Quack or cure?

Through our reading it had become clear that there are many alternative approaches to fighting cancer beyond those available through the National Health Service. The range of treatments is astonishing. There are various medications based on herbal ingredients, there are immunizations, there are dietary supplements, you can be baked till your temperature reaches 107F - a temperature that cancer cells cannot survive; and this is just a start.

I wanted advice about how to reduce the impact of the radio-therapy and so survive it with the minimum discomfort. I also wondered whether there were other, more appropriate approaches to my treatment. So, last Tuesday we took the last, long drive in my trusty Alfa down to Bath. We had an appointment to see a well known doctor who has specialised in cancer treatment for over twenty years. Although (as I understand) she works as a normal GP her cancer patients are all seen privately.

The hour long appointment turned out to be a sales pitch for various dietary supplements and an Indian Aryuvedic herbal concoction - all of which could have been predicted from the web-site and Internet investigations. There was some useful information;
- there is a private doctor working in Bristol who runs tests that are much more sensitive than those used by the National Health. She can identify whether there is still cancer in the body and also identify which chemo agent is most effective. Again, "cutting edge" technology, not accepted by the National Health.
- I can protect myself against the worst of the radio-therapy side effects by using Aloe-Vera cream and mouthwash and also by taking zinc tablets.
- she also questioned whether radio-therapy was necessary at this time (hence the conversation about testing) or whether it could be delayed until it was clearly necessary.

This is a ghastly field to get involved with. If I just accept the National Health approach without question I will just get on with it, grin and bear it and accept whatever comes with the treatment. Once I began to discover that there are alternatives - which appear less damaging and traumatic than what the NHS wants to throw at me, I then have to start making judgements about which I trust more (which I had more faith in!) and faith does not come easily to me. So I'm caught in a dilemma somewhere between faith and hope.
The alternatives offer far more hope. They appear less damaging and traumatic; I will emerge with a better quality of life, I won't be damaged by unnecessary treatment - all this sounds great .... but
My faith in these approaches is reserved. None of these treatments has the NHS 'seal of approval'. Some are supported by very little scientific research, testing, publication or approval. There appears to be a medical sub-culture of doctors with expertise in the field who do not have the approval of the establishment. They know each other and cross-refer their patients and claim considerable success for the treatments they support both here and abroad. They remind patients that cutting edge medical practice can take as much as twenty years to be accepted by the NHS, a fact confirmed by conversations I have had with NHS doctors.
Their time and tests do not come cheap and whilst I do not put a price on my good health I have no wish to waste money. As a result of my visit to Doctor Bath we went straight out and spent a small pile on dietary supplements that are supposed to build up my immune system, increase my cancer fighting capability and ensure I have a complete and well balanced diet. Are they going to help? Does taking them mean I can avoid being zapped by the Dalek? I don't think so!

I could go and spend a bigger pile on having a blood test to see whether I still have cancer cells in my body. If I have - well Dalek treatment is well established, provided by the NHS and has a long history of success. But what if the result is negative and shows no cancer? Is the test reliable and trustworthy? Can I safely thumb my nose at the Dalek and tell him that I prefer Doctor Who? Can I turn my back on treatment feeling secure in a belief that the cancer has been dealt with?
I'm quite sure that those who have committed themselves to conventional therapy within the NHS would advise me strongly against this and I can not avoid the suspicion that sailing too close to the wind brings one closer to the charlatans and quacks. I'm in a vulnerable place looking for the very best and least traumatic treatment. I could end up being an easy source of ready cash for someone with few scruples. I am sure such people exist - but how does one spot them. Of course it is too late now for any treatment that could have dealt with the tumor in a less dramatic way. I can live with the results of the surgery, there is little pain, I can still speak and eat but I would rather have avoided it. It's too late now to wish I'd had better or more timely advice. But I don't want to make the same mistake again and live with two sets of regrets.

So, how should I view and use the expertise of these doctors and their alternative therapies? Should I be courageous and go for the new, cutting edge therapies hoping that they work and will effect a cure. Or should I stick with the standard, tried and tested approach and put up with the unpleasant side effects? Should I put my trust and faith in these alternative practitioners or should I listen to my native cynicism and regard them through a veil of suspicion? It's a tough call and one I'm really not qualified to make. I suspect I'll just grin and bear it ... but watch this space.