I think, if you propose the kind of action I'm recommending, including looking for signs of change as detailed, you can find doctors who will work with you.
What might such a joint effort look like? You would, together, outline a plan of action, then you would carefully record your actions (exercises you complete), and your sensations. The doctors might very well also be able to refer you to experts in these methods (most of them still to be discussed here).
I note that in the medical literature (see link in earlier post), this is called complimentary therapy. That means it has a recognized role. I think there's information on it in the medical resources referred to.
Excuse me, I've been procrastinating. Please stay posted for detailed therapy recommendations.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
response to questions
Test read by my critical, skeptical (but inquiring) editor. She adamantly insists on certain questions, particularly, is it safe to follow my advice over the medical prescription?
After considerable thought, I arrive at an answer - not to the question of whether it is safe, but how it is safe. It calls for a reassertion, consolidation, and clarification of what I said on the subject earlier.
My prescription calls upon you to perform certain exercises (two already listed, more to follow). Then, each time your perform them, and also throughout the day, pay attention to sensations in relevant areas of body and life. Does the area in question feel refreshed, invigorated, more supple, strengthened, more comfortable, more alive? Those kinds of sensations will tell you that the exercises are working.
Hypothetically, if a part of your body feels comfortable, vigorous, supple, and strong, it is healthy, and disease of any kind in that area is out of the question.
Note that a healthy condition needs maintenance, so a sensation of health is not a recommendation to pay no further attention. Again, the exercises I'm prescribing for disease are really the exact same exercises I prescribe for maintaining good health. By following these prescriptions, you are learning the healthy habits that healthy people practice. Having learned them, keep them up. (Note that using your own senses, instinct, and intellect to decide specifically what you need to do at any particular time is one of those healthy habits.)
Two new questions/ideas:
The approach just described can help you talk to doctors. I'll write about that in the next post.
And, what about the case in question, where there aren't any physical symptoms (discomfort, loss of energy, anything at all)? You are looking for the same sensations of vigour listed above, and the context: you are applying the same prescriptions I have described, and will be describing. Also, the same ideas apply when speaking with your doctors, r.e. the next post.
After considerable thought, I arrive at an answer - not to the question of whether it is safe, but how it is safe. It calls for a reassertion, consolidation, and clarification of what I said on the subject earlier.
My prescription calls upon you to perform certain exercises (two already listed, more to follow). Then, each time your perform them, and also throughout the day, pay attention to sensations in relevant areas of body and life. Does the area in question feel refreshed, invigorated, more supple, strengthened, more comfortable, more alive? Those kinds of sensations will tell you that the exercises are working.
Hypothetically, if a part of your body feels comfortable, vigorous, supple, and strong, it is healthy, and disease of any kind in that area is out of the question.
Note that a healthy condition needs maintenance, so a sensation of health is not a recommendation to pay no further attention. Again, the exercises I'm prescribing for disease are really the exact same exercises I prescribe for maintaining good health. By following these prescriptions, you are learning the healthy habits that healthy people practice. Having learned them, keep them up. (Note that using your own senses, instinct, and intellect to decide specifically what you need to do at any particular time is one of those healthy habits.)
Two new questions/ideas:
The approach just described can help you talk to doctors. I'll write about that in the next post.
And, what about the case in question, where there aren't any physical symptoms (discomfort, loss of energy, anything at all)? You are looking for the same sensations of vigour listed above, and the context: you are applying the same prescriptions I have described, and will be describing. Also, the same ideas apply when speaking with your doctors, r.e. the next post.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
author's status
Since I am my principle test subject, I think it might be best to describe my own condition now.
(to be written ...)
(to be written ...)
completeness requires an additional note
My prescription, just completed (with abundant explanation of why it works, for which, please see the previous "post") amounts to this: sending nerve impulses to various parts of the body (in the form of instructions to allow circulation) and also listening to nerve impulses from various parts of the body (thus completing a cycle, and enabling nerve impulse circulation) is the basic health maintenance activity. (This may sound excessively esoteric, so, if this is the first thing you are reading about my theory, please read that explanatory material in its defense.)
I also asserted that that activity will give the practitioner of it all the information he or she may need to develop a complete health regimen. In saying that, I think I omitted something.
In addition to sending nerve impulses to and listening to them from various parts of the body, it is possible to send them to, and listen to them from, various parts of the world (or universe). This is done in the form of thoughts. This should make more sense as a complete resource for information.
It also also sounds esoteric. Really, I think there is a place for simply mentally sending thought around the world, and mentally listening to thoughts from around the world. I think that esoteric practice is immensely valuable. It is also true, though, that, even if we accept the validity of the esoteric (and a reasoned argument for doing so is on the list of topics for this exposition), it is a basic tenet of mysticism that it is always connected to the material and the practical, so it might even be just as useful to think of the discipline of sending and receiving thoughts in terms of things like letter writing, reading, academics, conversation, networking, and so on. That would be like saying, encourage yourself to get involved, or be in touch, with the world. (Being in touch could be a first step, when getting involved is hard. Hints like that may be a part of the blog, too, in time. Always, what we are seeking is methods that make the impossible suddenly possible, and, indeed, easy. Note that, if you can find an easy way to do something, it becomes possible. I love this interpretation of the old adage "where there's a will there's a way:" the "way" that's referred to is an easy way, a method, and it's not about "force" of will, except inasmuch as that means the will to find the way.)
There did arise, here, an opportunity to begin the defense of my esoteric assertion that simply sending and receiving thoughts has value: if you are undertaking some practical kind of communication, say, a meeting, you can practice by rehearsing the event in your mind, which is very much like - and, I would say, actually the same as - sending and receiving thoughts to and from the world.
I also asserted that that activity will give the practitioner of it all the information he or she may need to develop a complete health regimen. In saying that, I think I omitted something.
In addition to sending nerve impulses to and listening to them from various parts of the body, it is possible to send them to, and listen to them from, various parts of the world (or universe). This is done in the form of thoughts. This should make more sense as a complete resource for information.
It also also sounds esoteric. Really, I think there is a place for simply mentally sending thought around the world, and mentally listening to thoughts from around the world. I think that esoteric practice is immensely valuable. It is also true, though, that, even if we accept the validity of the esoteric (and a reasoned argument for doing so is on the list of topics for this exposition), it is a basic tenet of mysticism that it is always connected to the material and the practical, so it might even be just as useful to think of the discipline of sending and receiving thoughts in terms of things like letter writing, reading, academics, conversation, networking, and so on. That would be like saying, encourage yourself to get involved, or be in touch, with the world. (Being in touch could be a first step, when getting involved is hard. Hints like that may be a part of the blog, too, in time. Always, what we are seeking is methods that make the impossible suddenly possible, and, indeed, easy. Note that, if you can find an easy way to do something, it becomes possible. I love this interpretation of the old adage "where there's a will there's a way:" the "way" that's referred to is an easy way, a method, and it's not about "force" of will, except inasmuch as that means the will to find the way.)
There did arise, here, an opportunity to begin the defense of my esoteric assertion that simply sending and receiving thoughts has value: if you are undertaking some practical kind of communication, say, a meeting, you can practice by rehearsing the event in your mind, which is very much like - and, I would say, actually the same as - sending and receiving thoughts to and from the world.
down to business: my theory of cancer
Tom's Theory: cancer is caused by lack of circulation.
Lack of circulation can be caused by a number of factors: body chemistry, lack of exercise, and also "holding," or tissue stasis, sometimes caused by emotional habits or issues. There are also circulatory functions that are highly dependent on self-care habits. (The body is not quite as automatic as we commonly think.)
Lack of circulation in a tissue (organ, system, locale) makes for unhappy, sick, and, sometimes, insane cells. The latter is cancer.
This sounds like a fairy tale, but I think it holds up well as a theory.
Conversely, abundant circulation allows cells to "live easy." They can work effectively, they are comfortable, and they can take care of themselves, that is, maintain their vital structures, because they have abundant supplies of all they require.
Second component of Tom's Theory:
Cancer starts as ordinary discomforts: colds, aches and pains, and so on. These, also, are symptoms of lack of circulation. (I interpret the following experience as confirmation of that: I haven't had a cold, sniffle, sore throat, or any hay fever symptoms for two years, since I renewed my yoga practice. It was an unexpected benefit. Is yoga a cure for anything? It has a bit of that reputation, and maybe that's more justified than we might have thought. On the other hand, I'm skeptical about some yoga practices. Basically, I'd say stick with hatha yoga! More on that later.)
Some people know what to do about ordinary conditions like the ones just described. When they have an ache or a pain, they instinctively massage it, maybe even vigorously so. When they have a cold, they whip up steaming chicken soup. For a sore throat, they make toddies and gargle with salt water. Soon, the symptoms subside, and it was nothing. But many people don't have those responses to rely on. Without access to self care, their symptoms linger. Eventually, they may find themselves with cancer.
The above paragraph provides the most basic, and, in many ways, vital prescription for preventing and treating cancer. I cannot overemphasize that this is also, according to my theory, the correct treatment for cancer. From the idea that cancer starts as ordinary ailments, it follows that it is an ordinary ailment. (The logic is this: it is cells in need of attention.) From that it follows that ordinary treatments are appropriate.
This requires a bit more attention. The reason medicine thinks ordinary treatments don't work is because they work a little bit at a time. There's no immediate dramatic change, so the doctors think nothing's happening. Here is what to look for when applying these treatments: first, if it feels good - for example, if you take a gargle for throat cancer, and it feels cleansing - that sensation is your subtle sign that the treatment is working. Now, cancer is an advanced form of the ordinary condition (sore throat), so a lot of the structures that make up the illness are present. One gargle probably won't wash them all away. Therefore, these cure must be repeated, often over and over. Basically, every time you feel the discomfort associated with your condition, you apply the treatment. You are treating the symptom to treat the disease. Do it diligently ... just as you would be diligent in your disciplines to prevent disease. (Also, I will be discussing ideas for selecting treatments a bit later.)
You test to see whether they are working in a long term sense by: feeling for a cleansed, refreshed, or otherwise pleasing sensation each time you apply the treatment. Expect these positive sensations to become more long lasting as time goes by. (When they do, you know you don't need as much therapy, any more ... but you will always need some therapy, because that's part of ordinary life!)
Let me emphasize the last point. Those positive sensations are mild and self-effacing, but they are very real. You feel good because something good is happening. At first, sensations of distress soon return to the fore. That's another point: the pleasant sensations that indicate the effectiveness of the therapy may overlay the difficult sensations associated with the disease. The latter may not really subside, at first. Still, the pleasing sensations are quite real and tangible and meaningful, as described. Also, even in the presence of continued pain, the feelings of relief are wonderful and good. Again, give them to yourself over and over again, because, each time you do, you heal a little bit more.
The present case differs, though, in that there are no symptoms. In terms of my theory, then, we are talking about prevention, not cure. But I have just stated that the two are the same thing. The question that remains, then, is what actions are appropriate for prevention, or cure, in this particular instance.
Since that is a somewhat involved, I want to take it up in another chapter, and write about it another day. I have had the idea, though, that I can make a useful prescription already, based on what I've written here.
Just the idea that the preventive and cure for cancer is circulation, and that cancer symptoms - any kind of discomfort - are neurological signals for attention, should set you well on your way to being able to handle cancer, as a general phenomenon, and in its various manifestations (i.e., just the possibility of it, precursors, early symptoms, and even advanced cases, if you have that). I guess this is quite an outrageous claim, so let me add notes on a couple of other aspects of the problem, that will help reinforce the case.
The case I refer to is the case for the most universal therapy. I hinted that some therapies are appropriate for some conditions, others for other conditions. Sorting those variations out will take a bit of time, but there is a universal therapy. The only problem is, you might think it is a fantasy. That's why I need to lay out some of the details.
The universal therapy is as follows: let's say you feel an ache, the cause of which is unknown, or, maybe there's some hint of the cause, but the solution to it is not clear or readily at hand. Well, just thinking about the underlying reality of momentarily (or maybe chronically) impaired circulation will start the process of resuming circulation. Actually, you're thinking about restoring circulation ... sending circulation to the affected area. What's the affected area? It's where you feel some discomfort.
I'm reminded that I read about a well regarded method for pain relief, originating in the medical establishment, that involves asking the patient questions about the pain: how big is it, what shape is it, what color is it? These questions are repeated over and over, and it was reported that the pain would gradually become softer, rounder, smaller, and of a more pleasing color. What was not asserted, but what I would assert, is that the pain relief was accompanied by actual healing, and continued practice could be effective as a treatment for not only pain, but the condition itself.
That is exactly what I am prescribing. And here, in brief, is the logic behind it. I spoke of the somewhat erroneous notion that basic body functions are wholly automatic. Another possible misnomer is that circulation refers only to the circulation of blood. It would, I contend, not even be correct to only add lymphatic circulation to the list, though it could be helpful to consider it. What else can we add? There are, I think, several other categories. The one I particularly want to mention, here, is the circulation of nerve impulses through the body. We don't usually think of that as a form of circulation, but I think it very clearly is. I think we can even think of nerve impulses as a kind of nourishment, which is being sent to receptors all over the body. And, since circulation goes in a circle, let's also think about nerve impulses returning from distant parts of the body to the central nervous system: if we simply pay attention, listen, to messages from various parts of our body (perhaps giving ourselves some quiet time to dedicate to that especially), isn't that encouraging the free flow of the cycle? I think so!
Finally and in conclusion: I liked a comment I heard from macrobiotics, that eating macrobiotically (their method) will make you smart, and being smart will allow you to be rich. I will hypothesize, as part of the universal cure (in case you only have that to work with) that practicing it will give you information you need to construct the details. So, in effect, you now have all you need to be healthy. However, I will certainly continue with more detailed information on a number of applicable topics.
Lack of circulation can be caused by a number of factors: body chemistry, lack of exercise, and also "holding," or tissue stasis, sometimes caused by emotional habits or issues. There are also circulatory functions that are highly dependent on self-care habits. (The body is not quite as automatic as we commonly think.)
Lack of circulation in a tissue (organ, system, locale) makes for unhappy, sick, and, sometimes, insane cells. The latter is cancer.
This sounds like a fairy tale, but I think it holds up well as a theory.
Conversely, abundant circulation allows cells to "live easy." They can work effectively, they are comfortable, and they can take care of themselves, that is, maintain their vital structures, because they have abundant supplies of all they require.
Second component of Tom's Theory:
Cancer starts as ordinary discomforts: colds, aches and pains, and so on. These, also, are symptoms of lack of circulation. (I interpret the following experience as confirmation of that: I haven't had a cold, sniffle, sore throat, or any hay fever symptoms for two years, since I renewed my yoga practice. It was an unexpected benefit. Is yoga a cure for anything? It has a bit of that reputation, and maybe that's more justified than we might have thought. On the other hand, I'm skeptical about some yoga practices. Basically, I'd say stick with hatha yoga! More on that later.)
Some people know what to do about ordinary conditions like the ones just described. When they have an ache or a pain, they instinctively massage it, maybe even vigorously so. When they have a cold, they whip up steaming chicken soup. For a sore throat, they make toddies and gargle with salt water. Soon, the symptoms subside, and it was nothing. But many people don't have those responses to rely on. Without access to self care, their symptoms linger. Eventually, they may find themselves with cancer.
The above paragraph provides the most basic, and, in many ways, vital prescription for preventing and treating cancer. I cannot overemphasize that this is also, according to my theory, the correct treatment for cancer. From the idea that cancer starts as ordinary ailments, it follows that it is an ordinary ailment. (The logic is this: it is cells in need of attention.) From that it follows that ordinary treatments are appropriate.
This requires a bit more attention. The reason medicine thinks ordinary treatments don't work is because they work a little bit at a time. There's no immediate dramatic change, so the doctors think nothing's happening. Here is what to look for when applying these treatments: first, if it feels good - for example, if you take a gargle for throat cancer, and it feels cleansing - that sensation is your subtle sign that the treatment is working. Now, cancer is an advanced form of the ordinary condition (sore throat), so a lot of the structures that make up the illness are present. One gargle probably won't wash them all away. Therefore, these cure must be repeated, often over and over. Basically, every time you feel the discomfort associated with your condition, you apply the treatment. You are treating the symptom to treat the disease. Do it diligently ... just as you would be diligent in your disciplines to prevent disease. (Also, I will be discussing ideas for selecting treatments a bit later.)
You test to see whether they are working in a long term sense by: feeling for a cleansed, refreshed, or otherwise pleasing sensation each time you apply the treatment. Expect these positive sensations to become more long lasting as time goes by. (When they do, you know you don't need as much therapy, any more ... but you will always need some therapy, because that's part of ordinary life!)
Let me emphasize the last point. Those positive sensations are mild and self-effacing, but they are very real. You feel good because something good is happening. At first, sensations of distress soon return to the fore. That's another point: the pleasant sensations that indicate the effectiveness of the therapy may overlay the difficult sensations associated with the disease. The latter may not really subside, at first. Still, the pleasing sensations are quite real and tangible and meaningful, as described. Also, even in the presence of continued pain, the feelings of relief are wonderful and good. Again, give them to yourself over and over again, because, each time you do, you heal a little bit more.
The present case differs, though, in that there are no symptoms. In terms of my theory, then, we are talking about prevention, not cure. But I have just stated that the two are the same thing. The question that remains, then, is what actions are appropriate for prevention, or cure, in this particular instance.
Since that is a somewhat involved, I want to take it up in another chapter, and write about it another day. I have had the idea, though, that I can make a useful prescription already, based on what I've written here.
Just the idea that the preventive and cure for cancer is circulation, and that cancer symptoms - any kind of discomfort - are neurological signals for attention, should set you well on your way to being able to handle cancer, as a general phenomenon, and in its various manifestations (i.e., just the possibility of it, precursors, early symptoms, and even advanced cases, if you have that). I guess this is quite an outrageous claim, so let me add notes on a couple of other aspects of the problem, that will help reinforce the case.
The case I refer to is the case for the most universal therapy. I hinted that some therapies are appropriate for some conditions, others for other conditions. Sorting those variations out will take a bit of time, but there is a universal therapy. The only problem is, you might think it is a fantasy. That's why I need to lay out some of the details.
The universal therapy is as follows: let's say you feel an ache, the cause of which is unknown, or, maybe there's some hint of the cause, but the solution to it is not clear or readily at hand. Well, just thinking about the underlying reality of momentarily (or maybe chronically) impaired circulation will start the process of resuming circulation. Actually, you're thinking about restoring circulation ... sending circulation to the affected area. What's the affected area? It's where you feel some discomfort.
I'm reminded that I read about a well regarded method for pain relief, originating in the medical establishment, that involves asking the patient questions about the pain: how big is it, what shape is it, what color is it? These questions are repeated over and over, and it was reported that the pain would gradually become softer, rounder, smaller, and of a more pleasing color. What was not asserted, but what I would assert, is that the pain relief was accompanied by actual healing, and continued practice could be effective as a treatment for not only pain, but the condition itself.
That is exactly what I am prescribing. And here, in brief, is the logic behind it. I spoke of the somewhat erroneous notion that basic body functions are wholly automatic. Another possible misnomer is that circulation refers only to the circulation of blood. It would, I contend, not even be correct to only add lymphatic circulation to the list, though it could be helpful to consider it. What else can we add? There are, I think, several other categories. The one I particularly want to mention, here, is the circulation of nerve impulses through the body. We don't usually think of that as a form of circulation, but I think it very clearly is. I think we can even think of nerve impulses as a kind of nourishment, which is being sent to receptors all over the body. And, since circulation goes in a circle, let's also think about nerve impulses returning from distant parts of the body to the central nervous system: if we simply pay attention, listen, to messages from various parts of our body (perhaps giving ourselves some quiet time to dedicate to that especially), isn't that encouraging the free flow of the cycle? I think so!
Finally and in conclusion: I liked a comment I heard from macrobiotics, that eating macrobiotically (their method) will make you smart, and being smart will allow you to be rich. I will hypothesize, as part of the universal cure (in case you only have that to work with) that practicing it will give you information you need to construct the details. So, in effect, you now have all you need to be healthy. However, I will certainly continue with more detailed information on a number of applicable topics.
a bit of due diligence
Maybe as a first principle - and a bit of procrastination or hedging - ideally, I would like my friend to find a doctor who agrees with me. (I am not a doctor.)
I do feel fairly confident in suggesting that my friend inquire around a bit to see if he can find someone with legitimate expertise who is not so very ready to excise a vital part of his body.
A note, here: My prior experience with surgery to remove part of the colon: my air conditioning guy had the surgery. It slowed him down a lot, I think, put him out of commission for a couple of years, but he did return to do an inspection and tuneup, a couple of years later. I told Ben I didn't think it was the worst thing they could suggest ... meaning I think it's survivable, and maybe you can get back to normal ... probably, I should say.
About that "probably." I would say Ben's in pretty good shape, so surgery should go fine, and then I would say he can ensure full recovery by taking good care of himself. Regarding that last note, though, taking good care of oneself is what I'm recommending to avoid the need for surgery at all, so why wait until after the surgery.
Actually, here's another ideal scenario: Ben practices some of the self care disciplines I'm going to describe, then returns for a checkup, and is told the cancer has disappeared. There are stories to that effect.
Incidentally, another detail regarding Ben's story: he told us he had no symptoms at all. That makes me all the more skeptical of the doctor's thinking. However, getting a prognosis like that is, in itself, in a very real sense, a kind of symptom. (That's how I see it.) As such, it's like any other symptom (a core piece of my philosophy, here): it's your body (or, in this case, life) telling you it needs some kind of attention. More details later. I told Ben and Melissa that I was going to describe things they can do, and I am. See next posts.
One last scenario, here: it sure sounds to me like Ben is getting very limited information. This is ubiquitous in medicine, it seems to me. (It's not quite universal, though. I always take the approach of asking question about my condition, and sometimes I've received, in response, real information - and no hint of a medical prescription!) Also, I've been having the interesting experience of making assertions about health and disease, and then seeing them confirmed in news reports on science and medicine, shortly after. So I wonder if it might be possible to find in depth information on the science on this condition.
I just went to Yahoo and searched on "cancer." I specified a search of news. I got a lot of ... well, not exactly what I was looking for.
I then searched on "effectiveness of cancer therapies." (My ultimate take on the present matter: if the therapies that are being prescribed are notoriously ineffective, why on earth should they be pursued ... all the more so if they promise a less than desirable outcome at best ... or, alternatively, if there is a high probability of a less than desirably outcome, you would want to do your best to make sure it was quite necessary. Now, if I were saying this but could not offer a better prognosis, I wouldn't be making sense. My prognosis: using quality self-care - which, again, includes much due diligence - you can have good health, long life, no trauma (beyond normal life experience!), confidence going forward, much enjoyment ... and a high likelihood of success. Granted, my evidence is testimonial, not (extensively) statistical.)
Here's a source, the first listed by the my second search: http://www.cancer.gov/. I think it does look useful. It started to answer some of the questions I've suggested here (especially about the facts on standard treatments).
I do feel fairly confident in suggesting that my friend inquire around a bit to see if he can find someone with legitimate expertise who is not so very ready to excise a vital part of his body.
A note, here: My prior experience with surgery to remove part of the colon: my air conditioning guy had the surgery. It slowed him down a lot, I think, put him out of commission for a couple of years, but he did return to do an inspection and tuneup, a couple of years later. I told Ben I didn't think it was the worst thing they could suggest ... meaning I think it's survivable, and maybe you can get back to normal ... probably, I should say.
About that "probably." I would say Ben's in pretty good shape, so surgery should go fine, and then I would say he can ensure full recovery by taking good care of himself. Regarding that last note, though, taking good care of oneself is what I'm recommending to avoid the need for surgery at all, so why wait until after the surgery.
Actually, here's another ideal scenario: Ben practices some of the self care disciplines I'm going to describe, then returns for a checkup, and is told the cancer has disappeared. There are stories to that effect.
Incidentally, another detail regarding Ben's story: he told us he had no symptoms at all. That makes me all the more skeptical of the doctor's thinking. However, getting a prognosis like that is, in itself, in a very real sense, a kind of symptom. (That's how I see it.) As such, it's like any other symptom (a core piece of my philosophy, here): it's your body (or, in this case, life) telling you it needs some kind of attention. More details later. I told Ben and Melissa that I was going to describe things they can do, and I am. See next posts.
One last scenario, here: it sure sounds to me like Ben is getting very limited information. This is ubiquitous in medicine, it seems to me. (It's not quite universal, though. I always take the approach of asking question about my condition, and sometimes I've received, in response, real information - and no hint of a medical prescription!) Also, I've been having the interesting experience of making assertions about health and disease, and then seeing them confirmed in news reports on science and medicine, shortly after. So I wonder if it might be possible to find in depth information on the science on this condition.
I just went to Yahoo and searched on "cancer." I specified a search of news. I got a lot of ... well, not exactly what I was looking for.
I then searched on "effectiveness of cancer therapies." (My ultimate take on the present matter: if the therapies that are being prescribed are notoriously ineffective, why on earth should they be pursued ... all the more so if they promise a less than desirable outcome at best ... or, alternatively, if there is a high probability of a less than desirably outcome, you would want to do your best to make sure it was quite necessary. Now, if I were saying this but could not offer a better prognosis, I wouldn't be making sense. My prognosis: using quality self-care - which, again, includes much due diligence - you can have good health, long life, no trauma (beyond normal life experience!), confidence going forward, much enjoyment ... and a high likelihood of success. Granted, my evidence is testimonial, not (extensively) statistical.)
Here's a source, the first listed by the my second search: http://www.cancer.gov/. I think it does look useful. It started to answer some of the questions I've suggested here (especially about the facts on standard treatments).
into the fray
As of a few days ago, I heard a friend "has cancer, colon cancer." My wife was speaking with him on the phone, and she suggested to him he talk to me. (That was quite an endorsement.)
A few days later, we visited him - we were coincidentally traveling to his town - and he told us what was going on. He had gone for screening and the doctor told him he has polyps, diverticulitis, and needs to have a section of his colon removed.
For my part, I said that was deplorable advice, and asked him to please talk with me at length when he visited our town, as he was planning to do in a few days. (It turned out the doctor had also said he maybe shouldn't take time to travel, but should have the operation immediately. Talk about a bum's rush! What about getting a second opinion? Is there time for that?!)
Our friend's girl friend, an occupational therapist (read, medical professional) was looking at me with a shocked expression. She asked something to the effect of whether I realized this was a life and death situation. I feel a bit chastened. At the same time, the advice he is getting still sounds like nonsense.
I explained to them that I was not talking about doing nothing, and that I was eager to describe my prescription, though not over dinner. I described my philosophy in general terms, and they sounded reasonably impressed, though still (as they very well should be) skeptical.
Back home, with a few days having passed, it sure looks like my friend isn't going to make it over here for a chat. It's the universe telling me to get off my duff, get over my fear of failure, and start writing up my analysis and prescription.
A few days later, we visited him - we were coincidentally traveling to his town - and he told us what was going on. He had gone for screening and the doctor told him he has polyps, diverticulitis, and needs to have a section of his colon removed.
For my part, I said that was deplorable advice, and asked him to please talk with me at length when he visited our town, as he was planning to do in a few days. (It turned out the doctor had also said he maybe shouldn't take time to travel, but should have the operation immediately. Talk about a bum's rush! What about getting a second opinion? Is there time for that?!)
Our friend's girl friend, an occupational therapist (read, medical professional) was looking at me with a shocked expression. She asked something to the effect of whether I realized this was a life and death situation. I feel a bit chastened. At the same time, the advice he is getting still sounds like nonsense.
I explained to them that I was not talking about doing nothing, and that I was eager to describe my prescription, though not over dinner. I described my philosophy in general terms, and they sounded reasonably impressed, though still (as they very well should be) skeptical.
Back home, with a few days having passed, it sure looks like my friend isn't going to make it over here for a chat. It's the universe telling me to get off my duff, get over my fear of failure, and start writing up my analysis and prescription.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Why Speculative?
I'm concerned that medical professionals and advocates of a certain general approach (widely know as the medical approach) will accuse me of falsely claiming that my analysis is scientific. I believe my approach is scientific, especially in the sense that I am documenting the reasoning behind my assertions, and the nature of any testing that has been carried out.
What my analysis does not rely on, which the medical model typically does, is extensively repetitive systematic, or statistical, analysis. Although there are clearly instances where that kind of testing is valuable, I don't feel it is the only way to derive valid health information (or that the information it does produce is always valid).
I am going to emphasize active observation and reasoning in these posts. I hope the reader will inspect the posts and find them useful.
What my analysis does not rely on, which the medical model typically does, is extensively repetitive systematic, or statistical, analysis. Although there are clearly instances where that kind of testing is valuable, I don't feel it is the only way to derive valid health information (or that the information it does produce is always valid).
I am going to emphasize active observation and reasoning in these posts. I hope the reader will inspect the posts and find them useful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
