Article on MSN from Mayo Clinic

mssue
mssue Member Posts: 242
edited March 2014 in Breast Cancer #1
What do You folks think?
Debunking cancer myths: An interview with a Mayo Clinic specialist

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

By MayoClinic.com

More on this in Health & Fitness
Chemotherapy: Using chemicals to treat cancer
Diagnosing cancer: Common tests, biopsies and examinations
Medical Encyclopedia

As advances in the detection, diagnosis and treatment of cancer have increased, you may have discovered more opportunities to learn the facts about this disease. Yet some misleading ideas about cancer and cancer treatment still persist. Timothy Moynihan, M.D., a cancer specialist at Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minn., helps debunk some of the most common misconceptions and explains the truth about them.

A positive attitude is all you need to beat cancer.

Although many popular books on cancer talk about fighters and optimists, there's no scientific proof that a positive attitude gives you an advantage in cancer treatment or improves your chance of being cured.


What a positive attitude can do is improve the quality of your life during cancer treatment and beyond. You may be more likely to stay active, maintain ties to family and friends, and continue social activities. In turn, this may enhance your feeling of well-being and help you find the strength to deal with your cancer. A positive attitude may also help you become a more informed and active partner with your doctor during cancer treatment.

If we can put a man on the moon, we should have a cure for cancer by now.

Cancer actually includes a large group of diseases. Each can be caused by many different factors. Despite advances in diagnosis and treatment, doctors still have much to learn about what triggers a cell to become cancerous and why some people with cancer do better than others.

In addition, cancer is a moving target. Cancer cells may continue to mutate and change during the course of the disease. This may lead to the cancer cells no longer responding to the chemotherapy drugs or radiation treatments that were initially given.

Finding the cure for all cancer is, in fact, proving to be more complex than mastering the engineering and physics required for spaceflight.

Drug companies and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) are blocking or withholding new cancer treatments.

Going through cancer treatment is never easy. Even when things are going well, it's natural to become frustrated and wish for a magic bullet to cure your cancer. You might even wonder if such a treatment is available but being withheld.

That's not the case. Your doctor and the FDA, which must approve new drugs before they can be marketed, are your allies. As such, they make your safety a high priority. Unfortunately, scientific studies to determine a cancer treatment's safety and effectiveness take time. That may create the appearance or lead to reports that effective new treatments are being blocked. However, the thorough testing required has kept many unsafe and ineffective drugs from being used in the United States.

Hiding or withholding an important treatment advance would be difficult because the public has many ways to access medical information. In addition to verbal, print, video and electronic means, you may even gain access to information about experimental treatments by participating in a clinical trial.

If you still believe a cure is purposefully being withheld, ask yourself why a doctor may choose to specialize in cancer research. Oftentimes doctors go into cancer research because they have a family member or friend affected by the disease. They're just as interested in finding a cure as anyone else, for exactly the same reason — it affects them personally. They hate to see a loved one in pain and don't wish to lose this person. They also want to spare others what they have gone through.

As to suggestions that organizations keep cures a secret because they would otherwise lose their source of funding, human nature makes this scenario highly unlikely. It is indeed an unusual human being who would pass up the prestige associated with finding a cure in order to keep funds flowing to a research organization.

Regular checkups and today's medical technology can detect all cancer early.

Routine screening has clearly led to an impressive decrease in deaths from several cancers, including cervix, breast and colon cancers. Although regular medical care can indeed increase your ability to detect cancer early, it can't guarantee it. Cancer is a complicated disease, and there's no sure way to always spot it. Cancer cells can grow anywhere in your body — often deep within it. Until the cancer reaches a certain size, there isn't a technology or an exam capable of detecting it. By the time you can feel a breast cancer lump, for instance, the cancer may have been there four to six years. Scientists are looking for tests capable of detecting cancers even earlier, but these tests are experimental and have not yet been proved effective.

Undergoing cancer treatment means you can't live at home and can't work or lead a normal life.

Most people with cancer are treated on an outpatient basis in their home community. At times it may be helpful to travel to a specialty medical center for treatment. But often, doctors at such a medical center can work with doctors in your hometown so that you can be with your family and friends and perhaps even resume work. In fact, many people do work full or part time during their treatment. A great deal of time and effort has gone into making it easier for people to live a more normal life during and after their treatment. For example, drugs are now available to help better control nausea. The result is you're often able to work and stay active during your treatment.

Cancer is always painful.

Some cancers never cause pain. Many advanced cancers certainly do cause pain, but over the past five to 10 years, doctors have become more aware of the need to control such pain and have learned better ways to manage it. Many newer pain medications are available to keep you comfortable, and strong pain medication is no longer withheld for fear you'll become addicted. Although all pain may not be eliminated, it may be controlled to the point at which it has little to no impact on your day-to-day living.

Exposing a tumor to air during surgery causes cancer to spread.

Surgery is one of medicine's main weapons against cancer. It can't cause cancer or cause it to spread. Because you may feel worse during your recovery than you did before surgery, you might believe your surgery caused your cancer to spread. However, "air hitting the tumor" doesn't cause cancer to spread. In some animal studies, removing the main tumor mass sometimes temporarily facilitates growth of cancer that has already spread (metastasized), but this hasn't been seen conclusively in humans.

Some tumors will grow to a certain size and become relatively dormant. This occurs if the tumors secrete a substance called endostatin, which suppresses tumor growth in both the primary tumor as well as in distant sites.

Unfortunately all tumors, no matter what their size, secrete angiostatin, which promotes tumor growth — particularly the growth of new blood vessels that supply oxygen and nutrients to the tumor. Therefore, if you have a large primary tumor and only microscopic metastases, the endostatin produced by the large tumor may prevent the metastases from growing. But if you remove the tumor, you remove the source of the growth-inhibiting endostatin, and the metastases, which produce angiostatin, may continue to grow.

Although it's possible that during surgery your doctor may find the cancer more widespread than previously thought, an operation can't cause cancer to spread nor can it cause cancer to start. Don't delay or refuse treatment because of this myth. Surgically removing a cancer is often the first and most important treatment.

Everyone with the same kind of cancer gets the same treatment.

Your doctor tailors your treatment to you. What treatment you receive depends on where your cancer is, whether or how much it has spread, and how it's affecting your body functions and general health.

In addition, cells from the same type of cancer may have different features in different people. These differences can affect how the cells respond to treatment, which in turn may influence your doctor's recommendations.

Good people don't get cancer.

In ancient times illness was often viewed as punishment for bad actions or thoughts. In some cultures that view is still held. If this were true, though, how would you explain the 6-month-old or the newborn who gets cancer? These little ones haven't been bad. There's absolutely no evidence that you get cancer because you deserve it.

Cancer is contagious.

There's no need to avoid someone who has cancer. You can't catch it. It's OK to touch and spend time with someone who has cancer. In fact, your support may never be more valuable.

Though cancer itself isn't contagious, sometimes viruses, which are contagious, can lead to the development of cancer. Two common cancers caused by viruses are cervical cancer and liver cancer. Human papillomavirus (HPV) — a sexually transmitted disease — can cause cervical cancer. And hepatitis C — a virus transmitted through sexual intercourse or infected intravenous (IV) needles — can cause liver cancer, though only a small number of those with the virus will develop liver cancer.

content by:

(c) 2005 Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. All rights reserved. Terms of use

Comments

  • opam
    opam Member Posts: 9
    Thanks! Even those of us who have been through cancer hold some of these myths. Anybody else been asked "What did you do to cause this cancer?" That was from my mother-in-law! Thank God I can laugh about it now. Good thoughts to everyone.
  • hummingbyrd
    hummingbyrd Member Posts: 950 Member
    Very inclusive article. Some of which I agree, some he seems to protest too much.
    I don't think a positive attitude is "all" you need, but it sure does help.
    I don't think "air" spreads cancer, but I do question needle biopsies.
    While it is true patient's are treated based on individual tumor type, they still approach the course of treatment in a "cookbook" method. An alternative individualized treatment might be accomplished if they did CSRAs on us. That is a Chemotherapy Sensitivity and Resistance Assay. A test where your tumor tissue is exposed to a variety of chemo combinations to see which "mixture" is most effective at killing the cancer. This makes treatment more of a scientific approach as opposed to "hit and miss". For instance I would have been perfectly happy to have missed out on the AC/Taxol treatment and gone straight to carboplatinum/taxotere if by CSRA I would have known AC wasn't going to work.
    I do question why they don't do the culture and sensitivity test routinely.
    As for the pharmaceutical companies and all the rest I must admit I raise my eyebrows at this comment. Fact is cancer is big business. Now I'm not saying they have a "cure" that they hide from the general public, but I do think that this disease deserves something more than chemo and radiation. I think they should divert more funding than the 1% they allow into alternative medicine clinical trials. The medical community keeps saying there is no proof vitamins or herbal remedies work. Well...why don't they do some studies? Possibly because you can't patent an herb? And as for the FDA being our friend and not allowing dangerous drugs to be used I question the definition of "dangerous". Especially if they have a drug that looks really promising and they still spend 5-10 years researching it. I mean logically speaking if one is dying does it matter if the drug is still under study? I know there is a real gray area there, but in my opinion they are being "overly cautious".
    Bottom line is bottom dollar. I have no aspirations of a "cure", but I do think it is time and certainly reasonable to expect this condition to be taken to the next level of treatment which is that of a chronic nature. I think on that we can all agree and in the process make the treatments a bit more "patient friendly".
    Just my personal opinion.
    hummingbyrd
  • LorettaB
    LorettaB Member Posts: 51

    Very inclusive article. Some of which I agree, some he seems to protest too much.
    I don't think a positive attitude is "all" you need, but it sure does help.
    I don't think "air" spreads cancer, but I do question needle biopsies.
    While it is true patient's are treated based on individual tumor type, they still approach the course of treatment in a "cookbook" method. An alternative individualized treatment might be accomplished if they did CSRAs on us. That is a Chemotherapy Sensitivity and Resistance Assay. A test where your tumor tissue is exposed to a variety of chemo combinations to see which "mixture" is most effective at killing the cancer. This makes treatment more of a scientific approach as opposed to "hit and miss". For instance I would have been perfectly happy to have missed out on the AC/Taxol treatment and gone straight to carboplatinum/taxotere if by CSRA I would have known AC wasn't going to work.
    I do question why they don't do the culture and sensitivity test routinely.
    As for the pharmaceutical companies and all the rest I must admit I raise my eyebrows at this comment. Fact is cancer is big business. Now I'm not saying they have a "cure" that they hide from the general public, but I do think that this disease deserves something more than chemo and radiation. I think they should divert more funding than the 1% they allow into alternative medicine clinical trials. The medical community keeps saying there is no proof vitamins or herbal remedies work. Well...why don't they do some studies? Possibly because you can't patent an herb? And as for the FDA being our friend and not allowing dangerous drugs to be used I question the definition of "dangerous". Especially if they have a drug that looks really promising and they still spend 5-10 years researching it. I mean logically speaking if one is dying does it matter if the drug is still under study? I know there is a real gray area there, but in my opinion they are being "overly cautious".
    Bottom line is bottom dollar. I have no aspirations of a "cure", but I do think it is time and certainly reasonable to expect this condition to be taken to the next level of treatment which is that of a chronic nature. I think on that we can all agree and in the process make the treatments a bit more "patient friendly".
    Just my personal opinion.
    hummingbyrd

    There is one specific point that I want to highlight that Hummingbyrd mentioned...Cancer is a big business and the bottom line is the dollar. It has become so obvious to me over the last several months of surgery and chemo.

    So , thank you for the Mayo article, and thank you, Hummingbyrd, for you insightful response.

    Loretta