4 ms·
The standard treatment of cancer forty years ago meant very aggressive chemotherapy, radiation, and radical surgery. Many have reduced quality of life afterward
by noobermin 3y ago
The standard treatment of cancer forty years ago meant very aggressive chemotherapy, radiation, and radical surgery. Many have reduced quality of life afterwards, think having to walk with help or having brain fog for the rest of your life when for all intents and purposes, you were okay a few months before. Not being able to do strenuous chores like lifting a box off the floor. That is the nature of treatment after early detection, usually when cancer is discovered during an infection or with symptoms, it's too late. In the cases discussed above, early detection of mild cancers usually don't mean the patient has a poor quality of life at that time and would actually experience a drop in their QoL from the treatment itself.
Cancer treatment to this day is not magic, it's not like taking a pill other than in extremely rare cases. You should spend time looking at cancer statistics, the oft mentioned statistics state death rates are a result of "cancer or cancer treatments" because the treatments take a toll on your body and leave you disabled or infirmed for the rest of your life. Until we have better treatments, which are coming, yes if a tumor will go away on its own you best believe it this is better for the quality of life for patients. In fact, the people who stand to lose the most from such a re-diagnosis would be drug manufacturers or even hospitals who can charge a lot for radical surgery and hospices who care for patients undergoing chemo.
- ahi 3y agoFor unfortunate personal reasons I have been reading studies on rectal cancer. Rectal cancer is terminal if untreated and curable if treated, but still 20-30% of patients don't even complete radiation and chemo treatment. Standard of care is localized radiation, poison in pill and IV form, and hope the cancer dies before the patient. At 40, this is rough. At 80, I might decide to call it game over. Only in the last decade, they have downplayed surgery with ~40% dodging it altogether when chemo-radiation provides total response. Surgery typically means at least a temporary colostomy and is high risk for older patients so the incentive was there to avoid it. Modern medicine is very pro-treatment and it takes a lot of 5 year studies to get them to dial things back.
- greedo 3y agoI had colorectal surgery for a 5cm tumor at 41. I had two very young kids and wife, so opting out wasn't really a serious option. I'm pretty glad how things turned out, all things considered but knowing how tough those years of treatment and surgery were, there's no chance in hell I'd go through it at 80. I lost my father to lung cancer at 85, and his last year of fighting it really hit hard on his quality of life. He thought he was going to beat it though.