Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Jamastiene

(38,206 posts)
58. Does this mean doctors will quit trying to act like cancer is some moral failing on our parts?
Fri Jan 2, 2015, 10:22 PM
Jan 2015

I get sick of so much of it. They swear up and down that many ailments are some moral failing on the part of the patient.

My grandfather died of lung cancer and never smoked a day in his life nor did he live with anyone who smoked. My grandmother died of heart disease and ate nothing but the healthiest foods. Her cholesterol stayed sky high even after going vegetarian and eating only things with 0mg of cholesterol. My mother and I both have the same sky high cholesterol. Depression runs in our family too. Aneurysms are common in my family too.

My cousin died over the holidays from a headache that turned out to be an aneurysm. The doctors gave her fucking Ibuprofen, fussed at her for "triggering" her migraine by doing something "wrong" and unhealthy, and sent her home. She felt overly dizzy and sick on the way home and called the doctor and home. She said she was going back to the doctor to see if he could find out where that was coming from. She was on her way right back to the same doctor who just sent her home with Ibuprofen. On the way, she pulled off onto the side of the road, laid her head on the steering wheel and died. She didn't want to hurt anyone else. So, she pulled off onto the side of the road to die. Very fucking sad to lose a cousin this way, especially after the doctor didn't take her headache seriously enough to bother to follow up and find out before sending her to her death.

My entire family is full of health problems and it is not anything to do with "lifestyle" or diet. I asked my grandmother and my mother why we all had the same ailments if we all ate different diets and lived to varying degrees of healthy "lifestyles." My family is living proof that these ailments are not due to what we eat or how we live. Both my mother and my grandmother told me we shit in our blood. They were right.

I'm sick of doctors claiming physical ailments are always the fault of the patient. Sometimes, we just got shit in our blood and shit for luck. They need to quit making everything into a moral issue, as if our sins are causing diseases. It's fucking ridiculous. Blaming people for getting diseases is like some kind of fucked up religious dogma in our health care system and needs to stop.

Like those of us who live it say, cancer is something you get if you are unlucky as hell. It runs in families and there ain't a damn thing you can do about it. You can never smoke and get lung cancer. You can eat only the healthiest zero cholesterol foods and have sky high cholesterol. You can eat only heart healthy foods and get heart disease. You can be as big as the side of a house (that's one thing that does not run in my family, but I know people who starve and are overweight and picked on) and not eat as much as even a child. It is going to turn out that most ailments are in the genes and we've been lambasted by doctors for ages about being so sinful in the way we live, when the truth is, it's shitty luck and shit in our blood (so to speak) that is causing most of this shit.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Each cell in the body is a ticket in the cancer lottery. JEFF9K Jan 2015 #1
Is there a known correlation between body size and cancer rates? Helen Borg Jan 2015 #9
Recent studies have shown a somewhat shocking correlation between cancer rates ... JEFF9K Jan 2015 #34
But it should be "volume" not just height.. Helen Borg Jan 2015 #35
Thomas Samaras specializes in the corellation between height and longevity. JEFF9K Jan 2015 #36
Yay! I knew that being vegan was worth it!! Helen Borg Jan 2015 #37
More cells, more chances to 'win' a cancer? Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jan 2015 #52
Cancer will kill you if nothing else gets you first jeff47 Jan 2015 #2
Oh, neat. blkmusclmachine Jan 2015 #55
Any statistical spread spike91nz Jan 2015 #3
Yes. Yes. Yes. Or another way of saying it - truedelphi Jan 2015 #5
So many things I am sensitive to years later I will see an article saying it is linked lunasun Jan 2015 #7
I wonder if asthma, add, colitis, alzheimer's and autism are just bad luck? appalachiablue Jan 2015 #4
Bad luck due to environmental toxins in the case of glinda Jan 2015 #6
what's mds? n/t loudsue Jan 2015 #11
Marylands. Orrex Jan 2015 #12
doctors. progree Jan 2015 #21
MDS = Myelodysplastic Syndrome... rexcat Jan 2015 #48
Exactly. And there will tons of those coming up soon. glinda Jan 2015 #62
I guess people were just luckier 100 years ago CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #8
It seems likely that a lot of cancer deaths were undiagnosed a century ago Orrex Jan 2015 #13
I'm sure that's true in some cases CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #16
I'd need to see hard numbers Orrex Jan 2015 #18
One of the reasons for the rise of cancer rates sarge43 Jan 2015 #25
So you explain it by a vast network of scientists shilling for industries and making false reports.. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #26
Surely you don't deny the existence of industry shills CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #44
Cancer was not far more rare, per capita, 100 years ago than today, some types were, but there are reasons. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #14
There are scientists and then there are shills working for polluters CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #17
Indeed, critical thinking is essential. Let me help you: Orrex Jan 2015 #20
I would be interested Betty Jan 2015 #29
Plus there's the problem of our ability to save "unhealthy" people. jeff47 Jan 2015 #31
That *median* life expectancy was due largely to child and infant mortality CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #40
the increased BC in younger women is linked with late or no childbearing zazen Jan 2015 #49
No way CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #50
as a premenopausal BC survivor who might have had more kids, I've read a lot about this too zazen Jan 2015 #51
I don't see how that would explain the huge increase in BC rates CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #56
What was the rate of diagnosis of breast cancer a century ago? Orrex Jan 2015 #53
Why don't you assign yourself some homework CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #57
I posted links that destroyed your erstwhile point Orrex Jan 2015 #59
The hell you did! OMG, you can't be serious CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #60
FYI, stomping your feet and storming off is a poor substitute for argument Orrex Jan 2015 #61
And how many more carcinogens, pathogens, and polluted air & lakes are there now vs. ancient greece? Elmer S. E. Dump Jan 2015 #24
Not to mention smoking rates, obesity, no exercise, toxins, living longer, sun exposure, etc. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #27
No, we died from something else first 100 years ago. jeff47 Jan 2015 #28
Many died in childhood and infancy CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #42
I wasn't talking about median life expentancy jeff47 Jan 2015 #45
This is where I throw up my hands... CrawlingChaos Jan 2015 #46
No, I'm saying we can't do an easy, direct comparison. jeff47 Jan 2015 #47
Most didn't live long enough to get cancer hack89 Jan 2015 #32
100-200 years ago, people in cities breathed a toxic soup of coal ash NickB79 Jan 2015 #64
Being born is the cause of all the bad luck. Helen Borg Jan 2015 #10
Now this is a real example of ...... nolabels Jan 2015 #63
IMO this article is misleading or better yet Bull Shit watoos Jan 2015 #15
The problem with anecdotes is that you can't set up controls for a sample size of one. evirus Jan 2015 #19
Did prehistoric humans work around methyl chloride and tin tetrachloride? jeff47 Jan 2015 #30
Methyl chloride and tin tetrachloride killed the dinosaurs Orrex Jan 2015 #33
Um, It DIDN'T happen. Those are far from the only carcinogens in existance but GreatGazoo Jan 2015 #38
They aren't wrong. You're not understanding what they're doing. jeff47 Jan 2015 #39
You're saying, if I understand you correctly, that the body evolved a separate system to fight GreatGazoo Jan 2015 #41
No, it doesn't preclude those drugs jeff47 Jan 2015 #43
Bladder Cancer PADemD Jan 2015 #22
2/3rds. joshcryer Jan 2015 #23
, blkmusclmachine Jan 2015 #54
Does this mean doctors will quit trying to act like cancer is some moral failing on our parts? Jamastiene Jan 2015 #58
Latest Discussions»Latest Breaking News»Most cancer types 'just b...»Reply #58