observation based conclusions. -and questions of their validity

california_artist
california_artist Member Posts: 816 Member
in Uterine/Endometrial Cancer #1
I seem to remember that the argument that cigarette smoking did not cause cancer, put forth by the tobacco companies for decades, were based on the no trial was done mantro, and how could mere observation really prove that smoking is the cause of lung cancer, people couldn't prove it, right. So, those money grabbers got away with killing people for decades. Not too many volunteers for that study. Now, studies have been done. Or have they? In either case, most will grant that they would be better off not smoking. . Anyone wanna start smoking again to see if it does cause cancer? Think of the people who died while that fiasco was going on? Yikes.

In regards to cancer-
Things that might stave off cancer. Proof positive? maybe not. Reasonable enough observation to consider it might? yerp.


Similar situation with lots of areas where it appears that something will help. I am willing to give it a go --especially if it looks like funding for the research my never materialize.

I guess I'm trying to say, try not to be swayed from attempting something you feel could lengthen your life, simply because someone wants you to wait for the study to get funded, run its phase one, two and three and trials, and then get the FDA approval, which the FDA will only grant to "drugs" and not natural substances, so the dang thing is never going to get funded unless some group of concerned people make it their goal to see the subject in question does get some money.

Anywho, I'm going to think on the things I've learned of here and elsewhere and draw the best conclusions I can, for me, given my circumstances, and act accordingly. You can wait for the paper to be published that proves x, y, or z, conclusively, or you can... well, you can decide how you want to proceed.

Here's wishing you all the best and then some for good measure.

all we can all do is keep thinking about what we know and listen to what other's have to offer and think about that stuff. Then just go watch a good comedy and laugh, laugh, laugh.

Did you know that exhaling helps your body to get rid of weak acids. And laughter in general is just good for the soul. I do believe we are doing swimmingly swell.

My love to you all,

Claudia

Comments

  • fearlesshoneybadger
    fearlesshoneybadger Member Posts: 9
    #2
    Blinded me with science (SCIENCE!)
    So many thought-provoking posts Claudia!! My mind has been churning all weekend.

    I have difficulty weighing in on some of the discussions because I get caught up in the minutiae of the science of cancer (well, the process of science in general).

    One of the strongest mixed messages received since diagnosis is that doing x, y, z will stave off recurrence or progression and not doing these same things will ensure or possibly hasten demise. It's a bit mind-numbing at times and I don't think the issue is black and white.

    If cancer development = genes + environment + other* then we cannot look to any single study as providing *the* answer to the equation. It's not that simple.

    Near-open access to cutting edge research via conference abstracts, medical journal articles, and in-progress trials and research means we have lots and lots of information about our medical condition and potential treatment options (often more information than our medical providers).

    It is not responsible interpretation of science to point out single studies (regardless of their source) and proclaim "AHA! A solution to our problems!" Can this be promising research? Absolutely! Should we keep our eye on this work to see how it develops? Absolutely! Should we jump on board and follow the recommendations? I honestly don't know. The field of translational research (taking bench science and applying it to real people in a timely fashion) is trying to help bridge these gaps.

    I'm more persuaded by carefully controlled studies (correlational or experimental) which ask good questions, have sound methodology, and sensible interpretations. I'm less swayed by data from people who won't recognize the limitations of their work and/or proclaim "WE'VE FOUND THE CURE!" (buy my product/book/newsletter). I admit that this is my bias of the world and that each person has to find her way.

    I leave my comments with this last thought: There are sound reasons why MD Anderson and other researchers chose, for example, curcumin vs. something like PrugX ("frequency enhanced water" supplment recommended by cancerfightingstrategies.com) to address in their translational research program.

    -Karen
  • Rewriter
    Rewriter Member Posts: 493 Member
    #3
    fearlesshoneybadger said:

    Blinded me with science (SCIENCE!)
    So many thought-provoking posts Claudia!! My mind has been churning all weekend.

    I have difficulty weighing in on some of the discussions because I get caught up in the minutiae of the science of cancer (well, the process of science in general).

    One of the strongest mixed messages received since diagnosis is that doing x, y, z will stave off recurrence or progression and not doing these same things will ensure or possibly hasten demise. It's a bit mind-numbing at times and I don't think the issue is black and white.

    If cancer development = genes + environment + other* then we cannot look to any single study as providing *the* answer to the equation. It's not that simple.

    Near-open access to cutting edge research via conference abstracts, medical journal articles, and in-progress trials and research means we have lots and lots of information about our medical condition and potential treatment options (often more information than our medical providers).

    It is not responsible interpretation of science to point out single studies (regardless of their source) and proclaim "AHA! A solution to our problems!" Can this be promising research? Absolutely! Should we keep our eye on this work to see how it develops? Absolutely! Should we jump on board and follow the recommendations? I honestly don't know. The field of translational research (taking bench science and applying it to real people in a timely fashion) is trying to help bridge these gaps.

    I'm more persuaded by carefully controlled studies (correlational or experimental) which ask good questions, have sound methodology, and sensible interpretations. I'm less swayed by data from people who won't recognize the limitations of their work and/or proclaim "WE'VE FOUND THE CURE!" (buy my product/book/newsletter). I admit that this is my bias of the world and that each person has to find her way.

    I leave my comments with this last thought: There are sound reasons why MD Anderson and other researchers chose, for example, curcumin vs. something like PrugX ("frequency enhanced water" supplment recommended by cancerfightingstrategies.com) to address in their translational research program.

    -Karen

    Does my heart good
    not to mention my body and overall health, that we are having these types of discussions. I am so very grateful to all of the sisters on this board who seem to read all of the cutting-edge research while keeping an open mind and then "keep[ing] an eye on this work to see how it develops."

    My mind is always churning after I pay a visit here. This is a GOOD thing. Thank you.

    Jill

Discussion Boards