There are several different types of brain cancer. It is important to know and understand that treating a brain tumor should be customized to you. While treatments are typically standardized, it is important for the treating doctor to consider your age, as well as any and all health complications that you may experience.
This is caused due to the formation of cancer cells) on the inner surface of skulls or on the brain's tissue-cells. It is also known as intracranial tumor as it can be developed on any location or part of the brain and is a resultant of rapid cell division. The tumors that develop on the brain can be of the following types
Every individual having brain tumors should receive unique and individual brain cancer treatment. The treatment generally depends on the individual's age, general health, and size and location of the tumor.
There are several questions surrounding brain cancer treatment. The nature of treatment, its effects, and the long-term outcomes are some of them. Doctors are best equipped to handle these questions.
Brain cancer chemo-related nausea is one of the most frustrating effects that often accompany chemotherapy. While it is true that chemotherapy is effective in killing cancerous cells and reducing the possibility that those abnormal growths that are part of brain cancer will spread throughout other areas of the brain and the body as a whole, not too many patients feel that this brain cancer treatment is enjoyable.
This is especially true if they experience the nausea that is quite common among many individuals that indulge in treatment for their condition. In this medical guide, you will learn important facts about brain cancer chemo-related nausea.
Not only are your relations with others altered, the way that others relate to you are also altered. If you are reading this, it is likely that your brain cancer treatment has proven to be successful and you are clear of all cancerous cells and abnormal growths. Now, you are ready to live your life after brain cancer. In this guide, you will discover some helpful steps to help you initiate the process.
Brain cancer tumors may originate in the brain (primary site) or they may metastasize to the brain from another site. Prostate cancer, for example, may metastasize to the liver, the lung, the hip, and then to the brain. Metastasized brain tumors have a poor prognosis because of the already advanced state of the cancer.
Once this occurs, the cells are no longer able to go through their traditional characteristics of dividing and spreading through the body. The ultimate goal associated with this type of brain cancer treatment is to successfully eliminate the largest number of abnormal cells as possible while not damaging the cells that surround the abnormal ones that are considered to be healthy. Here, you will learn more information pertaining to brain cancer radiation therapy.
If you want to engage in a brain cancer nutrition therapy treatment plan, it is important to have your nutritional needs evaluated by a medical professional. There are many tests that may be performed so that the medical doctor may get a good snapshot of what nutritional needs you require.
In addition to encouraging you to consume only those foods that are positive to your overall health, the nutrition therapy plan will also include exercises that you will be safe performing during the course of your disease and the treatment of your disease. You may also be encouraged to take nutritional supplements. There are many supplements that have been found to benefit brain cancer patients in one way or another. These include Selenium, Vitamin E, and Beta Carotene.
Frequently Asked Questions
Do many people die from brain cancer after it is removed?
My brother had brain cancer about 9 years ago, but he had the tumor removed and went through radiation and chemotherapy.At the moment he is doing fine, but I found some statistics that said even living five years was immprobable.
Treatment of all sorts of cancer is much more aggressive, these days, with rather better outcomes.
Edit: There are a lot of out of date articles and stats online still.
How long can someone survive brain cancer?
I'm writing a story, and the character has brain cancer. She will pass away, but I don't know how long that would take. A friend of mine's mother recently had brain cancer, and was given four months to live, but she passed away within a couple weeks of that statement.
Will doctors always give you how long you're expected to live, or only when it seems real bad? About when will they hospitalize you? (I'm sorry if this is offensive to anyone)
I've seen survivals from weeks to months to years with brain tumors.
Every person is different.
Even a cancer specialist like me cannot possibly know
how much time a person has.
People push us to make guesses especially family members..
We do have averages for tumor types and stages.
But we are always wrong for an individual.
Doctors do not GIVE people so long to live. I hate hearing it put this way.
If WE decided - all of our patients would immortal.
What really gets me is a family pushing to know a survival time in a 90 year old.
By statistics, he or she should have died over ten years earlier.
What is the prognosis for brain cancer? Is this brain stem glioma?
Someone I know has brain cancer. The tumor sits on the right side of their brain stem and the tumor puts pressure on the nerves and they have tremors. The doctor said they only had a year when they was first diagnosed and they did radiation and now is on chemotherapy for over a year now. I want to know the prognosis of this type of cancer. I don't know if it's high or low grade or know the name of the cancer but if anyone has any useful information I would really appreciate it. I think they've had it for 2 years now.
Brain Cancer Prognosis: Summary
Cancer patients and their loved ones face many unknowns. While some people find it is easier to cope when they know the statistics, other people find statistical information confusing and frightening, and they think it is too impersonal to be of use to them. The doctor who is most familiar with a patient's situation is in the best position to discuss the brain cancer prognosis and to explain what the statistics may mean for that person. At the same time, it is important to understand that even the doctor cannot tell exactly what to expect. In fact, a person's prognosis may change if the cancer progresses, or if treatment is successful. Seeking information about the brain cancer prognosis is a personal decision, and it is up to each patient to decide how much information he or she wants to know and how to deal with it.
However, prognosis can be reversed with 'immunity boosters'.
Radio-therapy, Chemo-therapy, Interventional and Surgical procedures are instrumental in prolonging the human life by postponing the death also by a decade or two. I have seen many patients living for decades after Surgery, Mastectomy, Heart/Kidney Transplants, Dialysis, etc.
But all the patients are worried about side effects. Here is a way out to minimize scope for severe side effects.
“U have to take permission from the oncologist and take the following diet[s] with certain restrictions.”
1. Good liquid Diet, green leaf juices + honey, like aloe vera juice, noni juice, wheat grass powder, fresh fruit [seasonal fruit only] juices sprouted seeds like green gram, horse gram, ground nuts, boiled- after soaking in water for 15 hours-Soya beans, etc., raw coconut, raw dates, watermelon, cabbage, yogurt, spinach, helped many a no. of Health conscious people all over the globe.
2. Acupressure techniques – A MUST to ensure faster recovery. Utility—Blocked energy + toxins shall be moved from all Ur internal organs to purge in the normal drainage system, i.e., urine, feces, sweat, cough, menses[ladies], vomiting and all the organs shall function up to optimal levels.
3. No salt, no baking soda, no cooked food, No chocolates, No Pizzas, No burgers ----to boost-up immunity power to produce antibodies. Say no to Deep freeze and deep fried products from KFC and McDonald, Diet sodas with aspertime and colas made in India, etc.
4. Yoga Therapy—Kapalbhati, Bhastruka and Loma and anuloma to activate abdomen. Pelvic region and lungs.
5. Aloe Vera juice – 30 ml. + 1 tsp of honey—t.d.s.
6. Wheat grass powder – 1 tsp of powder + 2 drops of honey + 1 cup of hot water b.d.s.
7. Noni Juice-A French fruit. 5 ml., t.d.s., in the I week; 10 ml tds., in the II week and 15 ml. t.d.s, from III week onwards. Add double quantity of water every time.
8. For the first 10/15 days, drink pineapple juice.
9. After 15 days, if the patient gets very hungry (it is a good sign of recovery), give the patient 3 to 4 ounces of curd, prepared in the following manner. To the boiled warm milk (preferably of cow's or goat's milk) add 12/15 leaves of tulsi and prepare the curd. If the patient is of Pitt Prakruti, give him this curd, adding thereto little powder of crystal sugar. For all other types of patients, this curd can be taken with little rock salt or black salt in it. Such curd can be taken 3 to 4 times a day. from 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. only.
9. Eat roasted bitter gourd (Karela-bitter gourd) - has been found effective even in blood cancer. Just, burn it on direct fire as U burn –mokkajonna kande-Telugu, Hindi--Butta---- eat it just like that by chewing every mouthful 25 times.
10. Panch Tulasi Drops –available @ any local Ayurveda Shop all over India. Dosage 1 drop + 1 cup of hot milk/tea/water daily.
11. Triphala Churan to keep her bowels free from accumulated feces/toxins and Vaginal Douche to keep her gonads cleansed for 15 days daily.
God bless U. I pray the Almighty for Godspeed recovery.
PS. If satisfied/benefited with, inform others to browse 'Yahoo Answers’ on any health issue.
'Health in Ur Hands' Vol. I & II available in all Indian languages all over the globe- by Dr.Devendra Vora,DSc.,MD.,FRCP, an octogenarian & the pioneer in Acupressure in India. Dr.Vora, the world renowned Acupressurist, an octogenarian and the Bhishma Pithamaha of acupressure in India--- treated and caused to treat more than 150000 cases of Cancer, HIV/AIDS, Diabetes, lupus/sle, irregular menses and also many other most dreaded diseases.
How rare is it for someone who has never smoked to have lung cancer?
I just saw this thing about an actress - Valerie? - who had lung cancer a few years ago despite being a life long NON-smoker and now has brain cancer.
I know that older people can get lung cancer even if they've never smoked but whats the percentage of smokers / non smokers with it?
Lung cancer is by far the leading cause of cancer death among both men and women. Each year, more people die of lung cancer than of colon, breast, and prostate cancers combined.
Lung cancer mainly occurs in older people. About 2 out of 3 people diagnosed with lung cancer are 65 or older; fewer than 2% of all cases are found in people younger than 45. The average age at the time of diagnosis is about 71.
Overall, the chance that a man will develop lung cancer in his lifetime is about 1 in 13; for a woman, the risk is about 1 in 16. These numbers include both smokers and non-smokers. For smokers the risk is much higher, while for non-smokers the risk is lower.
Black men are about 40% more likely to develop lung cancer than white men. The rate is about the same in black women and in white women. Both black and white women have lower rates than men, but the gap is closing. The lung cancer rate has been dropping among men over the past 2 decades and has just recently begun to drop in women.
It has been estimated that active smoking is responsible for close to 90 percent of lung cancer cases; radon causes 10 percent, occupational exposures to carcinogens account for approximately 9 to 15 percent and outdoor air pollution 1 to 2 percent. Because of the interactions between exposures, the combined attributable risk for lung cancer can exceed 100 percent.
Exposure to radon is estimated to be the second leading cause of lung cancer, accounting for an estimated 15,000 to 22,000 lung cancer deaths each year. Radon is a tasteless, colorless and odorless gas that is produced by decaying uranium and occurs naturally in soil and rock. The majority of these deaths occur among smokers since there is a greater risk for lung cancer when smokers also are exposed to radon.
Lung cancer can also be caused by occupational exposures, including asbestos, uranium, and coke (an important fuel in the manufacture of iron in smelters, blast furnaces, and foundries). The combination of asbestos exposure and smoking greatly increases the risk of developing lung cancer.
Nonsmoking asbestos workers are five times more likely to develop lung cancer than nonsmokers not exposed to asbestos; if they also smoke, the risk factor jumps to 50 or higher. Environmental exposures also can increase the risk of lung cancer death.
Why is only breast cancer a big deal?
Now don't confuse me for somebody who doesn't take breat cancer seriously, I think it is a big deal and needs to be cured. But my question is that there is hundreds of different types of cancer, and why is breast cancer seem to be the only one that people care about? My grandma has leukemia, a friend of mine had a tumor,my step grandpa died from brain cancer, and my great grandpa died from lung cancer. Nobody makes a big deal about those. Why only breast cancer?
The answer to why breast cancer has a higher profile than other cancers is simple - sheer hard work.
Breast cancer awareness campaigns and Awareness Month started as a campaign by ordinary women, most of whom had breast cancer or had lost someone to it, to raise awareness so that people knew the symptoms, examined themselves regularly, attended their routine mammograms etc. It caught the public imagination and enthusiastic participation and hard work by women made it grow into something nationally, then internationally, recognised.
People have limited time for campaigns; those who campaign around illnesses are usually concerned with the illness that's affected them or their family. I know a couple who have a child with a very rare and life-threatening condition. Much of their time is now taken up with campaigning around this condition - fund raising, agitating for more funding for research, more education, more awareness etc. They're doing what what the women who started the breast cancer awareness campaign did. And it's as a result of the hard work by those women that breast cancer is no longer the automatic death sentence it once was - but don't lose sight of the fact that in the US an average of 112 women die from breast cancer every day; in the UK.that average is 33 a day - I don't have statistics for other countries.
There are awareness campaigns and months for other cancers - but the fact is that none has had the hard work put into it that breast cancer awareness has - hard work by people affected by breast cancer and their families.
I agree that awareness needs to be raised about other cancers too.and while I hate ‘competitive illness’ I can see why there is resentment about an imbalance in awareness and fund raising.
The solution is not less attention for breast cancer, but more attention for other cancers – and there is nothing to stop any group of people starting a campaign along the lines of the one started by those women who started all the breast cancer awareness.
It's up to you to make a big deal about the things you care about, with like-minded people
Why are people against Marijuana so uneducated about it?
Like, they still believe that it kills brain cells (despite it never being proven and the study claiming it being beyond flawed, and a study suggesting that it might actually stimulate the growth of new brain cells) or that it causes cancer (which there has never been a link found between marijuana smoking and any sort of cancer - however, it's been shown that weed smokers are less likely to get brain cancer, neck cancer, prostate cancer, etc - and it's been shown to shrink tumour size, starve off cancerous cells while leaving healthy onces alone).
Why do people get arrogant attitudes about being "above" or "better" than someone because they don't smoke weed, despite the fact that they go binge drinking every other weekend, which alcohol had been PROVEN to be MUCH MORE HARMFUL than weed?
Why do they claim that it's easy to OD on marijuana, when there has never been one reported case in all of history of this happening?
Why do they think legalization will cause more minors to use it, despite the fact that statistics show that after countries and all US states have legalized medical marijuana have actually seen an overall decrease in teen usage?
Why do they think that legalization would support drug dealers, when they'll be driven out of business since people would rather buy legally?
Honestly, if you guys think the only people who smoke weed are the ones who use it as a "crutch", you've got to start looking around a little harder. You'd be surprised at who uses it recreationally - from doctors and lawyers and teaches, friends and family, to politicians and even the president himself.
If, at the end of a long stressful day, someone chooses to sit down and relax while smoking a joint, who the damn cares? It's their body, their choice, and they aren't harming anybody.
Also, weed is NOT a gateway theory. It's a theory for a reason. The ones who go on to harder drugs would've prolly gotten there without weed anyways. Technically, using the logic, alcohol is the gateway theory, as most people who try weed started with alcohol (which is a harder drug, by the way). Out of the people I know, very few have tried anything more than ecstacy (which is also, believe it or not, generally safe and not too bad - save a couple instances). LSD/Acid (the same thing) is also generally
Also, with government control they'd need to sell at a cheaper price than the current black market, and many people would rather buy from legal sellers and pay taxes than go to the black market. Think of the prohibition of alcohol of the 1920s - it was a huge door of opportunity to the black market, prices rose and everything - but after it was made legal again it was taken back out of the black market pretty successfully, dont you think? There might still be illegal sales of alcohol today, but not nearly to the extent as back then.
Cannabis is cheap and easy to grow and if people could grow their own, it could help with it too. I wouldn't worry about the black market competing for too long - it won't be nearly as profitable to them in the long run.
I do, however, agree that too much of anything is a bad thing - from cheese to alcohol to weed - there can be bad effects from it, but all of society shouldn't be penalized for people that go overboard. People go overboard on fast food, sugar, and so on all the time, but that doesn't mean we should ban it all. People jump off bridges, but it doesn't mean we should outlaw them.
By buying legally, I do not mean that people will be buying legally from the streets like they do now - I mean buying it like you would alcohol - get ID'd and all, and NOT from criminals and gangs, but from honest working people that own legit businesses and pay their taxes.
Legalization DOES NOT support street dealers, since people would rather buy from legal sources, and finally they won't be able to make a good profit since weed prices would go down. Most people would rather know that they aren't supporting gangs and violence and criminal activity.
Would you rather buy alcohol from a legal liquor store, or from some sketchy guy on the streets? Would you rather buy fresh meat from a legit business, or out of somebody's trunk? People would rather support trusted people. Think of this - since alcohol has been made legalized, you don't see gang activity revolving around bootlegging like you used to in the 1920s. Believe it or not, Drug Dealers do not want to see weed legalized, because
People are ignorant and brain washed by the government. That's why people still support war and the laws against a harmless plant. I believe our generation will fix a lot of these problem we just need to vote and have our opinions heard.
What type of cancer is chemotherapy least effective against?
What type of cancer is chemotherapy most effective against and the least effective against?
Red Angel is correct. According to the study that was done by some Australian oncologists, when a person gets chemotherapy, they have a 2.1% chance of survival in 5 years for all of the cancer's included. The study was called "The Contribution of Cytotoxic Chemotherapy to 5-year Survival in Adult Malignancies. This study took every randomized controlled clinical trial performed in the U.S. from 1990 to 2004 and the results showed the above Cancer cure statistics. According to that study, chemo is most effective against Hodgkin's disease at 40.3% (ABSOLUTE numbers).
In 1989, a German biostatistician, Ulrich Abel PhD, after publishing dozens of papers on cancer chemotherapy, wrote a monograph "Chemotherapy of Advanced Epithelial Cancer." It was later published in a shorter form in a peer-reviewed medical journal.70 Dr. Abel presented a comprehensive analysis of clinical trials and publications representing over 3,000 articles examining the value of cytotoxic chemotherapy on advanced epithelial cancer. Epithelial cancer is the type of cancer we are most familiar with. It arises from epithelium found in the lining of body organs such as breast, prostate, lung, stomach, or bowel.
From these sites cancer usually infiltrates into adjacent tissue and spreads to bone, liver, lung, or the brain. With his exhaustive review Dr. Abel concludes that there is no direct evidence that chemotherapy prolongs survival in patients with advanced carcinoma. He said that in small-cell lung cancer and perhaps ovarian cancer the therapeutic benefit is only slight. Dr. Abel goes on to say, "Many oncologists take it for granted that response to therapy prolongs survival, an opinion which is based on a fallacy and which is not supported by clinical studies."
Over a decade after Dr. Abel’s exhaustive review of chemotherapy, there seems no decrease in its use for advanced carcinoma. For example, when conventional chemotherapy and radiation has not worked to prevent metastases in breast cancer, high-dose chemotherapy (HDC) along with stem-cell transplant (SCT) is the treatment of choice. However, in March 2000, results from the largest multi-center randomized controlled trial conducted thus far showed that, compared to a prolonged course of monthly conventional-dose chemotherapy, HDC and SCT were of no benefit.71 There was even a slightly lower survival rate for the HDC/SCT group. And the authors noted that serious adverse effects occurred more often in the HDC group than the standard-dose group. There was one treatment-related death (within 100 days of therapy) in the HDC group, but none in the conventional chemotherapy group. The women in this trial were highly selected as having the best chance to respond.
"April" You need to start using the ABSOLUTE NUMBERS and NOT the relative numbers often used by those that want to skew the results to encourage funding of chemo. You madam, are the laughable one here. Get your facts from credible sources.
EDIT: "April" My you have been indoctrinated well. Because the medical profession in America has gained so much power and money, it is foreign countries that are doing the real research it seems. The drug company studies are the real jokes with all the "Ghost writers" and throwing out the information that does not meet with their agenda and having people like you supporting that insanity makes it difficult to extract the real truth. You simply will NOT find ANY studies done in America that attack the medical industry's use of chemotherapy, it's just too lucrative and way to big of a cash cow.
You still have the brain tumor? How has our modern medicine helped you? Look at Genetic Engineering fiasco; same issue. Only in America do they NOT label GMO foods, but everywhere else in the world they do and the rest of the world has seen the tests and know how bad it is for you, but NOT in America! Same problem.
QRA testing is a very accepted method of testing people for many problems that even doctors have not been able to help. So you know, there is a machine that has been developed that gives data in place of the "O" ring testing you mentioned. It is very sophisticated and not only proves the validity of the "O" ring testing, but is very accurate. You need to update your data bank dear.
Can you name just ONE disease that ANY drug company has "CURED" in the last 100 years? Just one. And don't embarrass yourself by naming vaccines because there is way too much credible data showing how bad vaccines are and how ineffective they are in so many cases.
What is the percentage of people surviving stage 3b lung cancer?
Cancer has reached an area in the brain? My dad has cancer, just wondering how long will he live. He was diagnosed about a month ago?
He's already received radiation.
If the lung cancer has metastasized to the brain, it is stage IV.
Survival at five years is 1% or one in a hundred.
I personally have never seen a patient like this survive more than two years,
and I saw hundreds of stage IV lung cancer patients.
The following reference lists average length of survival at eight months.
That would fit with my experience. That is an average.
I lost some at less that six months and a few made it a year.
Of course his medical oncologist or radiation oncologist who know your dad
and his medical history would be the best ones to make guesses regarding
survival. Go with your dad and ask them when your dad has a doctor's appointment.
We have not seen your dad nor his x-ray studies.
You have not even given us his age.
So all we can do is show you statistics.
He's had radiation ? Where - to the chest or the head or both ?
- - - -
Sorry to give you such bad news. I assume people on this site want honest answers.
Was your dad a cigarette smoker ? Every single one of the many hundreds of people
with lung cancers I saw in North Carolina had been a smoker. I estimated that the
average person I saw with lung cancer had smoked half a million cigarettes before
their diagnosis was made. Smoking causes 90% of the lung cancers in men.
How long can a person live with a brain tumor before it is discovered?
I realize that some tumors are much more aggressive in growth than others... so I guess I'm asking about the ones that take a while to grow.
Additionally, for people with undiagnosed personality disorders or mental illness (therefore no monitoring of brain health)... how long can it take to discover there's a brain tumor? The reason I ask this is because with someone who already had a previous condition, such as a personality disorder, it may take longer to discover since people may just attribute their strange actions, etc., to their "different" personality.
Your question is a very good one. It typically takes about 10 years for medical science to discover a cancer in someone. You are right, some can be detected sooner due to the rapid growth that can happen. In regard to the so called "Disorders," those are made up phrases to allow doctors and psychiatrists to prescribe medications. Psychiatrists used to be called QUACKS until the drug companies figured out they had a great marketing potential.
Those psychotropic drugs are designed to get people addicted and do very little to help with much of anything. In fact, the ADD and ADHD drugs cause children to stunt their growth about 1 to 2 inches, stop working all together in about 2 years and are nothing more than amphetamines, again designed to expand the marketing reach of drug companies, nothing more.
ADD & ADHD symptoms are nothing more than nutritional deficiencies and toxic overload in the body. No one I know or have ever heard of has been DEFICIENT IN ANY DRUG!
Watch this video to learn about what the hack doctors and quack psychiatrists are doing to America today with those "Disorder" drugs:
Now in regard to brain tumors, you need to know what the mainstream medical machine is all about when it comes to cancer. The primary objective is PROFIT and SHAREHOLDER VALUE, not your health, not CURING cancer, and their only goal is to develop drugs to "Treat the symptoms and manage the disease," nothing more.
Watch this video and you will be shocked to see what a doctor went through that actually has a cure for brain tumors that is working, but how he has had to fight the American Cancer Society, AMA, Texas medical board, FDA, and even our own government, and some drug companies.
CANCER ( that involves brain tumors ) is BIG BUSINESS and "MONEY DOESN'T TALK, IT SCREAMS!" Here's the video:
It's time America wakes up to what is going on all around us. Drug companies write the text books for medical schools now. Drug companies are spending billions on drugs that are killing more Americans than any other disease in America today, yet, they are allowed to do so with the blessings of our government.
In July 2004, Gary Null Ph.D, Carolyn Dean M.D., N.D, Martin Feldman M.D., Debora Rasio M.D., Dorothy Smith Ph.D. wrote a paper that revealed very disturbing facts regarding an annual iatrogenic (induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by medical treatment or diagnostic procedures) death rate of 783,936 in one year. It is further disturbing to realize that as few as 5 percent and only up to 20 percent of iatrogenic acts are ever reported. This means that that iatrogenic death rate of 783,936 is much higher.
As we look at the causes of death from degenerative diseases and other causes in America in 2004, it is obvious we are not good at solving this problem on any level. Deaths from: Heart Disease 652,000, Cancer 553,000, and Stroke 150,000.
When comparing the iatrogenic acts of modern medicine in America with the statistical numbers of people dying of any particular disease, it is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States. And when we look at the cost of these iatrogenic deaths, the cost is in the billions.
A definitive review and close reading of medical peer-review journals, and government health statistics shows that American medicine frequently causes more harm than good. The number of people having in-hospital, adverse drug reactions (ADR) to prescribed medicine is 2.2 million. Dr. Richard Besser, of the CDC, in 1995, said the number of unnecessary antibiotics prescribed annually for viral infections was 20 million. Dr. Besser, in 2003, now refers to tens of millions of unnecessary antibiotics. The number of unnecessary medical and surgical procedures performed annually is 7.5 million. The number of people exposed to unnecessary hospitalization annually is 8.9 million.
good luck to you
What is the chance of survival with these cancers?
Brain, liver, lung and cervical.
Someone close to me has all four.. what is her chance of survival if she just found out about a week ago?
Ok well if i must be specific is started as cervical cancer and has obviously spread! I dnt know much about the detail, all i know is what she said. And I wouldn't think our best friends (and i mean they're literally our best friends and have been forever) would lie about cancer.. and she's been getting treatments every day.
I doubt very much she has all 4 of those cancers at once. She probably has a stage 4 cervical cancer which has a 5 year survival rate of 5%.
EDIT: Yes survival rate are just statistics. They are based on over 50 years of information we have kept on cancer. In this case it means 5 years after diagnosed with stage 4 cervical cancer 5% are still alive. As the years progress the percentage declines. HPV does not cause cancer it is a risk factor for some.
SECOND EDIT: If it started as cervical cancer it is still cervical cancer – it doesn’t turn into something else. Every type of cancer is a different disease, so yes you do need to be specific.
How many old people die of cancer, cardiocerebrovascular disease?
I found almost all the old people (70 and above) die of either cancer or brain heart vascular diseases or accidents. Are there any official statistics?
Heart is still the first killer
followed by cancer
Its very rare for someone who is 70 and plus to die in a accident
my 16 year old daughter has been diagnosed with stage 3 astrocytoma in her brain and spine?
she is nearly 17 years old and has 3 stage 3 tumors in the right side of her brain and the cancer has moved into her spine where she also has 3 tumors. she's in relatively good health. what do the statistics say about this age group with these tumors in the two different locations?
Statistics in childhood cancers such as astrocytoma are actually limited and should not be used for prognosis for this age group. The reason it is limited is because childhood cancers are rare and brain tumors are also rare to this age group . . so not enough data has been collected to determine 'prognosis' . . people are not statistics . .everyone is different and every cancer is different. A treatment that might work for one person may not work for another . . so you cannot look at statistics and think that this is a clear picture of what will or what will not happen.
If your daughter is in good health than seek out a pediatric cancer hospital which treats or specializes in this type of cancer. It is also best to join an online or hospital support group to share information with other parents and caregivers fighting this same type of cancer.
What are the roles of statistics in these fields?
Please help me.
The fields are:
Please tell me the role of statistics on one of these fields, better if more! Or all! No just joking, but please help.
In general, what statistics does is it tells us what is going on by giving us measurements. These measurements can then be used to evaluate things.
Medicine: We use statistics to determine how effective treatments are and whether or not they are safe. Say we have a new cancer drug and want to know if it is both safe and effective. We may test it out by undergoing an experimental procedure. We give one set of randomly chosen patients a "placebo" (a fake drug) and another the real one. After a certain amount of time, we try to see if there is a difference between the two groups. Before any drug gets to the human testing stage, it must first be evaluated on non-human subjects, such as in laboratories and on lab animals.
Education: We may want to know how many students are passing and failing, or how effective a teaching system is. Say you want to improve test scores and you have a new teaching system. You administer this to a group of random students- much like with a new drug- and try to determine if there are any differences between the treatment ("testing") group and the control (non-testing) group. If you cannot conduct an experiment, you simply try to observe a lot of students and try to see if the ones who are doing better also happen to be using the new teaching system.
The basic procedures of testing are the same throughout each of the fields. You can either conduct actual experiments, where you determine who is in your testing and control groups, or you can simply observe a large number of subjects and try to notice patterns or differences. Here are some other examples.
Military: test the effectiveness of a new weapons system.
Psychology: Statistics grew out of te desire by psychologists to measure things like intelligence and human behavior. Today, many psychologists are branching into biology, where they are testing hormone activity in the brain.
Sociology: We may want to determine the connection between handgun laws and violence.
At all these levels we try to understand the world by breaking it down into smaller components. We then try to find the patterns (statisticians call these "correlations"). For example, we might determine that a new brand of fertilizer is correlated with larger crops (agriculture).
Business-people are concerned with statistics that reveal how wella product or service is selling. Imagine that you are a huge corporation that sells pop soda, and you have a new TV advertisement that markets the soda. Is the advertisement effective? You may want to gather statistics about how consumers view the advertisement (either through directly asking them- such as through a poll or a panel where people sit down and answer questions face-to-face) or by observing the change in sales. If your sales grow drammatically right after you introduce the new ad, there is good reason to believe that part of that has to do with the ad itself.
Keep in mind that researchers always try to not immediately assume that correlation means causation. That is, just because two things tend to go together does not mean that either one causes the other. The only ways we can make sure that one thing does cause the other (for example, a good drug may "cause" a person to become healthier) is to rule out other possibilities. When we gather a lot of data ("statistics") about something, it helps us eliminate alternative possibilities. For example, when we administer a new drug to a treatment group, we want to make sure that they are not already taking a medication that may interfere with the outcome. Without doing this, we might think that the effectiveness of our drug comes entirely from it. In a sense, the "control" helps us remove some of that uncertainty, because it keeps everything but the treatment the same.
Lynn Redgrave died, but she was cured of breast cancer. How can that be?
The paper said the actress died after 7 years of fighting breast cancer. But she was a cancer surviver and cured after 5 years she was still living. If she was cured, why did she die of the cancer?
The medical community has decided to create an illusion that we are making progress using the 3 methods of "curing" cancer that has been legally accepted in the United States for the last approximately 100 years. Billions of dollars have been poured into this feeble attempt and it is failing miserably, but that is not something the medical community can tolerate. So they have done some things with the statistics that borders on shameful.
Cancer is the ONLY disease that uses a 5 year survival rate as the criteria to say a person is "CURED." The time starts when you are diagnosed. So now they are pushing everyone to get diagnosed early on the idea that you have a better chance of being cured. Well that's clever. Since it takes about 8 to 10 years for cancer to be growing before it is typically able to be diagnosed and another 10 years to die from it if you get NO treatments, the earlier you are diagnosed, the better statistic you will be.
Redgrave died 7 years after she was diagnosed, so she was CURED according to the way she will be listed. If they had diagnosed her a few years later, she would not be a good statistic and have to be labeled as NOT CURED.
She had breast cancer and the typical chemotherapy and radiation treatments statistically only cure 1.4% of those people. Living 7 years from diagnosis, she gets the distinction of her relatives of saying she beat the odds and was part of the 1.4% cured.
I challenge any person here on this forum or anywhere to show us all credible evidence that ADVANCED BREAST CANCER TUMOR PATIENTS BEING TREATED WITH CONVENTIONAL MEDICINE DO BETTER OR LIVE LONGER THAN UNTREATED. Where is the study that shows that? In fact, you will NOT see the real data, but only carefully massaged data that gives the results that promotes huge donations of money that is being poured down a rat hole and wasted on research that is just NOT WORKING.
Even the "cancer studies" are being manipulated to present a favorable impression that Cancer cures are making lots of progress, when in real life, it is just the opposite. It's now very common for these guys to make insults on our intelligence by using some ridiculous "Relative Benefit" study, and not the true data by using ONLY an "Absolute Benefit" study, like the major trickery used for Tamoxifen where the Absolute Benefit was 1.5% and the Relative Benefit was 49%. These guys are using the Relative Benefit and this is simply deceptive and wrong. When looking at data being presented, it is important to make sure honesty and true numbers are what you are looking at.
There are several cancers to consider when establishing the percentage of cases that are lumped into the 2 - 3% cure rate that chemotherapy & radiation are showing. Here is that data showing the % cured (defined using the word cured to mean that ridiculous 5 year survival rate) for a specific cancer using the conventional chemotherapy & radiation or surgery. The study that was done was called "The Contribution of Cytotoxic Chemotherapy to 5-year Survival in Adult Malignancies. This study took every randomized controlled clinical trial performed in the U.S. from 1990 to 2004 and the results showed the above Cancer cure statistics:
Uterus: 00.0%; Stomach 00.7%; Colon 01.0%; Breast 01.4%; Head & Neck: 01.9%; Lung 2.0%; Rectal 3.4%; Brain 3.7%; Esophagus 04.9%; Ovary 08.9%; Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma 10.5%; Cervix 12%; Testes 37.7%; Hodgkin's 40.3%.
Now realize that Testes and Hodgkin's only represents 2% of the total cancers.
To put an even better perspective on this understand that ANY drug evaluated by the medical community that shows less than 30% effectiveness is considered to be LESS THAN A PLACEBO. So, a sugar pill is just as effective as about 98% or more cancer treatments used today! ! !
You will be interested to know that the AMERICAN CANCER SOCIETY in 2007 said "Surgery, radiation therapy, and chemotherapy... seldom produce a cure." That was a quote from the "CANCER FACTS & FIGURES 2007."
I do wish the medical people would STOP using the word CURE for cancer at the 5 year survival rate. This is deceptive and degrading to real credible science. CURE in all other diseases, except Cancer, is defined as "ELIMINATION OF DISEASE." Why NOT be honest for a change about what is really going on? Instead of trying to hide the real facts, let's examine what is really working and what isn't. Drug companies love the fact that the typical cancer patient will waste 0,000 to fight cancer with these concoctions that are worse than sugar pills.
The most effective ways to treat cancer is what is being done outside the U.S. It is illegal for anyone to use any cancer treatment that does not involve chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery! All other treatments are considered illegal and a person can be put in jail for using, promoting, or experimenting, yet many of these treatments are getting tremendous successes. The average person fights off about 6 events of cancer in their lifetime. The body eliminates cancer cells each day as part of the immune system defenses. Our bodies are designed to do that.
Giving people poisons to fight cancer and destroying the immune system is as ridiculous today as it was when the top allopathic doctors decided to drain 1/2 of the blood out of the body of George Washington to cure a sore throat. That didn't work, so the next day they gave him 650 mg. of mercury thinking that would do it. It did, HE DIED. That was chemotherapy, or more aptly put, chemical poisoning.
To get far better answers to a "cancer cure," you should investigate the GERSON CLINIC in San Diego that has a facility across the border in Mexico where they can treat people by supporting a good immunity and detoxification that really works.
good luck to you
Why is breast cancer more "important" than brain cancer?
Why is it that breast cancer is broadcasted more than any other type of cancer? I don't think this is right..... For example brain cancer is much more life threatening. Yes, all types of cancer are life threatening, just why breast cancer. To be honest that kinda makes me furious.
Are you just sitting there feeling furious, or are you translating that fury into action?
Let me explain.
The answer to why breast cancer has a higher profile than other cancers is simple - sheer hard work.
BUT it does annoy me a little (well, ok; more than a little) when people complain about the attention breast cancer receives in comparison to other cancers. The solution is not less attention for breast cancer, but more attention for other cancers – and there is nothing to stop any group of people starting a campaign along the lines of the one started by those women who started all the breast. If brain cancer is a cause close to your heart - and good for you if it is - there is nothing to stop you from enlisting the help of a couple of friends to start an awareness and fundraising campaign. You'd have to be prepared to be as dedicated and to work as hard as those women though. Maybe you already are...?
How many people were diagnosed with Brain Cancer?
Title says it all. I just need adults and a accurate answer. Thanks. (Kids can work just put it in a kids spot.)
You can always enter "brain cancer statistics" into your favorite search engine and you'll get the information you are looking for.
I'm not sure what you mean when you say "were diagnosed." To what time period are you referring? Worldwide? US only? Europe? Australia? South America? North America? Africa? Asia?
Estimated new cases and deaths from brain and other nervous system cancers in the United States in 2012:
New cases: 22,910
"This year, an estimated 22,910 adults (12,630 men and 10,280 women) in the United States will be diagnosed with primary malignant tumors of the brain and spinal cord. It is estimated that 13,700 adults (7,720 men and 5,980 women) will die from this disease this year. Brain tumors are the tenth most common cause of cancer death in women.
"About 4,000 children and teens will be diagnosed with a brain or central nervous system tumor this year. More than half of these are in children younger than 15."
What are the effects of weed on the intellect of someone aged 14-16?
I'm assuming if vaporized, not taking into account any damage actual smoke would cause. And also, I would prefer unbiased results, not some pothead who smokes weed all day, or some conservative who has never done it. And any statistics you say, please provide links to studys that actually prove what you are saying. I only care about the effects on intellect.
I want to know the effects of doing it like once every other week, from a vaporizer.
PERFECT question. Watch "The Union". It's an up to date documntary on everything you need to know about it. It tells about an experiment done on monkeys awhile ago that proves the only physically harmful effect of it is suffocation. And the only way that could happen is if you inhale a certain amount in a certain amount of time, and this will kill brain cells. Otherwise, no problem. Not a single reported case of death. It is used for cancer patiens for crying out loud.
You can find this documentary very easily by typing it into google, it's a Google video so you can watch it right there without downloading/signing up for anything.
As for personal experiece, I smoke a couple times a week. Last year I didn't at all, and I was a freshman in high school. I got average grades, A's and B's and a couple of C's. This year, as a sophomore, I have been on the honor role all year with a 3.67 average GPA and almost all A's and a B+ or two. I never do it before school, but I honestly think it posiively affects me. I do well in school, and have realized a lot of things about the world and myself. I think smoking cigarettes is disgusting and alcohol dangerous. It's a natural herb, how bad can it be? It's like going outside and rolling a joint out of leaves from trees or grass from the ground. Natural.
I understand how some people can get lazy from it, but that's only if you do it a lot. My dad has been smoking since high school and has a well paying, steady job at the largest factor in town and went to college and everything. It's not like it makes you a loser. I believe that the reason some people graduate on to more dangerous things is becase they think it's cool or something. But if you understand that it's spiritual, makes you more friendly and open to new ideas/things, and is purely natural, you won't feel the need for anything else.
I'm almost 16, by the way.
Hope I helped!
Chemotherapy is most effective on which type of cancer?
I can't seem to find any statistics on this, and I know there are many combinations of chemo and radiation, but which type of cancer responds most readily to chemo by itself? Also, is there a specific form of cancer that is never treated using chemo?
Basal cell is just cut out, not normally treated with chemo unless it's spread. Cancers found early usually respond well to chemo. There's many different chemos for many different cancers. I would think I'm doing very well on my chemo for brain cancer since it hasn't started growing again. I just took it about an hour ago and I feel great.
Why are so many Americans dying from cancer?
Im just starting to notice so many people in my family and my community and not just us all over this country dying from the same cause . Cancer. Theres so many different types , but I have also noticed the statistics for cancer in America is high. Whats the causes? There has to be some type of cause.
I think people are dying from it because when they suspect something is wrong with them, they get scared and avoid their doctor. I know a woman who was a nurse and found a lump on her breast and never went to the doctor. Months later she finally went, found out she had breast cancer, and a few months later found out it had spread to her brain and spinal cord.
I don't think people realize the importance of health care screenings (mammograms, a colonoscopy, gynecologic exams, prostate exams, etc.). Everyone thinks it can't happen to them. These are especially important for people who have a history of cancer(s) in their family. Hopefully people will eventually realize how important these things are and in the end we'll be beating cancer, instead of cancer beating us.
Does anyone know the statistic of the average amount of time a child with cancer spends in the hospital?
I am also trying to find an estimate of how many treatments the average child with cancer has to undergo in a life time. I'm sure it varies depending upon if the disease relapses or not, but i'm trying to find such statistics for a presentation on pediatric oncology. I want to relate to the psychological toll that the disease takes on a child as a result of spending so much time going through treatments.
I don't think a statistic can be calculated as there are far too many variables. The time a child spends in the hospital for cancer treatment depends on the cancer they have, the stage it is, what type of treatment they receive/whether or not they have a bone marrow transplant, how their body responds, whether or not they get infections, number of surgeries, recovery time for surgery, among other things.
My 3 year old son Conrad was diagnosed with brain cancer in February and he has spent 23 days inpatient already. Psychologically he is doing very well, he is still hard to keep up with!
Any other questions please e-mail me at email@example.com
-Super Conrad's Mommy
Is it possible to change the Fabric of our Society?
Women are constantly being told to look a certain way. Look at all the cosmetic surgeries. Look at the beauty and youth industry in general.
I've heard some interesting statistics:
The average girl in the United States begins dieting at Age 8.
Girls report having body image issues at an average of Age 5.
Here is my question:
How do we change society itself? What measures should be taken?
Society changes all the time. Just a few generations ago a hanging was considered good family fun in this country.
As for women dieting, and your starting to see it in men too now. Plain and simple people look better when thin. How thin is thin enough to look good varies by who is looking and the the shape/bone structure/muscle type of the person being viewed. With fewer men doing taking part in sports, working labor intensive jobs and overall just not getting out much your starting to see males dieting also.
As for changing the culture unless you can rewire our brains to see beauty differently it's not going to happen. Nor is it any healthier to not diet. On one side you have the various detrimental effects of extreme diets including anorexia, poor nutrition, anemia, etc. On the flip side those who just let themselves go suffer from diabetes, heart disease, poor mental health, back pain, higher rates of cancer, and so on.
In short being at either extreme is unhealthy for MOST people, but not all. The one thing nutritionists are completely missing is that people are different. What is good for one person is lethal for another. They are trying to slap a single model and force feed everybody into it. No wonder half the time they are reversing themselves or contradicting previous findings. For some people extremely thin is both normal and healthy. For some people it's lethal. Some people can weigh in at 300 LBs and live for years with few health issues, most people cannot. For some it's a crippling experience they cannot recover from.
Where you'll have better luck is instilling healthier habits earlier than 8. Everybody should "diet" it's just a matter of their phsyiology, goals and easily obtained foods. A weight lifter "diets" but their goal is not to lose weight it's to bulk up. Almost nobody looks good or feels good even 20 lbs over their ideal weight. By waiting until they are 15 or 16 to try to diet they are already set in really bad eating habits which haunt them their entire life.
As for how attractive a woman is that is hard wired. Dudes are very visually oriented in that way. As long as we are a mixed gender society women will be judged by how they look to a lessor or greater extent. Short of wiping out our reproductive instincts you won't even dent that. Even if you manage to control one of our strongest instincts and bury it. The way men and women's brains work will place a heavier emphasis on looks when it comes to women.
So in short your barking up not only the wrong tree, your barking at a telephone pole cause you missed the forest on this one. To change what your trying to change would steal from humanity those things that make us so volatile and thus so unique. Those instincts and drives that have launched fleets, changed history over and over again and what has led to the happy union of so many humans over the ages. Remove it and we become some bland species of walking plants. I would suggest asking instead how can we safely help people manage diets for their goals and create realistic goals/ideals.
Can someone please edit my essay for Dual English 3?
Stereotypes on Mental Disorders
What comes to mind when you think of a person with a mental disorder? Do you think of them as crazy, sociopathic, and murderous? Or do you think of them as kind, gentle human beings? If you thought of crazy people, then you are one of the many people who believe the stereotypes of a mental disorder. Mental disorders are not easily accepted into todays society. In fact, almost every mental disorder has a stereotype behind it. Since mental disorders are not easily accepted into todays society, it makes it harder for people to understand them. People easily believe the stereotypes of mental disorders because of how little they are introduced to us. Schizophrenia, Bipolar Disorder, and Personality Disorders are only a few of the many stereotyped mental disorders.
Schizophrenic people happen to be stereotyped as someone with multiple personalities. For example, there are two definitions of schizophrenia that people tend to believe, but only one of them are correct. The first one is any group of psychotic disorders usually characterized by withdrawal from reality, illogical patterns of thinking, delusions, and hallucinations, and accompanied in varying degrees by other emotional, behavioural, or intellectual disturbances. The second one is a condition that results from the coexistence of disparate or antagonistic qualities, identities, or activities. The second definition is wrong. It implies that a person with schizophrenia also has multiple personalities. This is why most people think schizophrenia means a split personality, but what it actually means is a split with reality. A schizophrenic person often loses touch with reality, not identity.
Bipolar disorder comes with various stereotypes. For example, people with bipolar disorder who are having a manic or depressive episode are able to just “snap out” of it. This is not true. Bipolar disorder is a mood disorder that is neurobiologic. Meaning, bipolar disorder is a physical illness involving the brain. It is not a character flaw, nor can someone just snap out of it. It is a bodily disease and not something the person can stop on their own. A person with cancer cannot just “snap out” of having cancer, just as a person with bipolar disorder cannot snap out of being bipolar. Another stereotype associated with Bipolar Disorder is people with bipolar disorder have frequent mood swings. The exact opposite actually happens in this case. Bipolar disorder is characterized as someone getting stuck on a high or low mood which can last for weeks, months, and even years. Only in rare cases will a person have frequent mood swings.
Personality disorders are one of the most stereotyped mental disorders. For example, many people associate abuse with personality disorders. They tend to think that people with personality disorders were all abused when they were children. This is believed because it does happen to be one of the leading causes for a personality disorder. Statistics say that only 75% of people with a personality disorder were abused sexually, physically or mentally. This still leaves one out of four people that were not. Other causes could have been from a family history of personality disorders or loss of parents. Another example would be people think that a person with a personality disorder will never get better. This is far from the truth. Facts have shown that although personality disorders can’t be healed, they can be effectively managed through therapy and medicine.
Almost every mental disorder has some sort of stereotype behind it. Society has misinterpreted stereotypes so badly that the mentally ill have been classified as careless and violent people. Bringing enlightenment on this topic can hopefully show society the truth about mental disorders. Truths like schizophrenia is not having more than one personality. Bipolar disorder isn’t a choice that one can simply snap out of. Or that personality disorders doesn’t mean a person was abused as a child or that it is an incurable disease. It is so easy to go along with society and believe the things they say about them because we don’t know any better. Learn about mental disorders before you make conclusions. Don’t judge a person by their illness.
I will make two suggestions:
1. Remove the word "it" wherever possible.
2. The paper is a bit repetitive.
3. Aside from the repeats, there are quite a few filler words and phrases. It looks like it's about 700 words, but the same info could have been communicated in about 500 words.
If you have other questions, contact me.
Why do stoners think cannabis is harmless?
I've heard lots of shit from stoners saying weed cures/helps prevent many diseases; cancer, epilepsy, depression/anxiety and other mental illnesses such as schizophrenia. How can they think this when the evidence that it can both cause and worsen the above illnesses is overwhelming. If it cures, or helps treat, cancer why did Bob Marley die of it? If it treats mental illness why are psychiatric hospitals full of people suffering from "cannabis psychosis". I mean do these stupid stoners have ANY evidence to back this up? Do any of these people have a degree in Pharmacology or any Biological subjects? Please only answer this if you have any proper medical evidence that cannabis can treat these diseases.
R.J - I said he died of cancer
R.J - I said he died of cancer
I work with young people who are trying to get something back after having their lives wrecked by getting involved with drugs. Most of them started by smoking a little weed, very occasionally, and like others on here, telling themselves that a little bit is harmless. To those people I have to say - IT ISN'T! WAKE UP AND SMELL THE COFFEE! Even the smallest amount kills brain cells and these are never recovered. The damage is accumulative. With time, even smoking the odd bit, it starts to show - you can't continually lose brain cells and not be affected by it at sometime. Of course the brain cells that are killed are those that enable the user to be rational about the use. This eventually leads to using more often and eventually (because it's inevitable) trying something different. Then we're on the 'chase the high' trail. And then they end up in a unit like the one I work in, dependent on people like me. With time and a lot of work in rehab (and we don't just have rehab for hardened users) something like (but never actually) a more normal life can be attained. But the brain cells can't be recreated and they will never have the opportunities in life that non-users have available to them. I work with youngsters; I have colleagues who work with adults from all walks of life, including once successful businessmen who think they'll spend a bit of their money on a little 'high'. They eventually aren't able to be as useful in their occupations as they once were and start to drag their feet. It gets noticed and they get sidelined. Not understanding why, they think that trying more or something stronger is where to drown their problems. And so the downward spiral begins. And they end up with us. You would cry if you could see some of the guys/gals who have wrecked their lives. And you wouldn't do drugs, I promise you. I don't give a damn about statistics involving the Dutch or anyone else - I see the results every day.
I fully sympathise with those who acquire a little cannabis for their partners who are suffering with MS etc to ease their pains and I do know that some cannabis forms are occasionally prescribed in controlled doses. But without medical control, it's simply dangerous, end of. Drugs kill brain cells, they wreck lives. I'm off my soapbox (and I'm on call).
What is the survival rate for lung cancer?
My grampy who is 67 years old has lung cancer, and i guess is not going to be around for much longer. He is not telling the family much, however he had septicaemia less than a year ago, and presumably could not have had lung cancer at that point as he would have been tested for such diseases. I have been looking for information in regards to the survival rate of this disease, but keep finding statistics which differ a great deal. However one thing which is clear is that the survival rate is not so good.
And even if he does survive, i guess that he is unlikely to still be around in five or ten years time. What is the survival rate for lung cancer, and do you know anyone who has had this disease? And if so if the doctors got rid of the cancer, then were they around for a long time afterwards?
With radiation and chemo doctors kill or allow the cancer to kill 7 out of 10 cancer patients!!! Chemo has been proven to feed cancer cells, and it causes secondary cancers to grow, plus chemo traumatizes the brain for years!!! Mainstream doctors just use chemo and radiation to prey on cancer patients!!! They refuse to recognize any natural cure studies that have gone exceptionally well!!! The AMA must have a patent on chemo and radiation therapies so they will use it until pigs fly!!! Cannabis studies show it cures 7 out of 10 cancer patients!!! If you do come down with cancer then stay away from the mainstream "madical" profession, if you have any money use it to find natural cures if you want to live or keep thoughts of your family!!!
How long does Marijuana make you stupid for?
I smoked weed for my first time 2 days ago and i feel stupid. I cant think straight. I heard this lasts for a certain amount of time or maybe its perminent.
Allow me to unveil to you what no one really knows about marijuana:
1) Marijuana is the slang word for Cannabis. Cannabis is a plant that contains a chemical called tetrahydrocannibinol also known as Delta9 thc. Thc itself is ONLY found in Cannabis.
2) Farmers before the 1900's were required by law to grow hemp which derives from Cannabis(Weed) due to its EFFECTIVE use in making paper, biodegradable bags, CARS (the first maker (Ford) make his car with hemp fiber), medicine (many medicines were mixed with marijuana), and for therapeutic treatment.
3) In order to overdose with Marijuana, you need more than 2000 pounds of it which is quite impossible to intake judging you will fall asleep or pee it out before you can intake 2000 pounds in even a 24 hour cycle. So what people say is wrong btw.... you cannot die
4) Marijuana is the least killers of the major three 1)cigarettes 2) alcohol 3) marijuana
5) Surprisingly, schools condemn the use of marijuana due to its effect on KILLING braincells, well you see, that study was done decades ago and was proven WRONG. Sources: Go to harvard.edu research
6) Marijuana actually stimulates the growth of braincells sources: harvard.edu Uc San Diego research and much more if you ACTUALLY look into it
7) Marijuana shows promising results on curing Lung cancer, leukemia, brain cancer, and much more reducing tumors of up to 50 percent minimum where 3 out of 10 were cured a hundred percent and the cancer DID NOT RETURN such as chemotherapy with its 2percent success rate yet it is still the most preferred treatment? doesnt that sound wrong? 2percent yet Thc curing cancer is much higher in percentage?
8) Marijuana was illegalized mainly because during the 1930-70's much racism occured. Now, the jazz musicians, the mexicans, and SOME mormons used marijuana for its benefits. The United States therefore illegalized it with some quotes here saying: Marijuana makes a black man look at a white women twice. Mexicans are crazy because they smoke marijuana. Does this not sound a bit unjust?
9) Marijuana does not affect cognitive thinking after 3-4 hours of smoking. Basically, test scores have not be reduced at all even with people smoking it 3-4 times day for 10 years.
10) It is a class A drug meaning no medical value, yet i have my sources prepared for its medical use. How could this "drug" be Class A the same class as heroin when it cannot kill you, the statistics on people dying of its use of secondary causes are below 30 a year at most?
11) Question this with objectivity, you will not find it so haunting. It's even less dangerous than ADVIL, TYLENOL, PROZAC, COREG, ST. JOHNS WORT, MOTRIN, AND ALL THE OVER THE COUNTER MEDICATION
12) Last, what will happen to our economy, our trash bag companies, car companies, oil companies if hemp was allowed to be grown? These companies will go bankrupt as well as parts of the United States will as well; therefore, the Us has illegalized it due to the fear that this GOODNESS will bring the corruption of the government down.
13) If anyone is interested to hear more, would like my sources, or would like to debate, shoot me an email.
Harvard.edu UCSD.edu and much more
What is the survival rate for an astrocytoma?
My best friend was diagnosed with an astrocytoma and the doctor gave him 6 months. I want to know if the doctor may have made a mistake in the time he gave him to live, and if he didn't, what my friend's chances of surviving are.
About 7.4% of all brain tumors are astrocytoma, and about half of all childhood brain tumors are astrocytoma.
The five-year relative survival rate (the percentage of people who survive at least five years after the cancer is detected, excluding those who die from other diseases) for low-grade astrocytoma in children is more than 80%. For children with high-grade astrocytoma, the five-year relative survival rate is about 49%. Children with noninfiltrating astrocytoma (a tumor that is unlikely to spread) generally have a higher five-year relative survival rate.
Cancer survival statistics should be interpreted with caution. These estimates are based on data from thousands of cases of this type of cancer, but the actual risk for a particular individual may differ. It is not possible to tell a person how long he or she will live with astrocytoma. Because the survival statistics are measured in five-year intervals, they may not represent advances made in the treatment or diagnosis of this cancer.
is it dangerous to set up a BTS tower in housing areas?
I'm afraid that setting up a BTS tower will affect the people in that area due to radiation or something (i.e: getting cancer etc). can anyone help?
Yes recent statistics from the american radiation society show that long term exposure can result in malignant brain tumors and crazy delusions of grandeur
Is There Any Medical Knowledge Of What Exactly Causes Stigmata?
I have read some medical journals and some do explain that doctors have treated some patients for unexplainable bleeding from the hands, feet, and the head.
Nowadays with modern research is there anything that would explain from a medical point of view what causes some people to frequently bleed from their hands and feet.
Stigma, by definition, is a mark of disgrace or shame. Stigma has four components:
Labeling someone with a condition
Stereotyping people who have that condition
Creating a division — a superior "us" group and a devalued "them" group, resulting in loss of status in the community
Discriminating against someone on the basis of their label
Labels can be useful, though, and they're not always negative. In health, for instance, a diagnosis is, in essence, a label. A label can offer reassurance that your condition has a medical cause, and it can help steer you toward appropriate treatment.
Labels don't always result in stigma, either. Many illnesses today are gaining acceptance and empathy. Breast cancer is a shining example. Survivors used to feel shamed and kept their condition secret for fear of being stigmatized. Today, though, survivors and advocates openly talk about the condition, hold fundraisers or wear ribbons or wristbands to show support.
Why mental health disorders still face stigma
While most people would never think of mocking someone with breast cancer, mental health disorders and conditions still remain fair game for ridicule.
Mental vs. physical
Why does stigma of mental illnesses continue? For one thing, the term "mental illness" suggests that it's not the same as a medical or physical illness. To some, the word "mental" suggests that the illness is not a legitimate medical condition but rather a problem caused by your own choices and actions. People may blame you and think your condition is "all in your head." They may think that a mental health disorder means that you're weak or lazy. They may think that you should just "get over it." And you may begin to think these things about yourself, too.
In reality, mental illnesses have very complex causes, often a mix of your genetics, your biology and your life experiences — most of which are beyond your control. Neuroimaging studies, for instance, show physical changes in the brain associated with mental disorders. And studies show that some mental illnesses run in families, suggesting that they may be due in part to your genes.
Crime and violence
Some people also believe that if you have a mental health disorder, you must be dangerous and violent. This perception is often inflamed by media accounts of crime in which someone is vaguely referred to as "mentally ill."
Statistics, however, don't bear out a connection between mental illnesses and violence. Most people who have a mental illness are neither violent nor criminals.
Stigma worse for some conditions
As a result of such misperceptions, stigma continues, and mental health conditions remain the butt of jokes in popular culture. Negative portrayals of people with mental illnesses fuel fear and mistrust and reinforce distorted perceptions. That leads to even more stigma, causing a vicious cycle.
Some mental health disorders face more stigma than others, though.
Schizophrenia, for instance, is more highly stigmatized than depression is. It's routinely mocked and is less likely to generate compassion. Depression, on the other hand, is less often ridiculed, perhaps because an onslaught of advertising for antidepressant medications has made the disorder more mainstream and more acceptable.
Harmful effects of stigma
For someone with a mental illness, the consequences of stigma can be devastating — in some cases, worse than the illness itself. Some of the harmful effects of stigma include:
Trying to pretend nothing is wrong
Refusal to seek treatment
Rejection by family and friends
Work problems or discrimination
Difficulty finding housing
Being subjected to physical violence or harassment
Inadequate health insurance coverage of mental illnesses
Open discussion can help erase stigma
Not all the news is bad, though. Today, the stigma surrounding some mental health disorders is slowly eroding. That's due in part to greater public understanding of mental illnesses and the biological basis that many of them have. As causes of mental illnesses and better treatments for them are discovered, stigma may fade even more.
In addition, many celebrities and public figures have openly discussed their experiences with a mental health condition. This also helps bring the topic out of the closet of shame.
Coping with stigma
So what can you do about stigma? If you have a mental illness, you can decide who to tell, if anyone, and how much to tell. You may not be comfortable telling anyone anything at all about your condition. On the other hand, if you confide in people you trust, you may find much-needed compassion, support and acceptance.
Perhaps you want to actively combat stigma. You may only be comfortable pushing for more awareness within a close circle of family and friends by gently reminding them about the harm in jokes and stereotypes. Or if you're more comfortable tackling bigger challenges and facing bigger risks, you may decide to make your cause more public.
In either case, here are some ways you can cope with and help end stigma:
Get appropriate treatment. Don't let the fear or anticipation of being stigmatized prevent you from seeking treatment for your illness. For some people, a specific diagnosis provides relief because it lifts the burden of keeping silent and also underscores that you aren't alone — that many others share your same illness and issues.
Surround yourself with supportive people. Because stigma can lead to social isolation, it's important to stay in touch with family and friends who are understanding. Isolation can make you feel even worse.
Make your expectations known. People may not know how to support you, even if they want to help. Offer specific suggestions and remind people of appropriate language.
Don't equate yourself with your illness. You are not an illness. So instead of saying "I'm bipolar," say "I have bipolar disorder." Instead of calling yourself "a schizophrenic," call yourself "a person with schizophrenia." Don't say you "are depressed." Say you "have depression."
Share your own experiences. Speaking at events can help instill courage in others facing similar challenges and also educate the public about mental illness. Until you gain confidence, you may want to start at small events, such as talks at a support group or church community.
Monitor the media. If you spot stigmatizing stories, comic strips, movies, television shows or even greeting cards, write letters of protest that identify the problem and offer solutions.
Join an advocacy group. Some local and national groups have programs to watch for and correct archaic stereotypes, misinformation and disrespectful portrayals of people with mental illnesses.
Don't let stigma create self-doubt and shame
In the face of insensitive comments or crude advertising gimmicks, it may be difficult to feel good about yourself. Remember that you have a medical condition, that it's not your fault and that effective treatments are available. Try not to feel shamed, embarrassed or humiliated if someone knowingly or unknowingly makes light of or pokes fun at your illness. Therapy may help you gain self-esteem and put less stock into what others think of you.
And if you're comfortable enough to speak up, you may be able to help educate people about the hurt that can result from stigmatizing mental illnesses. The tide is slowly turning.
What questions do you want to ask, and what topics do you want to discuss?
What questions do you want to ask, and what topics do you want to discuss, that aren't found using your search engine? I can, in response to questions, research related information, that pertains directly to the topic of discussion.
Statistics on cancer caused by artificial sweetners, aspartame and saccharine.
Statistics related to cancer due to hormone replacement therapy drugs and birth control pills.
Facts on drug induced hypothyroidism, dementia and alzheimer's.
20 to 30 year studies on the effects of marijuana on the human brain and body.
What's the difference between Down Syndrome and ADHD?
I know both impair the learning ability and coordination, but what else?
ADD/ADHD is a biological disorder that starts in the brain related to irregularities in neurotransmitter activity. But what's the difference between the two? The official name of the disorder is attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, the recognized acronym being ADHD. ADHD is of three types: (a) combined (b) predominantly inattentive and (c) predominantly hyperactive-impulsive type.
The misbehavior of children or their poor academic performance were thought to be just "growing up" pains or related to the awkwardness of youth, but it appears that ADD/ADHD could explain poor grades and erratic behavior.
Statistics indicate that 4%-6% of Americans have some form of ADD/ADHD. This disorder can last a lifetime if it is not detected and treated immediately.
Common Symptoms of ADHD
Before an ADHD diagnosis is made, symptoms must exhibit three elements: they must be predominant or pervasive, they must be excessive or frequent, and they must be long term. These symptoms include (but not limited to):
• Lack of concentration
• Inability to perform simple tasks
• Losing things and forgetfulness
• Habit of interrupting others
Contrary to popular belief, ADD/ADHD is not caused by an over-consumption of sugar (although people with ADD/ADHD may be allergic to some foods), too much television, a brain tumor, bad parenting or ineffective teachers.
If your child shows signs of AD/HD, ask the following questions, bearing in mind that the degree and intensity of symptoms vary from one person to another:
• Does your child's behavioral patterns evident in more than one setting; that is, does your child behave that way only in school, or also at home and in social gatherings?
• Is your child's behavior NOT typical of other children's behaviors? Do the symptoms seem highly unusual?
• Have your child's symptoms lasted more than six months?
If you answered yes to all these questions, you may want to see your doctor who will refer your child to a specialist.
Because there is no identifiable cause of ADHD, the decision to choose one treatment over another is a decision that your doctor can recommend after your child has been examined. In some cases, a combination of treatments may be offered: medication and behavior therapy; or a third option - counseling or psychotherapy - may also be considered. The purpose of medication is to regularize brain activity and must be taken under the supervision of your doctor. Behavior therapy, on the other hand, is intended to help children and adults cope with the emotional effects of their disorder. It might interest you to know that the federal government classifies AD/HD as an allowable disability.
To understand why Down syndrome happens, you need to understand a little about chromosomes. What are chromosomes? They're thread-like structures within each cell and are made up of genes. Genes provide the information that determines everything about people, from hair color to whether they are girls or boys.
Most people have 23 pairs of chromosomes, for a total of 46. But a baby with Down syndrome has an extra chromosome (47 instead of 46) or one chromosome has an extra part. This extra genetic material causes problems with the way their bodies develop.
Health Problems Are Common
About half of babies with Down syndrome are born with heart defects, which means their hearts developed differently and don't work as they should. Usually, these problems can be corrected by surgery. Some babies may have intestinal problems that also require surgery to fix.
Kids with Down syndrome are more likely to get infections that affect their lungs and breathing. When they do get infections, they often last longer. They may have eye or ear problems or digestion problems like constipation. Some may develop leukemia, a type of cancer. Each person with Down syndrome is different and may have one, several, or all of these problems.
Kids with Down syndrome tend to grow and develop more slowly than other children do. They may start walking or talking later than other babies. Special help, such as physical therapy and speech therapy, can give kids a boost with their walking and talking skills.
Do a Lot of People Have Down Syndrome?
About 1 out of every 800 babies born has Down syndrome, no matter what race or nationality the parents are. It is not contagious, so you can't catch it from someone else. You are born with it. No one gets Down syndrome later in life.
Now you know that Down syndrome is caused by a problem with a chromosome. You might already know that we get our chromosomes from our mother and father. Remember the 23 pairs of chromosomes — half are from your mom and half are from your dad.
But doctors aren't sure why this chromosome problem happens to some babies. It's nothing the mom or dad did before the child was born. Anyone can have a baby with Down syndrome. But the older th
Are you worried about the safety of artificial sweetners?
Have you ever heard of Aspartame (Sweetner 950, 951)? If not, do a Yahoo search on Aspartame. Are you concerned about artificial sweetners?
Artificial sweeteners are really bad for you. Aspartame gives me horrible migraines. Consumers should be more informed about the dangers of these products. There is somewhat inconclusive evidence that artificial sweeteners are carcinogenic.
Artificial sweeteners are regulated by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).
There is no evidence that the regulated artificial sweeteners on the market in the United States are related to cancer risk in humans.
As new sweetening products come on the market, the FDA continues to investigate any possible short- or long-term health risks that these products might create.
Questions about artificial sweeteners and cancer arose when early studies showed that cyclamate, one of several types of artificial sweeteners, caused bladder cancer in laboratory animals. However, results from research studies do not provide clear evidence of an association between artificial sweeteners and human cancer.
Because the findings in animals suggested that cyclamate might increase the risk of bladder cancer in humans, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) banned the use of cyclamate in 1969. More recent animal studies have failed to demonstrate that cyclamate is a carcinogen (a substance known to cause cancer) or a co-carcinogen (a substance that enhances the effect of a cancer-causing substance). However, other issues must be resolved before cyclamate can be approved for commercial use as a food additive in the United States.
Animal studies have linked saccharin, another artificial sweetener, with the development of bladder cancer. For this reason, Congress required that all food containing saccharin bear the following warning label: “Use of this product may be hazardous to your health. This product contains saccharin, which has been determined to cause cancer in laboratory animals.” Congress also mandated that further studies of saccharin be performed.
The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and FDA have looked at the possible role of saccharin in causing bladder cancer in humans. People in the study (which included a large number of elderly people) who used this artificial sweetener had no greater risk of bladder cancer than people in the population as a whole. However, researchers looked at the data for those people who were heavy saccharin users (6 or more servings of sugar substitute or 2 or more 8-ounce servings of diet drink daily) and found some evidence of an increased risk of bladder cancer, particularly for those who heavily ingested the sweetener as a table top sweetener or through diet sodas. The results of the NCI–FDA study, together with findings of additional research with laboratory animals, suggest that consumption of saccharin is not a major risk factor for bladder cancer in humans. For these reasons, Congress removed the warning label in December of 2000.
Aspartame, an artificial sweetener distributed under several trade names (e.g., Nutrasweet or Equal), was approved in 1981 by the FDA after tests showed that it did not cause cancer in laboratory animals, although not all of the laboratory experiments agreed. Interest in aspartame was renewed by a 1996 report suggesting that an increase in the number of people with brain tumors between 1975 and 1992 might be associated with the introduction and use of this sweetener in the United States. However, an analysis of then-current NCI statistics showed that the overall incidence of brain and central nervous system cancers began to rise in 1973, 8 years prior to the approval of aspartame, and continued to rise until 1985. Moreover, increases in overall brain cancer incidence occurred primarily in people 70 and older, a group that was not exposed to the highest doses of aspartame since its 1981 introduction. These and other data do not point to a clear link, based on animal or human studies, between the use of aspartame and the development of brain tumors. The FDA still considers aspartame safe.
In recent years, a sweetening product called stevia (stevioside or steviol) has received much public attention. It is 250 to 300 times sweeter than sugar. To date, the FDA has not approved it for use as a sweetener in the United States, but stevia may be sold as a dietary supplement. Researchers have found that the main chemical in stevia can be converted in the laboratory to a compound that causes changes in genes. More study is needed to learn whether the same changes, which might lead to cancer, could occur in people.
is there a cancer or a disease that is completely incurable?
i'm just curious. I've had some people tell me that after stage 4 it becomes a matter of when your time is up, and others saying that it can be. If there are diseases which are life threatening or are deadly, how are they contracted?
Most of the so called degenerative diseases like Parkinsonism or Alzheimers cannot be cured. Symptoms treated, held at bay but not cured if you mean taking out even traces of the diseases.
Most of the diaseases, other than infections like AIDS -are not contracted. Your balance goes off, your immune system works bad, you overstress YOUR body -like eat too much, excercise too little and get diabetes -not every overweight, sedate person gets it though.
Or your body can't defend itself against whatever like toxins.
About cancer I doubt whether doctors ever cure -theyt may help the body to cure. Looking at statistics there is never a disease that nobody ever gets cured.I know personally 1 person who lived 27 years with her glioblastoma(=very malignant brain tumor) and still, half of the patients are dead after 12 months -so NOBODY EVER is a dangerous saying.
Besides -we all will die, either with disease or without -so?
Why do people want marijuana legalized?
I don't understand this at all. Who could want this stuff legalized? Marijuana smokers are 6 times more likely to get lung cancer than tobacco smokers, and marijuana is highly addictive (look at the statistics, more teens are in treatment for marijuana addiction that all other drugs combined). According to studies done by Dr. Gabriel G. Nahas, marijuana can cause irreversible brain damage and destroys brain cells. Why would anyone want this horrible narcotic to be legal?
first of all, weed is not addictive and when it says 6 times more likely...do you know how rare? blunts have no crap in it like cigs do... and i guess you dont go to parties or clubs at all, cause weed makes everything more different and fun. even though weed kills brain cells we are talking about 10 brains out of trillions... and i hope you know cells reproduce by dividing so no problem eh? i blaze since 8th grade and im a ap student in 10th grade, i wrestle on varsity in 140 weight class...im 2nd string full back and all my friends go to parties to have a fun time and sometimes blaze but not all the time. and just to let you know the teens who are in the treatment things are the loser ones that have nothing to do in their life besides staying inside and smoke 10 blunts a day... those are the kids no one likes...
Are there any true stories about people who never eat healthy food?
It's for my friend. She never eats healthy food, literally all she eats is stuff that's bad for her like chocolate and sweets. She doesn't gain weight very easily, so she thinks she's okay, but she really isn't. Are there any stories about people who never eat healthy food, and I mean literally never, so I can show them to her and get her to stop living like this? I've tried looking on the internet, nothing comes up.
Well what I can find are :
* think this may be the other one PlumDumplings was thinking of
Don't think either is quite what your looking for but they cite the negative side effects of bad eating. Unfortunately because it is so common now there aren't a lot of stories out there about individuals who never eat healthy.
You could try statistics such as:
- Two thirds of all deaths are related to what we eat (including heart disease, stroke, diabetes, cancer, and osteoporosis). Many of these diet-associated diseases begin in childhood.
- 18% of preventable deaths are due to smoking vs. 17% to poor diet and exercise
- The number of deaths each year due to unhealthy eating and inactivity is thirteen times more than are caused by guns and twenty times more than by drug use
- Deaths caused by poor eating habits and sedentary lifestyles rose by 33% between 1990 and 2000 It is predicted that within the next 20 years, in the United States, dietary linked disease will cancel health strides gained by improvements in medical technology and disease fighting measures.We may be seeing the first generation of children who are sicker and die younger than their parents.
- Youth are now being diagnosed and treated for diseases that until recently only affected adults.
Or what about watching the documentary Super Size Me. It is about a man who explores the consequences of unhealthy eating by eating nothing but fast food for a month and recording the impact on his health.
Note: I am aware the statistics and articles are American based, but the effect is the same
What's the difference between psychiatry and psychology?
Could someone please tell me...?
And also, I'm interested in doing psychology at college could someone tell me what it involves...?
Psychiatrists are medical doctors (usually, they obtain MDs) who attend medical school for four years, complete a residency, and then specialize in psychiatric medicine. The primary focus of psychiatry is treating mental disorders like other medical illnesses (like diabetes or cancer). This is called the "medical model." Because of this model, they typically prescribe medication to alleviate distress caused by the disorders from which an individual suffers. Medical doctors typically have higher salaries, but they pay a lot more for medical school.
Psychologists, on the other hand, complete a doctoral program (usually 3-5 years post-graduate, plus 2 years of supervision and/or post-doctoral study) that is research-oriented, complete a dissertation on a "new" topic of study that is of interest to them, and then study a variety of topics pertaining to human beings and their individual functioning. This could take the form of clinical psychology (providing therapy, but not medication, to assist in the treatment of mental disorders), neuropsychology (studying the brain and behavior, etc.), health psychology (studying how to improve people's lives who have certain diseases or illness, etc.), industrial-organizational psychology (I/O) (studying how to improve businesses and worker's mental health/happiness, etc.) and much more. This is not an exhaustive list, nor does it provide a full range of possibilities or definitions.
If you want to study psychology at college, it typically involves you choosing a psychology major, taking an intro psych course, and then moving on from there. Generally, two undergraduate degrees are offered (in the United States)--the Bachelor of Arts and Bachelor of Science (BA and BS, respectively.) The Arts concentration is much less mathematics and statistics-oriented, generally, because the BS prepares you for other career options besides only Psychology (e.g., if you wanted to go to medical school.)
There are several courses that you would take; aside from a general education curriculum, you would probably take at least one social statistics course, courses in developmental psychology, learning and cognition or perception, neuroscience (if desired), sexuality, psychopathology (mental illness), psychotherapy, social psychology, forensic (if you wanted)... there are a whole range of topics--it depends on the college you attend and its requirements as well as what you're interested in.
What do you think of the so called aids denialists?
They say that hiv does not necessarily cause aids. What do you think of scientists who feel the data supports this?
To date, more than 300 billion dollars has been spent on AIDS/HIV which a part there of keeps approximately 100,000 scientists in a job. With all this money (Tax payer funded research) there is still no cure(only treatments and highly toxic ones at that). There is still no vaccine's. So where has all the money gone and what has it been spent on??? For a disease that doesn't even rank in the top 10 killers in this country it certainly ranks top billing when it comes to money spent on it. More money is spent on HIV/AIDS than any other disease or illness such as heart disease/ cancer which is rather ironic given the fact that HIV/AIDS doesn't even rank in the top 10 of all diseases...Something is definitely not right here...
These are the biggest KILLERS in this country NOT AIDS.....SO WHY DOES HIV/AIDS RECIEVE THE MOST FUNDING? You don't thave to be a genius to figure that something is VERY WRONG here.
Stats are from the CDC website.
According to the current CDC statistics (1), AIDS killed 16,316 in 2005.
2004 deaths according to National Vital Statistics Report (2):
Cardiovascular Diseases 652,486
Cerebrovascular (stroke) 150,074
Respiratory diseases 121,987
Accidents (including vehicle) 112,012
Diabetes mellitus 73,138
Alzheimer's disease 65,965
Influenza and pneumonia 59,664
Renal and other nephritic conditions 42,480
Liver disease 27,013
Parkinson's disease 17,989
Other causes 414,674
Influenza KILLS around 3,000, 000 people world wide each year and yet the money spent on it amounts to virtually NOTHING.......If you have a brain in your head than you must ask your self, why does a syndrome called AIDS recieves the BIGGEST chunk of funding from the NIH,Government agencies when it DOESN'T even rate in the TOP 15 of all time KILLERS in this country.
Is getting high from a beer/alcohol is better than drugs?
I think both of them are bad.
I've done both. And both are bad. I just want to understand, why goverment legalize one of them? if both have the same after effect.
most of you talk about control of both substance. If abuse of control then it is danger. If you're not abusing it, does it make ok to use both (fat chance)
Alcohol is legal because the people who made it legal were alcoholics, look how long people were using Cocaine before it was made illegal, every depressed, board or over weight house wife in the 50s and 60s were prescribed cocaine. Either way extended use of both are harmful . Drugs like Meth and Coke deteriorate serotonin in the brain ( the chemical that makes you feel emotion ) it also causes paranoid schizophrenia, and is really bad for ones teeth. Alcohol causes psorsis of the liver , and in some cases even esophageal cancer from acid. Often times people drink and drink until they pass out what people don't realize is that even after one stops drinking there blood alcohol level may continue to rise and lead to an alcohol induced coma and eventually death. Most Americans that drink do it to get drunk and act stupid, in most European countries people drink socially and not more then a drink or two.
Here are some statistics
Have you known anyone with brain cancer?
My mom has stage 3 brain cancer,the doctors say 6 months with radiation maybe,other says oh thats just statistics,have you ever known anyone with brain cancer? She has recurring tumors that are cancerous,I should specify.Have you known anyone with this and how long did they live?
I have taken care of many people with brain cancer. They were all my patients, although I haven't known anyone personally who has been diagnosed. I am very sorry to hear about your mother. You, your mother and your family will be in my prayers.
Unfortunately, every single person is different. There is no way to tell how much time she has left. Her doctors who have her records and radiology reports would have the best inclination. Bottomline, enjoy every single second you have with her.
What does someone do if they've been diagnosed with cancer but has no health insurance?
How do they get treatment/surgery?
You are basically out of luck. The medical industry is NOT about helping you, but is about money. Cancer is one of the biggest money makers for them and if you have insurance, you can get pretty much the full treatment. The good news for you however, is that if you do NOT get the typical medical treatments, such as chemotherapy, you will actually live longer as a result according to the statistics. Only 2.1% live longer than 5 years if they get chemotherapy.
I recently had a patient that opted for chemotherapy to treat lung cancer & radiation to treat her brain tumor. After million dollars and 6 months, she died once the doctors told her there was nothing more than they could do for her. The only thing they did for her was speed up the process of dying and collect over million dollars for their trouble.
Cancer is one of about 200 different disease states and is about 99% caused by infections and long term abuse in terms of diet and toxins building up in the body. Alternative cancer treatments are far better than the medical treatments for most of the cancers. There are a couple that are slightly better than a placebo effect; testes cancer & non-hodgkins lymphoma respond somewhat to chemo, but that's about it. Of course, you can have them remove body parts and that can help for a while until the cancer comes back with a vengence because the driver keeps doing it's damage. Some people are lucky enough to die before the second bout of cancer is diagnosed.
good luck to you
how many australians die by cardiovascular diseas and cancer?
what percentage pf a;; deaths in australian are not a result of cardiovascular diseas and cancer?
"In 2010, the leading underlying cause of death for all Australians was Ischaemic heart disease (I20-I25), which includes angina, blocked arteries of the heart and heart attacks. Ischaemic heart diseases were identified as the underlying cause of 21,708 deaths, 15.1% of all deaths registered in 2010. While Ischaemic heart diseases have been the leading cause of death in Australia since 2000, the proportion of deaths due to this cause has decreased, from 20.4% (26,234) in 2001 to 15.1% (21,708) in 2010.
Cerebrovascular disease (I60-I69) have remained the second leading underlying cause of death in 2010. Cerebrovascular disease include haemorrhages, strokes, infarctions and blocked arteries of the brain. Over the last 10 years, deaths due to this cause have decreased by 7.8%, from 12,146 deaths in 2001 to 11,204 deaths in 2010.
Dementia and Alzheimer's disease (F01, F03, G30) was the third leading cause of death in 2010. The number of deaths due to this cause has increased 140.7% from 3,740 in 2001 to 9,003 in 2010. This is largely due to an increase in deaths due to Dementia (F01, F03), which increased from 2,133 in 2001 to 6,297 in 2010. For further information see Explanatory Note 90.
Trachea and lung cancers (C33-C34) were the fourth leading cause of death in 2010. Over the last 10 years, deaths due to this cause have increased by 15.1%, from 7,038 in 2001 to 8,099 in 2010.
The top 10 leading causes of death accounted for 52.2% of all deaths registered in 2010, and the top 20 leading causes accounted for 67.3%."
Australian Bureau of Statistics - Causes of Death, Australia:
Who does brain cancer affect?
So who is more likely to get brain cancer, females? males? the elderly? And how does brain cancer impact on a community's health status?
Google cancer statistics.
what would cause a person to get mentally confused all the time?
like not understanding who they are and the world around them? only at time this happens. Dont understand!! get dizzy too at times also and cant think stright.please no mean comments thanks really sad feels like im losing my mind.
This could be a combination of things, but low blood sugar would be my first guess and that is due to Adrenal fatigue many times. Since the Adrenal glands are part of the pituitary axis, any of the organs in that axis may be insufficient and since they all get sick together, you could have problems with your ovaries (especially if you take birth control pills), your thyroid, or pituitary glands.
Eating too many carbs and sugars can cause this problem. The fact you get dizzy is a strong indication of weak adrenals that help you to keep good blood pressure. Eating too many carbs and sugars can increase Candida growth and cause you not to sanitize your food well as a result of low hydrochloric acid production & utilization. This could allow parasites to get into your body and especially liver flukes. These flukes can cause "Brain fog" from their excrement. Many people are diagnosed with Alzheimer's that is just liver flukes.
Eating a diet low in fat, high sugar & carbs, low to moderate protein will create many of these problems. I strongly suggest you get advice from a Nutritional Therapist, not a doctor, because doctors have no clue about what good nutrition is.
EDIT: "Mick" One weekend you can learn QRA? Sir you are very misinformed and obviously have no idea what you are talking about. In fact, there is a medical device now created that integrates the biofield testing that verifies the accuracy of this methodology along with thousands of patients that have been greatly helped by this technology. Typically it takes about 1 year to perfect the QRA technique and then several years of study to fully integrate it into a practice.
A nutritional therapist is far more qualified than a dietitian that takes their instructions from a doctor. All one has to do is look at the hospital food to know the credibility of a dietitian. Nutritional therapists are qualified to test, evaluate, and recommend diets and supplements. There is an interaction between doctors and nutritional therapists all the time to help patients actually get well instead of just "Relieving symptoms and managing diseases." Adrenal fatigue is not something medical science recognizes as legitimate? What basis, proof, of that can you provide? So, because medical science does not recognize (according to you) adrenal fatigue, it is not something that happens?
You need to free yourself from the lies you believe. I think you need to revisit the definition of a quack. In July 2004, Gary Null Ph.D, Carolyn Dean M.D., N.D, Martin Feldman M.D., Debora Rasio M.D., Dorothy Smith Ph.D. wrote a paper that revealed very disturbing facts regarding an annual iatrogenic (induced inadvertently by a physician or surgeon or by medical treatment or diagnostic procedures) death rate of 783,936 in one year. It is further disturbing to realize that as few as 5 percent and only up to 20 percent of iatrogenic acts are ever reported. This means that that iatrogenic death rate of 783,936 is much higher.
good luck to you
Where is chemo made??? Or are they still using what they had left after the war to kill cancer patients?
Chemotherapy kills 7 of 10 cancer patients where cannabis cures 7 of 10 cancer patients!!!
@ lo_mcg The cancer did come back because he stopped treating it to soon but if you can read so good why didn't you read on to see that his cancer is being cured again with extra treatments with cannabis oil you medical workers are all alike just out to protect your mega profits from the billion dollar a year business of stealing cancer patients and their insurance companies money, you do not want any cures that you cannot get exclusive profits from!!! So go take a pill and just read and do not try to think, are you a LPN or what???
Of course they get ill you are overworking their immune systems with mustard gas or chemo that attacks not only the cancer but good healthy cells too, where cannabis oil just stops the blood flow to the cancer cells and leaves the healthy cells alone and does not overwork the immune system, thus leaving the patient in good health!!! Try learning about banned products that the AMA paid congress to ban because it does not get exclusive profits from before opening up your biased mouth!!! Just like the Rife machine!!! The AMA could not get exclusivity to it so they ran to congress and dropped a few bucks to get it banned too!!! We all know how big business is running our world and wants to kill off 95% of its citizens through genocide by cutting out all cures and vitamins and supplements that help keep us alive!!!
Synthetic derivatives are not the natural product they are chemical imposters to natural medicines, the only medicine that big pharma put out with just one cannabinoid of marijuana is not working on patients because it is woefully short of the real product and it was only made to cast doubt about the cannabis oils true effectiveness!!! So stop trying to make it look like pharmaceutical companies are trying to find a natural cure, cannabis cannot be replicated with mans chemicals and you and i know it and so does the side effect filled pill pushers and other big businesses know it, but they cannot just give up because they know that they will all go bankrupt very quickly if the hemp plant and marijuana were to be made legal!!! Many products can be made from the hemp plant better than the products that are being made and used today, just one of them, a concrete made from hemp is a better replacement for the concrete made today, it is also a great insulating material (if used to make ho
If used to make houses the house would not need to be heated or cooled because of the natural insulating characters of the hemp which can be grown to maturity in 5 months where it takes years for trees to mature, paper that never yellows can also be made from hemp and clothing, also we would never be in need of oil any more for fuel or to make other products such as plastics because hemp cam replace them all, and it is also a great nutritious food with a high protein content!!! Now tell me you still believe hemp or cannabis or marijuana should be banned from use!!! By the way the US constitution was printed on hemp paper!!!
It's about time you actually sought some information about cancer and its treatments, as your lack of knowledge has caused you to give some very dangerous advice to people who are, or fear they are, dangerously ill.
Luckily your exclamatory adolescent style of writing and your complete lack of any evidence to back up your claims (other than 'I live in California!') means that most - probably all - will have disregarded that advice. I notice you have stopped referring people to the 'pharmacist who cured his own cancer!' story since it emerged this person's cancer had recurred...
No, chemo doesn't kill '7 out of 10' cancer patients. It isn't always effective, but in those cases it's the cancer not the treatment that kills the patient - they have died in spite of treatment, not because of it. Distressed relatives sometimes look for something or someone to blame, and some conclude that it was the treatment that killed the person.
With most cancers there are few ill effects if any until the cancer is quite advanced, and a person with an aggressive and advanced cancer usually looks, feels and behaves like a healthy person.
Then if they have chemotherapy side effects of the drugs can make them ill, sometimes very ill and frail, while treatment is taking place.
So some people conclude that the treatment is worse than the disease, and people parroting bogus statistics, as you do, bolster this belief.
With some types of chemotherapy, and in some cancers, there is a very slightly increased chance of developing a second type of cancer later.
Generally this is more likely to happen when the original cancer was a lymphoma, but it can happen very occasionally with other types of cancer.
Fortunately this very serious long-term effect is VERY RARE. But yes it happens, and yes very occasionally someone dies as a result.
People with aggressive and advanced cancers who agree to chemotherapy aren't duped; they do so in the full knowledge of these facts because they have a life-threatening disease and this is their best chance.
You would benefit from reading this (stop shaking your head, read it!): http://anaximperator.wordpress.com/2009/09/02/only-3-percent-survive-chemotherapy/
There is no conspiracy to hide the effects of cannabis on cancer. There have been,and continue to be, studies into the possibilities; but so far there is no proof that cannabis has any effect on cancer.
There have been some interesting results. There has been a study that indicates that cannabinoids might possibly help prevent prostate cancer, and there was interesting research by Complutense University in Madrid and the University hospital of Tenerife into the use of chemical cannabinoids to help treat one type of brain tumour, glioblastoma multiforme. The results seemed promising, but the number of patients involved was very small (9), and much more research is needed.
I've seen you claim that natural substances can't be patented. In fact it's common for synthetic derivatives to be made, and it's also common to get patents on the methods of isolating or administering the substance.
So even if a pharmaceutical company couldn't make money directly from cannabis, if it were effective they could make plenty of money and get plenty kudos from developing a safer, more effective derivative. As Spree points out, the chemotherapy drug Taxol is derived from yew.
If cannabis had been proven effective against cancer, pharmaceutical companies would be all over it like a rash. But so far it hasn't, so drug companies don't bother with it. They're after profits, after all.
There have been a couple of studies that suggest that cannabis may be a risk factor for testicular cancer
EDIT: LOL (and I really did )!
'you medical workers are all alike' - I work in children's day care
'just out to protect your mega profits' - I earn above minimum wage, but less than what the Centre for Research in Social Policy calculates as 'the living wage', calculated according to the basic cost of living in the UK (Yes! Like most of the world's population, I don't live in north America!).
My interest in cancer stems from my own experience as a cancer patient.
'Now tell me you still believe hemp or cannabis or marijuana should be banned from use!!! '. - please tell me what it is about the words 'I'm 100% for legalisation' and (re cancer) 'There have been some interesting results...more research is needed' that gives you the idea that I 'believe hemp or cannabis or marijuana should be banned from use!!! '
EDIT2: Odd - tonight, 3 days after posting it, Thomas sent me the 'additional details' from his question in a series of emails. As I said - odd...
Why is it that God has to be blame for everything?
If you have a child and taught your child good morals and how to be safe, but your child doesn't listen to you, instead your child starts taking drugs, looking for trouble, getting into fights, Should you as the parent be blamed for your child's action? This question is for those who believe in God, If you answer then you must believe in God. That's how I see it.
A billion die every year from cancer, heart disease and strokes alone!
3 million die every year from starvation, drought and the diseases caused by it.
200,000 from natural disasters!
This god who christians credit with creating and causing everything seems to love killing more people every second than the number of people that have ever been claimed to have been saved by his miracles!
As for morals it is christianity that gave the way to destroy them!
Research shows that the reason humans struggle with emotion to find equitable solutions is pinpointed the region of the brain called the insular cortex, or insula, which is also the seat of emotional reactions.
The fact that the brain has such a robust response to unfairness shows that sensing unfairness is a basic evolved capacity.
The emotional response to unfairness pushes people from extreme inequity and drives them to be fair. This observation shows our basic impulse to be fair isn't a complicated thing that we learn.
It therefore fully illustrates that all humans have morals controlled by the brain and that Christians are entirely wrong to try and claim morals as their own!!!!
But Christians found a way round it!
Government statistics show that christians are vastly over represented in prisons for sexual, violent and fraudulent crime!
The Catholic church is paying millions in compensation for the sex/pedophile crimes of their priests alone!
Christians are vastly over represented in the divorce courts!
Christians invented the concept of sin and then the idea that you could sin, ask forgiveness, get pardoned and start with a clean sheet!
So no surprise that they are so expert at it is it?!
A Christian is a man that feels repentance on Sunday for what he did on Saturday and is going to do on Monday. - Thomas Russell Ybarra
Has anyone heard, cell phone radiation can cause cancer?
I saw on the news that doctors have confirmed talking on your cell phone over a long period of time emits some sort of rays into your brain causing brain cancer.
Yep, it microwaves your brain. It also causes cancer of the saliva glands that are located just under your ears. This one is difficult to treat because of the gland's location as it is located just behind the jawbone. The statistics for children with leukemia have gone up and they say it's caused from cell phones. It's also said this generation of children will be overwhelmed with all kinds of cancers because of cell phones. I remember one study done showing children who use a cell phone for even 20 minutes or less show all kinds of registered temporary brain damage. This is because their skulls are still developing and thinner than an adult's skull. All kinds of research studies have been done and support, but most are being ignored and definitely they are not letting them be publicized. Every now and then a story gets out and right away "officials" say, NOPE NOT TRUE. Of course, the people who say cell phones are harmless - these are the people who want your money. It is said the best help for those of you who can't live without a cell phone are to get those earphones so the phone is not right up to your head. Best of Luck. You are all gonna die young.
Cleaned out my basement today & found rolls of duck tape and plastic sheeting left over from Y2K. WTHell?
I must be having a brain fart! I can't remember why I bought six rolls of duck tape and heavy gauge plastic sheeting. I remember that it had something to do with the Y2K scare but what the hell? Can someone refresh my memory, please?
Yep, I've got a dozen gallons of water stored with purifiying pellets in a box.
Do you remember the silly "duck and cover" drills from the 1950's and early 60's?
I remember my teachers telling us to "take cover" and we'd dive under our school desks and cover our faces. Oh yeah...that's gonna save us from a nuke...you betcha! How ridiculous is hiding under a desk during a nuclear attack? About as silly as using plastic sheeting and duct tape to protect us from a biological attack by one of those whacko terrorist groups. Let's assume you even did do it correctly: How much extra time are you gonna buy yourself (or your family), assuming your family's all together in one location when and if something happens?
What if you're sealed in your supposed "safe room" and one of your kids arrives late; are you going to open up and let 'em in? What if they're contaminated? What if, by breaking the "seal" to your Home Depot-supplied safe haven, you risk contaminating the room and everyone else in it? Are you willing to sacrifice one of your own family members and not let them in for the common good?
Before you end up like John Travolta's "Bubble Boy" TV movie-of-the-week character, think about the following statistics:
You're 37 times more likely to die in a vehicle crash than on a commercial airlines flight.
Twice as many Americans die from strokes than by accidents.
Four times as many Americans die from diabetes than by homicide.
How many people died from Anthrax exposure? Less than a dozen? Yet over 20,000 people die every year from the flu! And throw in another 30,000 people dying from suicidal, homicidal and accidental gun deaths.
The odds of dying in an automobile accident each year are about 1 in 7,000, yet we continue to drive. The odds of dying from heart disease in any given year are 1 in 400, and of dying from cancer are 1 in 600, yet many of us fail to exercise or maintain a healthy diet.
So...go ahead and use the duct tape for anything and everything. As for the plastic sheeting, use it as a painter's drop cover or to protect a favorite and expensive Oriental rug by covering it and securing the edges with clear tape to a tiled floor--just a couple ideas.
Obama claimed his Obamacare would lower the cost, increase the quality and cover 46 millions more people?
and Add nothing to the National Debt.
Does he have a magic wan?
No magic wand, just cold hard statistics. We already pay for most of the folks that we would pay for under "Obamacare" as you call it. It is just that we pay for them through medicare, or through federal subsidies to Emergency Rooms and such services. But think about this, what costs less: taking a pregnant woman to an ER for a premature birth and caring for the preemie for 3 extra months, or giving the woman a few outpatient checkups and having a normal birth? Having some guy go to ER for knee surgery and a week in recovery, or a few visits to a PA, an x-ray, an MRI, and therapy -- all on an outpatient basis? Someone with a headache faints and is taken to ER, and finds out they have a brain tumor, turns out they had indicators for months and could have had early cancer treatment for about 5% of the cost. The ER cases are happening by the thousands everyday right here in the US because folks simply can't afford basic preventative medicine, so we are already paying for them through our taxes. Make basic healthcare available for them at an affordable rate (something private insurer's haven't done for the simple reason that there is no profit in it), and the cost of such emergency measures get slashed.
Okay, that is one big one. Obviously there are other issues that need to be dealt with, such as litigation that drives up the physicians' insurance rates, and thus his or her rates. Pharmaceuticals that have control over their copyrights now for longer periods than ever in history, meaning generics can't be produced, and the uninsured and underinsured cannot afford them. There are lots of basic fixes that need to be included in this healthcare reform, and no single one of them will do it all, nor will we have a perfect system afterwards, but anything is better than what we have now. And I am one of the folks who not only is lucky enough to have damned good insurance, but as a veteran, I already can get fully socialized healthcare, should I choose to use it.
What are the benefits of positive relationships?
The Department of Health released a 68 page report that married people are happier, live longer, drink less and have fewer doctor's appointments than unmarried folks.
The Mayo Clinic cites statistics that happily married people live longer than singles and have lower rates of diseases including cancer and heart failure. Not only do increased levels of happiness significantly improve longevity, but these coupls, acting as a team, also became better equipped to defray the stressors in life that may be detrimental to your health.
MRI scanners show sections of the brain that produce powerful neurotransmitters that affect pleasure, happiness and well-being are activated when people are experiencing feelings of love.
The higher a person rates their feelings of loneliness the more likely they are to develop cognitive problems, with the loneliest twice as likely to develop Alzheimer's disease.
Adults depreved of touch stimylation shows that many men become aggressive while many women become depressed and withdrawn.