|
Ralph Moss's views are controversial, but to me it is remarkable that anything as minimally successful and as toxic as treatment for breast cancer has been hasn't had even more probing criticism. When I was diagnosed one of the first 3 books I bought was his book "Questioning Chemotherapy", not because avoiding chemo was an "easy way out", but because oncologists were unable to say which patients would respond to chemotherapy -- and that was reason enough to try to find someone who at least was openly discussing its value.
Based on what we know so far, I agree with Helbaj01 and RB. But I still have to throw a bit of skepticism about traztuzumab due to the fact that so many "invisible" HER2-positive bc patients were not allowed to participate in the USA study at all (those who were node-negative and under 2 cm) and whose recurrence may be only delayed/long-term and who are thus an open question. After all, we do know that most breast cancer is being caught much earlier now, so that too could make that particular group of patients quite large. I would think that excluding this group allowed the traztuzumab results to be more spectacular.
AlaskaAngel
|