Dec 28, 2012 - 5:16 pm
First of all, no word on my CT of the lung scan, so this has nothing to do with my health status.
I don't know if this is more of a question or just a statement, maybe it's a bit of both. But here it is.
Lung Mets: I continue to hear from ALL the doctors I speak to that lung mets from H&N is "rare" I even got a % from one doctor one time that said 4%. Remember I'm a stats kind of guy so I have certainly looked and looked and looked, but can't seem to find anything as far as stats.
YET, on CSN and many other boards what I actually "see" vs. what the doctors "say" just don't seem to add up.
Anybody else get that same feeling / see that same thing? I understand that just adding up the number of people on the H&N forum and making a % out of who has lung mets and who does not is not scientific....but seriously....I just don't find the word "rare" viable.
The doctor I saw in Seattle this past month was even able to tell me that "once past the two year mark your recurrence rate for your cancer is only 2-3 people out of 100 (so that makes it 2-3%) wheras in the first two years we have all heard the % of recurrence. And that figure seems to hold up about correct...so why the big disconnect (in my opinon) of the lung mets numbers?