CAR T-Cell Immunotherapy Information Needed

In my opinion (everybody has one) as far as ethics and legal issues go, your physician would be free to prescribe CAR-T. The real challenge would be getting an insurance company or even Medicare to pay for the procedure for someone who is in remission. As Po said before the crash, there are degrees of remission. Is the cancer gone or still present and just inactive? Best of luck and good wishes as you proceed. 

po18guy said:

CAR-T cells for Dummies

A 13 minute video from Hematology Times, featuring Dr Carl June:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PC1H1l5gHM

po18guy,

Confirms a lot of what I have previously read but in one video short and sweet for easy consumption!

dewdrs

Thsts not really so much snow. But in a massive urban area like Seattle I can see how it might wreak havok.

https://www.weather.gov/crh/snowfall

ShadyGuy said:

In Minnesota

We got about 10 feet per year. In 1993 a friend came to stay with us because he “lost” his house in North Dakota. They could not even find the road it was on. In the small town of Cleveland NY the lake effect snow was so deep my sister had to enter and leave her house through a second floor window. Her car was buried for two months. When I lived in Nova Scotia we had a hatch on the roof so we could shovel the snow off. No, in absolute terms 11 inches isn’t much snow at all. In Seattle there are lots of “snowflakes“ all year. They run the place. I guess in their minds 11” of snow is just another thing that makes them “special”. Bright side is the homeless can build igloos to live in and Starbucks has home delivery so they should do well. I live in much less snowy places now but we have had two snowfalls over 1 foot this year. Fortunately it melted quickly which is what I expect will happen in Seattle. Rain tends to do that.

 Shady I like what you have to say usually.  However I find you calling people from Seattle "snowflakes" derogatory, insulting and upsetting.  When not refuring to actual snow it's not usually used in a positive or meaningful way.  It's a political hotbutton word now days. 

For reference I do not live in Seattle, never have, but moved from Minnesota in 1973 to San Francisco.  A few inchs of snow there can shut the city down and create hazardes road conditions.  West coast people do not have snow tires or supplies for snow.  Your lucky if you have gloves.  San Francisco has a lot of old homes that also don't have central heating systems but rely on space heaters of gas ranges.  Anyway the above remark was unappreciated.  What has Seattle ever done to you?  Shady I'm not in a sparring match just couldn't let the remark go.

ShadyGuy said:

Snowflakes

Yes, in todays jargon, it is a politically incorrect term. The meaning of "snowflake" you refer to is a recent one referring to college students who melt in the face of change or adversity. I was referring to a different meaning. When I was living in Minnesota I would go often to Arizona. The people there would comment that "every winter you people drop in here like snowflakes". My family in Seattle area complain that most of the City officials there are people who "dropped in" from California and "forgot to go home". It struck me as funny - kinda like Minnesota snowflakes in reverse. It was a simple joke not meant to offend. When we went to Florida from Minnesota we were called "Snow birds". I felt that was an insult to birds, especially cranes and warblers. Not so much Turkeys and geese. Sorry to offend you. But I must say you apparently are easy to offend. Don't worry, be happy. Smiiileeeee! I will strive to never offend you again. I agree that this board is no place for politics.

It is interesting (and rare) to study the history of "Nice."  Historically, politeness was of no relevance to anyone. The observation that some fact or action "offended" someone else would have not even been understood until recent decades; no one would have a clue as to what significance that might pose.  Historical examples are Jesus, who routinely enraged his listeners (I say this as a conservative Christian myself).  Socrates, the father of Western philosopy and political thought, was put to death for his blatant offenses against Greek aristocracy.   Most of the great men of history were crass, abrasive. The women also.  Tolstoy, the Russian writer.  The poet John Milton and a thousand other examples: being "nice" was not a concept they were even aware of.

The regard for "manners" entered Western culture through, and during, Victorian England.  Along with this came the regard for etiquette and respectable behavior.  It was an entirely new view of human interaction. A massive number of academic works recount this, in Victorian England History, which is a major branch of Western history in most university departments.  "Niceness" has of course since become normative throughout Western nations, but much less so throughout the Middle East, Asia, and Africa.

As recently as when I went through college, the "Liberals" were the advocates of Free Speech: they demanded that people be able to say whatever, whenever and wherever they wished.  This was the very definition of freedom and democracy.  It is no accident that the First Amendment came, eh, first.

So too in logic and reasoning: the core of these ancient disciplines was to distinguish valid thinking verses invalid; sound reasoning verses psychosis.  "Attitude" or "liking" something (or not) is still wholly irrelevant and even a distraction in determining whether something is cogent or reasonable.  And, feelings will remain wholly of no significance in formal logic.  It is just that logic has been usurped and displaced by emotions, which are fickel, transient, capricious.  "Offense" itself has become a default blungeoning weapon against anyone whose views differ from the person taking offense; it is itself the ultimate "code word" and "trigger."  I find the adolescent resort to offense offensive myself -- deeply offensive, since it renders the conversation juvenile and insipid.

Reasoning has been turned on its head, and the University today is the least tolerant place in society.  "Offense" today has suppressed many of the greatest minds and scientific accomplishments of the last two centures, because the scientists or writers have since been deemed contrary to currently dictatorial viewpoints.

My view here is that if an opinion is rationally articulated, relevant to the Lymphoma experience, not manifestly UNTRUE and not obscene or vulgar, then it should be welcome.  Adults used to be adults, but that golden age may never return.    I read what I find informative, and avoid those few writers with whom I routinely disagree, and it is a system that works great !  I have never flagged any individual here during my years and 3,000 posts, and my blood pressure stays on a nice, healty plateau.

max

Max, maybe its just evolution. Free speech stimulates social evolution in many directions. Thats why universities and dictators are so anti free speech. They like things to move only in a certain direction. Unlike you I am at most agnostic. Still we tend to agree on the issue of free speech. Having traveled for a living and visited over 60 countries I can tell you that our belief in free speech is not universally shared. Its becoming that way here.  I was taken aside in Egypt and told that when I made a statement it was only polite and expected for me say “Allah willing” A phrase that, in Arabic, is used constantly.  You are expected to use that phrase. For example “i am going home tomorrow, Allah willing”. Kinda like “good Lord willing and the creek don’t rise” except its not meant in jest. I won’t bore with any more stories. I think we could have a spirited converstaion but not on here. We could disagree and walk away friends. Remember that race of human/android hybrids on the old Star Wars Next Generation tv series? Their main message was “Resistance is futile, you will comply”. Sound familiar?

Cheers. Now back to cancer. I am having serious issues .....  again.

Answering too late for your case, but will comment in case it helps others. I received CAR-T about 18 months ago. It put me in remission after much chemo failed. It has been fantastic. But, (and remember, I am no doctor) I would think you would want to keep this potent weapon in your arsenal until after relapse, even if it was available while you are in remission. Why? It is like a cannon you don't want to fire until the enemy is crossing the moat. It may be preventative, but at unknown cost. CAR-T is risky and has side effects and AFTER effects. It  kills ALL B-cells in your body, good and bad. You are left without a normal immune system. Recovery of my mind took months (google cytokine storm). My body is still recovering and my Ig levels that protect me from all those common diseases have not returned yet. Don't get me wrong. It is well worth it. But, if it works for you, it will work after your cancer cells have returned. It will target them like an assasin. Until then, I'm not sure it was developed as a preventative as much as to be a direct weapon. It is like releasing the Kraken.