Post: #1

This isn't my opinion.

But that of Dr Richard Smith, the former editor of the British Medical Journal (the most prestigious medical journal in Britain).

Quote:Writing a blog post for the BMJ, Richard Smith said there are four main ways to die – sudden death, organ failure, cancer and dementia. He notes that suicide is a fifth option but that he is "leaving that on one side for now".

The former BMJ editor, who is chair of the board of Patients Know Best, a social enterprise that puts patients in charge of their medical records, said we should "stop wasting billions" trying to find a cure and let nature take its course.

While many people say they would like to die by sudden death, Smith points out that although this may be preferable for the victim, their family and friends are left traumatised, especially if relationships and finances are not in order.

Dementia is long and slow, where you are eventually erased, while organ failure will leave people hospitalised for most of their remaining time.

"So death from cancer is the best ... You can say goodbye, reflect on your life, leave last messages, perhaps visit special places for a last time, listen to favourite pieces of music, read loved poems, and prepare, according to your beliefs, to meet your maker or enjoy eternal oblivion."

"This is, I recognise, a romantic view of dying, but it is achievable with love, morphine, and whisky. But stay away from overambitious oncologists, and let's stop wasting billions trying to cure cancer, potentially leaving us to die a much more horrible death."

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/dr-richard-smit...it-1481569

The remarks are covered more extensively in this thought provoking magazine column:

http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/spectator-s...on-cancer/

I have always been interested in the fact that we are getting our asses kicked in the war against Cancer. And I often wonder if the wasted billions could be spent on something more productive?

What would you rather? A world in which millions of people are over diagnosed with cancers that will probably never kill them. And those with deadly cancer face painful expensive treatments for very little benefit.

Or a world - in which we just give up and the government just hands you 50 grand as a form of condolences instead?

Keep your shitty drugs that cause nothing but misery - and give me the money instead.

For those interested in a detailed look at the fact that we are losing the war against cancer - I recommend this one. There is no more comprehensive survey available.



http://www.amazon.com/The-Truth-Small-Do...1476739994

Post: #2

It might be if they legalized heroin to deal with it. A lot of cancer deaths are really opiate overdoses as the morphine drip is opened up more and more.

Post: #3

Being 95 and getting fucked to death by a 25 y.o. Russian girl is the best way to die. Just my opinion though.

Post: #4

Quote:While many people say they would like to die by sudden death, Smith points out that although this may be preferable for the victim, their family and friends are left traumatised, especially if relationships and finances are not in order.

Dementia is long and slow, where you are eventually erased, while organ failure will leave people hospitalised for most of their remaining time.

I see what he's trying to say, but I can't agree with him. Watching someone suffer as they're eaten alive by cancer, and chemo, is just as traumatising. Anyone's death is going to be traumatising to their loved ones but a quick, clean exit will at least give them comfort in the knowledge that there was no suffering.

Speaking from personal experience.

Post: #5

Well - death from cancer would be a lot quicker and less painful - if people adopted an attitude of defeat and didn't try to fight it so much.

Here is the blog post itself. I should have linked to it earlier.

http://blogs.bmj.com/bmj/2014/12/31/rich...est-death/

Quote:This is, I recognise, a romantic view of dying, but it is achievable with love, morphine, and whisky. But stay away from overambitious oncologists, and let’s stop wasting billions trying to cure cancer, potentially leaving us to die a much more horrible death.

Post: #6

I've read that cancer can be quite painful. And what other diseases will they decide not to support? If they can get the cancer in remission isn't it worth it? I'm sure the cost of treating will go down as well as they come up with newer treatments.

This reminds me of the Death Panel controversy awhile back. How do you determine who deserves full treatment, and who should just get pain killers?

Post: #7

The problem is the medical system keeping people a live to the very end tbh.

Post: #8

I remember my grandfather dying of cancer. He was one of those guys who was so tough the doctors told us that he lived three months longer than than he should have considering how bad a shape he was in.

I'm fairly certain with my former lifestyle and jobs that cancer is what is going to kill me also. I'm not even worried about retirement or such things as there is no way i'm going to make it considering what i have been exposed to.

The only way cancer can be considered a good way to go is if you have access to the strongest painkillers available.

Post: #9

@kbell - in the UK, a committee called NICE (National Institue for Clinical Excellence) decides that.

The rough rule of thumb is that the national health service in the UK will pay 30 thousand pounds a year (50 thousand dollars) for every year of comfortable life you get as a result.

When the costs are higher than that, or when the treatment will still leave you in pain - things get complicated. And new drugs and treatments have to be judged on a case by case basis. This can lead to a lot of controversy in the media - eg a breast cancer drug which costs 100 thousand pounds a year - but gives only patients an extra 6 months of life.

Post: #10

@JustlookingForAgoodTime - lifestyle doesn't have much impact on your chances of getting cancer.

Quote:Most types of cancer can be put down to bad luck rather than risk factors such as smoking, a study has suggested.

A US team were trying to explain why some tissues were millions of times more vulnerable to cancer than others.

The results, in the journal Science, showed two thirds of the cancer types analysed were caused just by chance mutations rather than lifestyle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30641833

It is interesting when you pull out specific numbers. Let's look at lung cancer and smoking.

82.8% of smokers will never get lung cancer.

Whereas 98.7% of non-smokers will never get lung cancer.

It is clear that smoking dramatically increases your chances of getting lung cancer. But what is often forgotten - is that the vast majority of smokers will never get lung cancer.

Of course - any analysis in these areas can get complicated very quickly. Since - cigarettes will kill smokers in other ways - such that they never get round to developing lung cancer. So - the above is just a rough overview of this area.

Anyway - with these numbers in mind - it is hardly a surprise that we all know lots of people who smoked their whole lives and never suffered as a result.

I don't smoke myself - but I am interested in this area. Since smokers are treat by society like immoral fools with a death risk. When the evidence does not not back up those claims.

Another interesting fact relates to emphysema (one of the most unpleasant ways of dying). Basically it is this. The human body can only withstand so much wear and tear from the pollutants found in ordinary air. As such - irregardless of whether or not you have ever smoked - your lungs will wear out and develop emphysema by the time you hit 120 years of age (not that you will).

It is a silly fact - but it is a reminder that even with perfect health - the human body can only survive for a certain number of years. And - in the case of your lungs - they will break down around the age of 120, at the very latest.

Post: #11

^^^

I wouldn't call just over 80% a vast majority.
A 1 in 5 chance of getting a horrible death is pretty significant.
Not only do you cut years off your life by smoking, you make the quality of life you have during those years significantly worse.

Post: #12

Fair point.

But you still have a 5 in 5 chance of dying, whether you smoke or not.

And most forms of death are pretty unpleasant.

Post: #13

HELLLLLL NOOOOOO!!!

Trust me, I had stage 4 cancer and its not a disease you want to have

I had stage 4b Lymphoma cancer in 2011 and the symptoms were not pretty and I was essentially on a death bed.

I couldn't walk because I was on so many steroids and my muscles were weak as hell. Chemotherapy had wiped out all my white blood cells so I was in danger of dying if I got a cold or an infection. My red blood cells were also obliterated so I had to get blood infusions on every cycle. Not to mention my fat cells, hair sells, and everything else.

I was coughing up blood, I felt weak with no energy. There was a sense of desperation of trying to get out of a coffin or if you're trap inside a dungeon and you can't get out. I threw up on every cycle and tasted the chemo in my mouth. I was in so much pain that Vicodin was not enough and my oncologist had to give me Dilaudid which is something like 6 times stronger than regular morphine.

The way I want to go down is by getting shot in a war zone somewhere and make it meaningful. Dying from cancer is just too depressing and too painful.

Post: #14

I am sorry to hear you went through such a terrible ordeal.

But I am delighted you seem to have beaten it.

The point that needs to be made here. Is how much of the pain of cancer is caused by the cancer and how much by the treatment?

In the vast majority of cases - the pain comes from the awful treatments and not the cancer. Chemotherapy is basically a race in which you try to kill the cancer and the patient at the same time - in the hopes that the cancer dies first. And then you can try and bring the patient back from the near death that the treatment put them through.

It is a heavy price to pay. But it is worth it when people survive. It is just incredibly sad that so many people suffer these treatments and then die irregardless. For the sake of a few extra (painful) months.

Post: #15

(01-11-2015 03:53 PM)Plato Wrote:  @JustlookingForAgoodTime - lifestyle doesn't have much impact on your chances of getting cancer.

I was was a total hope to die falling down alcoholic for years and though sober now, i still have some pain so i know that alcohol damaged my liver. I'm waiting for some paperwork to start a battery of tests to see just what is the extent of the harm.

Post: #16

(01-11-2015 03:53 PM)Plato Wrote:  @JustlookingForAgoodTime - lifestyle doesn't have much impact on your chances of getting cancer.

Quote:Most types of cancer can be put down to bad luck rather than risk factors such as smoking, a study has suggested.

A US team were trying to explain why some tissues were millions of times more vulnerable to cancer than others.

The results, in the journal Science, showed two thirds of the cancer types analysed were caused just by chance mutations rather than lifestyle.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-30641833

It is interesting when you pull out specific numbers. Let's look at lung cancer and smoking.

82.8% of smokers will never get lung cancer.

Whereas 98.7% of non-smokers will never get lung cancer.

It is clear that smoking dramatically increases your chances of getting lung cancer. But what is often forgotten - is that the vast majority of smokers will never get lung cancer.

Of course - any analysis in these areas can get complicated very quickly. Since - cigarettes will kill smokers in other ways - such that they never get round to developing lung cancer. So - the above is just a rough overview of this area.

Anyway - with these numbers in mind - it is hardly a surprise that we all know lots of people who smoked their whole lives and never suffered as a result.

I don't smoke myself - but I am interested in this area. Since smokers are treat by society like immoral fools with a death risk. When the evidence does not not back up those claims.

Another interesting fact relates to emphysema (one of the most unpleasant ways of dying). Basically it is this. The human body can only withstand so much wear and tear from the pollutants found in ordinary air. As such - irregardless of whether or not you have ever smoked - your lungs will wear out and develop emphysema by the time you hit 120 years of age (not that you will).

It is a silly fact - but it is a reminder that even with perfect health - the human body can only survive for a certain number of years. And - in the case of your lungs - they will break down around the age of 120, at the very latest.

Genetics plays a part.
On my moms side: mom smoked died of lung cancer. Uncle same thing. Cousin same thing. Aunt stopped smoking and dies emphysema. So i have NO choice but NOT to smoke!

Post: #17

Anecdotal I know, but I have a few relatives who went through chemo and lived or are living long, normal lives.

I think it depends on the type and stage. Some are easier to treat than others, especially depending on the stage.

I think what happens is certain types are relatively easier to treat (breast, prostate, skin) whereas others are very difficult to treat (pancreatic, brain) and the treatment can make life worse and the benefit of a few extra months may not be worth it. In those cases palliative care may be a better option. But that's a case by case basis and I'm certainly no expert on this.

Post: #18

I think Bill Burr has the best idea of how to go out.

Post: #19

The best way to die is martyrdom or getting shot holding it down for your people.

Post: #20

Hahaha the name is NICE for a death panel! That's like the Ministry of Truth from 1984 whose purpose was to spread lies. I wonder what name Obamacare will have for it. What's with Socialists using ironic names for their departments?

Post: #21

(01-11-2015 04:30 PM)Plato Wrote:  I am sorry to hear you went through such a terrible ordeal.

But I am delighted you seem to have beaten it.

The point that needs to be made here. Is how much of the pain of cancer is caused by the cancer and how much by the treatment?

In the vast majority of cases - the pain comes from the awful treatments and not the cancer. Chemotherapy is basically a race in which you try to kill the cancer and the patient at the same time - in the hopes that the cancer dies first. And then you can try and bring the patient back from the near death that the treatment put them through.

It is a heavy price to pay. But it is worth it when people survive. It is just incredibly sad that so many people suffer these treatments and then die irregardless. For the sake of a few extra (painful) months.

Yeah I'm in Remission now and pretty much cured. I've moved on from it and there's times when I even forget I had it. But proud of beating it nonetheless.

The scary thing about cancer is that you don't know if you have it or not. If you go to your local doctor and tell him that you have pain in your stomach, they will probably just give you an acid reducer or something and call it a day. I never really felt anything until I fainted one day from a very sharp stabbing pain in my arm and stomach. My parents took me to the hospital and that's when they performed a CT Scan on me and found that my lungs were covered with white spots all over the place which then I was hospitalized. I was there in the hospital for a month as they were trying to figure out what the hell I had. Doctor, after doctor, after doctor all while my symptoms were getting worse.

If I remember correctly I coughed up blood a few times, had non-stop bronchitis that wouldn't go away with antibiotics which made the bleeding worse. It was terrible. On top of that the sharp stabbing pain was getting worse and worse and they had to give me a very very potent pain-killer so I could at least chill normally. At one point I had trouble even walking, and felt like an old man and came to a point where my heart rate shot up to 150 just for simply getting up off the bed. I was slowly dying as the doctors were trying to figure out what I had. They then scheduled a lung biopsy where I had to wait another week for the results which came back "Advanced stage 4 Lymphoma" and I thought to myself "Well no shit!!!"

^^^^ This was all before I had chemo. Chemo was essentially just necessary evil add-ons. They gave me the steroids once diagnosed and my pain went away and so did the bronchitis and the coughing of blood, but at the cost of weak muscles, increased anxiety, insomnia and other crazy side-effects. The chemo did kill off the cancer cells, but it also killed white blood cells and red blood cells and they had to inject blood in me, because I couldn't breathe every time my red blood cells were low.

In the end Chemo is a necessary evil if you want to combat cancer cells, hopefully new technology can come up with a way to specifically target cancer cells only. I got lucky because Lymphoma is one of the most curable cancers today so chemo worked for me. It must have sucked for people with Lung Cancer or Liver Cancer or Brain Cancer because even with chemo, the cure rate is very very low. What kept me going was the hope that Lymphoma is a curable disease, I could not imagine what it must feel like to have a terminal illness where you know there is no hope.

Post: #22

lol - yeah, it is an ironic name.

We are not used to anyhting different. So - in a nationalised system - we except that unless everyone wants to pay much higher taxes, there has to be a limit.

I wonder what the attitude is in America? I guess - since you have insurance - the those is that you spend as much as you want, and then let everybody else who has insurance cover the costs with increased bills?

It is an understandable instinct. But it results in a country like America having double the healthcare costs of a country like Britain. With very little difference in actual outcomes.

Added to which - everyone in Britain is covered - whereas a lot of Americans are not.

I am not trying to make a political point (I don' give a fuck about politics). I am just pointing out the fact that people in the UK are not overly worried that NICE has to take pragmatic decisions from time to time.

Most people in the UK are not that bothered about death. It is a lottery and when your number is up - so be it.

Our realistic attitude to death is why so many of us are atheists.

Why bother with religion unless the idea of death terrifies you?

Post: #23

(01-11-2015 04:23 PM)MidWest Wrote:  HELLLLLL NOOOOOO!!!

Trust me, I had stage 4 cancer and its not a disease you want to have

I had stage 4b Lymphoma cancer in 2011 and the symptoms were not pretty and I was essentially on a death bed.

I couldn't walk because I was on so many steroids and my muscles were weak as hell. Chemotherapy had wiped out all my white blood cells so I was in danger of dying if I got a cold or an infection. My red blood cells were also obliterated so I had to get blood infusions on every cycle. Not to mention my fat cells, hair sells, and everything else.

I was coughing up blood, I felt weak with no energy. There was a sense of desperation of trying to get out of a coffin or if you're trap inside a dungeon and you can't get out. I threw up on every cycle and tasted the chemo in my mouth. I was in so much pain that Vicodin was not enough and my oncologist had to give me Dilaudid which is something like 6 times stronger than regular morphine.

The way I want to go down is by getting shot in a war zone somewhere and make it meaningful. Dying from cancer is just too depressing and too painful.

I had a close buddy who went through what you did. He suffered. He didn't make it; you did. CONGRATS TO YOU! What is your prognosis? Are you cancer free now? Sincere best wishes and I admire how you fought through such an ordeal - you are a man among men!

Post: #24

Sounds like he's trying to argue for not treating expensive patients under Britain's commie health care system. Problem with that is that while it does save money and most likely keeps the patient from suffering through potentially hopeless medical treatment, you never actually improve medical technology by not trying. Ultimately Britain and all the other countries with communist health care just leech off of American medical research while Americans get stuck paying huge insurance bills.

It's like playing Civilization and focusing all your cities on science, and then just giving away your techs to the AI for peanuts.

Post: #25

(01-11-2015 07:20 PM)The Father Wrote:  

(01-11-2015 04:23 PM)MidWest Wrote:  HELLLLLL NOOOOOO!!!

Trust me, I had stage 4 cancer and its not a disease you want to have

I had stage 4b Lymphoma cancer in 2011 and the symptoms were not pretty and I was essentially on a death bed.

I couldn't walk because I was on so many steroids and my muscles were weak as hell. Chemotherapy had wiped out all my white blood cells so I was in danger of dying if I got a cold or an infection. My red blood cells were also obliterated so I had to get blood infusions on every cycle. Not to mention my fat cells, hair sells, and everything else.

I was coughing up blood, I felt weak with no energy. There was a sense of desperation of trying to get out of a coffin or if you're trap inside a dungeon and you can't get out. I threw up on every cycle and tasted the chemo in my mouth. I was in so much pain that Vicodin was not enough and my oncologist had to give me Dilaudid which is something like 6 times stronger than regular morphine.

The way I want to go down is by getting shot in a war zone somewhere and make it meaningful. Dying from cancer is just too depressing and too painful.

I had a close buddy who went through what you did. He suffered. He didn't make it; you did. CONGRATS TO YOU! What is your prognosis? Are you cancer free now? Sincere best wishes and I admire how you fought through such an ordeal - you are a man among men!

Sorry, no need to repeat - I see now that you are cancer-free. I'm VERY happy for you!! Those who haven't seen someone go through this might not understand - you are Ironman, The Incredible Hulk, and Captain America all rolled up in one to me!