> The issue is around bellicose metaphors in oncology. Translation: You seem to be claiming that "the issue" is about hostile rhetoric regarding the study and

> The issue is around bellicose metaphors in oncology. Translation: You seem to be claiming that "the issue" is about hostile rhetoric regarding the study and treatment of tumors. > While some people respond to that language, many do not. I'm not understanding what you are trying to say here. Do we not all respond to hostile rhetoric in unique ways? When you say that someone "does not respond", surely you mean something else? > In particular, in some studies it increases feelings of guilt regarding the transition from active to palliative care in situations where the malignancy is not responding to active treatment or where the patient doesn’t want to accept the adverse effects of treatment, as in “Oh, you’re giving up?” When you say that "in some studies it increases feelings of guilt", what is the "it" that you are referring to exactly?