To ask if you believe radical remission is possible?

[Edenspirits73]

I’ve just read this book https://www.amazon.co.uk/Radical-Remission-Surviving-Cancer-Against/dp/0062268740

It’s written by an American researcher, lecturer and oncologist and charts her experiences of gathering cases of radical remission from all over the world. It’s presented in quite a scientific way & she charts the 9 things that all the people who went into radical remission & had in common. It’s fascinating too.

Ironically it was recommended to me when my dad was dying of bowel cancer - end stage for him.

It’s a real book of hope (but not false hope) as it charts a largely unreported area of health - and an idea that people survive and thrive even end stage 4 cancer.

So am I being unreasonable to believe? Obviously these are real case studies too as she felt it was a totally unreported area of medicine but it feels like believing that you can heal from cancer is not a mainstream belief at all - it’s almost contraversial and held up as false hope I think.

Intererested in thoughts!

I haven’t heard of this concept until now, very interesting. I hope it’s true, what are the 9 things?

Anything is possible with Jesus Christ.

It’s stuff like radical dietary changes, supplements, following intuition, dealing with negative emotions etc - every case study had those 9 things in common and she interviewed hundreds of people globally

See also 'cured' by Jeff rediger which explores cases of spontaneous remission/ healing from terminal conditions.

I'm always a bit uncomfortable with the idea that if you don't do everything 'right', you're going to die. The reality is that cancer is a bitch, however well you eat or however positive you think. For every case she reports, there will be hundreds of people who did the same things but died.

Yes definitely - I think that’s true. My dad died within 6 months and I don’t think there was anything else we could have done. And it was horrible.

Its an interesting area of research though

every case study had those 9 things in common and she interviewed hundreds of people globally

That's where these fall apart, selective reporting. It's very easy in a book to only include those cases that fit your ideas, and for example, leave out all the cases where everyone did the exact same things but died anyway. If she truly believes there's something in it, then her theory should be tested in a proper clinical trial.

Yes agreed, put it in a clinical trial.

To be fair to the author though, her motivation was to report on a largely unreported area of health - she was confused when reading some of these reports that no one ever talked about people who survived cancer. She doesn’t present it as ‘definitive proof’ at all and is very clear to spell that out at the start.

It comes more from a place of ‘isn’t this interesting and it might give you some hope’

Its got very good reviews because of her style of presenting it.

I’ve known two people close to me, relatively young and both very fit, who were diagnosed with (different) grade 4 terminal cancers and followed this book to the letter. It sadly didn’t work in either case. I also feel uncomfortable about the message that cancer is beatable if you do certain things. The oncologists my family saw were very kindly sceptical when asked about this.

Maybe it should form part of cancer research to explore why some of these things work for some people and not others - genetic differences etc. Some of the case studies are fascinating.

I have known a couple of people who experienced ‘spontaneous remission’ but they didn’t ‘do’ anything. It just happened.

One case I wondered if it was actually a compulsive lie - i.e. they didn’t really have it. The other it may have been an error as they were certainly on the pathway. On asking for a second opinion before a major op, no cancer found. Both young and fit.

It almost certainly does happen but I hated being told about this kind of thing when my dad had terminal cancer. It wasn’t going to happen for him.

In the case where the second opinion found no cancer, he was told (by the NHS) it was spontaneous remission pretty factually.

It gives the message that if you die it’s because you didn’t try hard enough. You didn’t care enough about your young children. You ate cake which is a terrible thing to do. You’re basically lazy.

None of these things are true though.

Sorry about your dad- it was the same for my dad sadly 💐

Its a fascinating area though but I guess if the body can create this stuff, logically it can also get rid of it (very basic terminology from me 🫣)

I actually don’t think this book does do that. She is very careful not to say that and addresses it head on at the start. She’s very respectful.

The reality is there are loads of people who this happens to and should thus be researched more.

I do think it’s the case that people get very funny about talking about cancer and this kind of thing.

My Dad, auntie, 2 grandparents, long term family friend all died of various cancers - none of it was nice. My grandmother had a tumour that grew outside her body- it was awful.

I just think there should be more research into these people - was it chance? Or was it really linked to some of the things they did? One man in Japan is still alive 30 years later after being sent home to die.

There is absolutely no logic in what you've stated there.

Fuck cancer, and fuck this cherry-picking book.

Fucking grifter profiting from desperation. Have you bought her 'healing' pack of a beeswax candle, some soap and herbal tea for 70-odd dollars? You even get a piece of blue ribbon that you can reuse. Or when that's proven to be fucking useless, you can send a grieving spouse a book of 'Proof of Heaven', some herbal tea, a candle and a fucking bath bomb.

Or you can pay shitloads (two and a half grand) to become an approved coach to have desperate people pay you hear you tell them that other people have had remission and if they pay you and buy the bathbombs and shit, you can make a living from their terror? They'll have to pay you 280 plus bucks each for the privilege - and then another 390 when it doesn't fucking work because they've done it 'wrong' because they've still got fucking cancer.

It's a fucking MLM.

I’m trying to comment on cases of radical remission.

It seems to be that in some cases the body creates cancer and then spontaneously gets rid of it too.

Why do you say "obviously" when you assert that the cases were real? Because the author is a doctor? The author also had a book to sell.

maybe you wouldn't put giving false hope above making a profit, but how do you know the author is?

As a survivor of three cancer diagnosis, I really hate peddlers of false hope, or the "fight" brigade. Like if I'd died, it would have been because I didn't fight hard enough? Trust me, I didn't do anything like fight in all three cases. I just did what various consultants told me to do.

Like millions before me, some survived, some didn't. I'm pretty sure no one can guarantee what they did, or didnt, do saved their lives.

she was confused when reading some of these reports that no one ever talked about people who survived cancer.

The concept of progression free survival in the context of clinical trials is always talked about.

Were any of these people having conventional treatment alongside these 9 rules?

I have read the book OP as I have a stage 4 diagnosis. I do agree with you that she is very clear in her introduction that she isn’t saying these things will definitely work, more that all the people interviewed had these 9 things in common. I have to say though that some of the case studies seemed a bit bonkers to me- there was a man that basically recorded his response to every single food (in terms of cancer markers). I can’t remember how he did this but it seemed pretty joyless. There was also a man that breathed in air during the dawn chorus as this is apparently when the air is more oxygenated?! I felt there were a few holes in the case studies & I forget now but I didn’t leave feeling that convinced.

I have no reason to assume the cases aren’t real. She’s a scientist and researcher. I don’t think she’s a money making charlatan - it’s pretty grim if she is and a grim thing to do.

Her intro is all about everything you have mentioned and she’s clear that she isn’t a peddler of false hope.

i’m just interested in it as I have lost a lot of people to cancer. I am interested in peoples stories and I think that’s fine - we get very few stories of survival and hope. Why is that a bad thing?