October 19, 2009

60 Minutes dusts off its #1 cancer story – for the third time

Posted By

Comments

Please note, comments are no longer published through this website. All previously made comments are still archived and available for viewing through select posts.

James Lum

March 5, 2012 at 8:41 pm

I had lung cancer. It was discovered when it was the size of a large walnut in my upper left lung and did not look like it had spread yet. I was being scheduled for the standard operation; ie., open the chest, remove a lung lobe, remove lymph nodes, and then undergo chemo for months. I asked my oncologist if there was anything else…and there was; Radio Frequency Ablation (RFA). Operation success was ~76%, RFA was ~74%, survival after 5 years. RFA was for patients that were too weak to survive an operation. I opted for RFA. Basically, the surgeon makes a 1/4 inch incision, inserts a probe into the tumor, and cooks it. The patient can go home that afternoon. Scans showed no more signs of cancer and its been 3+ years.
I have seen other cancer patients that have and are undergoing chemo and it is brutal. Chemo is basically a poison.
John Kanzius has/had the right idea. Once they find the right drug that carries the metallic particles to the tumor and wherever it has metastasized from smallest to largest size, the radio waves will kill it with heat. No more need for chemo. More than one drug company will not be happy.

COMMENTS button We welcome comments, which users can leave at the end of any of our systematic story reviews or at the end of any of our blog posts.

But before leaving a comment, please review these notes about our policy.

You are responsible for any comments you leave on this site.

This site is primarily a forum for discussion about the quality (or lack thereof) in journalism or other media messages (advertising, marketing, public relations, medical journals, etc.) It is not intended to be a forum for definitive discussions about medicine or science.

We will delete comments that include personal attacks, unfounded allegations, unverified claims, product pitches, profanity or any from anyone who does not list a full name and a functioning email address. We will also end any thread of repetitive comments. We don”t give medical advice so we won”t respond to questions asking for it.

We don”t have sufficient staffing to contact each commenter who left such a message. If you have a question about why your comment was edited or removed, you can email us at feedback@healthnewsreview.org.

There has been a recent burst of attention to troubles with many comments left on science and science news/communication websites. Read “Online science comments: trolls, trash and treasure.”

The authors of the Retraction Watch comments policy urge commenters:

“Shed light, not just heat. Facts, challenges, disagreements, corrections — those are all fine. Attacking the person, instead of the idea or the interpretation, is neither acceptable nor helpful.”

We”re also concerned about anonymous comments. We ask that all commenters leave their full name and provide an actual email address in case we feel we need to contact them. We may delete any comment left by someone who does not leave their name and a legitimate email address.

And, as noted, product pitches of any sort – pushing treatments, tests, products, procedures, physicians, medical centers, books, websites – are likely to be deleted. We don”t accept advertising on this site and are not going to give it away free.

The ability to leave comments expires after a certain period of time. So you may find that you’re unable to leave a comment on an article that is more than a few months old.