Re: ALT> Med and Cancer survival rates

[Guest guest]

>However, I

>still have to ponder the story of my cousin and others like him: He

>was diagnosed with, I believe, prostate cancer back in the 80s.

Karolyn,

If you are going to have a cancer diagnosis in your future men would wish

for prostate cancer. Prostate cancer is a very slow progression of

disease. Men diagnosed with prostate cancer in the 80s had a 70% survival

rate at ten years. This is really high and I don't know of any other

cancer with this high of survival rate. In this light it is likely that

your cousin and others would survive ten years on a macrobiotic diet or

doing nothing at all (well within reason).

Prostate cancer is not the best cancer to beat the drum about effective

alt-treatments given the exteremely high survival rates...and this is in

treated and non-treated prostate cancer cases! All in all your cousin

would appear to fall into the category of the majority with his survival

and eventual death of cancer which was likely metasized from the prostate

cancer.

What we need to look at is survival rates in more aggressive cancers such

as breast cancer if a person really wants to see what the difference is in

conventional treatment, no treatment, or alt treatment.

regards,

BobK