Cancer is ‘natural.’ The best treatments for it aren’t

It's easy to believe that something that is "all natural" is intrinsically good. That doesn't apply to cancer treatments.
Scanning electron micrograph of a three-day old cluster of breast cancer cells.

In the early years of my career as an oncologist, I’m learning that you really remember the patients you can’t save. Those with essentially curable cancers who refused the right treatment stand out the most.

One of those is a patient I’ll call Ruth. She was only 30 when she was diagnosed with breast cancer, as I learned later from her medical history. It was localized to her left breast and contained within the relatively small tumor; there were no signs it had spread to other parts of her body. With the right treatment, Ruth had about a 75 percent chance of

You're reading a preview, sign up to read more.

More from STAT

STAT5 min readSociety
After Ebola Spills Into Uganda, WHO Decides Against Emergency Declaration
The Ebola outbreak in the Democratic Republic of the Congo still doesn’t constitute a global health emergency, the WHO said Friday.
STAT3 min readSociety
Opinion: Shopping Blindly For Post-acute Care Is A Recipe For Disaster
The notion that sick, frail, or elderly patients and their families can somehow figure out on their own the best choice for post-acute care must be discarded.
STAT8 min readScience
‘It Felt Like An ’80s Criminal Drama’: What Happened When A Biohacker Met Bureaucrats Investigating Him
"If I can order this gene therapy online for under $500, there's maybe a little bit more we can do for people," says prominent biohacker Josiah Zayner.