Hess will be speaking at "Comprehensive Cancer Care 2," a conference in Washington D.C. (June 11-13) at the Hyatt Regency in Crystal City. Hess will join a panel to discuss: "A Cross-Cultural Look at Cancer and its Treatment."
TROY, N.Y. - The effective treatment of cancer requires a comprehensive approach by the medical community to a patient's total life situation, says new research by David Hess a professor of Science and Technology Studies at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute in Troy, NY. In addition, medical policy needs to be reformed to incorporate evaluation of alternative and complementary cancer therapies.
In his recent book Evaluating Alternative Cancer Therapies (Rutgers University Press), Hess interviews more than 20 medical doctors, researchers, and patient advocates who are pioneers in the alternative/complementary therapy movement. Hess' research is funded by a grant from the National Science Foundation for "Public Understanding of Science."
"Patients look to their clinicians for help in making decisions and navigating a new and frightening world of uncertain information about their treatment," Hess says. "But their oncologists may not be aware of many alternative treatments due to lack of scientific study by the medical establishment. Many patients, overwhelmed by their diagnosis, are emotionally unable to ask the right questions of their oncologists, but increasingly patients are taking a more active role in their treatment.
"The field is changing rapidly," Hess continues. "In the last year there have been major advancements on policy front toward making funding available evaluation of alternative cancer therapies. But what cancer patients need is more information, and they need it immediately."
Evaluating Alternative Cancer Therapies highlights the importance of providing more funding to evaluate the dozens of complementary and alternative cancer therapies that are in wide use by patients. Conventional therapies like radiation and chemotherapy offer documented levels of effectiveness, but with fairly high toxicity. Complementary and alternative therapies are usually nontoxic but have poorly documented effectiveness.
Modest estimates suggest that over half a million American cancer patients are using alternative and complementary therapies such as dietary programs, supplements, imagery, and herbs yet there has been little to no formal evaluation of these therapies.
Experts interviewed by Hess call for an overhaul of medical policy and a framework for evaluating alternative and complementary therapies for cancer. They say:
* It is misleading to say there is no scientific basis to alternative/complementary cancer therapies. There is a great deal of suggestive and anecdotal evidence in support of complementary and alternative therapies, but because many of the products are natural foods or herbs, they do not receive the financial support that patentable drugs get to determine their effectiveness.
* The tumor-oriented approach of conventional medicine needs to be balanced with an individualized, patient-oriented approach that considers life circumstances, stress, environmental toxins, and nutritional deficiencies.
* Eliminating cancer risk factors--smoking, lack of exercise, environmental carcinogens, nutritional deficiencies and imbalances, and stress--are important for cancer prevention and for cancer treatment.
* A better strategy than cytotoxic conventional therapies is to strengthen and stimulate the body, particularly its immune system and nutritional status.
* The magic-bullet strategy is counterproductive to the advancement of cancer therapy. The strategy is driven by the financial necessity to develop a drug that will return a profit on the investments needed to obtain FDA approval and then covering the cost of marketing that drug.
An interview with former congressman Berkley Bedell (D-Iowa), who helped found the Office of Complementary and Alternative Medicine (OCAM) of the National Institute of Health (NIH), opens the book, and veteran journalist Peter Barry Chowka, who has been a consultant for ABC's 20/20 and served on several advisory panels of the NIH's OCAM, contributed the last chapter.
Hess documents a movement of social scientists, engineers, actors, legislators, and journalists who, in conjunction with highly-credentialed biomedical clinicians and researchers are birthing a "new science"-one which offers less toxic and potentially more humane future for cancer therapies.
Hess' previous book Women Confront Cancer: Making Medical History by Choosing Alternative and Complementary Therapies (NYU Press) is a compilation of interviews with 21 women with cancer (mainly breast cancer) who want increased control and better information about their treatment options.
CONTACT: Megan Galbraith (518)276-6050 [email protected]
FACULTY CONTACT: David Hess (518)276-8509 [email protected]
RSS