Wednesday, March 16, 2011
Thoughts on radiation/cancer and the Japanese nuclear crisis
With a possibility of a looming Japanese nuclear meltdown I had this thought that I'm gonna throw out there with the complete foreknowledge that this thread will be easily proven wrong by the more learned medical folks here but this blog is more in the style of thinking out loud and so there is something I can't wrap my head around exactly. With the evacuations in certain sectors of Japan and the threat of some type of radioactive cloud drifting towards the West Coast with the Surgeon General telling us to take precautions (I don't know what this means) here it is: we use radiation to treat cancer. In one instance radiation is obviously bad for you and in the other it's the preferred mode of treatment combined with chemo. Now I know Saty will say it's the amounts or some such thing, we don't exactly nuke cancer patients but just the same many of them do look like Auschwitz survivors but this is to be expected whereas in other instances we're told in no uncertain terms to evacuate. I saw a few nights back on a news program how they are now trying to attack cancer cells in the brain with electromagnetism. It was Katie Couric's show and the initial results were promising and they showed one brave soul with his wife and he has been undergoing this experimental treatment for some time now but the reporter stressed that this treatment has to be combined with the more traditional chemo/radiation regimen and my question is why if the electromagnetism is doing a great job on its own? So why in one situation do we run away from radiation and in another embrace it? I thought it was always bad all the time but anyway there you have it:)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
We don't even need to wait for Saty to chime in bro.
ReplyDeleteIt's all about dosages.
Pop a couple aspirin and bam! Headache gone.
Pop a whole bottle of aspirin and well....
Like you said with the acid but I thought radiation was different, it's bad all the time. I mean those Japanese residents we see on the news being screened by some guy in a white suit, even small amounts are cause for alarm.
ReplyDeleteWell think of it like this, if you subject yourself to a small amount, they can see if your bones are broken or whatever.
ReplyDeleteOr, if you subject yourself to lots of it, the TSA will keep you safe from underwear bombers.
I think of it like this. It takes a low dosage of radiation to do an X-ray, a somewhat higher dosage to do a mammogram. Now to get to the point where a cancer patient looks like an Auschwitz survivor, to do that much damage would seem to require a rather high dose, no?
ReplyDeleteOr perhaps a number of smaller dosages.
ReplyDeleteWhich is why I'm waiting for what's-her-name to chime in:)
ReplyDeleteBTW got a doctor's app't later and been meaning to blog about the subject (that and unions and rejection and Borders closings and...). My thing, a certain followup is necessary but how much is the doctors just making money off of us? To many people being cynical is not a virtue but he has bills to pay just like everyone else and I'm a quick office visit. HOW do I break it off or phase it out? Average American once suggested not paying my bills:)
ReplyDeleteIonizing radiation kills individual cells by free radical formation of water as well as breaking DNA linkages. In addition to dosage as discussed above,
ReplyDeletecancer treatment by gamma radiation is point-focused, often changing the
approach angle to minimize
destruction of healthy tissue and cells. One of my college courses in radiation biology involved
lethal cobalt dosing of mice with followup histologies to determine
the time line of lethality
and the various biosystem
breakdowns. Needless to say, mice and PETA were not big fans....
I'm not an oncology nurse and I don't work in Nuclear Medicine.
ReplyDeleteIt Seems to Me that the Radiation Treatment that is Given to Cancer Patients is Hard Enough on the Body that they will not Give it to Someone who is Healthy. There are Even Cancer Patients that will Choose not to do it because it Decreases the Quality of Life Enough that Some will Chose to Live at Least Part of their Last Few Months or Years Feeling Better without the Treatment, because they Feel that Quality is Better than Quantity when a Person is Dying anyway.
ReplyDeleteI remember when I was a kid and the doctor or dentist wanted to do an X-ray of something my Mom would be dubious, it is radiation after all and she would tell him if it's absolutely necessary then go ahead but don't go crazy, don't get carried away. In other words don't masturbate the radiation and it seems to me that's what we're doing. Eh I'm not an oncologist either but thanx BB.
ReplyDeleteLista I agree but it's the only thing the Cancer Industry seems to have right now. It's so mainstream/traditional/ingrained it's scary and it's sad when you walk around Barnes & Noble and see the category Alternative Treatments in the medicine/health section. Maybe in some cases they should be THE treatment.
ReplyDeleteYou Know, when I was Thinking about it Today, it Occurred to me what you are Saying. On the One Hand, Radiation can Cause Cancer, yet on the Other Hand it can also Cure it. Go Figure.
ReplyDeleteOn the one hand, nothing can live without water.
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, a tsunami just crippled Japan.
For me the whole radiation thing is a contradiction and well I can see if the Cancer Industry were more honest and said to us:
ReplyDelete"you know this is the best we can do right now but we're trying. Chemo/radiation has such severe side effects we hope to come up with something else someday so bear with us yada yada"
Anyway I was never a fan of it and I think we need to get out of the whole chemo/rad mindset at least some point down the road. Nuclear medicine sounds like an oxymoron to me.