RIP Grete Waitz
Labels: cancer, grete waitz, heros, marathon, oslo
Labels: cancer, grete waitz, heros, marathon, oslo
Labels: atlas, cancer, end of life care, futile care, new america foundation
What Cancer Cannot Do
Cancer is so limited…
It cannot cripple love.
It cannot shatter hope.
It cannot corrode faith.
It cannot eat away peace.
It cannot destroy confidence.
It cannot kill friendship.
It cannot shut out memories.
It cannot silence courage.
It cannot invade the soul.
It cannot reduce eternal life.
It cannot quench the Spirit.
It cannot lessen the power of the resurrection.
Cancer can do all of this stuff. (The last three, I’m not sure about.) I wonder if other people have had the same reaction to something which is supposed to be comforting, but to me, seems a bit accusatory since all of these things (except for the last three) have actually happened to me. Cancer, it turns out, can do a lot. This is just tomfoolery; why would you mess with people who may be dying like that? Why possibly make them feel bad if their hope has been shattered, their peace has been eaten away, their soul has been invaded, etc.? And here’s a crappy poem telling you you’re wrong?
But I backed down from the ledge: people must like “Cancer Cannot” or you wouldn’t see it so much. It was time to do what I had come for. I took a seat and said a prayer for my new friend, and for the parents who donated the Meditation Room and their daughter, and decided that I’d contribute my own book to the Meditation Room collection, seeing as how there was no poetry on the shelf. The Collected Poems of Emily Dickinson: not a lie in the bunch.
Mary Valle lives in Baltimore and, in the latest Killing the Buddha book, Believer, Beware, wrote about her adventures in sex ed at Catholic school. She blogs on Killing the Buddha as The Communicant. For more Mary, check out her blog or follow her on Twitter. She is currently working on a novel called The Hexagon, which is, roughly, Rosemary's Baby set in a Waldorf-type school.
Labels: cancer, experimental treatment
We know already that most people want to be at home with family at the end-of-life, we also know that most end up in hospital or institution. We have hypothesized that increasing access and enrollment to hospices might help people meet this goal. This article seeks to understand how frequently and why patients with end-stage cancer choose to go to the ER.
So this begs the question… what percentage of patients with cancer visit the emergency room during the last 6 months and 2 weeks of life?
Of the 91,561 patients who died of cancer between 2002 and 2005, 84% of patients visited the ER in the 6 months prior to death and 34% of patients visited in the last two weeks before death. They outline the principle reasons for emergency room visits: primary cancer (mostly lung cancer), uncontrolled symptoms (pain, dyspnea and other non-pain symptoms), caregiver fatigue, and infection.
Top reasons for ER visits among patients with cancer:While many of the patients studied ended up admitted to hospital, the authors – and I believe, rightly so – postulate that most may have avoided acute-level care had the quality and quantity of care had adequately supported the needs of both patient and caregiver. Instead of emergency room care, most of these patients required “either additional support to remain at home or direct transfer to a palliative care unit or residential hospice.”
Barbera and colleagues suggest that “comprehensive and coordinated” palliative care could serve the needs of most of these patients and their caregivers and meet this demand for quality and quantity of care, allowing patients to have symptoms tended to at home, in clinics, or in in-patient or residential hospice facilities.
Labels: cancer, end of life care, hospice care, palliative care
Why is it important to not leap to the conclusion that opioids cause cancer growth? Two recent examples come to mind: hormone replacement therapy for post-menopausal women and vitamin E. Early retrospective studies (in humans, not mice) seemed to demonstrate that hormone replacement therapy led to reduced mortality. Unfortunately, large prospective cohort studies showed the opposite to be true! When researchers went back to re-examine the earlier studies, they found those earlier studies failed to account for important baseline differences in women: those who were healthier were more likely to take hormone replacement therapy, and therefore had better health outcomes that were attributed to the drug. Similarly, there was a great deal of excitement about vitamin E, including bizillions of laboratory studies that showed plausible mechanisms by which vitamin E could reduce heart attacks (antioxidant properties, etc). Again, large studies showed the opposite: people who do not take vitamin E live longer and have fewer heart attacks than people who do take vitamin E. In both the case of hormone replacement therapy and vitamin E, patients were taking the drug and health care providers were recommending treatment based on early evidence. And people died.
snip
Let's set the record straight.
Labels: abortion, cancer, contraception, ideological medicine, junk science, media, morphine, opioid, pseudoscience
Labels: cancer, morphine, palliative care