RM 2,830 lost for not wanting to proceed with radiotherapy

TT was diagnosed with cervical cancer. She underwent an operation to remove her uterus, ovaries and omentum. She was then referred to an oncologist who recommended both chemotherapy and radiotherapy. TT was not at peace at all about undergoing these invasive treatments but she did not have any other choice. She consulted with the oncologist three times and was assured that everything would be okay and that chemo and radiation were her only option — nothing else. During her second meeting with her oncologist, TT was told to pay RM 13,000 as a deposit for her radiation treatment.

Someone told TT about CA Care. TT and her husband decided to forgo further medical treatments. TT went back to hospital and cancelled her appointment for her radiotherapy. What then happened to the RM 13,000 deposit?  Can TT get a refund? Listen to this video.

 

Gist of what TT and her husband said.

  1. They were angry. Why don’t you want to go for radiotherapy? We are still unprepared!
  2. For your RM 13,000 deposit, we could only refund you RM 4,500. The remaining amount is forfeited.
  3. Why must I lose that much money for just not wanting to go for radiotherapy? We have not started with any treatment yet?
  4. Husband started to take pictures of the person. When I go back to Indonesia, I shall report this to the mass media
  5. Okay, okay be patient. Let me consult.
  6. You have to pay for the oncologist’s fee — RM1,700 and the cancer hospital fee is RM 6,000 plus.
  7. The treatment has not even started yet. Why so expensive? It was only the nurse who made some markings. We did not even see the doctor yet.
  8. TT and her husband was referred to the finance department. They demanded to know: Why must I lose so much money just to cancel the treatment? Your hospital comes to Indonesia for publicity. What I can do is to go home and tell the press about this. Okay, you can have your RM 8000 plus, return me my RM 4,500. It is okay. I am not a poor man. I can come to Penang for treatment means I can afford it.
  9. The hospital called up the cancer hospital and after some discussion said: Hang on for 10 minutes. We have miscalculated.
  10. The actual figure: RM 2,830 to be forfeited to cover the following cost:

HospitalBill Tiu Tjin Tjhin

Question: Do you mean that by just asking a patient to go for radiotherapy the oncologist earned RM1,700 up front?  Even when no treatment was given?

When you saw the oncologist three times for consultation, did you pay him any fee? Yes, of course, we paid him RM 60 for each visit. So, this RM1,700 is over and above his consultation fee.

The hospital earned RM 1,130 for putting marks on my tummy!

Comment

We have nothing much to say about this episode. Just feeling sad. Reflect on the quotations below and perhaps we all can learn something about the present-day “so-called-noble-profession.”

Medicine a business

As I was writing this story, there is this news report … if there is anything we can learn from this story it this: Before you proceed with any treatment, ask these important questions first:

  1. Can the treatment cure me or not?
  2. What are the risks and side effects?
  3. What will that cost me in total — financially and emotionally?

Don’t get caught up with the idea of wanting to only win. Know that you can lose the “battle” badly as well. In this case below: Imagine, daughter had an operation, (did the parents ask — can cure or not? can win?), then she was paralyzed, hospital bills came to more than RM 2 million !!!, parents declared bankrupt (besides the frustration and heartaches). That is not wining at all. So patients, beware.

Penang Adventist Hospital ordered to pay couple RM6 million

FMT Reporters:  July 15, 2015

See more at: http://www.freemalaysiatoday.com/category/nation/2015/07/15/penang-hospital-ordered-to-pay-couple-rm6-million/#sthash.HiQCSfF3.dpuf

The couple were earlier declared bankrupt after they could not pay the hospital RM2.35 million in unsettled medical bills.

GEORGE TOWN: The Penang High Court has ordered the Penang Adventist Hospital (PAH), a private centre, to pay RM6,023,802 in damages to the parents of a 18-year-old paralyzed girl.

The victim’s parents, Kee Boon Suan and his wife Ang Mooi Sim from Nibong Tebal, filed the suit three years ago. The High Court had ordered the couple in 2011 to settle RM2,350,013.85 due to the hospital in unpaid bills. The court order led the couple to be declared bankrupt.

In his verdict on the medical negligence suit here on Tuesday, Judicial Commissioner Nordin Hassan said he found PAH and three doctors had committed medical negligence during a spinal surgery performed on Kee Jun Hui on June 4, 2008.

He said the patient’s parents were also not briefed by the doctors-in-charge on the surgery details.

He said the hospital was responsible for the negligence acts by the doctors-in-charge and nurses, who had breached their duties and duty of care to the patient.

Nordin said PAH orthopedic surgeons Dr. Cheok Chee Yew and Dr. Wong Chung Chek neglected their duties after performing the surgery on Jun Hui.

He said the patient had collapsed several times during the post-surgery recovery period while still under the hospital’s custody.

He said anesthetist Dr. Patrick K. S. Tan neglected his duties and failed to instruct hospital nurses to attend to the collapsed patient after being informed of Jun Hui’s inability to move her limbs.

M.S. Dhillon, Rhina Bhar and K.B. Karthi represented the plaintiffs while Mahindra Singh Gill acted for the hospital.

All three doctors were represented by legal counsel J. A. Yeoh.

Mahindra later told newsmen that PAH would appeal against Nordin’s judgment at the Court of Appeal.

In 2011, PAH originally hauled Kee and Ang to court for failure to settle their medical bill for Jun Hui’s surgery.

In 2012, the couple sued the hospital for medical negligence, as their daughter was paralyzed after the surgery.

The hospital was named the first defendant in the suit followed by Cheok, Patrick Tan and Wong.

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Follow your heart not your head when it comes to deciding whether you should go for chemo /radiation or not

TT is 56-year-old Indonesia lady. She presented as a easy going, cheerful lady who takes care of her health rather seriously. One late morning we got a phone call from her requesting to see us immediately. Her urgency was rather understandable since she was to start her radiotherapy on Monday. We waited for her to come, even though our centre was about to be closed for the day!

This is her story.

In 2013, TT had her routine pap smear. According to her doctor, there was nothing, except some kind of fungus infection. She was given antibiotics. She was okay for 6 months. A checkup 9 months later showed fungal infection again. She was on antibiotics again and was better. But her problem persisted after that. TT was not happy and wanted to solve her problem. She was referred to another doctor. She was found to be positive for HPV (human papilloma virus — a virus associated with cervical cancer).

TT was referred to an oncologist who recommended surgery. TT came to a private hospital in Penang and  underwent a radical hysterectomy with bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (that is the removal of the uterus, cervix, fallopian tubes (salpingo), and ovaries (oophor) and  omentectomy. Histopathology indicated squamous cell carcinoma, Stage 2B with pelvic involvement.

The operation cost about RM 25,000.

TT was asked to undergo follow up chemotherapy. She met up with 2 oncologists in the hospital. One oncologist suggested 6 cycles of chemo and 30 times radiation. Another oncologist offered 4 cycles of chemo and 20 times radiation plus 2 times of brachytherapy, also known as internal radiotherapy. Obviously, TT was drawn to the second oncologist because of less severe treatment.

During our conservation, we asked TT: Did you ask the oncologist if he could cure you with that treatment? She replied: 60 to 70 % chance of cure. When she asked the oncologist if there was any other option, the answer was: No, no other way. Must do chemo and radiotherapy as soon as possible. It you don’t do quickly the cancer is going to spread and will be more serious.

TT agreed to undergo the recommended treatments. She was scheduled to start treatment on 15 June but unfortunately the oncologist was on leave and her treatment was brought forward to 23 June 2015.

TT came back to Penang in mid June. However, TT said she was not satisfied and felt heavy in her heart. She was not sure if these treatments would be good for her or not. She was in a dilemma and went to see the oncologist again. The oncologist said these to her:

  • Don’t listen to what other people say.
  • The dosage you are going to get is only small dosage.
  • Your hair don’t drop.

TT had no choice. She paid RM 13,000 as an advanced payment for the radiation treatment. Then she drove to a cancer hospital to have her “marked.” TT said as she drove to that hospital she felt she was led to the “slaughter house.” When the young technicians removed her clothing to make markings on her body she felt she was being “processed” for a death. But again, she had no other choice.

Then she went back to the hospital where she was supposed to undergo chemotherapy. She met someone who told her: Let us sit down and pray together. After the prayer this someone said: Why don’t you go back and see the oncologist again and ask him again if you can skip chemotherapy. But for radiotherapy, you have already paid for it.

For the third time, TT went to see the oncologist and express her reservation about chemotherapy. The oncologist told her again:

  • Don’t worry I guarantee that you would not loose even 1 kg after the treatment.
  • If you have no appetite, I shall give something to help you with that.
  • If your blood count is low I will give injections to help avoid infection.

TT was not convinced with the above assurance because staying in the same boarding house was a patient who was undergoing chemotherapy. He was once a very strong man but with the treatment he lost 16 kg and lost his appetite and could not eat. He told TT, if I know I have to go through this, I would rather die.

The next day (i.e. Thursday) after meeting the oncologist, TT decided to go shopping — a way to take pressure off her. On Friday morning, while she was preparing food in her boarding house one person told her this:

  • Who is sick? You are not sick. Don’t go for chemo. It would be a disaster.
  • Before you proceed further with your treatment, go and see this Chris Teo first and talk to him.

So, that Friday, late morning we got a call from TT requesting to see us urgently.

At CA Care, we spent almost an hour talking to TT and her husband.

Knowing that TT was under so much stress and jittery about what she was going into, it would not be fair or ethical to put more pressure on her. In situation like this, we know patients are generally vulnerable and we don’t intend be become “vultures” taking advantage of such desperate patients.  So basically our advice to TT and her husband were as follows:

  • Relax and take it easy. Go home and talk to your God. It’s Friday and you still have until Monday morning to listen to what God has to say. God will not shout out loud to answer you but I believe He will touch your heart in one way or another. Listen to your heart.
  • We tell everyone who comes to us, God will answer your prayer if you sincerely ask Him for guidance. And if He does not answer you, in time of desperate need like this, then there is no reason why you should worship Him day in and day out.
  • Go home first and don’t make any decision yet, not until you have done your part. Read these two comic books: Knowing The Truth May Save Your Life And Money and The Treacherous Journey. At least before you ask God to help you, you need to help yourself first. Go home and read. At most you need only 1 or 2 hours to understand the messages in these books.
  • Come and see us again if you decide you don’t want to follow up with your oncologist. But if you decide you want to go ahead with your chemo /radiotherapy, then go ahead.
  • Nobody should decide for you what you should do.
  • Follow what your heart says for that is where God speaks to you.
  • For now, there is no need to take any herbs — why the rush? You do not get cancer only yesterday!
  • There is no need to pay any consultation fee. God bless you and guide you.

TT and her husband understood our message and their facial expressions showed they felt very happy indeed. There was no compulsion, no threat, no sales talk! This has always been our way — to help those who need our help as honestly as we know how.

Monday — TT and her husband came back to see us again. The first word that out of her husband was, God has spoken to us. The husband read the books aloud while TT relaxed and listened. The story of Ella inspired her a lot, No chemo you live only three months, with chemo two and a half years! 

Tuesday — We chatted with TT and her husband to know more of what had happened. Watch this video (in Bahasa Indonesia) to get more details.

TT was determined that she was not going for chemotherapy or radiotherapy as recommended by her oncologist. By reading and knowing more she and her husband felt that there is another option — not radiation or chemo. We make it clear to them that this important (life and death) decision has to be TT’s decision. She had made her choice and she should be prepared to enjoy or suffer the consequences of that decision. TT said, I felt very much relief. Peace! The heavy load in my heart has been lifted away.

You have already paid RM 15,000 as a deposit for your radiotherapy. What has happened to that money? That’s another story to follow.

 

 

 

WHAT RADIATION THERAPY DOES TO THE BODY (PART 5)

Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

Continuing our journey, we summarize some points mentioned in THE HOPE OF LIVING CANCER FREE, published in 1999 andwritten by Dr Francisco Contreras, MD, the General Director of the Oasis of Hope Hospital in Baja California, Mexico.

Hope-of-living-cancer-free

In this book, we will learn why Dr Contreras described….radiation therapy…has proven to be another medical blunder. Why is this so?

Dr Contreras’s thoughts on the dangers of radiation therapy are summarized as follows:

  • Radiation therapy is the second line of attack. For a short time, total body radiation was used; however, that was stopped when many patients died from extreme toxicity.
  • Now radiation therapy has evolved into a localized therapy in which dosages as well as the size of the fields (areas where the radiation is beamed) have diminished significantly.
  • X-ray type beams are used to actually burn malignant cells. There are adverse reactions to the therapy because, even though the fields are limited, the beam will go (within the field) through benign as well as malignant cells.
  • Radiation therapy, in which we place so much faith a few decades ago, has proven to be another medical blunder. Motivated by the desperation of failure, radiation therapists have dreamed up new ways of applying increasingly aggressive doses to their patients. They have literally “burned” patients, leaving many permanently disabled. Plus, these patients have had to experience the temporary side effects of severe nausea, malaise, loss of appetite and the loss of other functions.
  • Radiation doses have to be specifically measured, and there is an air dose, skin dose and a tumour dose. The calculation has to be done by an expert, many times by the physicist. The radiation therapist does the planning to prevent the burning of the skin. The lighter the skin, the more it will be affected.
  • According to Dr Mario Soto, when the field of entry is large, there will be side effects. For example:
  • If the esophagus is touched during radiation to the chest, esophagitis, or the burning of the lining esophagus, can result.
  • In the case of cancer of the cervix or the uterus, proctittis, or burning of the lining of the rectum, can be caused.
  • In radiation to the head and neck, if radiation is given to the tongue, the salivary glands can be impacted, and the patient will be without saliva.

NB: Dr Mario Soto is the clinical oncologist at the Oasis of Hope Hospital where Dr Francisco Contreras is the Director General.

In a later book “50 CRITICAL CANCER ANSWERS” published in 2013 which Dr Contreras co-authored with Daniel E. Kennedy, M.C., both authors discussed Radiation: A New Era of Precision.

50 critical answers

Although researchers have worked hard to hone in the radiation onto the tumours while shielding the normal cells, there are still limitations to date. These are their comments:

  • Despite the improvements in 3D and 4D image-guided radiotherapy, brachytherapy, and proton therapy to target tumours more precisely, exposure and injury to surrounding tissues and organs with serious and permanent side effects still limits the amount of radiation therapy that can be administered to a patient undergoing cancer treatment.
  • Furthermore, the state-of-the-art technology, developed to increase efficacy and reduce injury, is so complex that human and mechanical error is inevitable due to software flaws, faulty programming, poor safety procedures, or inadequate staffing and training. The problem is compounded by how difficult radiation injuries are to identify.
  • Even with intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT), a serious complication exists. Most tumours “move with us” when we breath, or with peristalsis (the natural movement of our bowels); though this shifting is subtle, high-dose radiation still burns the normal tissue that moves into the beam.
  • Complications due to organ damage and radiation-induced cancers are not apparent for many years, even decades; meanwhile insufficient dosing is impossible to detect or interpreted as failure to respond to treatment.
  • According to the New York Times, accidents are chronically under-reported. In June 2010, a Philadelphia hospital gave the wrong radiation dose to more than 90 patients with prostate cancer, and in 2005 a Florida hospital disclosed that 77 brain cancer patients had received 50% more radiation than prescribed because one of the most powerful and supposedly precise-linear accelerators had been programmed incorrectly for nearly a year. The article’s author concluded, “ Regulators and researchers can only guess how often radiotherapy accidents occur”

According to the authors, ionizing radiation damages cellular molecules in both direct and indirect ways. It splits directly hit molecules into highly reactive fragments known as free radicals. These, in turn, can attack other molecules they encounter in a continuing and damaging chain reaction.

  • One key damage target in irradiated cells is DNA, which acts as a crucial blueprint for cellular function. Severe damage to DNA can induce cell death, and this effect is an important mediator of lethal radiation toxicity.
  • Radiation can attack DNA directly, but more often DNA is damaged by hydroxyl radicals formed when radiation interacts with water molecules in the body. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS:

It is extremely tragic and incomprehensible that the medical (or cancer) establishment still uses ionizing radiation that is clearly proven and known to be carcinogenic (as established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer).

It is also inconceivable that such conventional cancer treatments should cause so much pain, agony and money and then the patient has to suffer another form of cancer, heart disease or disorders to the bones, etc. Hence the cycle of treatment has to be repeated. 

Is this why conventional cancer treatment is referred to as “the Cancer Industry?”  Is this healing or is it “xxxx”? 

We welcome your opinion.

WHAT RADIATION THERAPY DOES TO THE BODY (PART 4)

Liver over cancerYeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

Our search for answers to what radiation does to your body takes us to review LIFE OVER CANCER written by an Integrative Oncologist, Dr Keith Block, MD who is the Director of Integrative Medical Education at the University Of Illinois College Of Medicine and Medical Director of the Block Center for Integrative Cancer Treatment in Evanston, Illinois.

This is what we found in the book on the dangers of radiation therapy:

  • Radiation therapy delivers a powerful dose of X-rays to kill cancer cells. It is used most in the care of patients with early breast and prostate cancer. But because the intensity of this radiation is many times stronger than that of diagnostic X-rays, it can harm normal cells, too, especially in patients with advanced cancers who are receiving palliative radiotherapy to shrink recurrent tumours. In this case, immune cells (lymphocytes) in particular may become impaired, making the body more vulnerable to other diseases.
  • Other common side effects of radiation include fatigue, eating problems, emotional distress, nausea, vomiting, bloating, discomfort in the neck or throat, and skin changes such as itching, blistering, toughening, and darkening.

The effects of radiation depend on where it is targeted…some main points:

  • Radiation to the abdomen and pelvis can cause radiation enteritis, which is characterized by inflammation of the intestines with severe diarrhea.
  • Radiation to the chest or breast can inflame the esophagus, causing difficulty swallowing.
  • Radiation to the breast can result in a painful skin reaction.
  • Radiation to the head, neck, and mouth can cause fungal infections in the mouth in addition to the usual irritation of the muscous membranes.
  • Radiation to the whole-brain can leave patients with cognitive and physical deficits.
  • Radiation to the lungs zaps so much normal tissue (its breathing and its attendant up-and-down movement of the chest causes healthy tissue to move into the X-rays’ path) that it leads to sometimes irreversible lung damage.

Elsewhere in the book, we gained an insight as to why radiotherapy and chemotherapy may not work for cancer patients:

  • Radiation and many chemotherapy drugs kill malignant cells by generating lethal oxidative stress. That is, they generate an avalanche of free radicals that the cells are destroyed. The problem is that there are always some survivors. Cancer cells that are exposed long-term to free radical levels that are high, but not high enough to kill them, adapt. In a perverse case of Darwinian “survival of the fittest,” some cancer cells may mutate in a way that makes them more and more resistant to treatment. If even a few develop resistance to treatment, all of their descendents have it too.
  • Indeed, cancer’s ability to continually adapt is one reason why chemotherapy and radiation are not more effective against cancer: the treatments also produce free radicals that support the disease process, allowing any cells that survive the barrage of radiation or chemotherapy to thrive.

CONCLUDING REMARKS:

It is extremely tragic and incomprehensible that the medical (or cancer) establishment still uses ionizing radiation that is clearly proven and known to be carcinogenic (as established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer).It is also inconceivable that such conventional cancer treatments should cause so much pain, agony and money and then the patient has to suffer another form of cancer, heart disease or disorders to the bones, etc. Hence the cycle of treatment has to be repeated.

Is this why conventional cancer treatments is referred to as “the Cancer Industry?” Is this healing?

We welcome your opinion.

WHAT RADIATION THERAPY DOES TO THE BODY (PART 3)

by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

Continuing our search to find answers to what radiation therapy does to the body, we re-read Chapter 4 RADIATION THERAPY: BURNING CANCER found in the best-seller “NATURAL STRATEGIES FOR CANCER PATIENTS” by Dr Russell Blaylock, MD. He was a board certified neurosurgeon and neuroscientist and was the Clinical Professor of Neurosurgery at the Medical University of Mississippi. ( http://www.russellblaylockmd.com/)

Natural Strategies for CA

Dr Blaylock’s comments gave us further insights into the hazards of radiation therapy. Some salient points in the chapter are:

  • Most cancer patients, upon first learning they will face radiation treatments, have an image of lying down under a death ray. Most know that radiation is dangerous and can cause burns, nausea and vomiting, loss of hair, and even additional cancer. Their fears are not unfounded.
  • Authorities in the field of radiation biology do not even agree on the safety of diagnostic X-rays, which involve infinitely lower doses of radiation than radiation therapy.
  • Today, many doctors recommend that their cancer patients undergo radiation treatments following surgery just as a precaution. In my (Dr Blaylock’s) estimation, this is not good science. Despite the fact that we have many sophisticated ways to determine who should have post operative radiation and who shouldn’t, we are not using many of these tools with the majority of cancer patients.
  • X-ray particles could not only kill cancer cells, but also cause cancer. In fact, Marie Curie and her daughter, Irene Joliot-Curie, both died of leukemia caused by their prolonged exposure to radium.
  • Radiation’s harmful effects are accumulative…even when the treatments are fractionated, the damage can accumulate and produce injury to the tissues in the path of the beam. In addition, the beam continues to reflect off hard surfaces, such as bone and surgical implants, with the result being delayed damage.
  • Because no way existed to really concentrate the X-ray beam on the cancer, the result was often a wide zone of damage, including to the overlying skin. The effects of this damage were not always immediate.
  • Often, patients who undergo radiation treatments experience degeneration of tissues months or even years after their treatments end. For example, delayed radionecrosis can occur following penetration of the brain or spinal cord by X-rays. 

The nervous system is not the only tissue that can be damaged by scatter radiation. Most vulnerable are the cells lining the gastrointestinal tract, as well as the cells of the bone marrow, lymph system, spleen, and hair follicles. This is because these are all rapidly dividing cells, easily damaged by radiation.

  • Over half of all our immune cells are found in the gastrointestinal tract. Abdominal radiation treatments, especially when combined with chemotherapy, also can kill off the bacteria in the colon, such as the acidophilus and bifidus organisms. This, in turn, can result in an overgrowth of harmful microorganisms such as Candida albicans and pathogenic (disease-causing) bacteria. When such bacterial disruptions are severe, which is not uncommon, yeast and bacteria can enter the bloodstream, with significant consequences to the immune system.
  • The damage to the cells lining the intestine, colon, and rectum can range from defective absorption (malabsorption) to severe inflammation of the bowel wall with resulting bloody, mucus-filled stools.
  • The cells lining the intestine are very complex and delicate. Damage to these cells can significantly alter the body’s ability to absorb foods, vitamins, and minerals, leading to significant malnutrition, despite a healthy diet. The simple fact is that if food cannot be properly digested and absorbed, a healthy diet does little good. This is especially a problem when chemotherapy is combined with radiation.

One hazard rarely considered, even by radiation oncologists, is the danger of blood vessels injury caused by the radiation passing through blood vessels, from small arterioles to larger arteries. Major arteries course very close to a cancerous tumour, and sometimes they are encased by the tumour. This means that the blood vessels receive a large degree of the radiation dose. The artery most often damaged by the radiation was the carotid artery (the main artery supplying blood to the brain)…another most often injured is the vertebral artery, which supplies blood to the brain stem. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

It is extremely tragic and incomprehensible that the medical (or cancer) establishment still uses ionizing radiation that is clearly proven and known to be carcinogenic (as established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer). 

It is also inconceivable that such conventional cancer treatments should cause so much pain, agony and money and then the patient has to suffer another form of cancer, heart disease or disorders to the bones, etc. Hence the cycle of treatment has to be repeated. 

Is this why conventional cancer treatments have been referred to as “the Cancer Industry?” Is this healing or is it “legalized” ???? We welcome your opinion.

To conclude this article, we recommend that you read Dr Blaylock’s article which describedHOW MODERN MEDICINE KILLED MY BROTHER…at the following link: http://www.wnho.net/medicine_killed_brother.htm

WHAT RADIATION THERAPY DOES TO THE BODY (PART 2)

by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

Essentially, it burns the body. Radiation (or radiotherapy) is designed to kill cancer cells or damage their DNA in a way that keeps them from dividing. The goal may be to destroy a tumour; to shrink the tumour prior to surgery, allowing for a less invasive procedure; or to use radiation after surgery to reach any cancer cells inadvertently left behind. In some circumstances, radiation may also be used to relieve pain, such as by shrinking a tumour exerting on the spine.

However, do the benefits outweigh the risks or side effects? To find answers to this question, we reviewed some books written by prominent medical doctors to help us understand what radiation does to our body. Hopefully with this knowledge, you will be able to make a better judgment when your doctor tells you that…” you must do radiation, you have no choice, it is the standard operating procedure, etc”

In Part 1, we reviewed “A WORLD WITHOUT CANCER” by Dr Margaret Cuomo, a board-certified radiologist at North Shore University hospital in Manhasset, New York. In Chapter 4 Cut, Poison and Burn, Dr Cuomo made some very frank revelations. Some of these are:

  • Research indicates that advising patients to undergo radiation is not always appropriate.
  • Although we have gotten much better at aiming radiation directly at a tumor, we can’t target it with the precision necessary to burn only cancer cells and leave healthy ones intact. That means that this therapy, too, is damaging.
  • Acute side effects caused by radiation can also include skin irritation, damage to the salivary glands, urinary problems (if the abdominal area has been treated), and sometimes nausea. While many of these eventually disappear, some can linger for a long time or become permanent.
  • Months or even years after radiation, chronic side effects can surface. With radiation, as with chemotherapy, the list of potential problems is lengthy.
  • Most troubling is the possibility that other cancers will emerge, often near the original site, long after receiving radiation therapy…children who survived cancer were 15 times more likely to die of a subsequent cancer later in life.
  • Though the young are most vulnerable, secondary cancers can develop as a result of radiation at any age.
  • Breast cancer radiation seems to carry a particularly higher risk, and may be associated with subsequent lung cancer, as well as cancers of the blood vessels, bone and connective tissues.
  • Women who have received radiation for ovarian cancer may be more likely to develop cancers of connective tissues, the bladder, and the pancreas, while radiation for cervical cancer raises the risk of cancers of the colon, rectum, small intestine, uterus, ovary, kidney, soft tissue, and stomach.
  • Men treated with radiation for prostate cancer subsequently have a higher risk of cancers of the bladder, colon, and rectum, compared with men who had surgery. Those same risks, as well as others, are evident after radiation for testicular cancer.
  • Radiation exposure is also associated with leukemia (including acute myelogenous, chronic myelogenous, and acute lymphoblastic leukemias}.

What all this tells us is that, once again, we have a treatment that initially works well for some people some of the time but in the long run fails to deliver a cure and carries significant side effects.

Dr Cuomo concluded the chapter by revealing the comments of Carole Baggerly, a breast cancer patient who was alarmed by the effect of her radiation treatment. Initially hesitant, Carole decided to accept her oncologist’s reassurance that the side effects would be minimal, only to develop a red, oozing burn on her chest and more redness on her back. “It was extremely painful,” she recalls. “The fact that the redness went through to my back was proof that the   x-rays had scattered.”

If you would like to research further on the dangers of radiation therapy, we recommend Dr Cuomo’s hard hitting article, “WHY CANCER TREATMENT IS FATALLY FLAWED “

Link:http://www.huffingtonpost.com/margaret-i-cuomo-md/cancer-prevention_b_1609446.html 

In this article, Dr Cuomo revealed that  Good Morning America co-anchor Robin Roberts announced  that she had been diagnosed with  myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) — a group of conditions in which the cells in the bone marrow are damaged…just barely having “beaten breast cancer” after having completed treatment involving chemotherapy and radiation which are both risk factors for MDS. In fact, ionizing radiation, according to Dr Cuomo, increases the risk for MDS.

You can read Robin Roberts story on MDS at the following link:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/11/robin-roberts-mds-bone-marrow_n_1586151.html 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

It is extremely tragic and incomprehensible that the medical (or cancer) establishment still uses ionizing radiation that is clearly proven and known to be carcinogenic (as established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer).It is also inconceivable that such conventional cancer treatments should cause so much pain, agony and money and then the patient has to suffer another form of cancer, heart disease or disorders to the bones, etc. Hence the cycle of treatment has to be repeated.

Is this why conventional cancer treatment is referred to as “the Cancer Industry?” Is this healing or what do you want to call it?

We welcome your opinion.

WHAT RADIATION THERAPY DOES TO THE BODY (PART 1)

by Yeong Sek Yee & Khadijah Shaari

One of the tragedies of radiation therapy, after it had burned your body, is that it may “reward” the cancer patient with  a second cancer and this comes quite commonly in the form of leukemias (including acute myelogenous, chronic myelogenous, and acute lymphoblastic leukemias) or pre-leukemias (myelodysplastic syndrome or MDS).

In this article, we shall concentrate on MDS. A myelodysplastic syndrome is a type of cancer in which the bone marrow does not make enough healthy blood cells and there are abnormal (blast) cells in the blood and/or bone marrow. In a patient with a myelodysplastic syndrome, the blood stem cells (immature cells) do not become healthy red blood cells, white blood cells, or platelets. These immature blood cells, called blasts, do not work the way they should and either die in the bone marrow or soon after they go into the blood. This leaves less room for healthy white blood cells, red blood cells, and platelets to form in the bone marrow. When there are fewer healthy blood cells, infection, anemia, or easy bleeding may occur.

For more general information on MDS, visit the website of the National Cancer Institute (NCI), USA: http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/treatment/myelodysplastic/Patient/page1

Incidentally, the NCI also specified that one of the causes of MDS is… “past treatment with chemotherapy or radiation therapy for cancer.”

What other evidence is there? Let us quote from 3 other sources:

1. In the MDS website (http://www.mds-foundation.org/what-is-mds/), the main cause for MDS  is listed as:

“Radiation and chemotherapy for cancer are among the known triggers for the development of MDS. Patients who take chemotherapy drugs or who receive radiation therapy for potentially curable cancers, such as breast or testicular cancers, Hodgkin’s disease and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, are at risk of developing MDS for up to 10 years following treatment. MDS that develops after use of cancer chemotherapy or radiation is called “secondary MDS” and is usually associated with multiple chromosome abnormalities in cells in the bone marrow. This type of MDS often develops rapidly into AML”. 

2. The world famous Mayo Clinic, USA (http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/myelodysplastic-syndromes/basics/causes/con-20027168), clearly states that:

Myelodysplastic syndromes that occur in response to cancer treatments, such as chemotherapy and radiation, or in response to chemical exposure are called secondary myelodysplastic syndromes. Secondary myelodysplastic syndromes are often more difficult to treat.”

3. The American Cancer Society, USA (http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/othercarcinogens/medicaltreatments/secondcancerscausedbycancertreatment/second-cancers-caused-by-cancer-treatment-treatments-linked-to-second-cancers)clearly acknowledged that:

“Radiation therapy was recognized as a potential cause of cancer many years ago. Acute myelogenous leukemia (AML), chronic myelogenous leukemia (CML), and acute lymphoblastic leukemia (ALL) have been linked to past radiation exposure. Myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS), a bone marrow disorder that can turn into acute leukemia, has also been linked to past radiation exposure.”

In June 2012, Good Morning America co-anchor announced that she had developed myelodysplastic syndrome (MDS) barely five years after she had “beaten breast cancer.” Obviously, she had chemotherapy and radiation therapies.

(NB: We have seen cancer patients developing leukemias shortly after completing conventional cancer treatment).

In addition to causing a second cancer, radiation therapy also cause heart diseases…you may wish to read the following:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist-explains/2013/07/economist-explains-22

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/10/091022202710.htm

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2013/10/131028162046.htm

http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/would-you-ever-use-chemo-or-radiation-for-cancer/

http://www.cardiovascularbusiness.com/topics/practice-management/surviving-cancer-cost-radiation-chemo-induced-cardiovascular-diseases

CONCLUDING REMARKS 

It is extremely tragic and incomprehensible that the medical (or cancer) establishment still uses ionizing radiation that is clearly proven and known to be carcinogenic (as established by the International Agency for Research on Cancer). 

It is also inconceivable that such conventional cancer treatments should cause so much pain, agony and money and then the patient has to suffer another form of cancer, heart disease or disorders to the bones, etc. Hence the cycle of treatment has to be repeated. 

Is this why conventional cancer treatment is referred to as “the Cancer Industry?” Is this healing or what is it that you want to call it? 

We welcome your opinion.

THE DARK SIDE OF RADIATION THERAPY

Danger-Ionizing-radiation

 

The darkest secret of radiation therapy (or radiotherapy), which uses ionizing radiation, is that it does cause cancer or a second cancer. Such “radiation-induced cancers” are mentioned in the website of the American Cancer Society (ACS). You can read the full article “Radiation Exposure and Cancer” at the following link:

http://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancercauses/radiationexposureandcancer/  index?sitearea=mh

Ionizing radiation is high-frequency radiation that has enough energy to remove an electron from (ionize) an atom or molecule. Ionizing radiation has enough energy to damage the DNA in cells, which in turn may lead to cancer. Gamma rays, x-rays, some high-energy UV rays, and some sub-atomic particles such as alpha particles and protons are forms of ionizing radiation. These forms of radiation have different energy levels and can penetrate cells to different extents, but all are capable of causing ionization.

If ionizing radiation passes through a cell in the body, it can lead to mutations (changes) in the cell’s DNA, the part of the cell that contains its genes (blueprints). This could contribute to cancer, or to the death of the cell. The amount of damage in the cell is related to the dose of radiation it receives. The damage takes place in only a fraction of a second, but other changes such as the beginning of cancer may take years to develop.

Ionizing radiation is a proven human carcinogen (cancer causing agent) itself or it causes a second cancer.Some cancer treatments such as chemotherapy and radiation therapy may increase a person’s risk of developing a different type of cancer later in life. Some of the second cancers include Hodgkin’s and non-Hodgkin’s lymphomas, and leukemias or myelodyplastic syndromes (pre-leukemias). Follow the following links to learn more:

Most studies on radiation and cancer risks have looked at people exposed to very high doses of radiation in the settings above. Still, most scientists and regulatory agencies agree that even small doses of ionizing radiation increase cancer risk, although by a very small amount. In general, the risk of cancer from radiation exposure increases as the dose of radiation increases. Likewise, the lower the exposure is, the smaller the increase in risk. But there is no threshold below which ionizing radiation is thought to be totally safe.

The above notes are extracted from the above ACS website.

Who else tells us about the dangers of ionizing radiation?

In the 1950’s Dr Alice Mary Stewart, a physician and epidemiologist specializing in social medicine (at Oxford University) and the effects of radiation on health warned that low-dose radiation is more dangerous than has been acknowledged. She spent more than 30 years studying the effects of radiation on human health. In 1956, Dr Stewart published a landmark paper that concluded that a single exposure to a diagnostic x-ray before birth will double the risk of an early cancer (usually leukemia).  Her results were initially regarded as unsound. Her findings on fetal damage caused by x-rays of pregnant women were eventually accepted worldwide and the use of medical x-rays during pregnancy and early childhood was curtailed as a result (although it took around two and a half decades). For more information on Dr Alice Stewart, read her biography “THE WOMAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH: ALICE STEWART AND THE SECRETS OF RADIATION” by Professor Gayle Greene, Professor of Women’s studies and Literature at Scripps College.

In the 1960s Dr. Ernest Sternglass, Emeritus Professor of Radiological Physics in the Department of Radiology at the University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, initially studied fluoroscopy, which “exposes an individual to a considerable dose of radiation.”  Later, he confirmed Dr Alice Stewart’s research findings and in 1963 he published the paper “Cancer: Relation of Prenatal Radiation to Development of the Disease in Childhood” in the journal Science. Dr Sternglass is best known for his controversial research on the health risks of low-level radiation. We recommend that you watch the following YouTube video on Radiation and Health at the following link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J3ib085o-K0

Following the footsteps of Dr Alice Stewart and Dr Ernest Sternglass, Dr John William Gofman, who was the Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology at University of California at Berkeley, promoted a linear no-threshold model for the dangers of radiation, suggesting that even small doses over time could prove harmful. Some of his major research/publications are:

  • His 1981 book, Radiation and Human Health expounded on this and gave prediction tables for how much average life expectancy might be affected by radiation.
  • In his 1990 book, Radiation-Induced Cancer From Low-Dose Exposure: An Independent Analysis , Dr Gofman provides the human and physical evidence that carcinogenesis from ionizing radiation does occur at the lowest conceivable doses and dose-rates. This finding refutes claims by parts of the radiation community that very low doses or dose-rates may be safe.
  • In 1996, Dr Gofman’s expose Preventing Breast Cancer: The Story of a Major, Proven, Preventable Cause of this Disease revealed that… “about three-quarters of the current annual incidence of breast-cancer in the US is being caused by earlier ionizing radiation, primarily from medical sources”

In year 2000, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) based in Paris, lists ionizing radiation as a carcinogen…you can read more at the following link:

  • IARC  Monographs on the Evaluation of Carcinogenic Risks to Humans

            Link:http://www.iarc.fr/en/publications/list/monographs/index.php

In 2005, the National Toxicology Program, US classified X-radiation and gamma radiation as known human carcinogen. Although some scientists challenge this premise, most agree that there is no such thing as a safe dose of radiation. A 2005 National Research Council report confirms this finding, stating that “the risk of cancer proceeds in a linear fashion at lower doses [of ionizing radiation] without a threshold and … the smallest dose has the potential to cause a small increase in risk to humans.” Radiation damage to genes is cumulative over a lifetime. Repeated low-dose exposures over time may have the same harmful effects as a single high-dose exposure.

To read more: http://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/twelfth/profiles/ionizingradiation.pdf

The European Committee on Radiation Risk (ECRR), in its 2010 Recommendations entitled “The Health Effects of Exposure to Low Doses of Ionizing Radiation” paid tribute to the work and research efforts of Professor Edward P. Radford, a physician and epidemiologist who clearly established that…”there is no safe dose of radiation” (The 2003 Recommendations was dedicated to Dr Alice Stewart as described above). To read the 2010 ECRR Recommendations, follow the link: http://www.euradcom.org/2011/ecrr2010.pdf

As a result of the above glaring hard evidence of the dangers of ionizing radiation currently used in various medical treatments, sensible medical doctors like Dr Russell Blaylock (a neurosurgeon), Dr Margaret Cuomo (a certified radiologist), Dr Francisco Contreras (an oncologist), Dr Keith Block (an oncologist), and many others do have serious reservations about the usage and effectiveness of radiation therapy. Their views/comments will be summarized in our coming review of their books under our series “What Radiation Therapy Does To Your Body”

Meantime, if you would like to read more on the dangers of ionizing radiation and radiation-induced cancers, visit the following links:

1)      Does Radiation Cause Cancer?

Link: http://www.rerf.or.jp/library/update/rerfupda_e/comment/cause.html

2)      Carcinogenesis after Exposure to Ionizing Radiation

Link: http://www.radiology.ucsf.edu/patient-care/patient-safety/ct-mri-pregnancy/carcinogenesis

3)      Diseases associated with Ionizing radiation exposure

Link: http://www.publichealth.va.gov/exposures/radiation/diseases.asp 

4)      Secondary Malignancies after Radiation Therapy

LINK:http://cancergrace.org/radiation/2011/05/09/secondary-malignancies/

5)      State of the Evidence on Ionizing Radiation

        LINK:  http://www.breastcancerfund.org/clear-science/radiation-chemicals-and-                    breast- cancer/ionizing-radiation.html

 SOME YOUTUBE VIDEOS TO ENLIGHTEN YOU:

1)      Dangers of Radiation by Dr. Joseph Maroon

LINK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6dTSgfB5q9s

2)    Uses and Dangers of Radiation (IGCSE Physics)

LINK:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VR4jDgiq35s

3)    Radiation-Hidden_Health_Danger.flv

LINK: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BrfjvXgtPLY

To conclude, it is just beyond human comprehension why the medical (or cancer) establishment would want to use a proven carcinogen to heal cancer or is it their intention to create more cancers? We welcome your views.

NB: We trust you know the meaning of “a carcinogen”

 The hazard symbol for carcinogenic chemicals in the Globally Harmonized System.

Danger-Ionizing-radiation

 

Cervical Cancer Stage 3B: Health Restored After Taking Herbs and Giving Up Chemo-radiation Treatments

The Ai Hoa (TAH) is a 78 year old lady from Indonesia. In May 2008 she had chocolate-coloured vaginal discharge. She consulted a gynaecologist and was told there was nothing wrong. In February 2009, the discharge recurred. She consulted another gynaecologist and was again told the same story – nothing was wrong.

Her daughter brought TAH to Singapore for further consultation. A PAP smear done on 16 March 2009 indicated high grade squamous intraepithelial lesion (HSIL) / CIN 3.

A biopsy of the cervical tissue was performed and indicated microinvasive squamous cell carcinoma.

A PET-CT scan on 23 March 2009 indicated a hypermetabolic FDG avid cervical mass with diffusely increased uterine avidity which was inseparable from the uterus and the upper part of the vagina. There was multiple FDG avid left iliac, aortocaval, recto-caval and bilateral paraaortic lymph nodes consistent with metastasis. There was no evidence of peritoneal or liver metastases.

Blood test results on 24 March 2009 showed normal hemogram with an ESR of 25 mm/hr. The renal and liver function tests were normal but LDH was 210 (normal <190). Her CEA was 6.9 (n<5) and CA 125 was 124 (n<35). HBsAg was reactive.

TAH was referred to another doctor for evaluation of her elevated CEA and HBsAg. She underwent endoscopy of her GI tract on 26 Match 2009. The result showed normal oesophagus but antral gastritis was noted. She was tested positive for Helicobacter pylori. Colonoscopy showed numerous small sessile polyps in the rectum. On biopsy it showed hyperplasic / metplastic polyps.  She was started on Baraclude (entecavir) for her hepatitis B (carrier).

Bone scan on 28 April 2009 showed increased tracer uptake in the midline of the upper sacrum as well as the left sacral ala, most probably due to degenerative changes, unlikely due to bony metastasis.

On 25 March 2009, TAH underwent concurrent chemo-radiation. TAH received 28 times of radiation treatment and 3 times of brachytherapy (internal).  Each chemo treatment was repeated weekly. The drugs used were cisplatin and 5-FU. After four doses of chemo (to receive a total of 8) TAH developed significant myelosuppression (lowering of white and red blood cells).  Chemotherapy was suspended temporarily.

Cost of Treatment

Not counting other costs, TAH had to pay a total of at least S$ 24,700 for her treatments in Singapore. The breakdown is as follows:

Radiation                                              S$17, 000

Brachytherapy (internal radiation)         S$  4,500

Chemotherapy                                      S$  3,200

Health Worsened After Treatments in Singapore

Chris: When did she complete all her treatments in Singapore?

Daughter:  16 May 2009 and we went home to Indonesia.

With the treatment, was she getting better? Better than before?

No. She felt nauseous and tired. She was not able to sit up for long and had pains in her back.

Before the treatment in Singapore how was mom’s condition? Good or bad?

She was healthy.

Before her treatment and after her treatment – was there any difference?

Yes, different. She was worse off after her treatment in Singapore.

You spent all the money and what happened then?

She was more tired.

What’s the whole meaning then?

Mom did not want to continue with the treatment any more. But the doctor said, “No, no, you cannot stop. You need to add more blood.” So we were confused.

Did you think mother would die if she was to continue with the treatment?

Most probably!

What happened during the chemo? Did she suffer?

It was difficult. She felt nauseous, she had difficulty eating. She had no strength to talk.

She was already 75 years old. I would not do that if she was my mother.

The radiologist in Singapore told us, “If she was my mother I would also give her the radiation.”

Oh yes, of course. If you go to a barber he will definitely tell you to cut your hair!

I did tell the radiologist that mom was already old but he kept insisting that if mom was his mother, he would do the same. Because he is a doctor, we believed him. But when I went home, I started to look for alternatives. That was when I found your book. In fact, the radiologist said that when we return to continue with the chemo, most probably mom would need to undergo another 20 times of radiation if the lymph nodes were still swollen. No, mom did not want to return to Singapore for treatment anymore.

Every half-hour Juice Therapy – almost fainted

On her return to Indonesia, TAH went on a 21-day-JuiceTherapy offered by an alternative practitioner. She had to drink all kinds of juices every half an hour. She almost fainted while on the therapy and gave this up.

Found CA Care

Her daughter read our book, Kanker: Mengapa Mereka Hidup (the Indonesian version of Cancer: Why They Live).  This led her to CA Care. She obtained herbs from Pak Teddy in Jakarta. After four weeks on the herbs TAH felt better.  Her facial expression improved, frequency of her urination lessen. She could sit in her daughter’s bread shop for one whole morning. Previously she could not do so even for half an hour and had to go upstairs and lie down.

Her daughter flew to see us in Penang on 19 July 2009. Below is the video recording on that day.

 

4 April 2010 – TAH and her daughter came to Penang

After taking the herbs for about ten months, TAH came to visit us for the first time, accompanied by her daughter.  She presented with the following problems:

  1. She felt “heaty” inside her abdomen.
  2. Her urination was very frequent – 7 to 8 times per night and this disturbed her sleep.
  3. She had incontinence.
  4. She had cramps in her legs if standing for too long.
  5. The soles of her feet felt “thick”.
  6. She had pains in the joints of her fingers.
  7. Her stomach felt bloated and this caused discomforts.

Mama, how did you feel after taking the herbs?

D: Most people who saw her were saying she looked better.

TAH: I felt my backbone was better after taking the Bone Tea. I took care of my diet – I do not take fish, any meat or chicken. Do I have to keep to this diet until I die?

I am not sick but I also take care of my diet. I don’t want to wait until I get sick before I start to take care of my diet.

D: But she is not putting on weight?

Do you want to put on weight? Many Indonesians who come here are like that – complaining about not being able to grow fatter! But I tell them – You are not a pig or a cow. If you need to sell yourself by the kilos then go ahead and become fat. What is important to you is that you are healthy – with no problem. If you can eat, can sleep, can walk or move around and have no pains – what else do you want? You will put on weight later but it takes time. Be patient. You are already 76 years old now and you look good. Take it easy.

TAH: You have helped so many people!

Now, let me ask. There is this patient in the same place that you come from. Many patients came to see me because of her – she is doing well. She has a bread shop or something like that.

D: Yes, that is us – we have a bread shop. After our treatment in Singapore, mama always felt nauseous and tired. She had to sleep upstairs. Now, she is able to help take care of the shop.

Comments

Let me ask you to reflect seriously on the following:

  1. With all the modern technology of medical science – PAP smear, biopsy, CT scan, PET scan, bone scan, endoscopy, colonoscopy, radiotherapy, brachytherapy and chemotherapy – how did TAH ended up?  Indeed these procedures may or may not be necessary, but do you ever wonder if all these are the answers to her problem? Well, she even ended up being prescribed Baraclude for hepatitis! What does that tell you?
  2. TAH was already 75 years old – if she was your mother and if you were an expert in radiotherapy and chemotherapy – would you subject her to such treatments? The Singapore radiologist said yes! Do you buy that?

3.  Before undergoing chemotherapy and radiotherapy do you want to know what the side effects of these treatments are?  If you want to know – why don’t you ask the doctors? But whatever they say must always be counter checked with the information found in the internet. After having gone through the list of side effects then use your commonsense and ask this question – Do these treatments make sense to you?

What are the side effects of radiation (external) and brachytherapy (internal radiation)?

In the cancer forum, many ladies wrote about their experiences. Here are some examples:

  • My mom had 2 brachytherapy treatments. A couple of weeks after the treatments she was complaining of some discomfort in her back.
  • I had 3 brachytherapy sessions and the side effects I had were – some bleeding for a few days after each session, lack of energy and needing to sleep more than usual.
  • Despite being told of the possible side effects of my radiation treatment, I found I wasn’t truly prepared. I was told I would experience issues with my bowels. I did and still do, one and one-half years later. I first experienced “loose” bowels about four weeks into treatment. For months after radiation I had lower back and leg aches. No one could truly offer an explanation for it, but I sense that much of what I felt was nerve and tissue damage. Bending or squatting down was especially painful.
  • I also had three days of internal radiation and that contributed to what is called ‘stenosis’ or vaginal scarring.
  • I found my tummy was upset in the beginning. About eight months after treatment, I had rectal bleeding and feeling of ‘blockage’ that turned out to be chronic inflammation due to radiation.
  • During the last two weeks of my external radiation treatments, I experienced diarrhea, loss of appetite, and fatigue. I had occasional vaginal itchiness. I have developed a problem with stress incontinence (urinary leakage when sneezing, coughing etc). My radiation oncologist told me the radiation has damaged the sphincter.
  • I feel that the side-effects were definitely minimized, almost to the point of lying. I can understand that they don’t wish to scare you with all sorts of rare complications, but I would rather have been “given the straight goods”, so to speak, on the more likely ones. I was told that the internal radiation treatments would probably cause some temporary and mild bladder and bowel problems. I started experiencing minor bladder irritation immediately after the first radiation treatment, and also had mild diarrhea. Five years after the treatments, I still have “funny” bowels – when I have to go, I usually have to go *NOW*, sometimes several times a day, and “normal” seems to be everything from loose to constipated. I didn’t realize this was after-effects from radiation until I found other women on the internet who’d also had radiation and were having the same symptoms. I felt tired and “draggy” for a couple of months after my treatments. I also underwent menopause, at age thirty-four. Symptoms of menopause, especially hot flashes, inability to concentrate, and moodiness, increased in intensity for several months until I finally realized what was going on. The radiation also caused some scarring in my vagina.

Side Effects of Brachytherapy

  • Nausea
  • Digestive disorders like loose stools, stomach upset.
  • Urinary incontinence.
  • Dryness in the vaginal canal, vaginal soreness and bleeding etc.
  • There are also many side effects that can cause permanent damage to the reproductive organs such as the vaginal canal becomes very narrow because of the radiation treatment. The length of the vaginal cavity is also shortened due to the procedure, rendering sex very painful and uncomfortable.
  • Menopause too is sometimes accelerated as a result of brachytherapy.
  • Another important side effect of brachytherapy is loss of bone density. 

Side Effects of Cisplatin

  • Increased risk of getting an infection from a drop in white blood cells.
  • Tiredness and breathlessness due to a drop in red blood cells.
  • Bruising more easily due to a drop in platelets.
  • Fatigue during and after treatment and feeling or being sick.
  • Cisplatin can cause kidney damage.
  • Hearing loss, especially with high-pitched sounds.
  • Ringing in the ears.
  • Loss of appetite.
  • Loss of taste or a metallic taste.
  • Numbness or tingling in the fingers and toes resulting in difficulty with fiddly things.
  • Allergic reactions such as skin rashes, itching, feeling hot, shivering, redness of the face, feeling dizzy, headache, shortness of breath, anxiety or a sudden need to pass urine.
  • Muscle cramps.
  • Fast heartbeat (during or shortly after a dose)
  • Lower back or side pain accompanied by fever or chills
  • Joint pain
  • Blurred vision

Side Effects of 5-FU

•  Sore mouth.
•  Taste changes.
•  Diarrhoea.
•  Eye problems.
•  Skin changes.
•  Risk of infection, bruising and bleeding due to low blood counts.
•  Tiredness or fatigue.
•  Feeling sick or nausea and vomiting.
•  Hair loss.
•  Nail changes.
•  Sun sensitivity.
•  Soreness and redness of palms of hand and soles of feet.
•  Chest pains and tightening across the centre of chest.

Reflect on the quotations below:

We wish to thank TAH and her family for giving us the permission to tell her story and use the videos above. And this is Ai Hoa at age 78! At this time she is doing well indeed – and her health is reflected in these pictures. She has been almost three years on CA Care’s herbs.