|Whole grains, that's what I need|
I'm liking the online Cancer Survivor's Network. Though many of the stories are horrible, the people are very encouraging, and it is lived experience rather than data. Found this book on there this morning. The "Tips for Recovery" look good: Outsmart Your Cancer.
I do not believe anyone who claims they can cure cancer. I don't doubt that by doing unusual things - and against all odds - some people completely recover. But I think it is very difficult to identify the exact reason for the recovery. And even if it were possible to say exactly why, one person's solution isn't necessarily another's.
All the 'cures' I have read about rely exclusively on anecdotal evidence, but fail to mention, well, death. So all these miracle treatments with a 100% success rate for each of the hundreds of kinds of cancer have simply been crushed by the FDA? I might have confidence in alternatives if there were real studies, real data. Which reminds me of something Jack Donaghy says on 30 Rock: “There are many kinds of intelligence. Practical, emotional. And then there’s, uh, actual intelligence, which is what I’m talking about.” (I love that show!)
Anyway, knee-jerk reactions from the different poles of medicine seem to kick both ways. It's confusing to go to a healer who is against chemotherapy in some way. The acupuncturist I went to before my diagnosis seemed to think chemo is more likely to kill you than anything else. That's one thing that's so great about Misha Cohen. She really understands what Western doctors do for people with cancer and how to support that process while minimizing harm.
And some oncologists are not sensitive to whether they may be creating a situation in which the medicine creates more suffering than it alleviates. Alternative treatments are not going to leave you disabled...The idea of 'complementary' medicine seems more useful than 'alternative', in that you hopefully get the best of both worlds without totally relying entire on either.