How Bad Was My Attempt In Approaching...
Family & Relationships1 min ago
Cancer detection
32 Answers
Over the years I have lost both parents, several friends and a former boss to cancer. In addition two family members and a good friend have to date survived cancer. All these people, to a greater or lesser extent, went through hoops in getting their cancers diagnosed. My father was fobbed off by the GP, who told him he had an ulcer, until it was too late and he died within three months of diagnosis. The friend who survived was also told there was nothing much wrong with him - despite losing as massive amount of weight because he was unable to eat - and it was not until he collapsed and was taken to a different hospital to the one he had been seen at before that he was told he had cancer and was going to die. Fortunately this diagnosis was modified when he was operated on and he has survived a recurrence of the cance and is to date fighting fit. Other people had to wait varying lengths of time for tests, referrals etc. before being diagnosed and treated.
Now a friend who is having stomach problems has been given a blood test and told that he does not have cancer. Given the history of my friends and family I am sceptical, although I am aware that medicine has advanced since my father died (over thirty years ago) and presumably diagnostic techniques have improved. Is it the case that a blood test can say definitively that a person does or does not have cancer? If so, is this true of all cancers, or only certain types? Given that I have regular mammograms and smear tests, I would assume that a blood test is not all that reliable or I wouldn't have to go through these particular tests. Or am I wrong?
Now a friend who is having stomach problems has been given a blood test and told that he does not have cancer. Given the history of my friends and family I am sceptical, although I am aware that medicine has advanced since my father died (over thirty years ago) and presumably diagnostic techniques have improved. Is it the case that a blood test can say definitively that a person does or does not have cancer? If so, is this true of all cancers, or only certain types? Given that I have regular mammograms and smear tests, I would assume that a blood test is not all that reliable or I wouldn't have to go through these particular tests. Or am I wrong?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Bambiagain. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
My wife once phoned me when I was away abroad to tell me her mother had taken ill in the afternoon and she described the symptoms. My immediate reaction was a sense of 90% certainty she had had a heart attack. My wife told me her doctor promptlyu saw her and prescribed tablets for indigestion. My wife then continued the story and described how the next day she again called in the doctor and a stand-in came to visit and immediately ran for the telephone to urgently summon an ambulance. My mother in law died from the heart attack within two hours of reaching hospital when they had a nurse sitting beside her to monitor an infusion of medication in the hope of saving her. I should point out that I have absolutely no medical training or anything remotely resembling it - but I do take note of passing information.
I could tell you numerous stories about friends and relations involving crass incompetence on the part of the medical profession, including something that is a direct equivalent of your friend's experence but unfortunately my friend died from the cancer she had suffered for a long time before she collapsed at a hospital when taking a friend there - the staff there promptly correctly diagnosed her affliction.
If car mechanics made such a pig's ear of servicing our vehicles we would be outraged - and please nobody start on about how the body is so mysterious and/or unpredictable. If civil engineers were as incompetent as some members of the medical profession then we would have structures (bridges, dams, towers, large buildings) collapsing all the time and not just in countries where floors are unwisely/illegally added on top of buildings. To be fair, these medics are not a manifestation of useless training regimes or an inept system of some kind - it is their complacent arrogance and inclination toward seeing themselves as infallible superhumans that is the problem and there some of society at large may be to blame for regarding them as s
I could tell you numerous stories about friends and relations involving crass incompetence on the part of the medical profession, including something that is a direct equivalent of your friend's experence but unfortunately my friend died from the cancer she had suffered for a long time before she collapsed at a hospital when taking a friend there - the staff there promptly correctly diagnosed her affliction.
If car mechanics made such a pig's ear of servicing our vehicles we would be outraged - and please nobody start on about how the body is so mysterious and/or unpredictable. If civil engineers were as incompetent as some members of the medical profession then we would have structures (bridges, dams, towers, large buildings) collapsing all the time and not just in countries where floors are unwisely/illegally added on top of buildings. To be fair, these medics are not a manifestation of useless training regimes or an inept system of some kind - it is their complacent arrogance and inclination toward seeing themselves as infallible superhumans that is the problem and there some of society at large may be to blame for regarding them as s
.....for regarding them as such.
My personal attitude is that I accept that if I ever need the intervention of a doctor then I shall regard my consequent death from oversight, direct error, neglect, acquired infection, etc. a roughly 50% likelihood. By the way, my sister is a doctor. I also personally know doctors for whom I have full respect it's just the percentages that bother me and the medics have an alarmingly high number of duds among them and they are a distinct liability.
My personal attitude is that I accept that if I ever need the intervention of a doctor then I shall regard my consequent death from oversight, direct error, neglect, acquired infection, etc. a roughly 50% likelihood. By the way, my sister is a doctor. I also personally know doctors for whom I have full respect it's just the percentages that bother me and the medics have an alarmingly high number of duds among them and they are a distinct liability.
Karl, I heartily agree with you about the attitude of a certain proportion of the medical profession - not all by any means, but enough to do serious harm in too many cases. When it hits so close to home it only comfirms the stories you hear. My mother went to her grave blaming the GP for my father's death, although ironically she failed to heed her own doctor's advice when her time came and refused to acknowledge that she might be seriously ill. However, I have also heard of and witnessed incredibly good treatment once the diagnoses were finally made in several cases. I just wish this extended to the pre-diagnosis treatment more often.
Well apart from one complacent GP that missed my 12cm fibroid and told me I was imagining things and a useless aviation nurse at work, I`ve never had anyone from the medical profession cock-up anything with me. I think you hear about the times when something goes wrong but not the sucessful outcomes which are in the majority.
If he has a replacement knee he wouldn't be able to get a scan due to the magnet which is used in an MRI.
The magnets in these have very powerful magnetic fields and I'm pretty sure his knee would be stuck to the instrument.
We have a few NMR instruments in work which is the same concept as MRI and metal objects which are stuck to it take a ridiculous amount of effort to get it back off of these magnets.
The magnets in these have very powerful magnetic fields and I'm pretty sure his knee would be stuck to the instrument.
We have a few NMR instruments in work which is the same concept as MRI and metal objects which are stuck to it take a ridiculous amount of effort to get it back off of these magnets.
some interesting information...
http://orthopedics.ab...replacement/f/mri.htm
http://orthopedics.ab...replacement/f/mri.htm
some more interesting stuff....
http://www.webmd.com/...blood-test-for-cancer
http://www.webmd.com/...blood-test-for-cancer
mostly blood tests involve assessing levels of tumour markers...which may indicate the need to investigate further although they seem more accurate in Testicular cancer and some types of ovarian cancer only... that is why they are not considered accurate for ovarian cancer overall ... I believe, some are also relevant to different types of breast, pancreatic and colon cancer but in the same way are not considered definitive . As Sqad said the only really reliable one still seems to be for prostate cancer.
