Delay in conventional breast cancer treatment associated with alternative therapy usage. C. McNeil, F. Collinson, K. Smith, R. Dunleavey, J. Boyages, R. Kefford; Westmead Hospital, Sydney, Australia Abstract: Background: Alternative therapies are used by between 28% and 83% of women with breast cancer, but their impact in causing deleterious delay in commencing empirically validated conventional therapies has been poorly documented. Methods: A retrospective qualitative study examined the clinical and psychological profiles of women presenting to Westmead and Nepean Hospitals (WNH) with breast cancer, over a 4 year period, after initially refusing conventional treatment in favor of alternative therapies. Results: Six patients were identified, aged 38 to 53 years, all with operable stage I-II breast cancer at initial presentation. Three patients had tertiary educational qualifications, one was a qualified oncology nurse. Elevated anxiety levels were noted in four patients, however only one had a significant past psychiatric history. All declined conventional therapy at initial presentation, choosing instead alternative therapies including high dose vitamin C, urine therapy and laetrile. One patient received prolonged alternative therapy from a registered medical practitioner. Reasons elicited for refusal of conventional management included perceived loss of personal control, dissatisfaction and lack of confidence in conventional treatments, and denial. At subsequent presentation all had advanced breast cancer with extensive fungating chest wall disease. The delay in commencement of conventional therapy was 6 to 24 months. Five patients accepted salvage conventional therapy, and responded for variable periods of up to 43 weeks. Three patients have so far died from their disease. Conclusions: Alternative therapy was used in isolation for potentially curable breast cancer by six women. Poor outcomes have been observed in all patients. The dangers of delay caused by ineffective alternative therapies may have been underestimated in a medico-political climate that favors accommodation of non-traditional adjuncts to cancer therapy. Abstract No: 593 Ralph Moss, PhD, newsletter, June,04 (www.cancerdecisions.com): "One of the first presenters I spoke to was Catriona McNeil, MD, a young doctor from New South Wales, Australia, whose poster presentation warned against the "delay in conventional breast cancer treatment associated with alternative therapy usage" (Abstract #593). This poster contained some of the most grisly pictures of untreated breast cancers I have ever seen. Really in-your-face stuff. Her presentation concerned six patients who had been treated at two Sydney hospitals, and who had delayed conventional treatment in order to try alternatives. Three of them died while the other three were still alive, and possibly cured by conventional means. Now, I happen to believe that women who have curable breast cancers should accept conventional treatment and use alternative treatments only as adjuncts. And I certainly have known a few women over the years who I think made tragic choices in this regard, some of whom lost their lives in the process. So I would be the last person to say that this is not a potential problem. But exactly how big a problem is it? The impression given by these Australian doctors is that it is a huge one. "Alternative therapies," the presentation cautioned, "are used by between 28 percent and 83 percent of women with breast cancer, but their impact is causing deleterious delay in commencing empirically validated conventional therapies…." This young doctor, thinking I was a fellow oncologist, began to confide in me concerning what she presumed to be our shared desire to limit the use of CAM treatments! I quickly corrected her misunderstanding and explained my position. I then asked how frequently this problem actually occurred. She didn't know, but volunteered that there were 6 oncologists involved in the study cited in her presentation, and each of them saw about 200 new patients per year, making a total of about 1,200 new patients per year. Since the study ranged over a four-year period, the patient base from which these six cases were drawn was approximately 4,800 patients. Thus, the "deleterious delay" affected 0.125 percent of the total patient population. This is obviously a miniscule proportion of the total number of women treated, a fact not pointed out in the presentation. Quite the opposite: the authors drew global conclusions about "a medico-political climate that favors accommodation of non-traditional adjuncts to cancer therapy." Dr. McNeil indicated that alternative medicine was so popular that many oncologists feared to criticize it. What amazed me was that Dr. McNeil and her colleagues considered this problem serious enough to do a study, create a grisly poster, and then travel 10,000 miles to warn their American and international colleagues about this imminent danger." Remember we are NOT Doctors and have NO medical training. This site is like an Encylopedia - there are many pages, many links on many topics. Support our work with any size DONATION - see left side of any page - for how to donate. You can help raise awareness of CAM.