Herceptin & HER2

inkblot said:

Hi there gdpawel: It's been a while since I've noted one of your posts here.

The info you've posted is encouraging to everyone...those of us who've had cancer as well as to those who may get it in the future. It's at least a step beyond what most of us have at our disposal currently to help us in our decision making about treatments.

However, there remains certain questions which science cannot begin to answer at this point (and not in the forseeable future):

Her2neu/herceptin: Herceptin doesn't work for everyone who is presumed to potentially benefit from it. Some Her2/neu positive women have taken the prescribed course of Herceptin and still suffered recurrence and/or mets. Why?

Still other women have been Her2/neu positive (3*)
have not taken Herceptin and have experienced no recurrence/mets, after many years? Why? The reports of successes/failures have been the same across the board, for many chemotherapeutic agents, alone and in various coctail combinations.
What accounts for this?

I tend to believe, at this point in the scientific timeline, that as much as we're all considered to be the same on the inside, we're actually not.

Our immune systems are different, our hormone levels are different, our diets and exercise habits are different, our supplement use is different, our spiritual belief systems are different and our local environments are different, the very air we breathe can vary greatly from one region of the country to another.
W eeach have different genetic propensities. We each have different levels of stress in our lives and we each have different methods of managing that stress.

Of particular importance, I believe, are the levels of contamination (carcinogenic pathogens)
in our food sources and drinking water. This can also vary widely from region to region. I believe all this combines to render each of us quite different on a biological level. Some perhaps living in a more contaminated environment, but somehow having a strong immune system which may gobble up threats before they can become a problem, while others in the same community may get cancer.

Logically, any two of us with the same path report and same test results can and do respond differently to the same treatment(s). Why? Could the answer for the differences be found in our environment?

Another point we often overlook is that many times, surgery alone can be curative, so to speak.
We may actually not benefit from either radiation or chemotherapy of any kind. The million dollar question, which again, science cannot answer, is who are the ones who will not benefit from further treatment(s)? Until that question can be answered we have terms such as the "gold standard" of treatment for particular cancers. Treatment recommended across the board for certain cancers. This leaves patients in the quandry of "what should I choose", based upon statistics and a particular physicians recommendations.

This leads us to logically seek 2nd opinions, for doctors can differ widely in recommendations, based upon all the same factors, including path report findings. This also leads us to read and research, talk to others with the same/similar dx's and then decide how we want to proceed. The bottom line is that we all want to feel that we've done everything we can to rid ourselves of any and all cancer cells lurking within our bodies, while also preserving a reasonable standard of life thereafter. (Side effects can be anything from dreadful to mild even among people on the same regimen of chemo) We all want to live and we hope
our futures will not be shortened 5, 15 or 20 years down the road, by virute of chemo/radiation exposures.

We're throwing tons of money at trying to close the barn door AFTER the horses are out. (While it's the best thing we have, we can do so much better)

Until our government is willing to acknowledge, as unacceptable, many of the elements they allow in our environment, which are compromising our lives every day and ultimately killing many of us, the research for a magic bullet to stop cancer (once it has already been diagnosed) will continue for many, many generations to come. If we refuse to address the known causes of so much disease, then our only logical option is to continue trying to find a cure. Cancer treatment and research is a multi billion dollar business.

I believe we should focus strongly on addressing the known causes of cancer. We know what many of them are. The problem is one of economy/politics vs. health/human life. An age old problem. Without strong, committed leadership and support from our elected officials, we cannot hope to make progress in this direction. Big business lobbying is a tough competitor for any group to successfully challenge.

We live in a world wherein beached whales are often treated as "toxic waste". Who cares or wonders why? We often look the other way. Asthma rates are climbing at an astounding rate in the general population and particularly in our children. We pour funds into newer, stronger, more effective treatment as opposed to the cause. Childhood cancers are on the rise. Levels of toxins within our bodies are testing higher and no one even knows what some of these toxins can do to us in combination. A recent report by EWG stated that toxic chemicals by the hundreds were found in the cord blood of just 10 newborns around the country. This report points out huge gaps in our federal safety net which should concern all of us as inhabitants of this planet. (Environmental Working Group is a research and advocacy organization) Go to: www.ewg.org/reports/bodyburden2/ for the full report. Also, check out www.ewg.org for more general enviromental info. Joining and/or supporting other solid environmental organizations is another way to get information and participate in effecting change. www.greenpeace.org Environmental News Service is another good source of info. Just a few sites among many others, composed of well educated, talented scientists and educators with a focus upon the health dangers/hazards which exist in our everyday environment and efforts to effect positive changes.

We must work to educate ourselves. Sadly, we cannot depend upon our government agencies to be above board and truthful with us about what's going on or not going on in our environment which is making us sick. Profits and big business often
shape/color their decisions and reports. Through aligning ourselves with like minded, concerned people, working for improvement and change, we can make a difference. We can exert pressure upon the powers that be, in large enough numbers, from the EPA right down to our local health departments, to help bring about positive change. Demanding a healthier environment, cleaner food, air and water. Mandated changes in farming practices, manufacturing, chemical processing,
demanding "positively" safe disposal of all nuclear fuel/weapons products and by products, demanding that our military clean up all areas which they contaminate/destroy during "training" processes. The list is literally a mile long.
This is method through which we could virtually guarantee a decrease in number of diseases and debilitating conditions which plauge us today. In our effort to help stop cancer, we need only look at the known causes and eliminate them. If this requires giving up a some conveniences and paying
more for certain necessary items, then we have some choices to make. Sadly too many of us cannot bear the thought of giving up anything, particularly our ability to "keep up with the Joneses". We all pay a health related price for conspicious consumerism/materialistic thinking. A thinking often spoon fed to us from the time we can talk and walk. We are taught little else actually, from elementary school throughout college. We must intent upon making the most money, driving the most expensive vehicles, buying the biggest houses and staying on that track until we die. It's the yardstick by which society mostly judges us...our level of consumerism. We are mostly taught to value that judgment.

In the meantime, those of us so unfortunate to have already gotten a dread disease, which possibly arose directly from environmental pollutants, must do the best we can with our treatment options and our decision making processes to prolong and/or improve our lives.

My greatest hope is that we can find a way to offer our children and/or grandchildren a cleaner environment in which to live, work, play and bring up their own children. A world they will learn to value and protect as the lifeblood that it is to each of us. Ideally, future generations would not need to worry about their safety when doing something so simple as eating or having a drink of water or just taking in a deep breath of clean air. The very idea of such a state of living sounds eutopian but it's certainly food for thought, and certainly an attainable goal within our lifetimes, if (and that's a huge IF) enough of us find it important.

Love, light and laughter,
Ink