This site uses cookies to improve your experience and to provide services and advertising. By continuing to browse, you agree to the use of cookies described in our Cookies Policy. You may change your settings at any time but this may impact on the functionality of the site. To learn more see our Cookies Policy.
Dublin: 3 °C Saturday 23 March, 2019

Comment #332747 by Aoife McCarrick

Aoife McCarrick Apr 1st 2012, 9:59 AM #

“In a word, yes. ”The broad-based treatment of cancer has improved significantly in recent years,” Reynolds says. In his specialty of oesophageal cancer, there has been an improvement of no less than 50 per cent in a patient’s chances of survival after five years. ”In the 1990s it was 28 per cent. In 2008, it was 44 per cent.””

This is ambigious at best as the survival rate for oesophageal cancer is much lower. See page 36 of report (this report was quoted in article), yes if you are fortunate enough to have the surgery then your chances of survival are higher, but only if you have the treatment. Most people are detected too late.

A 5 year oesophageal cancer survivor diagnosed age 32 and mother of 2 children under 2 (just).

| Share | Report this comment

Read the article where this comment appeared:

Explainer: Why can’t we cure cancer?

Explainer: Why can’t we cure cancer?

We pour millions into cancer research. So where is it actually getting us?


    Favourite Joan Featherstone
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Apr 1st 2012, 9:07 PM

    Well done Aoife, I’m a breast one, nine years! Great advances have been made, long may that continue! X

    Favourite Mhikl Hez
    Hide Comment
    Report as Defamatory
    Report this Comment
    Feb 20th 2013, 10:38 PM

    “Survival rate after five years”, is just wiggle words for claiming any minuscule success rate poisoning, burning and chopping might have in survival rates: What would have happened had the cancer patient been administered diet and natural cleansing we will never know because such treatments will never find the funding to prove.
    That profit is more important than the wellbeing of a child with cancer is abominable.
    Get it! Radiation for cancer- since 1899; Chemo: sometime after the end of WWII when the poisons from concentration camps were studied; cutting: sometime after a patient could be desensitised to pain.
    In another fifty years at this rate, cancer will still be with us and the same gopher hole, nix any gophers, will still be studied. There are crimes being carried out for the sake of wealth and public lynching should return to town square, tout de suite!


Trending Tags