癌症: 治是不治，不治是治

對付癌症: 治是不治，不治是治

已有 700 次閱讀 2016-5-13 11:06 |個人分類:Thought Leader|係統分類:科普集錦    推薦到群組

如何對付癌症？“治是不治，不治是治，夫唯不治，天下莫能與之治”。

老同學感到遺憾：他的父親因患癌症的治療。他的父親，70歲，農民，治療前可以肩按住天然氣罐到7樓。當診斷，老人的預測6個月至12個月的生命。他的父親不想痛任何手術，因為他說他得到了很好的生活，不希望任何痛苦的手術和治療。所有成功的孩子無法接受不治療他們的父親。老人通過規範的治療：手術，放療和化療，在五個月內死於癌症。
另一個同村70 +歲老人，沒錢負擔手術放療和化療，家裏等待死。這老頭診斷五年後現仍然活著。

怎麽回事？我不知道，因為我覺得它總是個人 - 你不能這些個別案例得出任何結論。我一直在思考與了解許多癌症患者的治療之旅：什麽是最好的解決方案？我不知道答案。你呢？有一些想法和故事的患者如下。

“不自見，故明；不自是，故彰；不自伐，故有功；不自矜；故長；夫唯不爭，故天下莫能與之爭。”語出自《老子》。
意思是說：不顯示自己，不自以為是，因而更顯耀突出；不誇耀自己，因而有功績；不自以為賢能，因而受到尊重；隻有那不與人相爭的，世界上沒有人能和他相爭。

“爭是不爭，不爭是爭，夫唯不爭，天下莫能與之爭”。

“夫唯不爭，故天下莫能與之爭。”其實是自相矛盾的一句話，無爭故莫之爭，意思與佛經的如來寂滅眾生，其實並未寂滅眾生是一個道理，世界上別人唯一不能和你爭的就是你的心，隻有你自己才能渡自己，隻要你不願意，如來也不能寂滅你，對自己心毫無矯揉造作，對私心，貪念以自然流逝的心態對待，這就是與心無爭，
自在圓滿，沒有了雜念，自然天下莫能與之爭。

人道有善惡，天道無善惡
天地萬物恒為“大"者為天道！生老病死，春去冬來自然之理也，天道即是自然，既然是自然有何須分個善惡呢？

人道隻是天道中的一道，回歸天道，得到天道的大仁、大智，最尋天人合一、物我相忘的理想境界便是天命！

如何對付癌症？

“治是不治，不治是治，夫唯不治，天下莫能與之治”。

“我們可能會反應過度對癌細胞”，“中
入侵的外星人“，”這導致過度治療和傷害我們
自己的身體用激進的多模式（手術，
輻射和化學療法）[8]。也許，我們應該
考慮到腫瘤細胞有著相似的公民，要求
地球上的生存，因為他們的生存
是由它們的演化的驅動力驅動的[9]。維持
生物多樣性和異質性可能平衡的有機體或
器官出了充滿敵意的環境[10,11]。因此，
管理腫瘤生長，而不是消除它應該是
用於治療腫瘤的新指導方針。刨除癌症
治療驅動生產的人群耐藥
腫瘤細胞在消除對藥物敏感的細胞，而
管理腫瘤生長來治療腫瘤的最小
藥物的劑量，以便調節一些藥敏的生存
細胞[12,13]。這種治療模式可以幫助
對藥物敏感的細胞外競爭抗病品種
藥物治療後，從而保持腫瘤存活
但小的，可管理的[1,14]。
''保持腫瘤活著，但小的，可管理的'聲音
合理的策略。但是，我們如何管理腫瘤
增長，而不是消滅它？我們認為，管理SSS
可能是一種有效的策略。（幹細胞與發育
21卷4，2012年，503-506頁。瑪麗安力博特公司DOI：10.1089 /scd.2011.0267）。

~~

English version of original thoughts:

Former classmate regrets: his father died of cancertreatment. His father, over 70 year old, farmer , could shoulder-hold a tank ofnatural gas up to 7 floor before treatment. When diagnosed, the old man'spredicted for 6-month to 12-month life. His father didn’t want any surgery ofpain as he said he got good life and didn’t want any painful surgery andtreatment. All children, however, are so successful that they couldn't acceptno-treatment for their father. The old man got through standard treatment:surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, died of cancer in five months.

Another old man of 70+-year-old in the same village, was sopoor to afford any surgery, radiation and chemotherapy, waiting to die at home.This old man still lives now after five years of diagnosis.

What happens? I don’t know as I thought it’s always personal– you can’t draw any conclusion out of these individual cases. I’ve been thinkingas knowing many cancer patients’ journey of treatment: What’s the bestsolution? I don’t know the answer. How about you? Some thoughts and patientsstory are as follows.

How to deal with cancer?

“We may over-reacttoward cancer cells, ‘‘the

invading aliens,’’which lead to over-treating and injure our

own body by usingaggressive multi-modalities (surgery,

radiation, andchemotherapies) [8]. Perhaps, we ought to

consider thatcancer cells share similar citizenship, demanding

to survive on theEarth because their survivorship

is driven by theirevolutional driving force [9]. Sustaining the

biodiversity andheterogeneity may balance organisms or

organs out of thehostile environment [10,11]. As such,

managing tumorgrowth rather than eliminating it should be

a new guideline fortreating tumors. The eliminating-cancer

treatments driveproducing populations of drug-resistant

tumor cells uponeliminating the drug-sensitive cells while

managing tumorgrowth to treat tumors with minimum

doses of drug so asto modulate the survival of some drugsensitive

cells [12,13]. Thistreatment paradigm may help the

drug-sensitivecells out-compete the resistant ones upon

completion of drugtreatment, thereby keeping tumors alive

but small and manageable[1,14].

‘‘Keepingtumors alive but small and manageable’’ sounds

areasonable strategy. However, how can we manage tumor

growthrather than eliminate it? We argue that managing SSS

may be an effective strategy. (STEM CELLS AND DEVELOPMENT

Volume 21,Number 4, 2012, pages 503-506.Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. DOI: 10.1089/scd.2011.0267).

~~

"Your paper is one of the most important discussions
and documented evidence that indirectly support a 19th century view that
the genetic/chromosomal changes found in cancer cells are spurious
manifestation of the malignant state, rather than the cause of their
malignant state."

Cited by Frank Arguello, MD, in his cancer clinical trial company's video clip

at Time 03:32 cited/mentioned our publication - see https://vimeo.com/163936159

By Frank Arguello, MD
Director, Atavistic Chemotherapy Trial
http://www.atavisticchemotherapy.com/

 

~~

 

	ShengwenCalvinLiPhD @ShengwenLi	5s
	At 3:41 minutes (Li): This is the Future of Oncology: The Scientific Quest to Understand and T... youtu.be/KwX43KPbpDY via @YouTube

 

~~~

When Do You
Give Up on
Treating a Child
With Cancer?

Andrew Levy’s parentsknew that
the rare and deadly cancer in his
blood could not be beaten, so they
began to prepare for the worst. Then
something mysterious happened.

By MELANIE THERNSTROMMAY12, 2016

When Esther and Dan Levy’sson Andrew was 14 months old, he received a diagnosis of a kind of leukemia sorare that their medical team said getting it was like being bitten by a sharkand struck by lightning at the same time.

Leukemia, a cancer ofthose cells in the bone marrow that produce new blood cells, has manyvarieties, but the most common type in children, acute lymphocytic leukemia, islargely curable. Andrew’s cancer, however, a subtype of acute megakaryoblasticleukemia (AMKL), affects only about 45 children a year nationwide and is muchmore difficult to treat. The odds of surviving this type of AMKL are roughlyeven — unless the child is one of a handful who happen to have a particulargenotype, in which case these odds plummet to a mere one in 10. Geneticanalysis revealed that Andrew was in this tiny group.

There was more bad news.Two weeks after the diagnosis, Andrew’s doctor, Norman Lacayo, an oncologist atLucile Packard Children’s Hospital at Stanford University, received an urgentcall from Michael Loken, the president of Hematologics Inc., a Seattle lab thatwas analyzing Andrew’s cells. Loken had recently discovered that a smallpercentage of children with AMKL had a specific phenotype — a pattern ofproteins on the surface of the leukemia cell he called R.A.M. (a former patient’sinitials) — that independently predicted a terrible outcome, with a survivalrate of about one in six. Andrew had this phenotype too.

“Has anyone ever survivedthis kind of cancer?” Dan asked Lacayo. “All I wanted to know is that it wasnot impossible,” Dan recalls. Lacayo said yes, but Dan felt his answer was “foggy.”The truth was that the team couldn’t find a single equivalent case in theliterature.

Beginning on thatDecember morning in 2014 when Esther took Andrew to the E.R., she recalls, shefelt as if they had stepped into a horror movie, the unfolding events bothsurreal and evil. Up to that point, Esther and Dan had led, in her words, “charmedlives — picture perfect.” Only a small subset of people would sincerely saythat nothing truly bad has ever happened to them; before the diagnosis, Estherand Dan say, they were among them. When Andrew got sick, they were in theirmid-30s and energetic, optimistic and extroverted. They had both attendedStanford — Dan majored in industrial engineering, Esther in human biology,