My dad used to mix chemo drugs when he worked at a hospital years ago. Despite being anal about using protective gear, not only would he shower before he left work he shower again as soon as he came home before he’d let us near him, he was that worried about contamination. Knew other pharmacists who got sick/poisoned from being careless around that stuff.
The whole point, of course, is to kill the cancer before the chemo kills you. Sometimes, the docs and you didn’t/don’t win the race.
Maybe that’s one reason why, when he was diagnosed with lung cancer, he wasn’t so eager to FIGHT AND WIN!!! That, and being really old (the chemo probably would have killed him before it killed the cancer) and a few other factors.
I’ve had pneumonia twice, both mild cases that did not require hospitalization. I was 10 and 15 years old. It was not fun. I got my pneumonia shots when they were offered (I’m asthmatic and prone to lung stuff).
Get the pneumonia shot. Don’t you want to have the power to decide to live, rather than have it potentially taken away from you by something preventable?
Given QtM’s statement that the vaccine is for the “walking pneumonia” (which is what the persons mentioned had) and that the “slip away quietly” process is not addressed, I am all for it.
As mentioned, it is the “slip away quietly” effect that is viewed favorably.
This thread was addressing that characteristic of the disease, not the “healthy except for it” version.
The one chemo exposure I know of that I got was 5-FU, which as chemo drugs go is rather “mild”; it’s even used in a skin cream for some precancerous skin conditions. I dropped a vial, and a little bit splashed on my sock (I was wearing sandals). As a result, I had to go to Employee Health and have my blood drawn several times over a period of a few months. All this was covered by worker’s comp, as was the routine blood work we all had to have once a year. Pregnant women were prohibited from handling chemo, and some tablets, usually hormone blockers, too.
I worked with one technician who stuck herself in the thumb, through her glove, and she had been preparing one of the stronger drugs. I happened to see her dabbing a blood spot on her thumb, and when she told me what she had done, I said, “Keep that thing bleeding as long as possible, and I’ll tell our boss and we’ll get you to Employee Health.” She was a 20-something who was afraid of getting in trouble, and I said, “You’re not in trouble, and you’ll probably be fine.” AFAIK, she was and still is.
There are some situations where fighting back is futile, and everyone knows it. It takes a very honest doctor and patient to admit this. In those cases, just give the patient all the morphine, Ativan, Phenergan, etc. they want and keep them as comfortable as possible.
Cisplatin does terrible things to everyone who takes it. Doxorubicin does some terrible things to everyone who takes it, and sometimes does other terrible things to them too. It’s not nicknamed “the red death” for no reason. If you get any on your skin, it will penetrate right through it, and often leave a permanent red stain if it spills or extravasates. :eek: It’s one of the oldest chemo drugs, and is used because it works, and that includes some cancers that have an excellent prognosis.
I really should look up the who/where/why of chemo.
But:
With all the popular press noise about genetic mapping, gene splicing, ‘stem cell’ therapy: are we any closer to either eliminating scattergun toxins or at least limiting damage caused by them?
I just can’t wrap my mind around the kinds of horrors employed to keep a damned pump running.
If I, as a ‘frail old man’, had the choice:
I can either end up:
‘25 and healthy again’
or
‘dead’
and the odds were 50/50, I’d say the treatment is a “good” option
If, as a ‘frail old man’, my choice was:
‘frail old man’ who is bald, deaf, blind and spastic
or
‘dead’
It pretty much doesn’t matter WHAT the odds are. What the hell kind of choice is that?!
My previous PCP was an oncologist/internist. I cannot imagine signing up for that kind of “ring-side seat” to human misery.
For some cancers we have less toxic ways of dealing with them, and better ways of mitigating toxicity. However, things like “gene splicing” are extremely specific in regards to targets and won’t work for all forms of cancer. So some people still have to chose between the highly damaging chemo which might buy them a longer life or going straight to palliative care.
As I said, my dad chose not to fight and I think it was the right choice - not that I had a say but his reasoning made a lot of sense to me. On the other hand, my father-in-law went three rounds with cancer before it killed him. His choice. He probably got an additional 20 years of life, most of them quality, by doing so.
Just in case you’ve scared the pants off anyone reading, let me say, loudly and emphatically that NOT ALL CHEMO IS HELL. I’ve got patients who literally report no side effects other than some feeling tired the day of. Seriously. Don’t let old stories of old cancer treatment and Hollywood portrayals of “courageous battles” make you decide chemo isn’t worth it. Not all chemos are the same, not all cancers are the same, and not all patients are the same. Talk to your doctor about what YOU can expect before you decide whether or not to do chemo, because what she has in mind may be no worse than the side effects of a flu shot.