Powerful + beautiful: “I may hate what cancer did to my breasts, and I once mourned the damage, but … -
I was so focused on the pharmacologically induced aspect of this that I totally spaced out on the other side of the coin—the emotional impact of incurable cancer. I honestly don’t know which has more of an effect and suppose it doesn’t really matter, it’s a package deal… But the stress, fear, and…
We all have our “moments” when the mind goes blank or we say to ourselves “what the hell was I thinking?..” Those are just the everyday occurrences in our world of multitasking, non-stop stimulation, and too much stress. Before cancer, I would never let those moments cause much concern.
Dr. Sherwin Nuland, author of How We Die
How We Die was written at a time when the prevailing medical practice was to use all means available to extend the life of terminally ill patients for as long as possible, even if aggressive treatment also caused extended suffering in the final days of life. Nuland’s book made an impact on the national debate about end-of-life care, at a time when palliative care and the hospice movement were beginning to assume a bigger role in the care of terminally ill patients.
By Timothy A. Swope, Research Policy Analyst, FasterCures
How are we doing in developing new therapeutic interventions? A few years ago, Bernard Munos noted in Nature that the number of truly innovative new medicines approved by the FDA has declined substantially despite continued increases in R&D spending, raising the current cost of each new molecular entity (NME) to approximately $1.8 billion.
In an effort to diligently track where the field stands and where it is going, we looked at three reports that examine aspects of the drug and medical device regulatory landscape in an effort to identify trends and understand their impact.
- Journal of American Medical Association: “Clinical Trial Evidence Supporting FDA Approval of Novel Therapeutic Agents, 2005-2012”
- Nature Biotechnology: “Clinical development success rates for investigational drugs”
- Ernst & Young: “Pulse of the Industry: Medical Technology Report 2013”
TV Re-Runs: Part I â âSNLâs Mr. Short-Term Memoryâ Iâve got cancer controversy fatigue. It is only the beginning of March and already 2014 has had too many breast cancer controversies. The bizarre …
Dr. Nuland’s book, which won the National Book Award in 1994, depicted death as messy and often humiliating, and it urged readers to approach late-life care with tempered expectations.
Not long after I was diagnosed, someone suggested that I read this book. Highly recommended, best seller, National Book Award winner, the idea being that it would somehow make it easier for me to face death from cancer. Well, I’m here to tell you that it had just the opposite effect. It ramped up my fear as I read the descriptions of how a body actually dies. Not pretty to say the very least. I didn’t need those clinical descriptions…
While I respect his position on the issue of extreme life-extending therapies as often increasing suffering and misery, I reject his premise that there is rarely any dignity in dying. Yes, death is often quite messy, painful, and protracted. But it is my belief that the acceptance of death in and of itself is an act of dignity. Regardless of our health situations, it is the ultimate fate that awaits us all. I believe that it is how we go to meet that fate that defines dignity. Because he’s right, we often have very little control at the end.
The positive effect of reading this book was that I began to look for ways to address my fear. Having stage IV disease was bad enough but adding in the messy death thing was almost too much to bear. I had to find ways to cope so that I could keep on living. Maybe there was value in reading it from that perspective.
And how did he die? Prostate cancer…
friendly reminder not to support lindt this easter season, or apparently ever again, because they support autism speaks.
can someone please explain why autism speaks is so bad?
because they’re adamant that autism is a disease that can be “cured”. They don’t have a single autistic person on their board. Autism Speaks produces advertisements, small films, ect. about what a burden autistic people are to a society. They only spend about 4% of their money on “family services.” They create a stereotype that makes it hard for actual autistic people, like myself, be heard and recognized as actually autistic. I was diagnosed with Bipolar Disorder before they realized that I actually showed signs of Asperger’s. They don’t actually help us.
That’s the problem with Autism Speaks.
(tw for violence, ableism, abuse, murder, and death)
It goes deeper than not having any autistic board members. Many of the allistics running the organization promote the horrific notion that you’re better off dead than autistic, and their influence and “activism” only supports the ideology resulting in the continued murder of autistic children and adults by their parents and caregivers.
Former Autism Speaks board member Harry Slatkin, whose wife, Laura, continues to serve on the Board of Directors, stated in an interview with Town and Country while still a board member that sometimes he hoped their autistic son David would drown in the backyard pond rather than “suffer like this all his life.” Evidencing a pattern of similarly violent rhetoric, Autism Speaks is also responsible for the 2006 PSA “Autism Every Day" in which their then Vice President states on camera that she considered putting her autistic daughter in the car and driving off a bridge, and that the only reason she refrained from doing so was because her other, non-autistic daughter would have been waiting for her at home—her autistic daughter was in the room as she made these statements. Furthermore, the producer of this PSA explicitly admitted that the film was intentionally staged to portray negative images of autistic people and their families.
Only four days following the release of “Autism Every Day,” pathologist Karen McCarron smothered her autistic daughter with a garbage bag. McCarron stated that she murdered Katie because her “autism had not been improving,” had thought about killing Katie, that made an earlier brief attempt at suffocation, wanted to cure Katie, thought killing Katie would make her “complete” in heaven, and wanted to live without autism and thus had to kill Katie. Investigators found that McCarron was obsessed with different treatments for Katie. (See People v. FRANK-McCARRON, 934 NE 2d 76 - Ill: Appellate Court, 3rd Dist. 2010.) Though it is not presently possible to draw a direct connection between Autism Speaks’ PSA and Katie’s murder, this crime and dozens like it only underscore how the kind of rhetoric that Autism Speaks favors only serves to recklessly endanger the lives of autistic people.
Autism Speaks also publicly supports the Judge Rotenberg Center, a group home for autistic and neurodivergent students that uses “treatments” like food and sleep deprivation and electric shock to try and train the residents into acting neurotypical. The center has changed states three times in an attempt to bypass regulation against abusive treatment, and their practices have resulted in the deaths of more than one student.
It’s not just an issue of Autism Speaks making it harder for us to get proper diagnoses and treatment. Autism Speaks is actively killing us.
I was eyeing up their strawberries and cream lindor the other day but this is more important than delicious chocolate.
the realest thing I’ve ever read.