[AlaskaAngel]

Making the decision IS tough. But whatever decision you make, the people here will support you.

It is only on the last decade or so that computerization and things like the Human Genome Project results have been available for cancer research. Some of that research is now starting to influence treatment and provide less toxic treatment choices. Without those changes in information technology, treatment has been quite limited and basically chemotherapy with or without radiation has been the only shot in the dark that was commonly used. What do oncologists have to gain from recommending against doing chemo? When chemo is recommended they have nothing to lose. No one blames them if it doesn't work.We tend to believe that it takes something really toxic and nasty to handle cancer. That is a mindset of fear, and not necessarily a reality. There are indications that the risk/benefit of chemotherapy and radiologic treatment and repeated radiologic testing long-term have worse outcomes. Some oncs have recognized that, and in the case of patients who are most unlikely to benefit, are simply trying to make sure those patients are not overtreated and ending up at HIGHER risk rather than lower risk.

Remember, the first people to benefit from Herceptin were the ones who believed that it could offer something better than conventional treatment. All the research that creates better and less toxic treatments won't make a difference if we aren't listening to advice about them.

There is no reason to rush into making the decision. Take your time, and research it as best you can.

AlaskaAngel<O</O