 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / Cancer / March 2007Is cancer contagious?
I already know the answer to this, at least I think I do, and that would be a NO. But, there's a problem here. My husband's father had cancer, and then his mother got it. She told my husband that she thinks she caught it from her husband as she cared for him. (Both are deceased, the mom and dad) I didn't realize that my husband felt this way; he had vaguely mentioned it in passing, but I thought he wasn't being seious, but when my son brought the new baby over, Don wouldn't hold her because he said he was afraid his mom might be right, and then I thought about how when I leave for work or just give him a kiss in general, he won't kiss me on the lips...it ends up on my cheek or my forehead... At first when the kiss thing happened, I thought he was worried aboutl the chemo/cancer breath that he's had, which is bad but not something that would make me not give him a kiss...I'm not a total bitch, lol. So, now what? My son would love to have a picture with Don holding the baby and isn't worried about her "catching cancer from him" because he doesn't think it's contagious either. It's always something with this beast cancer. Tell me what to say and do...as you know, I am a novice in cancer caregiving. love, Giuditta > I already know the answer to this, at least I think I do, and that would be > a NO. But, there's a problem here. My husband's father had cancer, and then [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > and isn't worried about her "catching cancer from him" because he doesn't > think it's contagious either. Cancer's not contagious. However, since Don's weak and because of his breath, probably best that the photo be taken with Don sitting in a chair and baby cradled in his lap/arm (facing forward) and Don cracking a grin at the camera (not down at the baby). J >> I already know the answer to this, at least I think I do, and that would >> be [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > baby). > J He won't do it. We asked him again today if he wanted to hold her for even a minute, and he said that when he is cancer-free that he will. Thanx! G J schreef: > and Don cracking a grin at the camera (not down at the baby). > J > > And the reason for that is? Anne > J schreef: > > and Don cracking a grin at the camera (not down at the baby). > > J > > > And the reason for that is? Unpleasant for the baby See 2nd last paragraph http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/group/alt.support.cancer/messages/134168.html J J schreef: > Unpleasant for the baby > See 2nd last paragraph http://www.talkaboutsupport.com/group/alt.support.cancer/messages/134168.html > J > > Baby's don't react to smells like older children or grown ups do. People all over the world have different sensations if it comes to smells because of what they learned to appreciate and what not. I don't think Dons breath is unpleasant for the baby, the baby doesn't mind. Anne > J schreef: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > because of what they learned to appreciate and what not. I don't think > Dons breath is unpleasant for the baby, the baby doesn't mind. It's a moot point now, Anne. J While it doesn't apply in this situation, .... From what I've read & heard, some forms of cancer can be transmitted, spread through sexual intercourse. [And maybe from other bodily fluids? Saliva? BM & urine? Blood? Sweat?] It seems best to be careful, within reason. So far, the docs don't seem to know much about cancer. ??? On TV, they're touting a new vaccine for pre-teen & teenage girls, concerning some STD-type cancers. Ovarian? Uterine? Also, some forms of cancer occur in AIDS patients. AIDS is another STD or blood-borne-type disease. Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions > While it doesn't apply in this situation, .... > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions Thanks for the info...makes sense. But like you said, that doesn't apply to this situation. G > While it doesn't apply in this situation, .... > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Also, some forms of cancer occur in AIDS patients. AIDS is another STD > or blood-borne-type disease. Cancers are not contagious. STD's can be. Some types of HPV can cause cervical cancer. Other types are associated with vulvar cancer, anal cancer, and cancer of the penis (a rare cancer). Most HPV infections do not progress to cervical cancer. http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/stdhpv.htm J > While it doesn't apply in this situation, .... > <snipped> > Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions Susan, Join the roll call and tell us about your cancer and your current treatments and how it's going, please. J quote: Susan, Join the roll call and tell us about your cancer and your current treatments and how it's going, please. J ================================== I'll keep trying to. Am too sick & weak from radiation treatments. Last one was about ten days ago. Can barely function, but am now getting a little better each day. Am to start chemo in a few days. Maybe gem-something & navelbine? Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions > I'll keep trying to. Am too sick & weak from radiation treatments. Last > one was about ten days ago. Can barely function, but am now getting a > little better each day. Am to start chemo in a few days. Maybe > gem-something & navelbine? > > Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions Thank you, Susan. I think fatigue from RT starts to improve after a few weeks. The radiation was to the bones and neck, cervical spine? I hope it helped the pain, Susan. Ginger ale or club soda for the mucous. I see you on another newsgroup talking about a UTI and hot flashes. Is it hot down there in Texas? We're still shivering up here in Canada. Has your urine been checked for infection (since) ? I worry about you and chemo, after what happened to your mother. Is there a soft tissue tumor to shrink and/or what do you hope to accomplish with it? You sound very tired, Susan. Keep in touch as you are able. Hugs from me, J Giuditta schreef: > So, now what? My son would love to have a picture with Don holding the baby > and isn't worried about her "catching cancer from him" because he doesn't [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > I don't know what to say to some one who thinks lung cancer is contagious. I think Don deprives himself of a relationship with his grandchild, and I think that is so very sad, it could be such a joy having this baby around, a new life and holding her :-(( I would be careful about kissing a baby all over the first week after chemo, but not because of the cancer, but the toxins that are in bodyfluids right after chemo. Anne > Giuditta schreef: >> [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Anne He wouldn't be kissing the baby anyway...just holding her...he's not one who kisses his kids, although he would give them a hug when he left town or came home...and now when it's vice versa, he will give our other son a hug when our son leaves town, etc... And he always sang to them when they were babies...love was obvious...and it still is...he's always been a great dad even to my first three kids that I had before we married and then we had three more together. He has never made a difference between them and never ever said a word negatively about supporting my children when their own dad didn't. Even though my ex has matured and now is making up for everything with the older children by giving them good jobs in his company and doting on them, they still have a great love for Don who raised them... The son who had the baby is not Don's biological son, but he feels like he is...gives him Father's Day cards, etc. He loves Don and wants him to be part of the baby's life...he has brought the baby over Friday, Saturday and Sunday for Don to see her, and he lives across town on the east side of Memphis...I'm rattling on here again...sorry... What is so cool is that my son's fiance, Lisa, also has three children from a former marriage...three precious little girls. I don't think a huge number of guys would take on raising a ready-made family, and I so respect my husband and son for this. We have three little grandsons from my older two children, and I prayed one day for a granddaughter too, and I ended up with four in one whack...I thought God is so good...and now Courtney (my son with the new baby) has a role model in Don and is being such a great dad to Lisa's three children. And she's like a wonder woman because she has been coming out here with the children all weekend and just had a baby a week ago. She's a great mom and has raised her girls, ages 9, 8 and 6, while finishing college to be a teacher and also working two jobs before Courtney met her. My ex has even given her a job at his company and is making a nursery there for the baby since she has to wait until fall to begin teaching. He's done a huge turn-around, proving that people do change for the better... Now that I have yakked enough and been off topic, I will jump off here...I just need to talk sometimes, and writing on here, venting, conversating seems to relieve my own stress. It's spring break...yahhhoooooo! I will be here with my hubby all week, and today I can take him for his dr. appointment. He's coughing again although not as much as when he was first diagnosed, but it seems like after his third week from chemo this happens. He says it's the chemo killing the cancer in his lungs, but I worry that it's the tumor growing again... I don't voice my opinion to him or my fears about that. I just pray that he's right. He says he feels stronger but still not up to even a short walk. Is this normal? I have offered to take him for rides, walk with him, anything he wants, but he doesn't have the energy. Yesterday, taking a shower exhausted him/ So much of this is confusing to me. I assume that being on chemo six times since November would wear one down, but should he be this weak still? It worries me. I'm so scared that this weakness is from the cancer and that I'm losing my best friend day by day. I want to feel more positive, but the doctor's prognosis looms over me from November 7. He said with chemo that he would have 8 to 12 months...then he got all wishy washy after the scan about the prognosis...I've told you all about that already. Here I go analyzing again instead of just taking a day at a time, but that's so hard to do. I am hoping every day to see him stronger, some sign that he's going to be okay. Am I living in some fantasy land? God bless, Giuditta Giuditta schreef: > Here I go analyzing again instead of just taking a day at a time, but that's > so hard to do. I am hoping every day to see him stronger, some sign that [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > I don't know Guiditta. I don't think your husband can be cured, but it is possible that the chemo did some good work and the tumors are reduced in size and his fatigue is from an overkill of chemo he had the past few months. You can't tell unless he has a scan to see what is going on inside. It is normal though that he still feels very tired and is exhausted. It took me about a month to recover a bit from the chemo and it didn't have such an impact on me as on Don. I always had good bloodcounts etc. and my cancer was in lymphnodes only at that time, not in vital organs. I guess you just have to wait until you hear what the oncologist has to say but I do hope Don recovers a bit and you can have some quality time together and enjoy the spring. All the best, Anne Scientists say we all have cancer in us, they just don't know what triggers it. The accepted doctrine is that it is most likely related to evironment, exposure to toxins or diet. We beleived Darwin's theory for dacades but science is poving him wrong. It was found some years ago that a previously unknown virus transmitted by mosquitos caused a catatonic state in many mental patients that was once thought to be a simple mental disorder. High doses of dopamine brought some out of this state temporarily. My point is there are simply many unknowns still. While we'd like to think it's not contagious, the truth is almost anyone who currently has cancer can most likely remember close contact with someone in our past who had cancer. While I don't think cancer in and of itself is transmitted or contagious, I do wonder if there is a yet unknown contagious virus that triggers the cancer cell mutation in somepeople perhaps with weakened immune systems.. They have concluded that cervical cancer is due to a virus so I don't think it a far stretch to assume they may all be related to a virus. That would explain why many families seem to be plagued with cancer. If it is in fact a virus that triggers or awakens the cancer then that could prove to be an even bigger hurdle since as we all know viruses tend to mutate, which could explain why cancer cells mutate if they are infected with a virus, and viruses are very hard to destroy. quote: From: jonboy42@webtv.net (J W) Scientists say we all have cancer in us, they just don't know what triggers it. The accepted doctrine is that it is most likely related to evironment, exposure to toxins or diet. We beleived Darwin's theory for dacades but science is poving him wrong. It was found some years ago that a previously unknown virus transmitted by mosquitos caused a catatonic state in many mental patients that was once thought to be a simple mental disorder. High doses of dopamine brought some out of this state temporarily. My point is there are simply many unknowns still. While we'd like to think it's not contagious, the truth is almost anyone who currently has cancer can most likely remember close contact with someone in our past who had cancer. While I don't think cancer in and of itself is transmitted or contagious, I do wonder if there is a yet unknown contagious virus that triggers the cancer cell mutation in some people perhaps with weakened immune systems.. They have concluded that cervical cancer is due to a virus so I don't think it a far stretch to assume they may all be related to a virus. That would explain why many families seem to be plagued with cancer. If it is in fact a virus that triggers or awakens the cancer then that could prove to be an even bigger hurdle since as we all know viruses tend to mutate, which could explain why cancer cells mutate if they are infected with a virus, and viruses are very hard to destroy. ===================================== Interesting. There was a TV show, on PBS I think, about one of the first "bubble boys". He had virtually no immune system. Finally, the docs took him out of the bubble, observed him as he sickened & died. The best I can remember, his was the first time they were able to link bacterial infection & cancer. Probably, many kinds of damage to the immune system, can give cancer cells the jump-start they need, to get off & running, to take over. So, cancer now has links to virus & to bacterial infection. Also to things breathed in, like asbestos dust. And in BC, speculation about mouse feces dust. And in my case, cancer is growing at injury sites. There's so much that the docs don't know yet. Esp. about cancer. Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions Another way to get cancer: Too much sun: skin cancer There is also a theory, that the lack of Vitamin D over time, might allow cancer to develop more & better, faster. Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions > Another way to get cancer: > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions I'm sorry but didn't see your post until now. Thanks for the feedback. G > Scientists say we all have cancer in us, they just don't know what > triggers it. The accepted doctrine is that it is most likely related to [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > explain why cancer cells mutate if they are infected with a virus, and > viruses are very hard to destroy. That makes perfect sense. There are also some statistics on neighbors of cancer victims having cancer...I don't remember the stats but in nursing school I remember a lecture about that. I didn't complete RN school but learned enough to be somewhat aware of some things but had forgotten the lecture on cancer and what you are talking about...triggered my memory... I guess he won't be holding the baby. Thanks, Giuditta >> Scientists say we all have cancer in us, they just don't know what >> triggers it. The accepted doctrine is that it is most likely related to [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > That makes perfect sense. It's complete and utter nonsense > I guess he won't be holding the baby. And that would be a great shame Steph wrote: It's complete and utter nonsense. Response: And you cite what concrete scientific evidence to prove that some if not all cancers could possibly be triggered by a virus???? Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Tue, Mar 13, 2007, 5:13am (EDT+4) From: It's complete and utter nonsense "Giuditta" <jnotmarrs@giudiittaspeedworks.com> wrote in message news:HwpJh.89$zc6.477@eagle.america.net... "J W" <jonboy42@webtv.net> wrote in message news:527-45F5950F-469@storefull-3256.bay.webtv.net... Scientists say we all have cancer in us, they just don't know what triggers it. The accepted doctrine is that it is most likely related to evironment, exposure to toxins or diet. We beleived Darwin's theory for dacades but science is poving him wrong. It was found some years ago that a previously unknown virus transmitted by mosquitos caused a catatonic state in many mental patients that was once thought to be a simple mental disorder. High doses of dopamine brought some out of this state temporarily. My point is there are simply many unknowns still. While we'd like to think it's not contagious, the truth is almost anyone who currently has cancer can most likely remember close contact with someone in our past who had cancer. While I don't think cancer in and of itself is transmitted or contagious, I do wonder if there is a yet unknown contagious virus that triggers the cancer cell mutation in somepeople perhaps with weakened immune systems.. They have concluded that cervical cancer is due to a virus so I don't think it a far stretch to assume they may all be related to a virus. That would explain why many families seem to be plagued with cancer. If it is in fact a virus that triggers or awakens the cancer then that could prove to be an even bigger hurdle since as we all know viruses tend to mutate, which could explain why cancer cells mutate if they are infected with a virus, and viruses are very hard to destroy. > Steph wrote: It's complete and utter nonsense. > Response: And you cite what concrete scientific evidence to prove that > some if not all cancers could possibly be triggered by a virus???? Can you post any that suggests cancer is contagious, top-posting webtv boy? I already have sir, cervical cancer. Howsabout you try keepin yer flap shut if you have no proof of what you say. You are always quick to jump on people and call things rediculous or nonsense but you have to my knowledge not once ever offered any proof whatsoever to back the claim. so if you are going to call someone a liar or a nut, prove your case or shut up. If you thhink my post was as you say and I quote " complete and utter nonsense." then give evidence why you beleive that. I stated why I thought it may be possible so why is it not possible bathtub bubble boy? Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Tue, Mar 13, 2007, 2:56pm (EDT+4) From: It's complete and utter nonsense. stop-posting webtv boy? Genetics, carcinogens or diet may play a role in the developement of cancer but why aren't they consistantly the trigger? If there is a genetic predisposition to cancer, it has always been there. Maybe diet plays a part but in all likelihood your diet has been predictable for most of your life. Carcinogens? Most everyone has for sure been exposed to some degree to them for the better part of their lives for sure. But why now? What's different now that caused the cancer to develop and not years ago? The human body generates abnormal or cancerous cells daily and our immune system takes care of them, so the question is why did we get a tumor now? The body needs more than just the presence of abnormal cells to develop full blown cancer. It requires the suppression of our immune system for this to occur. That narrows the field of triggers down quite a bit. Stress is probably one of the top causes of a suppressed immune system and there is no question that the stress levels of life today are much higher than they were a few decades ago. One can probably find a direct corelation between that and the increase in cancer rates. How we deal with stress has a great deal to do with it as well. Another possibility also is viral infection. Aids is proof that deadly immune system targeting viruses exist. Is it possible that another as yet undetected form of virus that affects the immune system in less obvious but equaly destructive ways exists? Who knows, it is possible. I'm not saying that if you have cancer you should become a hermit or that if you know people with cancer that you should avoid them. Just simply that it is a possibilty and that any disease should be treated with proper respect and reasonable precautions or common sense should be observed. It's foolishness to just take someone's word that something deadly cannot affect you. After all at one time we did all believe the world was flat. That was only proven wrong a few hundred years ago. That means for 1000s of years we believed an untruth. And just a mere century ago universal transportation was via horse and most common folks did not have indoor plumbing or electricity. Best not to get so full of our wisdom and our bright future that we forget to be humbled by our history. > Genetics, carcinogens or diet may play a role in the developement of > cancer but why aren't they consistantly the trigger? If there is a [quoted text clipped - 31 lines] > wisdom and our bright future that we forget to be humbled by our > history. I feel so much better getting this from someone with no medical training. At least none you have bothered to share. J W schreef: > Genetics, carcinogens or diet may play a role in the developement of > cancer but why aren't they consistantly the trigger? If there is a [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > years ago? > Life is totally different than it was some 60 years ago, don't you think? We have a totally different diet, live to be much older and the things we're blowing in the air and dropping in the seas, inject in our cattle, use on our plants, won't do much good either. Anne > I already have sir, cervical cancer. I haven't seen any proof at all from you. Try re-reading what I've posted to you before. > Hows about you try keepin yer flap > shut if you have no proof of what you say. http://www.niaid.nih.gov/factsheets/stdhpv.htm Human Papillomavirus and Genital Warts National Institutes of Health (NIH) More than 100 different types of HPV exist, most of which are harmless. About 30 types are spread through sexual contact and are classified as either low risk or high risk. Some types of HPV cause genital warts-single or multiple bumps that appear in the genital areas of men and women including the vagina, cervix, vulva (area outside of the vagina), penis, and rectum. These are considered low risk types. High-risk types of HPV may cause abnormal Pap smear results and could lead to cancers of the cervix, vulva, vagina, anus, or penis. <end quote> J >I already have sir, cervical cancer. There is a virus, it's true which is associated with cervical cancer. But most people who have that virus don't have cervical cancer, and some people with cervical cancer don't have the virus. Geddit? Correlation does not imply causation. And for the vast majority of cancers, there isn't even a correlation with a virus. Again, can you prove that statement? If you can't then state it as an opinion not a fact. I don't beleive there is any solid proof out there that can unequivicably claim cancers, if not all at least some are not triggered in some way by some form of virus. If such proof exists then I would be very interested in seeing it. Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2007, 6:28am (EDT+4) From: Correlation does not imply causation. And for the vast majority of cancers, there isn't even a correlation with a virus. > Again, can you prove that statement? If you can't then state it as an > opinion not a fact. I don't beleive there is any solid proof out there > that can unequivicably claim cancers, if not all at least some are not > triggered in some way by some form of virus. If such proof exists then I > would be very interested in seeing it. Either your grammar or your logic is whacky - or both are. Are you asking me to prove that all cancers ARE caused by a virus, or AREN'T? If the first, I won't because it's untrue, if the second I won't because you can't prove a negative. You were the one making claims about what causes cancer. You said cancer was not caused or triggered by a virus, fact. I asked you to prove that statement. But as usual I see your response is the predictable steph response to either twist it around to something entirely different or the old standard "i'm right so you have to prove me wrong" in otherwords you don't have a darn thing to back your statement. I never claimed That what I said was a fact sir, I said it was a possibility, learn to read. Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2007, 3:09pm (EDT+4) From: Either your grammar or your logic is whacky - or both are. Are you asking me to prove that all cancers ARE caused by a virus, or AREN'T? If the first, I won't because it's untrue, if the second I won't because you can't prove a negative. You were the one making claims about what causes cancer. >>> Scientists say we all have cancer in us, they just don't know what >>> triggers it. The accepted doctrine is that it is most likely related to [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > > And that would be a great shame I know...his choice. G Giuditta schreef: > That makes perfect sense. There are also some statistics on neighbors of > cancer victims having cancer...I don't remember the stats but in nursing [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I believe in genetics and environnement: smoking air pollution etc. but I really don't think all cancers are caused by an virus, though some might lungcancer and what I have bladercancer isn't. Some are more destined by their genes and constitution to have these types of cancer than others that's it. I think it's dangerous to promote ideas like cancer might be contagious, it might bring us back to the old days when cancerpatients were considered outcasts, better not be around them. Anne I never said it was a fact that cancer could be triggered by a virus. Nor did I say it was a virus that could be spread from person to person. If it is a virus at all at least partialy responsible it is also possible that it could be transfered by means other than simple breathing or close proximity such as ingesting or sexual promiscuity. What said was that since it has now been proven that at least one kind of cancer (cervical cancer) is directly unequivicably linked to a virus, that to me it's not that far a stretch of the imagination to perhaps correctly or incorrectly assume that all cancers may be triggered by some sort of virus. The validity or invalidity of that is as yet to be proven. This virus may have been here since the dawn of man, it may be a type of natural population control. We all have cancers lying dormant in our bodies. Why are they there? What triggers or awakens them, No one knows for sure. Scientists are at this point purely speculating and taking educated guesses as to what truly awakens the beast. I'm not promoting the idea, I merely stated a possiblility, one possibility out of 1000s. Scientists have said cancer can be caused by such things as pollution, asbestos, smoking, drinking, incorrect diet, chemicals in our food and so on and so on. Why is it easier to believe those ideas than to believe it may be triggered by a virus? It's because those things we can have at least some degree of control over, we can if educated and willing to make sacrifices and lifestyle changes limit our exposure to those things so we feel that we have some power (albeit limited) but nonetheless power over the beast. A virus heaven forbid would mean that it's something that is potentialy completely out of our control and we would then be soley at the mercy of no more that simple statistics (being in the wrong place at the wrong time.) and that's a thought most have a tough time wrapping their minds around.. Judging from the rampant and in some countries pandemic spread of another dread disease (aids) I'd say that perhaps going back to the days when people were ill with a known contagious disease not only did people avoid them but the victems themselves were not selfish self indulgent people such as today and they themselves made efforts to limit their exposure to others. The ease at which we simply accept and freely interact with people who are afflicted with deadly diseases because we don't want to hurt their feelings or encroach on their rights frankly frightens me. Because of such behavior if a pandemic such as the bird flu ever does hit here, we would undoubtedly suffer huge casualties. I have cancer, right now there is no proof that it is triggered by a virus but I do have that possibility always in the back of my mind and out of respect for human life other than my own I am concious of close or intimate contact. If it is ever proven in my lifetime then I would take whatever means were necessary to segregate myself from such contact to prevent the spread. If I did not take such steps I would expect society/govt. to step in for the good of all and take those steps for me. Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Tue, Mar 13, 2007, 10:05am (EDT+5) From: I think it's dangerous to promote ideas like cancer might be contagious, it might bring us back to the old days when cancerpatients were considered outcasts, better not be around them. Anne J W schreef: > What said was that since it has now been proven that at least one kind > of cancer (cervical cancer) is directly unequivicably linked to a virus, > that to me it's not that far a stretch of the imagination to perhaps > correctly or incorrectly assume that all cancers may be triggered by > some sort of virus. This was suspected 25 + years ago (maybe longer but that is how long I know about that) since f.i. nuns never got that kind of cancer. It's nonsense to suggest that the same would be true for cancers of the lung or breastcancer f.i. There is nothing that might suggest even the smallest indication for that. Anne Likewise there is nothing That I know of to conclusively prove that s is not at least a possibility. And BTW I did not specify any certain types of cancer such as lung or breast. In my family, every single female with only five exceptions has either survived or died from breast cancer. Three of the five exceptions had their breasts removed in their teens, the other two left the state in their teens and NEVER returned.. ALL of the rest have had to deal with it. I used to think genetics alone were at work there but after seeing that the two that left were unafected and how many of their close male relatives/ husbands/caregivers also contracted cancers myself included, I'm not so completely convinced anymore. I could be completely wrong but then again their are many other accepted theories out there that could be just as wrong in the end. We may never know Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Tue, Mar 13, 2007, 5:42pm (EDT+5) From: This was suspected 25 + years ago (maybe longer but that is how long I know about that) since f.i. nuns never got that kind of cancer. It's nonsense to suggest that the same would be true for cancers of the lung or breastcancer f.i. There is nothing that might suggest even the smallest indication for that. Anne quote: From: starfleet1960@hotmail.com (starfleet) wrote: I think it's dangerous to promote ideas like cancer might be contagious, it might bring us back to the old days when cancerpatients were considered outcasts, better not be around them. Anne --------------------------------------------------------- From: jonboy42@webtv.net (J W) I never said it was a fact that cancer could be triggered by a virus. Nor did I say it was a virus that could be spread from person to person. If it is a virus at all at least partialy responsible, it is also possible that it could be transfered by means other than simple breathing or close proximity, such as ingesting or sexual promiscuity. What I said was that since it has now been proven that at least one kind of cancer (cervical cancer) is directly unequivicably linked to a virus, that to me it's not that far a stretch of the imagination, to perhaps correctly or incorrectly assume, that all cancers may be triggered by some sort of virus. The validity or invalidity of that is as yet to be proven. This virus may have been here since the dawn of man, it may be a type of natural population control. We all have cancers lying dormant in our bodies. Why are they there? What triggers or awakens them, No one knows for sure. Scientists are at this point purely speculating and taking educated guesses as to what truly awakens the beast. I'm not promoting the idea, I merely stated a possiblility, one possibility out of 1000s. Scientists have said cancer can be caused by such things as pollution, asbestos, smoking, drinking, incorrect diet, chemicals in our food and so on and so on. Why is it easier to believe those ideas than to believe it may be triggered by a virus? It's because those things we can have at least some degree of control over, we can if educated and willing to make sacrifices and lifestyle changes, limit our exposure to those things, so we feel that we have some power (albeit limited) but nonetheless power over the beast. A virus heaven forbid, would mean that it's something that is potentialy completely out of our control, and we would then be solely at the mercy of no more than simple statistics (being in the wrong place at the wrong time.) and that's a thought most have a tough time wrapping their minds around. Judging from the rampant and in some countries pandemic spread of another dread disease (aids), I'd say that perhaps going back to the days when people were ill with a known contagious disease, not only did people avoid them but the victems themselves were not selfish self-indulgent people such as today, and they themselves made efforts to limit their exposure to others. The ease at which we simply accept and freely interact with people who are afflicted with deadly diseases, because we don't want to hurt their feelings or encroach on their rights, frankly frightens me. Because of such behavior, if a pandemic such as the bird flu ever does hit here, we would undoubtedly suffer huge casualties. I have cancer, right now there is no proof that it is triggered by a virus, but I do have that possibility always in the back of my mind, and out of respect for human life other than my own, I am concious of close or intimate contact. If it is ever proven in my lifetime, then I would take whatever means were necessary to segregate myself from such contact to prevent the spread. If I did not take such steps I would expect society/govt. to step in for the good of all and take those steps for me. ====================================== Your opinions about these possibilities, are interesting, JW. Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions su-texas@webtv.net schreef: > I have cancer, right now there is no proof that it is triggered by a > virus, but I do have that possibility always in the back of my mind, and [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > me. > Why not stay in the house all alone, live like a hermit then just to be on the safe side? Maybe we should put cancer patients in a separate part of town and let them walk the streets with rattles. Anne quote: From: starfleet1960@hotmail.com (starfleet) su-texas@webtv.net schreef: I have cancer, right now there is no proof that it is triggered by a virus, but I do have that possibility always in the back of my mind, and out of respect for human life other than my own, I am concious of close or intimate contact. If it is ever proven in my lifetime, then I would take whatever means were necessary to segregate myself from such contact to prevent the spread. If I did not take such steps I would expect society/govt. to step in for the good of all and take those steps for me. Anne wrote: Why not stay in the house all alone, live like a hermit then just to be on the safe side? Maybe we should put cancer patients in a separate part of town and let them walk the streets with rattles. Anne ======================================== Anne, I didn't write that. I quoted it as part of a much longer quote. Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions su-texas@webtv.net schreef: > ======================================== > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You said you were careful in intimate contact just in case. It's a small step to the situation I wrote. We're not talking about AIDS but about cancer. What is next? Use seperate dishes for cancerpatients, not allow them to go to the swimmingpool just in case? I think the way you think "I'll be careful just in case" is potentially dangerous and it is based on nothing. Anne > su-texas@webtv.net schreef: > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > I think the way you think "I'll be careful just in case" is potentially > dangerous and it is based on nothing. J W wrote that, Anne, This is what Susan wrote/replied: ====================================== Your opinions about these possibilities, are interesting, JW. Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions J J schreef: > J W wrote that, Anne, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Ah, I understand now. I didn't see that it was quoted text. I'll be more careful when Susan quotes, because it's not very clear to me what is quoted text and what isn't. Sorry Susan, it must be a web t.v. thing with the quoting and I am not used to that, we don't have that in our neck of the woods ;-) Anne Apparently you cannot read nor comprehend opinons. As I said no proof exists that I know of to indicate that cancers are caused or triggered by a virus other than cervical cancer at present. My post was merely an opinion, a thought for discussion, not a target for insults or ridicule. I thoght discussion groups were for sharing of thoughts, ideas, experiences. Apparently this one is that only if the idea jives with the few that seem to rule this roost. I also said that if we guage leaving folks who have a deadly and spreadable disease to their own devices and letting them simply do as they please for fear of encroaching n their rights. to the near pandemic spread of aids throughout the world it becomes rather obvious that is not a good idea. Human beings are by nature selfish and self induldgant. They will alawys abuse freedoms. Hell yes if my neighbor had a disease that I knew might very well kill me then I would not want that person near me. There have been 1000s of recorded cases of people who without a doubt know they have aids and still freely engaged in unprotectd sexual activity, some for selfish pleasure, some for revenge on the world that they perceive gave them the disease, Ask any cop in a major city how many times aids patients have cut themselves and treid to use the blood as a threat or weapon against them or spat on them or tried to bite them or thretened them with a dirty syringe in hopes of giving them aids. Is that fair or right? NO it isn't. Shuld those people have been seperated from society to prevent such atrocities, in hindsight YES, by accepted societal rules of conduct NO.Is segregating people with deadly diseases for the good of all as cruel as it may seem a bad idea? Some say yes but then again if you'd were told the person you just had intimate contact with had such a disease and they did not tell you they had it, would you still think so? All I said was a viral trigger for cancer was a possibility, only a possibility. There are 1000s of possible causes and triggers for cancer being ossed around out there. some ludicrus, some maybe. I don't think at this stage there is any concrete without a doubt that any one thing will cause or trigger cancer. There are some very strong cases for some claims but I don't see how any could be proven beyond doubt. We just don't know for sure. Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2007, 10:07am (EDT+5) From: Why not stay in the house all alone, live like a hermit then just to be on the safe side? Maybe we should put cancer patients in a separate part of town and let them walk the streets with rattles. Anne You can read about Asbestos at http://www.asbestos-now.com - its a HON certified medical site - it should address your questions about cancer as a contagion. On Mar 13, 7:16 pm, su-te...@webtv.net wrote: > quote: > [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] > such as the bird flu ever does hit here, we would undoubtedly suffer > huge casualties > I have cancer, right now there is no proof that it is triggered by a > virus, but I do have that possibility always in the back of my mind, and [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > Susan Wms, Su_Texas my opinions That proves absolutely nothing. They make a statement that asbestos is proven to cause a certain type of cancer. They do not offer the proof. They also state that it may not surface in a person for many years. I don't see where they offered any proof that the cancer is not or could not be triggered by a virus. All they've done is state that exposure to a certain chemical is linked to a certain cancer type, nothing more. Cigarettes are lnked to lung cancer yet a person can smoke for 40 years before they get it. Others get it after smoking only a few years. Some quit smoking and get lung cancer 10-15 years later. Some smoke all their lives and never get it. Some never smoke and get it. Again all they've in reality proven is that lung cancer is linked to exposure to ciggarette smoke. They have not proven that the cigarette in fact triggered the cancer, only that once the cancer has been triggered exposure to cigarette smoke seems to produce a predictable type of cancer. Common sense it's like any virus, bacteria or preditor. They always attack the weak points. If you breathed carcinagins for years then obviously your lungs are your weak point. If you drink like a fish or are a heavy drug user then your liver is a weak point, if you eat anything that isn't nailed to the floor then your colon, rectum or stomach is a weak point. Most, maybe not all can be linked to exposure of some kind to something that weakened that part of your body. Doesn't neccessarily mean the exposure caused the cancer, only that it caused a weak point so that once the cancer present in your body is triggered then that of course is where you will most likely get cancer. Just an opinion, not trying to say it's a fact. Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2007, 12:05pm (EDT-3) From: flavoflav@gmail.com (John Faber) wrote: You can read about Asbestos at http://www.asbestos-now.com - its a HON certified medical site - it should address your questions about cancer as a contagion. John Faber wrote: > You can read about Asbestos at http://www.asbestos-now.com - its a HON > certified medical site - it should address your questions about cancer > as a contagion. You're a disease. Mesothelioma patients get their support elsewhere, safe from "ambulance chasers". (ACOR if any are lurking) J >I never said it was a fact that cancer could be triggered by a virus. > Nor did I say it was a virus that could be spread from person to person. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > correctly or incorrectly assume that all cancers may be triggered by > some sort of virus. One car crash is caused by a drunken driver, so all car crashes must be? > The validity or invalidity of that is as yet to be > proven. This virus may have been here since the dawn of man, it may be a [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > take such steps I would expect society/govt. to step in for the good of > all and take those steps for me. You may as well claim the right to shout "FIRE" in a crowded cinema.........when there isn't one >>I never said it was a fact that cancer could be triggered by a virus. >> Nor did I say it was a virus that could be spread from person to person. [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] > You may as well claim the right to shout "FIRE" in a crowded > cinema.........when there isn't one You know, it seems that there's an awful lot of mystery about cancer because there sure isn't a cure yet and since I've been in the "cancer club," and now that I am more aware of it because it's affecting me, it seems that everyone I know either has it or has a loved one with it. Anyone could speculate on cancer causes, etc. but no one knows how to stop it from happening. Many of us have read this and that on cancer, but all we can do is what feels right. I don't know if it's contagious or not, my husband feels that it could be so won't hold a baby or even me like he once did...that's sad, but he's only thinking of others like he always has ... Cancer is like a devil, a horror show, making people suffer. It's worse than the fear of terrorists...cancer is the war I wish our country would be fighting with all those billions. cancer seems to be claiming more people than any war...and it isn't stopping... But ... one day, one day, there will be a cure and maybe it will be as simple as eating a lime on the high seas... I don't know what the hell I am even getting at...on a rampage I guess...yesterday was even worse... Thanks! I needed that. Giuditta Giuditta schreef: > Anyone could speculate on cancer causes, etc. but no one knows how to stop > it from happening. Many of us have read this and that on cancer, but all we [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > You can't change what your husband thinks Guiditta. The biggest risk for getting NSCL clearly is smoking and baby's don't smoke, but if Don thinks he got cancer because of a virus there's nothing in the world that can convince him to think otherwise. How's Don doing today? Anne > Giuditta schreef: >> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Anne Don seems to feel better today, and he's enjoying the basketball games on TV. Tomorrow at 8 a.m. we find out of we're off to the hospital again for blood. Keep fingers and toes crossed, please. He really doesn't want to go. You're right...he would not do anything to put the baby at risk or any of us either...he keeps his space away from us ... sad. I get a hug now and then... And I really need it, and I think he does, too. I hug him anyway...I don't care what he thinks... Giuditta Giuditta > "starfleet" <starfleet1960@hotmail.com> wrote in message > > How's Don doing today? [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > And I really need it, and I think he does, too. I hug him anyway...I don't > care what he thinks... Good luck today, Giuditta. J >> "starfleet" <starfleet1960@hotmail.com> wrote in message >> > How's Don doing today? [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > Good luck today, Giuditta. > J Thanks! G Giuditta schreef: > Don seems to feel better today, and he's enjoying the basketball games on > TV. Tomorrow at 8 a.m. we find out of we're off to the hospital again for > blood. Keep fingers and toes crossed, please. He really doesn't want to go. > I'm keeping my fingers crossed and hope it'll be okay and you'll be able to enjoy the weekend. It's of again to work for you on monday or is springbreak longer than a week? Anne > Giuditta schreef: >> [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Anne Yep, back to work Monday. Don was in the hospital but as an outpatient, so we do have the weekend. I wrote about the whole shabang in an earlier post...enter at your own risk. Giuditta >>>I never said it was a fact that cancer could be triggered by a virus. >>> Nor did I say it was a virus that could be spread from person to person. [quoted text clipped - 53 lines] > club," and now that I am more aware of it because it's affecting me, it > seems that everyone I know either has it or has a loved one with it. How many times do I have to repeat - MOST PATIENTS WITH CANCER ARE ALREADY CURED> What friggin planet do yu live on pal? First off no one is ever cured of cancer. some are in remission and some have no evidence of disease but none are ever cured and I've seen very darn few that remain NED for life. The larger percentage of folks I've met with cancer or people I've met who's loved ones have had cancer are dead or still taking poison for it.. I'm fairly active in cancer circles as well so I'm not talking about an isolated handful of people either. nearly every single person on the planet has had a family member or loved one with cancer and when you ask the outcome in more than half the cass the answer is they died. It isn't encouraging nor is it positive, it's just the truth at least what I've seen of it. Yes people do survive it. I have a realtive that's had cancer twice over a 15 year period. She's still alive but she is not cured Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2007, 3:11pm (EDT+4) From: How many times do I have to repeat - MOST PATIENTS WITH CANCER ARE ALREADY CURED> J W schreef: > Yes people do survive it. I have a realtive that's > had cancer twice over a 15 year period. She's still alive but she is not > cured > > Maybe that's the difference between you and Steph. You look at some people you know and family members and draw conclusions from that, Steph looks a bit further and his conclusions are based on large populations. Anne Steph says 65% or more of all cancers are cured and that is pure hogwash. there are a few cancers such as breast, testicular, prostate for example that are much more curable than in the past, but the truth is radiation or chemo do not have much better results today than 20 years ago. Yes people are living longer with cancer and that is partially due to better chemo I'll admit and partially due to earlier and better testing. The end result though has not changed much for most types of cancer unless they are caught in the early stages.. CURE or CURED is a word that no doctor (at leat in the USA) will use. The most you will get one to say is remission or NED (no evidence of disease). Group: alt.support.cancer Date: Wed, Mar 14, 2007, 7:30pm (EDT+5) From: Maybe that's the difference between you and Steph. You look at some people you know and family members and draw conclusions from that, Steph looks a bit further and his conclusions are based on large populations. Anne > J W schreef:> Yes people do survive it. I have a realtive that's > > had cancer twice over a 15 year period. She's still alive but she is not [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Anne Anne, I was told by oncologist that I would never be cured and there is NO CURE only no evidence of disease. Some cancers are cured....thyroid and blood cancers. Alex > I was told by oncologist that I would never be cured and there is NO > CURE cancer free. All people are cancer free until diagnosis or death from other cause. > only no evidence of disease. Some cancers are cured....thyroid and > blood cancers. And others. Make yourself useful. Pull out numbers for JW (he's in FLA) or anyone else who doubts there's cures. http://www.cancer.org/docroot/STT/stt_0.asp Statistics for 2007 http://seer.cancer.gov/statistics/ Finding Cancer Statistics http://www.naaccr.org/cinap/index.htm North American Association of Central Cancer Registries J >J W schreef: >> Yes people do survive it. I have a realtive that's [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > Anne If that's true then I say whoopie...I just wasn't aware of it, but I'm not an expert or a doctor with stats in front of me. I damn well pray Steph is right. Giuditta > If that's true then I say whoopie...I just wasn't aware of it, but I'm not > an expert or a doctor with stats in front of me. I damn well pray Steph is > right. You already have Don's oncologist's prognosis. J >> If that's true then I say whoopie...I just wasn't aware of it, but I'm >> not [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > You already have Don's oncologist's prognosis. > J I know. G Giuditta schreef: > If that's true then I say whoopie...I just wasn't aware of it, but I'm not > an expert or a doctor with stats in front of me. I damn well pray Steph is [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > There are a lot of cancers that are treatable these days and have a 60-90 % survival rate if detected early enough : breastcancer, bladdercancer, Hodgekin, leukemia, throatcancer, cervical cancer then there are other cancertypes with a very low survival rate because f.i. for the most part they don't give complaints until it is to late: cancer of the pancreas, stomach, esto (I don't know the word in English), ovarian cancer etc. The stats are based on all cancertypes, so the survival rate differs in different cancers + stages. When I told my nine year old I had cancer and wouldn't survive it he said "Oh but more than 50% of all cancerpatients are cured nowadays, you can be cured maybe". It doesn't work that way alas. Anne starfleet schreef: > The stats are based on all cancertypes, *so* the survival rate differs > in different cancers + stages. *so* has to be *but* Anne > Giuditta schreef: > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > 60-90 % survival rate if detected early enough : breastcancer, > bladdercancer, Hodgekin, leukemia, throatcancer, cervical cancer and prostate and non melanoma skin cancers and Osteosarcomas and uterine and oropharynx, nasopharynx, hypopharynx and larynx, the salivary glands and Wilms' tumours and (90% average ten year survival) are expected with melanoma depth of tumour less than 1.0 mm Large bowel: Malignancy confined to the bowel wall, not penetrating muscle in the wall. Cure rate exceeds 90% Cancers of the penis if found and treated in the early stages have a five year survival rate of 85-90% I've probably missed a bunch that Steph could add to the list. > then > there are other cancertypes with a very low survival rate because f.i. > for the most part they don't give complaints until it is to late: cancer > of the pancreas, stomach, esto (I don't know the word in English), esophageal? > ovarian cancer etc. The stats are based on all cancer types, so the > survival rate differs in different cancers + stages. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Anne How many longterm (or cured) bladder cancers survivors, Anne? J J schreef: > How many longterm (or cured) bladder cancers survivors, Anne? > J > > That depends on grade and stage. The lower the grade and stage, the higher the chances of survival. Since bladder cancer still mostly is an old age disease the survival rate for low grade superficial bladder cancer probably is even higher than the stats show. For the low grade superficial cancer that is about 90%. Problem is the high recurrence rate, in that sense one is never cured. Five year overall survival is about 60% but that includes all bladder cancers, also the high grade muscle invading bladder cancers. Five year survival for metastasized (distant mets) bladdercancer is < 5% Anne > J schreef: > > [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Anne OK thanks, Anne. I thought you might have numbers from the bladder cafe list. Hugs J J schreef: > OK thanks, Anne. > I thought you might have numbers from the bladder cafe list. > Hugs > J > > There are tuns of statistics, but they all differ a bit depending on which patients were included. Overall 5 year survival for bladder cancer (that is all people that were diagnosed with having bladder cancer, regardless stage and grade ) is 57%. Anne > J schreef: > > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > (that is all people that were diagnosed with having bladder cancer, > regardless stage and grade ) is 57%. I understand Anne, but Eric of esophageal list gave us numbers (not statistics) a while back. Not to worry if you don't have them. Thanks J J schreef: >> . >> [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > I have Dutch numbers if you mean by numbers cases per year (4000 new case of bladdercancer very year on a population of 16 milion etc). In this thread numbers are not important statistics are I think. You can easily look up the numbers in the bladdercancerwebcafé, it doesn't require membership. Anne > J schreef: > > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Anne It's okay really, Anne. Looks like JW has moved on to other topic anyway. Hugs J >>>>I never said it was a fact that cancer could be triggered by a virus. >>>> Nor did I say it was a virus that could be spread from person to [quoted text clipped - 65 lines] > How many times do I have to repeat - MOST PATIENTS WITH CANCER ARE ALREADY > CURED> Is this a documented fact? Seriously. I don't understand. Please, explain, and I'm not being sarcastic; I really want to know what you mean. Thanks, Giuditta > "Steph" <steph@vancouvers.island> wrote in message > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Please, explain, and I'm not being sarcastic; I really want to know what you > mean. Many people are cured. I see them on other newsgroups, on TV, in magazines, on radio, in person. Relatives, friends, neighbors, colleagues. Many, many are cured and getting on with their lives. Unfortunately, Don's prognosis is grim. J >> "Steph" <steph@vancouvers.island> wrote in message >> [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > Unfortunately, Don's prognosis is grim. > J I know. G > ><snip J W rant> > >>> [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Please, explain, and I'm not being sarcastic; I really want to know what you > mean. Depending on the source and the statistics... For every 100 cancers cured, surgery cures about 50, radiotherapy about 40 and chemotherapy at best 10. That's just the way it is..... for every 100 cancers cured, radiation cures about 45...........And surgery about 52 There are some relatively rare advanced metastatic cancers which can be cured by chemo - testicular germ cell cancer, high and medium grade non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, some childhood cancers, but that's it. Chemotherapy is vastly overblown. It is a valuable adjuvant treatment after surgery for some common cancers, but none of the common epithelial cancers (breast, stomach, colon, rectum, lung, prostate, etc, ) can be cured by chemotherapy. And there is nothing on the horizon to suggest that that is going to change anytime soon.<end Steph quotes> J > Giuditta schreef: >> [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > Anne Thanks, Anne. He had his blood checked today, and there were low flags, more than I have seen before except the WBC count wasn't quite as low. His platelet count was very low, so the nurse showed it to the oncologist. He said if Don was doing okay and not bleeding anywhere for him to go home, rest and be back on Wed. for the procrit shot. He can't have it but once a week, and it's not due yet. He's weak and shaky but hanging in there. He's been craving salads and fruit, so I went to the store and called the nurse on my way there because Don wasn't with me, and I wanted to speak freely to her. I asked her how long he could be weak from the chemo, and she said sometimes people take a year or year and a half to get their strength back. I told her that I was confused because his prognosis wasn't even that long. I also told her that he wanted a huge salad and why couldn't he have one and enjoy life a bit. She then tells me that he only had to stay away from foods like that when his WBC count was so low...I'm thinking, why didn't you all tell us that before now because it's not like I haven't asked. I asked her about his prognosis again and if the chemo was for curing him or giving him more time, and she suddenly had to get off the telephone, but she did call me back later, I assume after speaking to the doctor. We had a good conversation when she called me back, and she said that her father was going through the same as Don except his lung cancer wasn't extensive but that he had a prognosis of a year...his tumor is resting on the aorta. She said the ultimate goal was for the chemo to put the cancer in remission but that I know Don's prognosis, too. She sounded sad and afraid to tell me his chamces are slim, but then she also said not to give up hope because every case is different. A couple of questions she answered by not answering at all, and the conversation ended with none of us know when our time comes to leave this earth. I told her that I didn't expect the doctor or her to be God but to be up front with me about Don's condition even though I don't want to know yet have to know because I'm a mom and have a teenager to cope with while he's coping...plus the rest...I don't want to sound like I have no faith yet I want to know what's possible also. So, I just got Don lots of fruits and salad makings and came home and fixed him all of it...I told the nurse that if he's not doing so well and has a short prognosis, what the hell does it matter what he eats at this point...even a convicted murderer gets a last meal of anything he/she wants... I'm not saying that this was Don's last meal, I'm just saying I want to see him enjoy himself and it might even make him feel better...it seemed to and it sure helped with the constipation... So, I'm back to taking a day at a time and hoping and praying for a miracle even though he is pale, weak and coughing his brains out. But every fiber of my being is on alert and it sux. Giuditta Giuditta schreef: > I asked her how long he could be weak from the chemo, and she said sometimes > people take a year or year and a half to get their strength back. I told her > that I was confused because his prognosis wasn't even that long. That might be true for full recovery, but it doesn't mean it's normal to be as sick and tired as Don is now for a year and a half. Usually, if there is no progression of disease people recover in about three to six weeks in the way that they feel a lot better than while on chemo and are able to stay awake more, go on an outing, feeling a bit better every day etc. Of course this differs from person to person and has a lot to do with attitude to along with how fast the body recovers from chemo, that also depends on age and health otherwise. > I asked her about his prognosis again and if the chemo was for curing him or > giving him more time, and she suddenly had to get off the telephone, but she [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > want to know what's possible also. > Usually if you ask up front what the prognosis is they will tell you, but frankly I never wanted a prognosis about how long I would survive after chemo since I'm an individual and I wanted to take it a day, a week maybe at a time. I still do. > So, I'm back to taking a day at a time and hoping and praying for a miracle > even though he is pale, weak and coughing his brains out. But every fiber of > my being is on alert and it sux. > > I think that's the only way to go, taking it one day at a time and trying to make the most of today. Otherwise you forget to enjoy what you have while worrying about the future and what might happen or not and when. I really hope Don will be feeling a bit better today. I understand it must be very, very hard to see your spouse suffer. Good thing you bought him some fruit and salads, he'll enjoy that after such a long time. All the best, Anne > Giuditta schreef: >> [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > All the best, Anne He did enjoy it ... a lot. Thanks! G >I don't voice my opinion to him or my fears about that. I just pray that >he's right. He says he feels stronger but still not up to even a short walk. [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > >Giuditta Gieditta, Just wanted to jump in here with my own experience with chemo. I only (only!) went thru 4 rounds of chemo and really lost quite a bit of stamina from it. I had finished my last chemo in April of 2003. I went to a Springsteen concert in September of the same year and spent most of it in my seat (and thus, unable to see quite a bit of the action) mostly because I couldn't stand for all that long of a time. The following month I went to the Outer Banks (friends are the best!) and wasn't able to walk as much as I could in past years - just tired out too quickly. But slowly it came back. It'll take some time. As far as venting goes, vent on. You and yours are going thru a lot, you should be able to get it out of your system every now and then. And your new grandbaby sounds lovely..... Carla >>I don't voice my opinion to him or my fears about that. I just pray that >>he's right. He says he feels stronger but still not up to even a short [quoted text clipped - 40 lines] > > Carla Thanks, Carla. How are you doing now? It sounds like you have energy back so that's good. Are you in remission or has the cancer disappeared? I hope so. Someone called my husband today to see if he could play a concert in two weeks, and he told them he'd let them know after today's dr. visit. There's no way he could even walk up on a stage much less play a gig. When he turns down a gig, I know he's sick and he hasn't played since November. I told him to send our eighteen-year-old if they want a picker as good as he is, and Don said, "No, he's better than I am." Cheyenne (our son) would be thrilled to know his dad said that, and I'm going to tell him, but he plays a whole different kind of music...but heck, he can still do it so I say why not... Don says he will have to ease back into it as he gets energy, and I told him there was no rush...so, we'll see what happens. He said that when he was diagnosed that he figured he would have the chemo and be back at work in a couple of weeks...he had no idea all this would happen. Keep going to those concerts...support the musicians! Giuditta >>>I don't voice my opinion to him or my fears about that. I just pray that >>>he's right. He says he feels stronger but still not up to even a short [quoted text clipped - 61 lines] > >Giuditta I was lucky; my cancer was found pretty early (non-Hodgkins lymphoma). I've had no evidence of cancer for almost 4 years now. I'm still seeing my onc, about 6 months appts now and get bloodwork done of course. I feel good. I feel like myself these days. I hope Don will feel well enough to be able to play again soon. Carla >>>>I don't voice my opinion to him or my fears about that. I just pray that >>>>he's right. He says he feels stronger but still not up to even a short [quoted text clipped - 81 lines] > > Carla I am so happy for you!!! I pray he will play again...that's his lifeline. Thanks! G |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message