different. I studied cancer as part of my degree, (biochemically not medically) and as soon as we got the diagnosis and were told it was inoperable I was onto the NICE website to look up the threatments and survivial rates (5% at five years, median survivial from diagnosis 5-9 months, that one was a real pisser)
So, although I kept it to myself, I assumed the chemo was just for the sake of having something to do, and as soon as the side effects got bad it would be best to stop and let nature take its course. But that just shows a little knowledge is a dangerous thing. After all, one in twenty people do survive, and if they all had the attittude that they were just waiting to die then they wouldn't, would they? Mum's attitude has been that the drugs WILL shrink the tumours until they are operable and she WILL then survive. Its that state of mind thing.
So I'm glad I kept my mouth shut. Depends on your mates personality of course but my advice now is that there is always hope the chemo may do something wonderful, after all, he may respond massively well to it, they don't know til they try.
Incidentally on drugs there are new monoclonal drugs about that are being clinically trialed, I don't think they are suitable for everyone but he might see if he can get on a trial, you have them alongside the standard drugs so there is nothing to lose. Google "avastin", although that's just a brand name and there is another one that is basically the same.
"The only thing I've gotten out of this thread is that Navaros is claiming that Satan gave Man meat. Awesome." Gorebag
cheers EA. Good to hear that your mum isn't taking it lying down.
Also, re the smoking point.
Quietus: What I was asking really was this:
I know that smoke contains carcinogens etc. but I was flicking through some news a few weeks ago and saw a headline about smoking interfering with cancer recovery, as in if someone has cancer and smokes away through their treatment then it is less likely to be succesful.
I would assume that this would also apply to second hand smoke if somebody in that condition was usually in the company of a chain smoker.
So, in that case, can somebody give me a definitive answer on whether smoking harms any recovery (rather than just causing the illness) or not?
Because I do not want to get this wrong and make a tit out of myself.
One of my Mum's collegues is going through all this, it's pretty grim.
Yes. Smoking and being exposed to second-hand smoke harms the recovery from any disease, never mind cancer. There are reasons smoking is prohibited in hospitals besides the inherent danger of smoking in an oxygen-rich environment.Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff
cheers again.
I am a Radiation Therapist, and Certified Medical Dosimetrist...meaning I treat cancer patients. Your questions, which I'm sure seem pertinent to you, are too broad in scope, and misdirected from the question you should be asking, "is it terminal or manageable?"...sorry.Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff
The most important question I have is, what type of Cancer? Followed closely by, what stage has it been classified? Stage IV Pancreatic cancer is for all intents and purposes a death sentence, for example. Meanwhile Stage I True vocal cord cancer has a 95% cure rate.
To answer your questions:
1. Smoking reduces the oxygen exchange rate. Oxygen is a radio-sensitizer (radiation works better in an oxygen rich environment), ergo it would be better to not smoke. However, if your friend is late-stage then let him/her do whatever makes them feel comfortable. Smokers often say "I've already got cancer, why should I stop now and feel all agitated?"... if they're being treated palliatively then they're right.
If your friend is a non-smoker living with a chain smoker then the chain smoker is doing your friend a disservice.
2. Chemotherapy is optimised for systemic treatment of cancer. It flows through the bloodstream attacking rapidly dividing cells (that's why some chemo agents make you lose your hair, or make you nauseated). Obviously some forms of cancer can only be treated this way, think leukemia (generally speaking), whilst other cancers are chemo-irrelevant, like vocal cord (no vascularity).
Your friend being advised to undergo chemo can have numerous numerous meanings. Since I don't know what form of cancer it could simply be the only viable treatment option ( no nexus). It may also be that the doctor wants to do chemo in combination with radiation therapy (known nexus, but with metastic disease, or a high probability of mets). Chemo can also be used palliatively, but only if it somehow improves the quality of life (think pain control or relief of immediate life threatening symptom).
Cancer doesn't have to be a death sentence. Most people survive, those that don't often have many years of quality.
All we are saying....is give peas a chance - Jolly Green Giant
cheers Black Ship.
I'm sad to say that my friend has pancreatic cancer. I don't think it's stage 4 yet but it's also not been caught really early (which I understand is quite a common problem with this particlar affliction) but I'm still hopeful for them.
Friend is a non-smoker, living with a heavy smoker (whom everybody considers to be an inconsiderate, selfish a***hole).
Bookmarks