I have to say, the article itself is also not very "scientific" though. The doctors mentioned that chemotherapy would result in a 50% long-term survival rate. S

I have to say, the article itself is also not very "scientific" though. The doctors mentioned that chemotherapy would result in a 50% long-term survival rate. So it is entirely possible that he could have gone with chemotherapy, and still died in the end. In the same way, the fact that he went with alternative therapies and died doesn't "prove" that alternative therapies are all effectless. Though I also believe that in the case of cancer, until a definitive cure comes out, chemotherapy is probably as good as we can get, and I don't really assume any ill intent on the part of the people who invented it, even though it's perfectly understandable that people (even including Steve Jobs) try to seek for alternatives when it doesn't work out. But I do think that it is not entirely meritless to keep a healthy dose of skepticism on the drug industry, especially given precedents that are plain to see such as the rampant opioid crisis, as well as the dubious practice of using antidepressants on juveniles etc. etc.