Chemotherapy Success Rates are Absurdly Low And Are Often Mis-Represented in the Media. Absolute Benefit Vs Relative Benefit.
Sadly I am once again digging in to reading literature about cancer and methods of healing as another family member is extremely sick with it. Thankfully, I have found a very good book on the subject and am working through it. Here's some thoughts in response to the intro so far...
Like most of us, until I started looking more closely at the drug/pharmaceutical and 'health' industries - I tended to just take in statistics and claims that are made about them in the media and while I didn't really know if they were accurate or not, I also didn't have much reason to assume they were wrong. I can remember, many times in my life, hearing claims such as 'A revolutionary new cancer drug has proven to be 40% effective' or similar phrases and I just assumed that they were probably right, since I figured there were enough people paying attention that if they were wrong, they would get found out. Unfortunately, after my Mother died as a result of chemotherapy treatment for cancer and I studied the subject more closely, I found out that actually we are being lied to habitually.
Absolute benefit of a drug/treatment vs. Relative benefit?
One of the biggest manipulations is this tactic of using 'rubber numbers' to persuade your mind into thinking something has been said that hasn't really been said.
When testing/trialing drugs, an 'absolute' benefit can be measured as a percentage of the amount of change that was recorded in regards to the amount of people who got sick vs. the amount that were expected to get sick statistically. This might be called 'Absolute Risk Reduction'. So if 100 are in a trial over 2 years and statistically 2 are likely to develop a cancer during that time - yet only 1 does, then the absolute benefit (risk reduction) can be said to be 1%.
The 'relative' benefit is actually slightly different. The relative figure is the percentage difference in the risk between the group that took the drug being tested and a control group (or general population). In other words, in our example above, the 1 person difference in the numbers (1 person less developed cancer than statistically expected), the relative benefit (risk reduction) is 50%!
The relative figure is the one that is standard in studies and this makes sense to me since we are really most interested in the effectiveness of a treatment in relation to the absence of the treatment.
However...
What often occurs is that when the news of such a study is reported in the media, the figure of 50% is trumpeted in such a way as to give the impression that the survival rate as a result of this drug is now 50% - when in reality, the survival rate might only be 2%.
Chemotherapy causes cancer
The reality for chemotherapy, for example, is that despite claims that are sometimes made that it is effective, a meta analysis by the Australian Royal college of Radiology a few years ago concluded that the absolute benefit of chemotherapy was so tiny and it's cost so high - along with it basically being so freaking toxic and dangerous - that they recommended it's use be reconsidered immediately across the board. Obviously that didn't happen because.. well.. corruption, greed and ignorance got in the way (in my humble opinion).
We don't really live in a world where science decides medical practice - although that is often the claim. In reality, we live in a world where healthcare boards determine policies that prevent Doctors from acting freely and from their own understandings/research. In fact, in some cases Doctors can be punished even for speaking about therapies that aren't approved. It doesn't matter how many 'good' people do good research and expose problems with our healthcare approaches - if they have to wait until they are 70 to speak out due to fear of losing their pension and being sacked!
Wishing you well,
Ura Soul
Vote @ura-soul for Steem Witness!
(Witnesses are the computer servers that run the Steem Blockchain.
Without witnesses there is no Steem, Steemit, DTube, Utopian or
Busy... You can really help Steem by making your 30 witness votes count!)
@ura-soul have you seen this docu?:
Hoxsey: The Quack Who Cured Cancer - How The AMA & FDA Shut Down 17 Cancer Clinics
Yes, I am aware of this case - you can view this and other similar cases in the documentary 'cancer, the forbidden cures'. If I were looking for treatments for myself I possibly would have looked at this and others along these lines - but I am looking for family members and the least 'chemical' in nature the solution is, the better.
The whole cancer industry is a scam. Find an effective cancer treatment and use it to save lives and you will find yourself in the same position as David Noakes who got sent down last week. I don't hold out any hope for any further development of his effective GcMaf treatment.
The book I am reading at the moment is from a US based Doctor and the first 16 pages or so are about the legalities involved and how he has protected himself from prosecution in the US using constitutional protection - he essentially states he is acting as a pastoral healer and uses a little known vehicle in law to act as part of a 'club'. He seems to have done his homework.
I agree though, yes, this 'industry' is a lesion on the face of humanity. :/
That's very interesting. It seems David Noakes just got sick of the hurdles put in his path and went ahead with what he knew to be right and chose to accept the consequences. Maybe he could have done a better job even though he has saved many lives with his GcMaf treatment. It would seem churlish to write to him in prison with this information as it's too late for him. I hope he doesn't live to regret his brave choice.
I spoke with his company years ago and it was clear that they had a lot of fear. I investigated as best I could and found a mixture of promising information, along with some evidence of what looked dodgy on his part- I absolutely could not see how they could justify the cost of the product, for one. We absolutely should be seeing major research being done on GcMaf. I think David Noakes has psychological issues relating to egotism, myself.. It's unfortunate that he didn't approach the situation more professionally.
Your post has been up voted because of similarities to the #informationwar project (by @wakeupnd).
Our purpose is to encourage posts discussing Information War, Propaganda, Disinformation and other false narratives. We currently have over 7,500 Steem Power and 20+ people following the curation trail to support our mission.
Join our discord and chat with 250+ fellow Informationwar Activists.
Join our brand new reddit! and start sharing your Steemit posts directly to The_IW, via the share button on your Steemit post!!!
Connect with fellow Informationwar writers in our Roll Call! InformationWar - Leadership/Contributing Writers/Supporters: Roll Call
Ways you can help the @informationwar
Hi @ura-soul!
Your post was upvoted by @steem-ua, new Steem dApp, using UserAuthority for algorithmic post curation!
Your UA account score is currently 6.831 which ranks you at #100 across all Steem accounts.
Your rank has not changed in the last three days.
In our last Algorithmic Curation Round, consisting of 189 contributions, your post is ranked at #19.
Evaluation of your UA score:
Feel free to join our @steem-ua Discord server