Why would you quote my post when what you've said doesn't address anything I said? Alternative therapies aren't dangerous in the sense that they don't usually do anything significant unlike chemotherapy which has been shown to actually harm humans... If you think I was suggesting that alternative therapies be taken in lieu of actual medical treatment, you're mistaken. My point was made fairly clear: people should be allowed to decide whether or not they want chemotherapy even if the doctor recommends it as their only viable medical option assuming they're able to understand the situation.
[quote name='"Penelope420"'] "Alternative" therapies can be just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, then chemotherapy.[/quote] So a parent shouldn't get to choose? Its arguable that chemo is the most effective treatment, but also easily arguable that its the most painful - and even a shorter life resulting in early death would be preferred. It isn't about which ones more dangerous. But not putting your child on chemo is NOT mistreatment, and that is the point of this thread. There's plenty of cancer treatments that don't have risks, fyi.
[quote name='"Penelope420"'] "Alternative" therapies can be just as dangerous, if not more dangerous, then chemotherapy.[/quote] Wait a second, you were arguing for state intervention because the child was being denied chemo because you were arguing that chemo is the best but now you have just admitted that chemo is just as dangerous as other optional therapies. if they're all equally dangerous, then tell me why the parent would not have the right to choose betwixt them? If they are all risky treatments why does the state have precedence over the parent? I normaly dont mind reading your posts because your actually articulate, but that is just silly.
At this point, I'm just getting sidetracked by a discussion on traditional medicine vs. alternative medicines. There's honestly no need to be offended or off put by my answer. It's an interesting conversation... why else would either of us be participating? I could go on, but I'll admit I'm biased... in previous careers, I have worked on the inside and on the outskirts of the "natural cosmetic/medicine" industry for over a decade, and it's one of the most fraudulent, self-interested, and fastest growing industries out there. There's a large piece of the pie to be made! I have also made my point very clear. I agree with you 100% that people should be able to decide if they want chemotherapy or not. I could not agree with you more. But we are not talking about you making the choice for yourself. You are making a choice for someone else. Your rights are not infinite when you make the choice for someone else. I was also pretty clear when I said that when it comes to medical choices I believe the government should only "intrude" so far as to be a mediator that represents the rights of the child, between all of the people who have a vested interest in the life of that child (ie, family). It's not like the state is watching over your medical choices waiting to make you do something you do not want to do, or control how you parent your child. And I would never defend that.
In most cases, I would like the child to be able to decide whether or not they receive chemotherapy. Obviously, if they're an infant or a toddler, something like that probably won't be possible, in which case, I would leave it to whoever was charged with being their guardian. I agree 100%. I think unless the child is unable to comprehend the situation and convey what they want, the child should have the final say, but I agree a mediator may be necessary in that kind of dispute. Well, they do throw quite a few people away for cannabis possession and growing. I think a few of those people were using it for medical reasons.
[quote name='"WildWill"'] This has NOTHING to do with liberal vs. conservative, it's about a specific department of health and their overzealous policies. NOT EVERYTHING can be boiled down to liberal vs. conservative. Shame on you for misleading everyone like this.[/quote] Yeah it can will!... its a mental disorder, a thought process that corrupts, a cancer on this nation!... middle man!
I don't live by many standards, reality doesn't work that way. Not being imperialist is one of them though, plus you have to factor in the application of practical politics (they bombed the WTC, they have nuclear weapons, they will nuke Israel, they are attacking our allies etc...) as an excuse for resource acquisition on behalf of lobbyists.
Nah if you do your research reality technically does work that way. Why is it that Israel is the modern state of the Middle-East and South Africa is the model state in Africa? Why are these two nations the most advanced in their regions despite having the most US affiliated policies and intervention? Hell the African National Congress in the 80s actually decreased South Africa's industrial potential with its vote to end apartheid in South Africa.
Study Accidentally Finds Chemotherapy Makes Cancer Far Worse I know the thread got off this topic a while back but I just read this and thought it was just perfect.