This is incorrect. Radiotherapy is a direct treatment applied to cancerous tissue, chemotherapy targets fast dividing cells (such as cancer), surgery physically cuts the cancer out.PaulH said:
This is also incorrect. The whole point of surgery is to cut out the cancer. IF the tumour is operable and IF it has not metastasized you can very well potentially remove the cancer entirely.
As stated above in theory if you can outright cut the tumour out in its entirety and it has not metastasized then you absolutely can get rid of cancer entirely. Unfortunately that's not the easiest thing to do when you're talking about tumours growing on key organs. Also its incredibly difficult to actually ever be certain that it really has gone entirely and that there was no metastasis.MCerberus said:
Individual tumors yes, and perhaps I was playing loose with the term remission. And it doesn't change the fact at all that the genetics and the vast majority of environmental causes have already been done. Even after you're released and on with your life, the overhanging spectre of it will never, ever go away.Lightspeaker said:
Right. That's why it's pivotal to rush to a doctor if there is a sudden change in bowel habits or dark colored blood in stool. If TB went to the doctor sooner they might have been able to remove the tumor and/or part of the colon in an earlier stage decreasing likelihood of metastasis. Colon cancer has a fairly high survival rate if detected early enough. Unfortunately when cancer has spread all you can really do is delay the inevatible.Lightspeaker said:
.....Okay. Seeing it seems you're the one with some medical experience I have to beg as to why it is gotten so advanced.Lightspeaker said:
Technically, stepson. Jenna already had a son when they got together, so he's not TB's biological son, but TB seems to be taking the role of "dad" very seriously and is doing his damndest to be a good parent.Zhukov said:
iirc, the original diagnosis was that it was a pre-cancerous growth, but when treatment started it was discovered to be stage 3 colon cancer. They then had to step up the level of treatment and hoped to get ahead of it. Unfortunately, it looks like they didn't.mad825 said:
If I remember correctly it was Stage 3 when it was caught, which is not "early" by any definition. Depending on where you are in the spectrum of Stage 3 the five year survival rate is anywhere from 90 to 50%. There was some reason for optimism because TB is so young, but with the cancer in his bloodstream now it's just a matter of time.mad825 said:
Eh, it's most likely to spread to the lungs next then to the rest of the body. I think it's the heart after that then it goes into the bloodstream and goes wherever assuming if his lungs don't give out by then.BloatedGuppy said:
Holy crap? Stage 3? That's....not early like you said. In fact that's more of a 'you just found out about it before you suddenly dropped dead.' kind of deal. Only difference is that now you have an expiration date for when you...go.BloatedGuppy said:
TB's outlook, as given to him by his physician just a couple of weeks back, was 2-3 years. That's the prognosis given the treatments available today, not a rough estimation given the last 25-50 years of cancer research. They're not going to give the man a misleading prognosis based on aging or irrelevant data.Chris Foy said:
I understand the need to be realistic but I still think there is something to be said about remaining positive about any chances that remain. I see nothing wrong with some people not wanting to "fret" just yet...BloatedGuppy said:
