|
Complex as usual.
And an interesting thread.
And as Lani points out its dangerous to jump to conclusions. I try not to but had wondered if a non chemo herceptin group might expose differences of any sort with a chemo herceptin group.
My mind direction was, is there a greater incidence of brain mets consequent on treatment by Chemo or Herceptin or both. Most of the discussion I had seen in passing was those already in treatment with herceptin and chemo, and hence my belief that the figures were higher. I do vaguely recall concerns that brain tumour rates with herceptin might be higher in absolute terms.
The answer is probably we don't yet have the figures for early BC treatment.
The earlier post on fats is the result of trying to put a lot into a small space in terms that were comprehensible. It is based on reading and the thoughts largely of others, albeit often in little snippets here and there. The connection of cancer with the reproductive pathways and evolutionary pathways is not new but is on the edges. The more one reads on fats the more their importance and functionality is evident. Anybody who has read in this area will have got the jist of what I was saying even if they held very different view points.
I apologise for the typos etc my touch typing is not all it should be (A Mavis Beacon CD student) and I have no access to a spell check in the version of posting engine I have access to. I can be a bit word blind and suscribe to the view of a famous news paper editor that getting the general message out is the most important element.
Thank all
RB
|
Hybrid Mode
