This is a post in response to a comment made by Brian Hill on December 29,2002. It is located under the Activism heading under the topic Now Hear This.

Brian made a comment that not much research is going towards oral cancer and that this research probably won't lead to new treatments. This comment really offended me because I am in the research field and I directly benefitted from a new treatment regimine brought about through research.

I want to say right off the bat that I am an advocate for more awareness and am involved in groups trying to promote awareness for oral cancer because hightened awareness could have prevented me from going through my battle with oral cancer. In fact, a news story featuring an interview with both me and my doctor was shown all over the country during the month of September to promote the new treatment technique and oral cancer awareness.

The new treatment I went through was developed by Dr. Schuller and his team at the James Cancer Hospital at Ohio State. It is called the intensification protocol and can give people with stage 3 or 4 oral cancer a 60-70% chance of survival. That's a huge difference from the normal 30-40% survival rate provided by other treatments.

I know that oral cancer isn't one of the most common and therefore not much funding goes towards it's research, but I want to stress the fact that quality research is being done to help all of the patients and survivors of this disease. I did a search for papers published on oral cancer from January 1, 2000 to January 1, 2003 and ended up with 2809 results. Many of these papers dealt with specifically characterizing oral cancer tumors so that future treatments can be focused in on the affected areas with less damage to the rest of the body.

One example of these studies is going on at OSU, and someday I hope to get a post-doc position working in this lab. A group has found a specific gene defect that causes some oral cancers to be more agressive than others. In the future, patients could be screened for this defect so that they can be monitored more closely and treated more intensely.

I just had to post this because I really don't think researchers get enough credit. My support group at OSU was lucky enough to have one of the oral cancer investigators come and give a talk and this was one of the biggest attended meetings. This meeting was really enlightening and at the end a bunch of the survivors actually thanked the investigator for the work he is doing. I think we should all take some time to thank the researchers that are out there working for better treatments and a cure for oral cancer. The life of a researcher is not an easy one....believe me I can tell you lots of horror stories. It is worse for researchers dealing with a topic that isn't one of the "hot" ones such as breast cancer or prostate cancer.

From my own personal experience, most of the people doing research into oral cancer personally knew someone who fought the disease or had the disease themselves. Their work is one that really matters to them, and they should be applauded for it, especially the physicians who choose to take on research as well as treating patients.

Jeanette. I am sorry if my comment offended you, but I am also very surprised by your offense. I stand by my comment. If you wanted to reduce the death rate from oral cancer TODAY, all you would have to do is start catching it early. This is what has brought down the death rates in other cancers, such as what they have done in cervical cancers, and prostate cancers. Before the PAP test and before men were getting screened regularly, the death rates were significantly higher in these two cancers. The reduction in death rates from both those cancers is directly attributable to early detection. In oral cancer the results would be the same. That is a tangible and immediately achievable goal that will save lives. I don't know where in my previous post you get that I don't give researchers credit for what they do. Read it again. My point is that there is something that can change things RIGHT NOW. That doesn't mean there isn't a long view of things, and research (and researchers) into treatments for oral cancer are definitely necessary if we are ever going to find a cure. IT IS LIKELY THAT ALL THE RESEARCH INTO CURES FOR OTHER CANCERS WILL TURN UP SOMETHING THAT WILL ALSO HAVE AN IMPACT ON ORAL CANCER. I AM PRO CANCER REASEARCH IN ALL ARENAS!!! But the bulk of cancer research is not related to oral cancers, so what they discover, while it may be in the arena of another cancer type, will come to help oral cancer in a round about way. What we learn about one will affect another. This was my point. As to the example of genetic reasearch that you posted, please note that if that study produces something sucessful, it will also be realted to EARLY DETECTION, not treatment.

As to there being lots done today in this field (a cure for oral cancers specifically), I disagree with you. If you look at the total number of articles on cancer research as a whole, (there are hundreds of thousands in the last ten years) oral cancer gets a pretty puny share. So your number of several thousand pales by comparison. Of course this is probably proportionate to the funding issues in comparison to other cancers, as well as public visibility of other cancers. There is a ton of research on cancers in general going on worldwide, and it is exciting because what we learn from research successes and failures in one cancer, will help those with another. Which brings me to another point. As a side note, the oral cancer model (particularly in the hamster cheek pouch) is used in many GENERAL cancer research studies, hence the number of articles you found related to oral cancer. But if you think this is because these papers and research are funded to find a cure for oral cancer, you would be wrong. It is because it is a cancer model that is easy to reproduce and experiment within. What is likely to impact the growth, life, reproductive rate, etc. etc. of that oral cancer model, will impact other cancers as well. It is an ideal cancer model for research with a well documented and stable route of metasistis and progress, it is also easily accessable in the animal, and can be sampled at various stages of development without sacrificing the laboratory animal. There are that many oral cancer articles because it is a highly workable model for research, regarding cancer in general, and not specifically oral cancer. That is why there are as many articles as there are.

For sure the Ohio group is doing valuable work, as are others in the US. And I can relate to your passion and desire to be involved with the people who have helped drive your cancer into remission, as well as it being your area of interest as a student. But you need to think about what I was referring to. SOMETHING WE COULD DO TODAY THAT IS WITHIN OUR REACH AND POWER. THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE POSTING. I don't get my panties in a bunch over much, and I certainly appreciate the support that you have given the message board. But jumping in my face about that comment was unnecessary. It would also be appropriate to post your disfavor of another post in the same forum and thread as the post you are so obviously ticked about. Passion is a good thing, just be sure it is well directed.