I have no problem with people deciding they want to have the most aggressive TX possible. I do have a problem, which I expressed quite clearly and forcibly, with stating that there is new patients have "only one shot at curing " oral cancer. I can not stop people from conflating the two. Conflation is one of the most prominent logical fallacies and this board is no exception.
I like Cheryl, I like Paul, I like DonFoo. They are all fine people. But there is enough pressure on newbies without stating that unless they get the cancer the very first time, then they have no other shot at curing it. Unless of course you subscribe to the Humpty Dumpty school of thought:
[quote]When I use a word," Humpty Dumpty said, in a rather scornful tone, "it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less."The question is," said Alice, "whether you can make words mean so many different things."
[/quote]
In my not so humble opinion, sometimes people do too much. They has been lots of speculation already that HPV patients may need LESS radiation or LESS chemo to achieve the same results. .
It's fine to disagree on tactics. But its scary enough for newbies to usually get greeted by people with recurrences, let alone to start implying that there is only one shot at curing it and if you do not get it right the first time, then you have no other shot. Under that theory, I would have been dead 4 years ago. You need only look at the changes in treating breast cancer and cardiac problems to see how super aggressive TX may not be necessary or advisable.
while I understand why proponents of do whatever and as much as you can would want to state that there is only one shot, I will continue to object when that happens. As long time readers know, IMO it's more important to play FAIR and TRUTHFULLY then NICE.
Charm