 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Breast Cancer / December 2003Cancer Treatment Ctrs of America?
Cancer Treatment Centers of America I've heard about these. Has anyone been there, & what were the results? http://www.cancercenter.com Susan, Su_Texas my opinions PS RIght now, I feel really stupid for going to Houston, for trusting the doctors & oncologists there, & for agreeing to try the standard, allopathic, PHARMA-controlled approach to cancer care. Very foolish! So far, it's proved to be a long, drawn-out, hellishly-awful, pain-filled & frustrating nightmare = Cr*p-care. > Cancer Treatment Centers of America > > I've heard about these. Has anyone been there, & what were the results? > > http://www.cancercenter.com CAT in the Hat had much common sense and experience. "If you have loads of money and awesome insurance, they will talk to you. If not, they won't." I don't know if his wife tried them, but she tried everything (almost) in the book. She died anyway last winter IIRC. colorectal cancer, she had the best of the best locally before that. Also <http://groups.google.com/groups?q=+%22Cancer+Treatment+Centers%22&start=10&hl=en &lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&selm=4AKWa.586796%24ro6.13163444%40news2.calgar y.shaw.ca&rnum=13> J Su wrote: << PS RIght now, I feel really stupid for going to Houston, for trusting the doctors & oncologists there, & for agreeing to try the standard, allopathic, PHARMA-controlled approach to cancer care. Very foolish! >> Look, cancer 'sucks' now matter how you look at it. They haven't found a fool-proof cure yet for any type. Researchers are working on it. Progress has been made, but they are not 'there' yet. One's chances are best if it is caught in the earliest of stages. Beyond that, treatment can extend life for some to varying degrees. There is some understanding and ways to now test who is responding to what--to some degree. However, that, too is often a 'crap' shoot. It is no fun for any of us to be going through this. Nobody wants to have to deal with thoughts of their their mortality shoved under their nose or hanging over their head on a continual basis which is what cancer can do to some. Yet, that is a harsh reality that those who have cancer often must face. It isn't fun, but that's 'life,' no matter what would be otherwise preferred. Life happens, and cancer is part of that reality for some. Perhaps, things will be different in the future in this regard. Changes have been made, but not enough to be able to adequately treat or cure all. Some happy to get lucky with the treatments they receive. There is often no way to predict who will respond to what, beyond the above indicated limited parameters. Some treatment centers have better results, overall; in other cases, sometimes those who receive their treatment privately may fare better. Again, there is no way to predict which facility will be best or better for any one given individual at this point in time. Dear Su, there is a list of the best U.S. cancer centers at http://www.usnews.com/usnews/nycu/health/hosptl/rankings/specihqcanc.htm. There is also a pretty thorough explanation of the methodology behind the ranking. Maybe it could be of some help to you. sofie254 From: sofie254@hotmail.com (sofie254) Dear Su, there is a list of the best U.S. cancer centers at http://www.usnews.com/usnews/nycu/health/hosptl/rankings/specihqcanc.htm. There is also a pretty thorough explanation of the methodology behind the ranking. Maybe it could be of some help to you. sofie254 =========== Thanks Sofie. There are many problems with this rating system. They set up the criteria & rules for it, so that few hospitals could qualify, & only those associated with medical schools. Some medical schools have become notoriously bad, ... & a hospital's association with them, can quickly drag the level of care way, way down. Medical students can do a lot of damage & harm. Too often, the medical students are left in charge of each other, while the professors are off somewhere else, doing research or whatever. Also, professors have a tendency to become arrogant when they're adored, followed, listened to, & obeyed by students, ... & this can significantly affect their morals, judgement, & work. After so many bad experiences, I'd now rather go to a doctor or center, which is definitely Not affiliated with any medical school. ---------- Also, the guy (Mortimer Zuckerman ?) who owns the magazine & runs this study of best hospitals, ... has some special interests in medical schools & universities, religion, etc., ... which could have also warped the results. The biggest give-away that the study is bogus, is that they rate Parkland in Dallas highly. ?! It's a charity hospital, packed solid with people who are obviously desperate for any care, while others are standing in long lines waiting for drugs/meds. [It's a dangerous place, esp. around the elevators.] It's very dirty inside, filthy, & seems to be run mostly by student docs acting like outta-control, arrogant yahoos. When I questioned the students about the lack of medical care/etc, they acted ugly & asked me what I expected from a charity hospital. They treated their work, patients & me, like jokes. When you have good insurance, you'll get sent next door to the Aston (Astin?) building, where the older & better-dressed (but still determinedly-dumb, won't-work-type) doctors, ... will refuse you medical care & referrals, & will also act like jerks, snicker & grin, & get "high" on their meanness & abuse of power. I've now learned from experience, that the "best hospitals" list doesn't mean much. Susan, Su_Texas my opinions >I've now learned from experience, that the > "best hospitals" list doesn't mean much. >Susan, Su_Texas my opinions Well! That list certainly must be off the track. I could not find ANY "Louisiana" hospitals on it! We certainly must have "one" hospital which could qualify for something!<g Bea > From: sofie254@hotmail.com (sofie254) > Dear Su, [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > criteria & rules for it, so that few hospitals could qualify, & only > those associated with medical schools. > Some medical schools have become notoriously bad, ... & a hospital's > association with them, can quickly drag the level of care way, way down. [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > schools & universities, religion, etc., ... which could have also warped > the results. > The biggest give-away that the study is bogus, is that they rate > Parkland in Dallas highly. ?! > > It's a charity hospital, packed solid with people who are obviously > desperate for any care, while others are standing in long lines waiting > for drugs/meds. [It's a dangerous place, esp. around the elevators.] Dear Su, I'm sorry to hear that you don't seem to be able to get the help that you expect. Just a thought - maybe you should bring a friend to important appointments with your caregivers. An extra pair of eyes and ears could help rule out misunderstandings. I sure wish I had done that on one or two occasions when I came alone. I'm sure that there are problems with any rating system. The most obvious one, I believe, is the mortality rate. Any small hospital that hasn't the expertise or equipment to treat serious diseases, or advanced stages of serious diseases, would be likely to get lower mortality rates simply because they refer patients to the more advanced clinics. Just wanted to comment upon two things in your post - first, Zuckerman doesn't run the list. It is designed by the Statistics and Methodology Department of NORC, a national research center, using original survey data and secondary analyses of data from the American Hospital Association and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. Second, I can't see that they mention Parkland in Dallas at all, at least not in the Cancer section. Maybe you looked at some other section. Best wishes, Sofie254 Sofie wrote: Zuckerman doesn't run the list. It is designed by the Statistics and Methodology Department of NORC, a national research center, using original survey data and secondary analyses of data from the American Hospital Association and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services. ============ Thank you very much for that information. Whoever puts out this list, uses such a flawed criteria, ... that it makes the list not only worthless, but very misleading & harmful to patients. It wastes a lot of time & resources (years), to check out some of these "best hospitals", only to find them bogus, bad. It's tragic. A major betrayal. Mort Zuckerman's magazine just publishes the list, as they publish any other BS that's put out, esp. by the govt. Hmmm. I apologize to him. Susan, Su_Texas my opinions Hi Sofie: Regarding Parkland's being listed as a best hospital in U S News (which it obviously isn't!): 36 in Digestive disorders 26 in Ear, nose, and throat 8 in Gynecology 24 in Heart and heart surgery 17 in Hormonal disorders 15 in Kidney disease 16 in Orthopedics 24 in Psychiatry 37 in Respiratory disorders 27 in Rheumatology ------------- From experience, I know they're not interested in Any kind of injuries. They refuse care & referral for strokes, unless you exactly fit a study which one of their professors is doing ... [a study which is probably being sponsored by a PHARMA-type corporation or by their stooge (the govt & NIH)]. They refuse testing, diagnosis, & care for breast lumps & cancer. They refuse basic medical care to patients, even those who have excellent insurance which pays 100%. Basically, they proved only interested, in running patients in endless dead-end loops for years, while treating them very badly. They most definitely were Not interested, in offering Any good or quality medical care. Susan, Su_Texas my opinions Su wrote << Medical students can do a lot of damage & harm. Too often, the medical students are left in charge of each other, while the professors are off somewhere else, doing research or whatever.>> My aunt was first treated by a resident while undergoi breast cancer 22+ years ago. This resident went on to become head of hematology and oncology at NYU hospital. He continues to treat my aunt. She went on to have a recurrence in her other breast 5 years after her first dx with positive nodes. She then went on to develop lung cancer--for which she has had surgery 3 separate times to have the tumors removed. She is still living and the only member of our family with known cancer to have survived for any extended period of time. Her oncologist is that same student she first saw over 22 years ago... Su wrote: << Also, the guy (Mortimer Zuckerman ?) who owns the magazine & runs this study of best hospitals, ... has some special interests in medical schools & universities, religion, etc., ... which could have also warped the results.>> What type of special interests are you referring to? What does religion have to do with medicine? The above statement sounds frighteningly like unfounded, racially-based rhetoric used to proliferate prejudice. Kaye wrote: What type of special interests are you referring to? What does religion have to do with medicine? The above statement sounds frighteningly like unfounded, racially-based rhetoric used to proliferate prejudice. ========= I've learned from experience (sadly), that you need to be very careful when dealing with any person, who is heavily & openly involved in religious organizations & causes. They can prove prejudiced, protective, ... [Fanatics.] I often write about problems with some of the "good Christian" types here in Texas, of which the Bush-t*rds are prime examples. Susan, Su_Texas my opinions |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.