Treatment

My husband was diagnosed with melanoma in Aug 2007.  Original spot (a mole on his back that he had his whole life started to change) was 1.3 mm Breslow's thickness with no ulceration present - Clark's Level III.  He had a sentinel node biopsy and wide excision in Sept.  Two nodes were removed under his arm and one from the groin.  Wide excision came back all clear - as did both lymph nodes under the arm.  The lymph node in the groin, however, came back posititive - scattered cancer cells present - .4 mm largest concentration.  In early Oct he had a PET scan that came back all clear.  Next came a total removal of all lymph nodes in the groin area.  No further cancer cells were found.  Our surgeon said that interferon was an option.  Is there anyone out there with a similar case and what have you done?

It seems that interferon is the only chemo type treatment available for melanoma and can be pretty rough on most people.  For that reason, my son, stage 3 chose not to do it based on the statistics.  Seems that the interferon can sometimes delay recurrence but with no proven overall improvement in survivor outcome.  My understanding is that 1/3 of stage 3 patients will never recur.

My best to you.

Mrs. C

 

On 11/1/2007 Mrs. c wrote:

It seems that interferon is the only chemo type treatment available for melanoma and can be pretty rough on most people.  For that reason, my son, stage 3 chose not to do it based on the statistics.  Seems that the interferon can sometimes delay recurrence but with no proven overall improvement in survivor outcome.  My understanding is that 1/3 of stage 3 patients will never recur.

My best to you.

Mrs. C

Hello ~

 Interferon is the only "treatment" that allopathic physicians are allowed to recommend. Any alternative or non-allopathic treatments or modalities are out of the scope of their practice and the FDA only allows them to use radiation, chemotherapy and surgery as choices when dealilng w/cancer. Been there, done that.  Watched my mother waste away after they "treated" her w/chemotherapy which did nothing but make her last days miserable. The oncologist was very resistant to any other protocols outside her area of "expertise."  My husband had a Clark's level 4 melanoma on his back and it was removed 15 years ago successfully.  He did not do interferon and instead has regular checkups and eats healthy (organic food whenever possible), and uses therapeutic-grade essential oils which have helped immensely.  He has had no signs of reoccurence.  Three other sisters have had melanoma, squamous and basil cell cancer, all removed surgically.  Most traditional doctors would discount alternative treatments as the "when in doubt, cut it out" practice is their standard.  However, they don't have all the answers and when it comes to preventative care, they're out of their league w/less than 8 hours of medical school devoted to studying nutrition and preventative methods.

Interferon is not what you need, most cases it doesn't help.

If it reoccurs, go to a major medical facility that is cancer only, don't waste time with the locals. Interluken 11

Your message interest me -- had your husband's Stage IV spread to the lymph system? My significant other was diagnosed in March with Clarks Level 4 melanoma which started on the back of his head -- it was removed sucessfully, but further tests showed contamination in several lymph glands (neck, abdomen and lymph glands within the lung -- not lung tissue). He was successfully treated with temodar for 5 months with 60% reduction of tumors -- However, the tumors in his lungs did not respond. He was then given 96 hours of a cocktail drip (temador, cisplatin, vinblastin,Interluekin and Interferion Alpha. The side effects of Interluekin and Interferion Alfa almost killed him. After recovery from that treatment, he has taken one 3-day treatement of temador, cisplatin and vinblastin. Made him feel bad for a few days, but no where near as sick as with the 96 hour drip ordeal. He is scheduled for a repeat 3-day treatment next week. Does anyone have any experience with this routine? I would be interested in your results.

However, I am very interested in alternative treatment and nuitrition and want to know more about positive results without chemotherapy treatment.

My husband has had clean check-ups every couple of years now. In the beginning, he had lung x-rays every year, but we found out that x-rays of this magnitude can actually promote the growth of cancer. So, no more x-rays and instead he has a physical/check-up every other year now. He is 60 years old and in good health. He has his skin checked out by a dermatologist and so far, so good. As you probably know, the FDA only allows its own protocols to be used, essentially negating
other treatments that have shown results. This is about $$ and fear bottom line. He eats organic food, uses supplements and therapeutic-grade essential oils which strengthen his immune system, which is what you need to concentrate on. Also have found that sunscreens can actually cause skin cancer by not allowing vitamin D, which is a precursor to calcium, to be absorbed by the skin. Check out www.mercola.com and www.newstarget.com for more info on this important subject. I cannot go into all the details on this page and those websites have been very helpful for other areas of concern as well.
If your doctor dismisses other "alternative" treatments which work, consider a naturopathic doctor. Acupuncture works well too as does vitamin supplementation. Lots of anti-oxidants, foods rich in these and vitamin C, E, A and selenium. And as my grandfather, who was a well-known and highly respected doctor said, "the cheapest medicine is water." Stay away from petroleum solvents in your body care products and any other chemicals you can't pronounce. These are usually methylparabenes, disodium..., etc. Through osmosis, the skin absorbs these chemicals which causes cell mutation among other problems, in particular HGH (human growth hormone) production, which does not diminish w/age, but is blocked from being excreted by the anterior pituitary gland due to petroleum "grease", in effect, blocking its receptor sites.