An Informed Decision:
Quite a few people, on hearing of my cancer, express open alarm because I have rejected conventional medicine, preferring instead the alternative option. I find however, that more often than not, these people do not have a logical argument for their sentiments. Seemingly, they have a blind faith in the medical fraternity doing the right thing for them.

I wonder though, could this be because they are afraid of the very word itself - having been “dumbed down” by the contradictory and confusing rhetoric put out by the drug companies and the medical fraternity - and finding it all too difficult to comprehend? A consequence of which is succumbing to the socially perceived horrors of cancer in all its forms.

Or is it because most people don’t think too much about the specifics of cancer, unless or until, they come into direct contact with it?

It appears to me that a large number of cancer victims, having been understandably shocked by the original diagnosis and thoroughly dismayed by the subsequent prognosis, are totally bewildered by it all and fall deep into a quagmire of fear and confusion. The unfortunate result, invariably, is absolute dependence upon their doctor for all advice and future direction.

Or as a colleague mused recently “they jump on the conveyor belt direct from surgery to cemetery”.

This then, when we know that within the medical profession world-wide there is much discussion and argument as to the: causes of prostate cancer; accurate diagnosis; treatment methodology; likely side effects and, probable outcomes. This being the case, each man must surely therefor take full control and active responsibility for his own health and wellbeing, together with all applicable decision making processes. Or am I being too idealistic here?

What must be understood is that the clinical outcome of many, if not all, the medical solutions available, are just as likely to be worse than that of enduring the cancer itself. I believe that oftentimes it is arguable that the “do nothing”, or the “watchful waiting” approach is a lot more sound than medical intervention.

It is worth remembering that prostate cancer is slow growing and diagnosis itself very subjective, so in my view, there is no rush to make decisions. Besides, statistically speaking, medical intervention does not offer any guarantees as to the future and only minimal benefit in terms of longevity, which is very marginal indeed. And even then, only with a greatly reduced quality of life.
I am somewhat amused when I hear or read statements from doctors boasting that most patients die with prostate cancer - not of it. Could that possibly be because the treatment given has severely damaged the patients immune system, perhaps to the point where he was prone to almost any disease that came along?

All up, there is no right or wrong decision. Decisions must take into account the diagnosis, prognosis, treatment options and possible outcomes, together with an individual’s general health and personal circumstances. However, the ultimate decision making process must itself be based on being ‘well informed’ as to all the available options and likely outcomes - both conventional and alternative.

Only then can one take responsibility for one’s own health and future well being.

end/

This entry was posted on Thursday, October 26th, 2006 at 9:03 am and is filed under My Meanderings Pt111. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.