A post, "Yes, Actually I CAN Judge the Chemo Kid" , on DailyKos in response to my piece Don't Judge the Chemo Kid" about Daniel Hauser, caught my eye. It's written by a blogger who goes by the name Turkana, who is a cancer survivor.
After an excerpt of my piece, Turkana starts his discussion of it by telling readers:
"I call bullshit. First of all, every type of cancer has a different chemo regimen, and because the bulk of his post is actually about Ponnusamy's treatments, to have any credibility, Parikh must first explain the similarities between Ponnusamy's cancer and Hauser's."
Quite right about different cancers having different chemo regimens. But to be clear, many of the drugs used to treat ALL (which my friend, Arun Ponnusamy had) and Hodgkin's are similar (though, how similar depends on many factors).
But my point isn't fact check a piece written with a great deal of passion by a man who survived cancer and now has a great life. Rather, in many ways, our views are the same. For example, looking at Turkana's last point:
"I sympathize and empathize with the Hauser boy. I know what he's facing. But he is a child and his parents should be his protectors. Hodgkin's Disease is one of the great medical success stories, for it used to be almost always fatal. Now, it is usually treatable and survivable. The process is hellish. But there's plenty of time for death. This kid deserves a chance to live."
I was struck by how similar it is to my closing sentences:
"So I sympathize with the Hausers, who want to treat Daniel with complementary medicine. But there's a reason why it's called complementary. It may have a place, but that place must be alongside medications that will save Daniel's life, save him from a death that is bound to be more ugly and prolonged than hellish cancer treatments.
In the end, chemotherapy saved Ponnusamy's life, and although he wouldn't wish it on anyone else, he agrees it's the right choice for the Hausers. "I get how horrifying it would be to see your child go thorough chemo," he says. "But there's a light at the end of the tunnel."
I don't think Turkana would argue that the ordeal that patients go through fighting cancer, whatever that cancer may be, is easy, whether is 1, 5, 12 or more rounds of chemo. His experience and the horrible effects of it share a great deal of similarity to what Arun faced. The fact that they're both alive today to tell their stories is a great tribute to them. Turkana writes about his own post- cancer life:
"I now have two small sons. I met and married my wife. I've done a ton of writing, and played a ton of music. I've traveled widely. I've experienced every kind of culture, seen sunsets that made me shiver in ecstasy, and I can cook you a feast that will make your eyes water from purest joy."
We doctors may pat ourselves on the back for finding cures for the sick, but it's patients and their loved ones who deserve the credit, especially with cancer therapy. They consent, they partner with us, they believe, even as we put such drugs into their bodies so purile that they barely deserve to be called "medicine." That's true with Turkana, Arun, and countless others who have stared cancer down.
As for Daniel Hauser, let's hope that he'll be able to answer Turkana's questions someday:
"Who knows what this kid will experience over the rest of his life? Who knows what contributions he will make to the world?"
________________
www.rahulkparikh.com
www.twitter.com/docrkp
TIP:
Enter the amount, and click "Tip" to submit!
Davis Liu, MD
Judy Berman
Barbara O'Brien
thedrmommy
david edwards
Patrick D Hahn
Salon.com
Comments
Still, physicians ought to step back and ask themselves why their profession no longer enjoys the sort of unchallenged moral authority it once did. In the book Beyond Brain Death, cardiologist David Hill wrote about he case of an eight-year-old boy with liver failure. Doctors said if he didn't get a liver transplant, he would die within a year. He got THREE liver transplants and died within a year anyway.
I'm against overmedicalization for a number of reasons, not the least of which is that if people lose all trust in the medical profession, they will reject the treatments which actually do work.
Many thanks.
good question--I've always used purile to describe something toxic. But you're right I couldn't find a clear definition online, though I've seen others use the same word. Maybe it's slang? I thought maybe it was medical term, though can't find a medical dictionary anywhere.
anyway, maybe the wisdom of the crowd can help us here.
as always, your comments are insightful and thought-provoking. thanks for reading and writing
Thanks,
Otimização Sites - Acompanhantes - Desentupidora
Logo Design services - stationery design - cheapest air ticket
Christina Lavassaur
web host