I earlier said Jan's radiologist had given her advice that was not in her best interest.
There is a product named Cavilon that helps protect against damage to the skin during radiotherapy. I can find trials for its use in Australia, South Africa, USA, and even references in our NHS at Leeds and Bath. Yet when we twice ask can we use it the answer is NO. They prefer their traditional moisturising cream....
Jan's radiologist seems unaware of such developments, even though the Australian trial started in 2004. How come I can find it with a simple Google search yet our NHS radiologist is unaware of it? Just as they were unaware of the PRIME radiotherapy trial which could cut the need for any radiotherapy for people like Jan. This is a trial that my taxes are funding, why cannot we even be aware of the possible benefits?
I despair......80% or folk get skin reactions to radiotherapy, yet our team are unaware of this treatment, which cuts the incidence of some cases by 33% from trial data to date. Is 33% not worth it?
Yesterday Jan's friend who has now completed radiotherapy phoned. Her skin continues to deteriorate, and is so bad her doctors reckon she will need to be off work until 23 June. Yes, it doesn't stop deteriorating once radiotherapy ceases. So another 8 weeks loss of pay and work from her, when Cavilon costs less than £12 a bottle. Is it the cost of Cavilon hits the NHS budget, whereas 8 weeks loss of pay does not?
For more info on Cavilon see my post dated April 1st, where I link to photographic evidence.
I will willing to pay for Cavilon myself, and have no links to 3M, the makers of Cavilon. This is not a commercial! Yet does it illustrate a more serious underlying problem?
Cavilon is not a quack product with unscientific claims unlike so many health food remedies. It is made by 3M, the makers of Post it notes amongst other plastic products. 3M already supply to the NHS. Their research is done by university professors. If radiologists at one of the top NHS hospitals are unaware of this, would they also be unaware of important breakthroughs in cancer treatment and care, such as may have been found by Professor Jane Plant?
Can we trust their dietary advice? Would they recognise a better treatment if it was available?
Friday, April 25, 2008
Parish Nursing - good christian links
Having said in the previous post that I would rather see eminent scientists guiding the NHS instead of Joan Saddler, what is the role of the church with the sick?
I attend a church that is pioneering Parish Nursing in the UK.
I was introduced to the chaplain of the hospice at the hospital treating Jan. She had a strong faith, and wanted to see the NHS more willing to cry "enough" and pass dying patients over to her hospice rather than the typical 8 hours before their death. Thinks, would government stats rate the hospice as poor, as many of their patients died within 8 hours of arriving, or good because of their low budget for food!
On a more serious and positive note I liked the American Elmbrook Church resources. I have used their audio archive of the Briscoe's teaching many times. Stuart Briscoe was a banker in England, so he and his wife Jill Briscoe have UK connections. I am humbled by the breadth and quality of their resources. They have a disability ministry, honestly, I am not against them! This church resource covers prayer and cancer so well that I printed it out for Jan. It is written by Dianne, a lady who has survived breast cancer for 8 years. She worked in the medical imaging department of a major hospital so mixes Christian faith with sound medicine and personal experience. She says:
"My eight plus years of prayer since cancer came have left me feeling insulated. Again, look up, not around. I daily look to God first. I thank him for each day, and ask him what his will is for me. Again he has answered, by getting me to reorder my priorities. I have started doing some new things (for instance this ministry), and stopped doing others. I also ask him how he wants me to do the things he has given me to do. For instance, what to teach my two sons. And we talk more about God and life and truth. I am affected far less by things "around" me. I look "up", and I have joy and peace I could not have imagined. Prayer is answered. I am so thankful."
I attend a church that is pioneering Parish Nursing in the UK.
I was introduced to the chaplain of the hospice at the hospital treating Jan. She had a strong faith, and wanted to see the NHS more willing to cry "enough" and pass dying patients over to her hospice rather than the typical 8 hours before their death. Thinks, would government stats rate the hospice as poor, as many of their patients died within 8 hours of arriving, or good because of their low budget for food!
On a more serious and positive note I liked the American Elmbrook Church resources. I have used their audio archive of the Briscoe's teaching many times. Stuart Briscoe was a banker in England, so he and his wife Jill Briscoe have UK connections. I am humbled by the breadth and quality of their resources. They have a disability ministry, honestly, I am not against them! This church resource covers prayer and cancer so well that I printed it out for Jan. It is written by Dianne, a lady who has survived breast cancer for 8 years. She worked in the medical imaging department of a major hospital so mixes Christian faith with sound medicine and personal experience. She says:
"My eight plus years of prayer since cancer came have left me feeling insulated. Again, look up, not around. I daily look to God first. I thank him for each day, and ask him what his will is for me. Again he has answered, by getting me to reorder my priorities. I have started doing some new things (for instance this ministry), and stopped doing others. I also ask him how he wants me to do the things he has given me to do. For instance, what to teach my two sons. And we talk more about God and life and truth. I am affected far less by things "around" me. I look "up", and I have joy and peace I could not have imagined. Prayer is answered. I am so thankful."
The curse of political meddling
I struggle to work out why if Jane Plant has an answer or more useful treatment for cancer how is it that our NHS have missed such treatment? Surely our "National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) or NHS Healthcare Commission should lead our hospitals and doctors to the best practice .....but will they when they seem obsessed by equal opportunities and political correctness? I despair at the political meddling in the NHS.
As Jan has cancer we are looking for good treatment, and if not a cure maybe the best possible odds or longest survival. Jan's odds are good for a cancer, but without cancer she would have had a mean life expectancy of another 25 years, the cancer has dropped that by 10 years. I think we can restore some of those lost 10 years by diet and or lifestyle changes.
So I use the Internet. 95% of the sites quickly lead to crack pot ideas from cranks. But I place enormous value on respected universities and professional sites. Before we chose Jan's treatment we looked at statistics by county in the UK, looked at hospital websites, and the CVs of the two consultants who are treating Jan. Their CVs cannot be faulted, just a shame Jan has yet to meet the oncologist, we have only seen her registrar and houseman, and the surgeon failed to turn up at our last appointment.
What if I look at government sites.... after all this year's mantra is patient choice and involvement under PPI. The government run an online hospital comparison site.....just like those that get best value car insurance. I compare the 2 hospitals we have been offered for Jan's radiotherapy, and look for info such as death and cure. NOTHING.
So what do I find. One hospital is satisfactory, the other weak.... but why, did they offer less cures, more deaths or what? I am not told, just it failed to meet one financial target so was automatically rated as weak. I guess the most likely reason is they worked flat out relieving suffering, so treated and cured more sick folk, had shorter waiting lists, and spent more on staff fees and medicines. To the government stats that is weak performance, to me it is praiseworthy!
What else does the government comparison site tell me? The hospital scored 79 out of 100, because it had facilities such as an induction loop, signing for the deaf, car parking, and disability access. It seems not to matter if they cured or killed.
So I look at the new NHS patient and public involvement known as PPI. Joan Saddler OBE has been appointed by the government to revitalise PPI. How did she come to be so involved in the National Health Service? A far as I can see she is a political activist, her contribution so far has been in women's and ethnic minority equality issues and in singing with the London Adventist Chorale.
At an interview Joan Saddler said: “I am very pleased to accept this exciting new role. I am passionate about community engagement and look forward to working with groups across the NHS, so that patients and the public are true partners in the delivery and improvement of healthcare"
Why do we need to consult with the public over all issues? Surely developing cancer treatment needs some scientific training, just under half the members of the public are below average intelligence and lack such training. Why concentrate on access by minority groups or the disabled when what we need first of all is effective treatment for anyone. Personally I would rather see an eminent scientist heading such work.
My GP is similarly hamstrung by government targets, in my case to have no-one waiting more than 48 hours for an appointment. Why????? I book a holiday 6 months ahead, why should I not book a non urgent appointment with a doctor more than 48 hours ahead? But Tony Blair stated I must not.
When I phoned one afternoon for a non urgent appointment to see a doctor say within the next week, maybe even at the start or end of a day to save excessive interruption to my work, I was told that was impossible, it would breach the targets. I must phone again the next day at the 08:30 scrum, and keep dialing the normally engaged number until I got through to book an emergency appointment. As a fit man I can do that, but could a weak bedridden person keep dialing?
I despair of our NHS with this present government control.
As Jan has cancer we are looking for good treatment, and if not a cure maybe the best possible odds or longest survival. Jan's odds are good for a cancer, but without cancer she would have had a mean life expectancy of another 25 years, the cancer has dropped that by 10 years. I think we can restore some of those lost 10 years by diet and or lifestyle changes.
So I use the Internet. 95% of the sites quickly lead to crack pot ideas from cranks. But I place enormous value on respected universities and professional sites. Before we chose Jan's treatment we looked at statistics by county in the UK, looked at hospital websites, and the CVs of the two consultants who are treating Jan. Their CVs cannot be faulted, just a shame Jan has yet to meet the oncologist, we have only seen her registrar and houseman, and the surgeon failed to turn up at our last appointment.
What if I look at government sites.... after all this year's mantra is patient choice and involvement under PPI. The government run an online hospital comparison site.....just like those that get best value car insurance. I compare the 2 hospitals we have been offered for Jan's radiotherapy, and look for info such as death and cure. NOTHING.
So what do I find. One hospital is satisfactory, the other weak.... but why, did they offer less cures, more deaths or what? I am not told, just it failed to meet one financial target so was automatically rated as weak. I guess the most likely reason is they worked flat out relieving suffering, so treated and cured more sick folk, had shorter waiting lists, and spent more on staff fees and medicines. To the government stats that is weak performance, to me it is praiseworthy!
What else does the government comparison site tell me? The hospital scored 79 out of 100, because it had facilities such as an induction loop, signing for the deaf, car parking, and disability access. It seems not to matter if they cured or killed.
So I look at the new NHS patient and public involvement known as PPI. Joan Saddler OBE has been appointed by the government to revitalise PPI. How did she come to be so involved in the National Health Service? A far as I can see she is a political activist, her contribution so far has been in women's and ethnic minority equality issues and in singing with the London Adventist Chorale.
At an interview Joan Saddler said: “I am very pleased to accept this exciting new role. I am passionate about community engagement and look forward to working with groups across the NHS, so that patients and the public are true partners in the delivery and improvement of healthcare"
Why do we need to consult with the public over all issues? Surely developing cancer treatment needs some scientific training, just under half the members of the public are below average intelligence and lack such training. Why concentrate on access by minority groups or the disabled when what we need first of all is effective treatment for anyone. Personally I would rather see an eminent scientist heading such work.
My GP is similarly hamstrung by government targets, in my case to have no-one waiting more than 48 hours for an appointment. Why????? I book a holiday 6 months ahead, why should I not book a non urgent appointment with a doctor more than 48 hours ahead? But Tony Blair stated I must not.
When I phoned one afternoon for a non urgent appointment to see a doctor say within the next week, maybe even at the start or end of a day to save excessive interruption to my work, I was told that was impossible, it would breach the targets. I must phone again the next day at the 08:30 scrum, and keep dialing the normally engaged number until I got through to book an emergency appointment. As a fit man I can do that, but could a weak bedridden person keep dialing?
I despair of our NHS with this present government control.
Wednesday, April 23, 2008
Due diligence Jane Plant Dove Clinic
Before a business takeover it is said that the only way you can determine if it's right and what the future looks like is by conducting such an exhaustive due diligence investigation that by the time you're done you'll know more about the business than the current owner does.
I have done it in business, so why not for Jane Plant's cancer cure? In summary the more I look the more I like her ideas....
The following is not a full detailed investigation, but records some of my research and thoughts. I still like Jane's ideas, and question why the NHS seem to overlook them.
1: Professor Jane Plant's background. It could be said that one should only "trade" on relevant qualifications. Some criticise her use of the title doctor as her doctorate is in geology / earth sciences rather than medicine. Is this fair? I think not as further investigation shows she worked for a time with Chinese doctors to study health effects of growing food in the selenium deficient Chinese soils. So she has looked at health effects of geology in a team with medical doctors.
2: Her background is one of personal success, she has a CBE etc, and has survived breast cancer for 20 years so far.
3: I rate her scientific approach. She quotes peer reviewed scientific research, not too many "unproven health food fads"
I then went on to look at one of her recent employments at the Dove Clinic, a private clinic specialising in cancer care. I am not endorsing this clinic, and have never used it, but I think it important to understand the clinic to assess her abilities.
There are publicly available reviews of the clinic. Their private audit gives me great confidence, the government review so misses the point that I think I see why our cancer care is so appalling...
4: The Dove Clinic audit. It covers 227 cancer cases. The horror of cancer brought tears to my eyes. 52 folk died within 6 weeks of seeing them from advanced metastases. I believe this does not reflect on the Dove clinic, more that the patients saw them too late as a last resort.
Of those treated for 4 months or more there were many deaths, but NOT ONE BEFORE NHS predictions. many had at least double the predicted life span, say 6 months extends to 14 months. So they do NO HARM, unlike some NHS treatments which are sometimes worse than a placebo (see my earlier post on Placebo).
The clinic also concentrates on quality of life rather than length, so in keeping with my views as a Christian, after all death is not a failure or defeat.
5: The government's Healthcare Commission. How do they audit a cancer clinic that I think is ten times as effective than many NHS treatments, and may even have a cure for some cancers? Their first report I can find is here. It is a 43 page report making 27 recommendations to improve the service...I look for items such as death and cure to see the effectiveness, NOTHING!!!!!! So the government inspectors look at cleanliness of hand basins and loos but do not look for cancer cures, or deaths prevented.
What burdens do I find our government inspectors lay on the organisation which employs some of the UK's leading doctors? I quote a few of their findings:
a) the clinic needs a documented procedure to handle patient deaths....... but they have had NO DEATHS on site, that is the point, it is an effective outpatient hospital a point which seems to be missed by the government inspectors.
b) a written human resource policy needs to be developed...... why? They employ the doctors who have the answers, what more do we need? The NHS have such written policies and employ doctors who dare I say so often fail.
c) written policies were needed on the prevention of harassment and bullying......what? This is an upmarket private clinic, patients don't return if they are not satisfied or bullied...
So if the government watchdog can so miss the important data yet burden a leading clinic with what I see as 27 irrelevant recommendations maybe that is why the NHS is failing to provide effective cancer treatment. They cannot see the wood for the trees. Did Jane leave the clinic to escape such bureaucracy?
I have done it in business, so why not for Jane Plant's cancer cure? In summary the more I look the more I like her ideas....
The following is not a full detailed investigation, but records some of my research and thoughts. I still like Jane's ideas, and question why the NHS seem to overlook them.
1: Professor Jane Plant's background. It could be said that one should only "trade" on relevant qualifications. Some criticise her use of the title doctor as her doctorate is in geology / earth sciences rather than medicine. Is this fair? I think not as further investigation shows she worked for a time with Chinese doctors to study health effects of growing food in the selenium deficient Chinese soils. So she has looked at health effects of geology in a team with medical doctors.
2: Her background is one of personal success, she has a CBE etc, and has survived breast cancer for 20 years so far.
3: I rate her scientific approach. She quotes peer reviewed scientific research, not too many "unproven health food fads"
I then went on to look at one of her recent employments at the Dove Clinic, a private clinic specialising in cancer care. I am not endorsing this clinic, and have never used it, but I think it important to understand the clinic to assess her abilities.
There are publicly available reviews of the clinic. Their private audit gives me great confidence, the government review so misses the point that I think I see why our cancer care is so appalling...
4: The Dove Clinic audit. It covers 227 cancer cases. The horror of cancer brought tears to my eyes. 52 folk died within 6 weeks of seeing them from advanced metastases. I believe this does not reflect on the Dove clinic, more that the patients saw them too late as a last resort.
Of those treated for 4 months or more there were many deaths, but NOT ONE BEFORE NHS predictions. many had at least double the predicted life span, say 6 months extends to 14 months. So they do NO HARM, unlike some NHS treatments which are sometimes worse than a placebo (see my earlier post on Placebo).
The clinic also concentrates on quality of life rather than length, so in keeping with my views as a Christian, after all death is not a failure or defeat.
5: The government's Healthcare Commission. How do they audit a cancer clinic that I think is ten times as effective than many NHS treatments, and may even have a cure for some cancers? Their first report I can find is here. It is a 43 page report making 27 recommendations to improve the service...I look for items such as death and cure to see the effectiveness, NOTHING!!!!!! So the government inspectors look at cleanliness of hand basins and loos but do not look for cancer cures, or deaths prevented.
What burdens do I find our government inspectors lay on the organisation which employs some of the UK's leading doctors? I quote a few of their findings:
a) the clinic needs a documented procedure to handle patient deaths....... but they have had NO DEATHS on site, that is the point, it is an effective outpatient hospital a point which seems to be missed by the government inspectors.
b) a written human resource policy needs to be developed...... why? They employ the doctors who have the answers, what more do we need? The NHS have such written policies and employ doctors who dare I say so often fail.
c) written policies were needed on the prevention of harassment and bullying......what? This is an upmarket private clinic, patients don't return if they are not satisfied or bullied...
So if the government watchdog can so miss the important data yet burden a leading clinic with what I see as 27 irrelevant recommendations maybe that is why the NHS is failing to provide effective cancer treatment. They cannot see the wood for the trees. Did Jane leave the clinic to escape such bureaucracy?
Cancer, pain and death
I said we had two "encouragements at church last Sunday. In reality one sufferer was so ill she couldn't get to church, and another told of the death of her sister. It gets worse! The friend of a member died that same day from cancer, leaving a husband, a three and a six year old. We only heard about it yesterday.
We had a phone call from another of Jan's friends who completed her radiotherapy yesterday, she was triumphantly looking forward to a rest. Yet in reality her skin was so burnt she could not sleep, wear a bra or tight fitting clothes, and she was told the skin reaction was yet to peak, it would get worse for at least the next 7 if not 10 days.
I also worry about a UCSF Professor whom I had used for diet tips. I have had no response to my emails, and her regular blog suddenly stopped on 18th March 2008. Is she too ill to continue?
Sadly Samantha Hughes, a 4 year old's death from cancer hit the press today. A tribute to her is here. Beware, it is begging for money! Seems God does not shield Christians from the problems that everyone else has, we have no charmed life.
And another sadness, we had a letter from "Telling the Truth" by Jill Briscoe, apparently Laura Meleski, who had been their administrator has had to stop work due to progressing cancer. Interesting list of prayer concerns from her church...
Yet we still welcome and need this contact, we would rather cry with others than be isolated. We are told Christ shares our sorrows. Isaiah chapter 53 verse 4 reads "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows."
We had a phone call from another of Jan's friends who completed her radiotherapy yesterday, she was triumphantly looking forward to a rest. Yet in reality her skin was so burnt she could not sleep, wear a bra or tight fitting clothes, and she was told the skin reaction was yet to peak, it would get worse for at least the next 7 if not 10 days.
I also worry about a UCSF Professor whom I had used for diet tips. I have had no response to my emails, and her regular blog suddenly stopped on 18th March 2008. Is she too ill to continue?
Sadly Samantha Hughes, a 4 year old's death from cancer hit the press today. A tribute to her is here. Beware, it is begging for money! Seems God does not shield Christians from the problems that everyone else has, we have no charmed life.
And another sadness, we had a letter from "Telling the Truth" by Jill Briscoe, apparently Laura Meleski, who had been their administrator has had to stop work due to progressing cancer. Interesting list of prayer concerns from her church...
Yet we still welcome and need this contact, we would rather cry with others than be isolated. We are told Christ shares our sorrows. Isaiah chapter 53 verse 4 reads "Surely he took up our infirmities and carried our sorrows."
Sunday, April 20, 2008
Zimbabwe - God can over-rule
Today's church was encouraging, a Nigerian visited. Our UK congregation had many hurting people there... seems God uses broken weak people, maybe to show his over ruling strength.
One of Jan's friends who also has breast cancer has been so ill she has missed the last four meetings, and Jan felt too weak to go in the evening herself. I sat next to an older lady who kindly asked how Jan was doing. It turns out her sister died of breast cancer about ten years ago. That's two encouragements in one day!
The guy from Nigeria worked for African Enterprise - encouraging stories about what is happening to bring reconciliation to Africa. They had recently organised a mission in Nigeria, 11,000 people joining the church in just one week of mission, held in something over 700 meetings, so presumably many small house type meetings. He didn't seem to be the type to exaggerate. He had an insight to background of the political leaders around Zimbabwe which made it far easier to understand the current situation which he described as the verge of civil war. He said it was the churches bringing water and food to prison inmates nowadays in Zimbabwe, as the government don't feed their prisoners!
We joined hin in prayer afterwards for Africa. He prayed just like any UK Christian, no more tears or strange languages!
I bought two books brought by African Enterprise. One shows the amazing power of God. It deals with how God converted a freedom fighter in Zimbabwe. He was Stephen Lungu who by the age of 11 had run away, preferring life on the streets. As a teenager, he was recruited into an urban gang, the Black Shadows, which burgled and mugged with a half-focused dream of revolution. When an evangelist came to town, Stephen was sent to fire bomb the event, carrying his bag of bombs and mingling with the crowd. Instead he stayed to listen...Today, Stephen is Africa's Billy Graham, an international evangelist who regularly speaks in UK, US and Europe. I like his smile on his web page!
The book is entitled "Out of the Black Shadows: The Amazing Transformation of Stephen Lungu"
I spent the day concentrating on God rather than cancer, which maybe has somewhat overtaken me as I search for a cure. Strangely I switched tha car radio on three times that day to listen to the BBC and Premier Radio, probably totaling 7 minutes listening in all, as it is not a long drive to church. Returning from church I heard the testimony of a UK cancer sufferer who after surgery had refused further treatment, but had gone out to an African church which had prayed for his healing.......resulting in a remission of 5 years so far, or am I showing a lack of trust in God to not just call it a permanent miraculous healing. He also said he still had to almost "claim" his healing from God each day in trust, as his UK medical diagnosis had not been encouraging, and he was well aware in human terms of the dangers of remission ór return of the cancer.
I struggle. I believe God can guide by many means including chance circumstances. In the last 8 days there have been three such incidents at church,
Yet God also calls me to a sound mind, I need to discern. I want to learn from others experience. I cannot see that God is so limited that we need to visit Africa to see his work.
One of Jan's friends who also has breast cancer has been so ill she has missed the last four meetings, and Jan felt too weak to go in the evening herself. I sat next to an older lady who kindly asked how Jan was doing. It turns out her sister died of breast cancer about ten years ago. That's two encouragements in one day!
The guy from Nigeria worked for African Enterprise - encouraging stories about what is happening to bring reconciliation to Africa. They had recently organised a mission in Nigeria, 11,000 people joining the church in just one week of mission, held in something over 700 meetings, so presumably many small house type meetings. He didn't seem to be the type to exaggerate. He had an insight to background of the political leaders around Zimbabwe which made it far easier to understand the current situation which he described as the verge of civil war. He said it was the churches bringing water and food to prison inmates nowadays in Zimbabwe, as the government don't feed their prisoners!
We joined hin in prayer afterwards for Africa. He prayed just like any UK Christian, no more tears or strange languages!
I bought two books brought by African Enterprise. One shows the amazing power of God. It deals with how God converted a freedom fighter in Zimbabwe. He was Stephen Lungu who by the age of 11 had run away, preferring life on the streets. As a teenager, he was recruited into an urban gang, the Black Shadows, which burgled and mugged with a half-focused dream of revolution. When an evangelist came to town, Stephen was sent to fire bomb the event, carrying his bag of bombs and mingling with the crowd. Instead he stayed to listen...Today, Stephen is Africa's Billy Graham, an international evangelist who regularly speaks in UK, US and Europe. I like his smile on his web page!
The book is entitled "Out of the Black Shadows: The Amazing Transformation of Stephen Lungu"
I spent the day concentrating on God rather than cancer, which maybe has somewhat overtaken me as I search for a cure. Strangely I switched tha car radio on three times that day to listen to the BBC and Premier Radio, probably totaling 7 minutes listening in all, as it is not a long drive to church. Returning from church I heard the testimony of a UK cancer sufferer who after surgery had refused further treatment, but had gone out to an African church which had prayed for his healing.......resulting in a remission of 5 years so far, or am I showing a lack of trust in God to not just call it a permanent miraculous healing. He also said he still had to almost "claim" his healing from God each day in trust, as his UK medical diagnosis had not been encouraging, and he was well aware in human terms of the dangers of remission ór return of the cancer.
I struggle. I believe God can guide by many means including chance circumstances. In the last 8 days there have been three such incidents at church,
- introduction to work of Jane Plant
- introduction to an elderly lady whose sister died of cancer 10 years ago, I am sure she could open up on their path of faith, prayer, yet eventual death.
- hearing this talk about the church and power of prayer experienced in Africa.
Yet God also calls me to a sound mind, I need to discern. I want to learn from others experience. I cannot see that God is so limited that we need to visit Africa to see his work.
Saturday, April 19, 2008
Lies, damn lies and statistics
I will delay my rant about radiotherapy for another day, and say more about Jane Plant's book that has rekindled my anger about conventional cancer treatment.
Should I as a Christian be angry?
I think of Wilberforce and the slave trade. In his day there must have been discussions amongst slave owners of the cost benefits of providing good food and health care for ones slaves. Yesterday I was reading cost benefit studies for radiotherapy! The cost benefit could easily have shown things such as a 3% increased return on investment if one provided better food for slaves, just as today's chemotherapy could provide Jan with a 3% risk reduction. But Wilberforce saw that was irrelevant, and in his anger saw through to the abolition of slavery.
Similarly I want to see a change from concentrating on almost useless conventional treatment to more effective lifestyle changes.
Jane Plant says similar things, she has re-enforced my view. How can the established medical service be so blinded to what I see as obvious? Is it our enforced multi-culturalism, whereby we cannot say something is wrong? For example the formal guides Jan has on aftercare list diet, acupuncture, meditation, Yin and Yang, Yoga, exercise, visualisation, aromatherapy etc. all as valid. No wonder diet does not stick out if mixed with quackery....
I am not knocking Professor Sir Richard Peto's statistics or work at all, I quote him as the UK's most authoritative source of UK cancer mortality statistics, the Peto method of meta analysis is named after him. But when he says chemotherpy adds a 3% benefit and we are making progress towards a cure do politicians understand that 3% is next to nothing???? Is it that because it is so close to UK target inflation figures they think 3% is goodness? It is the result of something like 50 years research and billions invested, and in my opinion rubbish!
Or is it that folk don't understand statistics? Jane suggests that reason.
I had said just by surgery Jan's chances of healthy life for at least 5 years was 4 in 5, and with conventional treatment we are trying to extend that to 6 in 7. Sounds good??? Or does it? Take Jane's airline example. Suppose you were off to Greece for a holiday tomorrow. There was a choice of seven flights, all leaving that day and scheduled for Greece. Suppose intelligence said one plane had a terrorist bomb on board and would explode that day, killing all its passengers. Would you still fly that day knowing you had a 6 in 7 chance of being OK?
Is that why a 6 in 7 chance is unacceptable to Jane and me, we are so close to the risk, albeit for me it is in a spouse? Yet for an Oxford university professor who has worked on cancer stats for the last 33 years it is old hat and acceptable. Not that I wish to discredit Sir Richard Peto, he was the first to demonstrate the magnitude of the growing worldwide epidemic of tobacco deaths.
So I stay in anger, I trust justifiably. I see another book coming to balance any bias by Jane,
"Foods to fight cancer" by Richard Beliveau. Richard is a leading authority in the field of cancer research. He holds the Chair in the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer at the University of Quebec at Montreal, where he is a professor of biochemistry. He is the director of the Molecular Medicine Laboratory of UQAM—Sainte-Justine Hospital (Centre de cancérologie Charles-Bruneau) and is also a professor of surgery at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Montreal.
I like his french name! Lets see.
Should I as a Christian be angry?
I think of Wilberforce and the slave trade. In his day there must have been discussions amongst slave owners of the cost benefits of providing good food and health care for ones slaves. Yesterday I was reading cost benefit studies for radiotherapy! The cost benefit could easily have shown things such as a 3% increased return on investment if one provided better food for slaves, just as today's chemotherapy could provide Jan with a 3% risk reduction. But Wilberforce saw that was irrelevant, and in his anger saw through to the abolition of slavery.
Similarly I want to see a change from concentrating on almost useless conventional treatment to more effective lifestyle changes.
Jane Plant says similar things, she has re-enforced my view. How can the established medical service be so blinded to what I see as obvious? Is it our enforced multi-culturalism, whereby we cannot say something is wrong? For example the formal guides Jan has on aftercare list diet, acupuncture, meditation, Yin and Yang, Yoga, exercise, visualisation, aromatherapy etc. all as valid. No wonder diet does not stick out if mixed with quackery....
I am not knocking Professor Sir Richard Peto's statistics or work at all, I quote him as the UK's most authoritative source of UK cancer mortality statistics, the Peto method of meta analysis is named after him. But when he says chemotherpy adds a 3% benefit and we are making progress towards a cure do politicians understand that 3% is next to nothing???? Is it that because it is so close to UK target inflation figures they think 3% is goodness? It is the result of something like 50 years research and billions invested, and in my opinion rubbish!
Or is it that folk don't understand statistics? Jane suggests that reason.
I had said just by surgery Jan's chances of healthy life for at least 5 years was 4 in 5, and with conventional treatment we are trying to extend that to 6 in 7. Sounds good??? Or does it? Take Jane's airline example. Suppose you were off to Greece for a holiday tomorrow. There was a choice of seven flights, all leaving that day and scheduled for Greece. Suppose intelligence said one plane had a terrorist bomb on board and would explode that day, killing all its passengers. Would you still fly that day knowing you had a 6 in 7 chance of being OK?
Is that why a 6 in 7 chance is unacceptable to Jane and me, we are so close to the risk, albeit for me it is in a spouse? Yet for an Oxford university professor who has worked on cancer stats for the last 33 years it is old hat and acceptable. Not that I wish to discredit Sir Richard Peto, he was the first to demonstrate the magnitude of the growing worldwide epidemic of tobacco deaths.
So I stay in anger, I trust justifiably. I see another book coming to balance any bias by Jane,
"Foods to fight cancer" by Richard Beliveau. Richard is a leading authority in the field of cancer research. He holds the Chair in the Prevention and Treatment of Cancer at the University of Quebec at Montreal, where he is a professor of biochemistry. He is the director of the Molecular Medicine Laboratory of UQAM—Sainte-Justine Hospital (Centre de cancérologie Charles-Bruneau) and is also a professor of surgery at the Faculty of Medicine at the University of Montreal.
I like his french name! Lets see.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
