Health & Fitness >
Cancer
Get a Widget for this title
RSS FeedCancer vaccine: Should the FDA approve Provenge?
Results so far:
| No | 29% | 53 votes | Total: 182 votes | |
| Yes | 71% | 129 votes |
No
Write now
Print
Invite a writer™
Add to FavoritesProvenge has only been tested on terminal prostate cancer patients. According to two small studies carried out by researchers, Provenge has minimal short-term side effects. In one study, the median survival for patients was 26 months on the placebo. The median age with Provenge treatment was 30.5 months, that's a 4.5 month gain on the median lifespan. Provenge was shown to NOT delay the cancer's progression.
It has been said by Thomas Farrington, founder of the Prostate Health Education Network, that the FDA's delay in approving this treatment going to cost us 57,000 deaths over the course of two years. This is wrong. Provenge doesn't stop the cancer, merely delays it. This can of course be a good thing for some individuals who value quantity of life over quality.
The quality of life during those last 4.5 months can be devastating not only to patients but their families. While they may technically live longer, the disease will not be slowed. Managing a dis-ease thus far progressed is usually done with strong narcotics which, under sustained dosages, destroy everything that is meaningful about a person.
That's argument one: Provenge extends the length of life while the quality of life continues to plummet.
Argument 2 has to do with money. We know who is going to profit materially from Provenge, that would be the manufacturer and patent-holder, Dendreon. The aforementioned group founded by Thomas Farrington has been funded by Dendreon. Since this funding, Farrington has been working to increase awareness of Provenge's existence among men with prostate cancer.
Speaking to the group at one summit listed on their site, Dr.Michael Gold made one remark, at least that was quoted, about Provenge that are wholly inaccurate, thus leading to the cry by prostate cancer patients of foul play at the FDA. He says that "we have found a away to reeducate the immune system and kill those cancer cells." That the 4.5 months offered along with a progressing dis-ease does NOT offer "immeasurable hope to those who aren't diagnosed in the early stages" is only an effect of propaganda being pushed by the corporation manufacturing the drug.
That's argument two: Dendreon is manipulating the hopes of dying men through the Prostate Health Education Network (PHEN), which by the way is an organization devoted wholly to the American healthcare industry.
There is hope for even advanced cases of prostate, but you won't find it coming from the labs of Eli Lily or Merck or a little start-up like Dendreon. From the Prostate Health 101 Blog on PHEN's website, we find that the list of treatment options available from western medicine is rather short.
Treatment options include:
*Watchful Waiting (monitoring with no active treatment)
*Radical Prostatectomy (surgery)
*External Beam Radiation
*Brachyther apy (internal radiation through radioactive seed implants)
*Hormone Therapy
*Chemotherapy
Any of those sound good and wholesome to you? Does radiation sound like it will restore health? The alternatives to these are wide and varied. One is a compound called artemisin, which is extracted from the herb wormwood. It works by oxidizing those cells that have large amounts of iron, which cancers cells have to allow frequent reproduction. It has so far been tested on breast cancer, but there should be a major push to do this testing on men with prostate cancer.
http://www.dr lam.com/opinion/arte misinin_study_abstra cts.cfm
Other herbal treatments have shown their abilities to create natural estrogen in the body, destroy tumor and cancer cells, and generally boost the immune system. Here are a couple of sites to check out on this.
http://www.webm d.com/prostate-cance r/news/20021213/herb -mix-nixes-prostate- cancer-in-lab
http:// www.crazyowlsperch.c om/diseaseprevention .shtml
Learn more about this author, Micah Myers.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Yes
Provenge, has been labeled by the media as a "cancer vaccine". It is
not a vaccine.
Provenge therapy has been proved effective in treating late stage
prostate cancer. The method used for treatment, is to draw blood from
the patient, separate the cells, add the antigen, and infuse patients
with their own treated blood. In Provenge therapy, the antigen causes
the patients immune system to attack the prostate cancer cells.
Provenge has shown itself efficient for its purpose in all six clinical
trials. This treatment has only been used in late stage cancer treatment.
Patients in these studies using traditional cancer treatments had an 11%
survival rate after three years. Patients using Provenge treatment had a
34% survival rate after three years. I find this evidence enough to begin
mainstream use of the Provenge therapy. There are not many good options in
the treatment of late stage prostate cancer. This can offer more hope to
patients for an actual recovery.
The only real opposition to the use of Provenge in cancer treatment, is the
pharmaceutical companies, and the scientists that are financially influenced
by them.
If Provenge becomes a common medical treatment for prostate or other cancers,
the pharmaceutical companies stand to lose a lot of money from their many,
less effective chemotherapy drugs. They have the deep pockets to keep this
fight going on for years.
Some members of the FDA are working in what appears to be a conflict of interest.
These certain members, besides being on the FDA advisory board, also hold
memberships on the board of firms involved in research of the rival drugs of
Provenge. Because of these apparent conflicts of interest,several investigations
are underway.
It is these types of under handed tactics that keep potentially life saving
treatments out of the mainstream of medical treatment.
Some of our Congressmen are also calling for an investigation into this conflict
of interest. In a statement before Congress, Congressman Mike Michaud, of Maine
stated, "I believe that the FDA should not be appointing scientists leading the
testing of a rival drug for another firm onto an advisory committee evaluating
Provenge. Congress needs to get to the bottom of this. I believe a full
disclosure is necessary in order to restore confidence in the FDA".
Congressmen Mike Michaud (Maine), Dan Burton (Indiana), and Tim Ryan (Ohio),
wrote a letter to The House Energy and Commerce Committee, asking to hold a
hearing into this problem within the FDA.
The FDA states, that they are conducting their own internal investigation.
They have not made any comments as to their findings.
Patients wanting to obtain Provenge treatments, have filed lawsuits against
the FDA for denying their access to this life saving treatment.
Provenge, though not a vaccine, will take cancer treatment in a completely
different direction, once all this legal wrangling with rival companies,
and the FDA is over.
Learn more about this author, Mary Vance.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.
Difference of opinion? Debate now.
