Hi Lisa,

I have to agree with Ricky's belief here--precisely because it seems clear to me that whenever very important tissue such as lymph nodes are removed in this process, the body loses a HUGE vehicle for healing itself. This kind of compromise in the whole body's function forces an increasingly weakened system to deal with the cancer threat.

I've also seen Chemotherapy thoroughly destroy healthy tissue and really put the body in danger quickly. Its not unusual in both cases for cancer to metastatize--with a weakened inability to defend itself, the body's organs also falter in their function. It is truly not out of the ordinary for chemo to enhance the growth of cancer in organs such as the liver, which is left to contend with the huge toxic load forced on the body. When surgery also disables the lymphatic system in any way, the body's ability to protect itself with that complex and very effective system is compromised; with lymph nodes removed-- the sites in the body where its natural defenses against cancer would be concentrated--the body is left far more vulnerable to metastasis. Specifically to other areas in the body where other lymph nodes would have to compensate for the ones no longer capable. In general, these kinds of suppressive treatments are not curative and actually encourage the spread of the cancer simply because they remove the secondary evidence of the disease and end up forcing the disease to find a deeper, more threatening expression--usually in the next weakest part of the body. If you cut it out of the breast, it will likely next be found in the uterus; if it is cut out of the lung, it next is found in the liver...these are scenarios which are typical in allopathic treatment.

I truly don't want to be misunderstood here, and give the impression that I'm saying "Oh oh, I think your friend made a mistake with that surgery!" because as practitioners we have to realize that in some cases surgery may "get the patient out of danger" until a more curative means of treatment can be employed. But the whole theoretical notion behind what gets cut out of the body is flawed, and contrary to what Hahnemann discovered and knew.

That being said, I don't think its impossible for your friend to restore her health--but there IS an obstacle to cure that has been created by the surgery. So any treatment which follows now has to compensate for that deficiency...and this is possible with homeopathy and supportive treatments to a certain extent. Treatment at this point has to go beyond "treatment for cancer"..it has to address complications created by the chemo and surgery too.

The prognosis? Well, that's difficult. It all depends on whether or not she has someone to work with who is "on top" of treating with homeopathy while the patient undergoes chemo and radiation. Treatment during this stage usually involves trying very hard to reverse the extremely damaging effects of the chemo--and very close case management in order to address problems as they come up. The goal is to lessen the trauma on the body by the chemo--help the body cope with its devastating effects, which can then give the patient a fighting chance against fighting off the cancer.

The prognosis really does depend on this--if the homeopathy successfully supports the patient through these ravages, there is a very good chance that she will survive the chemo and respond to homeopathy later. Like I said, the chemo and radiation and surgery all provide some firm obstacles to cure--if she can use homeopathy to get over as many as possible, the prognosis will be good.

Far better than it would be with just allopathic treatment, that's for sure.

Also, let me get this straight--after chemo, the lump in the lymph shrank and the lump in the breast tissue grew?

Divina

[ 27 March 2002, 13:23: Message edited by: Divina ]

__________________
...and deliverance has many faces<br />but grace<br />is an aquaintance of mine