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!

Many, many, many people survive breast cancer. Complete cure is possible with conventional treatments.

No one is saying her PhD has less value. - they’re saying it doesn’t make her an oncologist and therefore doesn’t qualify to write a book giving people with cancer false hope with no scientifically rigorous basis.

As a researcher, I’m sure you know all about controlled trials and verifiable, ethical research methods. That includes not portraying oneself as having expertise when one doesn’t. Most people will assume a ‘cancer expert’ is a medically qualified doctor specialising in cancer treatment. If she isn’t, don’t you agree she should make that clearer?

Actually we do know her background because she is quite open about it - her undergraduate degree was in English literature, and her PhD was on The Spontaneous Remission of Cancer: Theories from Healers, Doctors and Cancer Survivors, based on interviews and their perceptions.

There is no indication that she has studied any science, or done any scientific research.

And it is not "by UK standards" that she is not a medical physician or an oncologist. She is not a medical doctor or oncologist in any way, shape or form, and in fairness does not claim to be.

Judging by the comments on this post, I can see why no one would touch it because anyone who goes near it is professionally discredited, called a grifter and a charlatan peddling false hope etc.

Seems a dangerous area to go near.

I still found it an interesting book but it’s just that, a book. I read it to get a different perspective on cancer.

In that case she is exactly as qualified as I am to be a ‘cancer expert’ 😁

I’m very proud of my humanities research, but I wouldn’t go consider myself qualified to go around telling dying people they’d survive if only they thought more positively, because to do so would be cruel, unethical, and untrue.

To be fair, at no point in this book does she ever tell anyone that they will be cured from cancer if she does these things.

Please read the book before making wild assumptions about it.

I think it’s a shame OP, reading this thread, that you’ve read a book you enjoyed and it seems to be getting thoroughly shot down in flames by people who in the main haven’t read it. I haven’t read it either but in general I find these studies that look at trends for people who live ‘well’ are interesting and worth exploring - with caveats that following such plans won’t result in the same outcomes for everyone.

Personally I believe Eastern medicine is worth exploring alongside western and that we have our gross fleshy body and also a subtle body, with channels and flows of energy around the body, and this is why repressed emotions and the like can cause physical health problems. Like someone who spends their whole life biting their tongue and holding in what they really think, can develop illness associated with their throat, due to the blockage created energetically. But I know views like this are fairly verboten and sneered at on MN! But thought I’d add that in the spirit of the discussion I think you are looking for.

Okay, so I looked her up. She is rather coy about her precise qualifications...

Her first degree is in geography and, surprise, surprise, her PhD is related to the subject of her book - essentially epidemiological research on cancer case studies.

She has no medical qualifications that I could find.

Integrated oncology refers to various ancillary treatments aimed at improving cancer patients' quality of life. It 'sounds' scientific and is sufficiently fluffy to confuse the uneducated, but essentially it refers to things like acupuncture, aromatherapy, diet, exercise, emotional support, et cetera. All very useful for many patients but without actual effect on the cancer.

For those 9 suggestions to be worth anything she should have interviewed thousands of patients with a cancer diagnosis , then waited to see the outcome of their disease then said ‘these are the 9 things survivors did which patients who died did NOT do’ . Or am missing something? If that’s not what happened here she might as well say ‘all of these survivors wore socks/ drank tea/ drove family cars/ dunked their biscuits/ insert common human behaviour here ‘ .

Oh you’re just being disingenuous now.

We’re calling her a charlatan because she is one. She is selling a book peddling false hope.

If she were to decide to get a relevant degree, conduct appropriate scientifically rigorous research, and dedicate her life to studying this area and improving the lives of people with cancer, she’d have my full support.

Why do you think she doesn’t choose to do that?

Thankyou!

Have you read the book?

So what is her point, then? If she doesn’t suggest the 9 listed actions have an effect on cancer remission, what is her argument?

Nor being snarky - I’m genuinely interested.

No, I haven’t - which is why i’m interested and asking you questions about it.

I think the fact that she has trademarked the term 'radical remission' tells you everything you need to know about her motives.

You can read the intro to the book here:

https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=gm8pAgAAQBAJ&pg=PT3&source=kp_read_button&hl=en&newbks=1&newbks_redir=0&gboemv=1&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false

Of course it's possible, hence the reported cases. Whether it can be controlled or replicated is a different matter though.

Not by any standards!
Shes just another fucking grifter making money from people who are desperate to cure their cancer
As someone diagnosed with 2 cancers, one of them incurable, she makes me sick. You also make me sick for peddling this rubbish

As someone whose husband has stage 4 cancer; I feel massively irritated by this. I will not be reading this book. I feel I have heard everything I need to about it. She is making a shit load of money out of people who are desperate.

The author isn't an oncologist. She has a PhD, although it's quite hard to find out what in. She then describes herself as a 'counsellor in integrative oncology' - integrative is usually code for alternative medicine.

But basically her 9 steps are utter bollocks. I've met hundreds of terminal cancer patients over the course of my career and practically every single one has done most, if not all of those 9 things. Ultimately, without success.

It's grifting of the worst kind.

OMG did anyone read the intro to the book I just shared?

@Edenspirits73 does she address or explain the issue of children getting stage 4 cancer? Or does she believe they are an exception?

Read the intro to the book I shared. She doesn’t make any claims at all.

She's not an oncologist. She doesn't have a clinical qualification, her PhD is in social work. She's nowhere near a medical doctor.

She's also a fucking quack. Dig a little deeper, she's selling a product https://www.radicalremission.com/. You can buy her workshops and train to become a fellow quack.

OP, you've posted a link and promoting something deeply upsetting. Next time do your research.

Her PhD is in social work basically. Found her on LinkedIn.

She has no clinical qualifications and is not an oncologist.