WHAT IS CANCER, ANYWAY?

Linda with French-Canadian goat
Or is that a sheep?

 

Well, Summerun North 2013 is part of history.  About two dozen people walked through the tourist swarms in Old Fairhaven on a warm and sunny Sunday, wearing their “Linda’s Team” T-shirts.  They accosted anyone who couldn’t creep away fast enough, and gave them potentially life-saving literature, furnished by the Marsha Rivkin Center.  Then they came back to my house and lunched delicately on hot dogs (cooked by Joe Mortimer), beer (I opened the bottles), and many sorts of salads and desserts provided by the nice ladies of Linda’s various organizations, quilting and otherwise.  I seriously over-estimated the thirst of the participants, resulting in an ambient beer supply sufficient to open a bar.  I think everyone had a good time, and we raised almost $2K – a bit more than the $750 I had hoped to raise.  Stay tuned for Summerun North 2014.  Thanks to all, but especially to Linda’s sister Carolyn and Linda's good friend Florence.  And, by the way, our shirts really looked good.

So, anyway, Dick Ingwall has again spotted a story in the NYTimes concerning cancer – in this case, what it is & what it isn’t.   A “working group” of the National Cancer Institute has just published the results of its deliberations concerning what we should call cancer, and what we should call something else.  To boil the issue down to its dry essence, there are lots of things our medicos refer to by long names including words like “carcinoma”.  Many of these things are being detected as direct results of progress in early detection (I almost said early “cancer” detection, but maybe I shouldn’t.)  Some of these things may in fact develop into full blown metastatic cancer and do us grave harm, but many of them won’t.  The problem arises, then, because, given the current state of medicine, telling which is which is an uncertain at best.  So, if your doctor says that you have (to make it up)a squamous neoplastic porous yellow lesion” you might go home content, but if she says you had a squamous neoplastic porous yellow protocarcinoma you might be terrified – and demand to have the damned thing cut out immediately.  This, says the working group, results in lots of unnecessary surgery and needless anxiety.  So, they say, ditch the word carcinoma (sarcoma, etc.).  Call it something bland, until you know what the damned thing really is. 

Do you agree?  I guess I do, somewhat.  What I really want my doc to say is: “Well, the path report says you have this thing with a long name.  As far as we know, it has a 5% or less chance of growing into a full-blown cancer.  As far as we know, yeah, but we really don’t know all that much.  I would suggest watchful waiting.”  If he phrased it that way I probably would take his advice.  But if he said “…. 30% chance…..”  I might say “Take it out.  Now.”  I don’t think our docs need to worry overmuch about disillusioning us with their lack of certainty.  In my somewhat post-disillusioned state I realize that much of diagnosis, despite the multiply fortunes being spent on bio-medical research,  remains a cosmic crap-shoot.    

But – progress is being made.  I have faith.

To read the story yourself:  http://nyti.ms/1aSMm6a