Another confirmation that oncology is... - Advanced Prostate...
Another confirmation that oncology is a pseudo-science
It’s a practice session on us .. 😂
Precision is the key.... The science is coming, albeit, a bit crookedly.... LOL...
Thanks for the science...
Don Pescado
The article confirms exactly the opposite: that medical science as any other field of science is a constant process of iterative development carried out by accumulating empirical observations, analyzing data in the context of the new knowledge and questioning its own hypothesis postulated prior. Pseudo-science doesn't work like that, it just creates dogmas.
You never head about Karl Popper right? I'm using his definition of pseudo-science fyi.
In any case, what in reality happens is that since more than 70 years there is NO advancement (Radiation, chemo or surgery aren't dogmas?) in oncology (and related field) despite 100's BUSD invested. A clear sign that things were/still are badly managed and the pseudo-scientific approach still dominates. To do science you need to put yourself under risk making PREVISIONS and not explaining à posteriori what happened. As easy as that.
all the best
Only 70 years? Excepting only very rare successes, life extending(OS) therapies,,,,try 4,000 years with almost no advancements as documented in this excellent book on our abject failures both in untold billions of dollars expended and lives lost dealing with this disease.
amazon.com/Emperor-All-Mala...
I read it some 8 years ago, Ken Burns has made a 3 part PBS broadcast documentary on it. Might be found on U Tube.
"In any case, what in reality happens is that since more than 70 years there is NO advancement (Radiation, chemo or surgery aren't dogmas?) in oncology (and related field) despite 100's BUSD invested."
That's an inaccurate and totally unwarranted dismissal of the efforts of many dedicated researchers, doctors and engineers. I don't care what this Popper maverick had to say. He seems to have been a loose cannon. I've benefited from the invention of a thermo-ablation machine used to perform HIFU surgery.
It is a science or pseudoscience is decided by the outcome. After knowing the drug working mechanism is wrong, will they revoke the patent or will they take the drug off the market? NO.
The scientist who said the drug working mechanism is wrong will be replaced.
If the industry drives science there will be no science. Only pseudoscience which will be picked and chosen in favor of the industry will be left.
My heart goes for the unfortunate scientist.
I think pseudo-science is real...
Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.
j-o-h-n Friday 09/13/2019 7:19 PM DST
Well my psuedo-intellectual oncologist has keep me alive for 5 years and counting when everyone else told me I had 2 years to live if I was lucky. Her pseudo-scientific approach has managed to keep me off Zytiga so far due to her ability to keep my Psa low and stable with no radio graphic progression. But then again, if it's on the internet it must be true.
This is another point... unfortunately there is still some "doctors" estimating survival when they even don't know how things really work. Very nice contradiction. Fortunately, here in Switzerland, doctors are not making any survival time prediction anymore because they learned afterwards (pseudo-science method) that they failed the most of the time.
Point well taken. However all I have to lean on is what's available via my Oncologist who plays the angles while waiting for the FDA to approve something new or clinical trials that mix something new with something old. To me it's a weird sense of karma, " A bird eats ants and when the bird dies, ants eat the bird. " I hope the health care system in Switzerland is superb. Good luck.
Exactly right. We shouldn't be surprised though, in an atmosphere in which we are asked if we "believe" in climate science.
Personally, I think we've come a long way in a short time from the days of leeches and bloodletting. Cancer needs iron to survive, so let's just do something to get rid of excess iron, right?
Cancer is not an easy problem to solve. Expect many more failures along the way.
chest-thumping is good for drama. But will not produces any result. comparing your past with the present is no way an indicator. compare medicine and physics. it started around the same time with similar knowledge. now they are measuring the time to trillionths trillion and billionth billion light-years away. Physicist now could not find anything interesting in the world. compared to other branches of science medicine is 100 years behind.
It's not just the iron it's the rust of the stuff...
Good Luck, Good Health and Good Humor.
j-o-h-n Saturday 09/14/2019 1:56 PM DST
I guess I do not understand your definition of "pseudo science."
The article referenced in the original post is a very encouraging sign that American medicine, oncology included, is alive and progressing as a genuine science, if our own experiences fighting the beast weren't evidence enough.
Go for the "big picture" of American medicine ( and fully appreciate why the poster above has made a silly claim) and read Paul Starr's great book the "Social Transformation of American Medicine". You will also gain a new perspective on how we got here and why we are different from other countries, especially the Europeans and British, in our delivery of healthcare.
Not what you're looking for?
You may also like...
2nd opinion
Trust the "Science" (however we define that)
Compassionate Oncology Medical Group L A , Cali
Is another MRI needed?
Another Brother is With God.
Related Posts
Masofaniten +Enzalutamide This could be a game changer...Science is coming to our aid
supplements that is not AO
Is One Statin Better than Another. 
Hmmm. My "Good News" is that my "Bad" news is not "that" bad.
Is there science concerning OMAD (one meal a day), or TRF (time restricted feeding) specifically for PCa?
