The great advantage of writing this “blog” is that it gives “yours truly”, the opportunity to share experiences, and ideas, with a wide audience. In fairness, while the ideas expressed in this article may not receive universal understanding, I’m sure the motivation behind them will be appreciated. Allow me to continue because the other day several things happened that set in place the thoughts expressed below.
With dreadful irony and tragic foreboding the following chain of events unfolded, virtually within an hour of one another, some four or five weeks ago.
Along with my daily newspaper a letter arrived from Cancer Research asking for money and carrying their slogan that “together we can beat cancer.” I then read in my daily paper that a young lady had died from cancer; following endless visits to her GP over six years and being told that all was well. While in another article the plight of cancer sufferers being denied potentially life extending drugs was given a public airing. Finally the tragic foreboding I mentioned came in the form of a phone call saying that a much loved relative had been given a matter of weeks to live, as her cancer had spread rapidly and could not be contained.
Once the full impact of these items sank in, particularly the last one, I became angry!
Angry because as a non medical man I feel that cancer has already had plenty of money thrown at it, yet it still manages to claim an excessive number of victims. An online visit to the obituaries section of my old Forces association website confirms the many names listed who became victims of cancer!
Understandably much of the money donated to charities has been put to good use and produced results. But where is the point in raising yet more money to develop drugs that are too expensive for general release, or that end up being distributed by committee or are only available via the so called “postcode lottery”? As I see things life is a precious gift; one that should be placed well beyond the reach of any organisation believing it has an appointed right to sit in judgement on life expectancy of seriously ill people. Although a few weeks, or months, of extended life may not seem long to an autocratic and detached committee, balanced against eternity for the sufferer they are beyond price.
Of course the medical professionals tirelessly giving care to cancer sufferers are to be congratulated for doing their best, but might their efforts be misplaced? By this I mean is it not better to have a system designed to detect and eradicate cancer in its infancy, as opposed to trying to tackle the problem once it has gained a foothold?
As one business leader said “forget fire fighting, catch the arsonist.”
In the same way that police forces, and fire services, spend both time and money trying to prevent crimes and fires before they occur, should we not adopt a similar approach when it comes to tackling the scourge of cancer? Might it not make more sense to give every citizen the annual version of an MOT health test in which detecting the early signs of cancer would be an essential part of the process?
Expensive yes, but might not such a cost be offset by the savings made by reductions in providing advanced cancer treatments, hospital places, surgery and end of life care processes? When travelling by air we do so safe in the knowledge that our aircraft will have undergone rigorous and routine inspections to identify potential faults before they become life threatening.
Might not such a human checking process show similar benefits?
While I have no objection to donating to cancer charities, from now on I will ask and implore such bodies to join forces and utilise the money collected to lobby Parliament for the introduction of the human version of the MOT. To further support this approach might not those courageous and admirable people who embark upon marathons and other tremendous physical fund raising activities, in support of cancer research, make the same request with regard to how the money they raise is used?
In support of this approach how many times have we read newspaper stories concerning people who have gone into hospital with an unrelated condition yet, while undergoing treatment, have been found with developing cancer cells? Is this not “proof positive” that, when seen early on by suitably qualified staff, patients with detected cancers can benefit from the prompt action needed to address their illness in its formative stages?
However, with final irony, my telephone has just rung and delivered the sad news that our relative has died.
It is hoped that readers of this “blog” will share the views expressed.
