Reddit Reddit reviews The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

We found 56 Reddit comments about The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer. Here are the top ones, ranked by their Reddit score.

Health, Fitness & Dieting
Books
Diseases & Physical Ailments Health
Cancer
Brain Cancer
The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
The Emperor of All Maladies A Biography of Cancer
Check price on Amazon

56 Reddit comments about The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer:

u/BedsideRounds · 37 pointsr/AskHistorians

I sort of addressed this in a previous comment, if you want to read more. There's actually a book that has your definitive answer, and that's the The Emperor of All Maladies, one of the best pop-medical books I've ever read.

But briefly, cancer is not a new disease; the ancients were aware of it (Edwin Smith papyrus is the first likely mention of cancer, and the Hippocratic corpus deals with cancer explicitly). Prevalence prior to modern times is essentially impossible to figure out; nosology didn't exist in any modern sense, and any number of diseases could present like cancer (especially "pthisis", or tuberculosis). There have been a few paleopathological reports (essentially medical examinations of old bones) that suggest that cancer was far less common in pre-modern peoples. However, this is controversial (this is a great NYTimes articles that nicely outlines the controversy). There are all sorts of methodological reasons this is incredibly difficult to ascertain, and while some risk factors (most notably tobacco smoke and copious red meat consumption) weren't around, there's every reason to believe ancient peoples would have been exposed to risk factors that we don't have (ergot-contaminated grain, open fires, &c).

Sorry for the abbreviated answer, but I hope that helps!

u/FMERCURY · 19 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

Cancer is basically a series of mutations that screw up the part of a cell that says "don't go crazy, OK?" This leads to uncontrolled growth. Normally, the cell has a lot of built-in mechanisms to stop this, so there's a lot of things that have to go wrong in order for cancer to actually get hold.

The carcinogens in smoke cause mutations at a certain rate. Over time, as more mutations accumulate, the chance that the mechanisms for suppressing uncontrolled growth will fail becomes greater. However, it's a statistical thing. Some people can smoke forever and not get cancer. They just happened to get lucky; their mutations are in genes that aren't important to cancer.

edit: if you're interested in cancer, get this book. It's seriously "buy a copy for all of your friends" good.

u/redrightreturning · 15 pointsr/suggestmeabook

I loved Emperor of all Maladies by Siddhartha Mukherjee
It gives a lot of good background about the history of cancer, but along the way you learn a lot about the history of science and research, as well. A lo of basic research and epidemiology that we take fro granted these days came out of cancer research.

I also recently read "Rabid" which was more of a cultural history. It was a really interesting read.

I was also moved by a book about end of life. It's called "Knocking on heaven's door" by Katy Butler. She describes how the US healthcare system caused her family immeasurable suffering due to its persistence on prolonging life, without regard for the quality of that life or for the quality of life of the caregivers. Butler makes a powerful case for the benefits of Slow Medicine, palliative care, and hospice.

u/andrewrgross · 14 pointsr/whowouldwin

Different forms of cancer have different outcomes, but if it's peak cancer, no one can really survive.

Cancer just gets stronger and stronger. It has no peak, unless you consider its peak to be whatever stage it's in when the patient dies.

If you're looking for a respect thread, check out "The Emperor of All Maladies", by Siddhartha Mukherjee.

u/hlabarka · 14 pointsr/todayilearned

Around the same time the way cancer was treated by removing as much of the body near the tumor as could possibly be removed without killing the patient. In the case of breast cancer surgeons would remove so much muscle that women would lose the use of an arm. But dont take my word for it...

http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography/dp/1439170916

u/i__cant__even__ · 12 pointsr/suggestmeabook

The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer

It reads almost like a mystery novel even though you know how it will end, weirdly enough. I highly recommend it to anyone who has been touched by cancer.

u/topdolla90 · 11 pointsr/pharmacy

I found this to be a good read

u/Wahrnehmung · 10 pointsr/medicine

The Emperor of all Maladies is a brilliantly written book documenting the history of cancer, told through a human lens.

u/xKomrade · 9 pointsr/medicalschool

MS1 here:

Is she a coffee or tea drinker? If so, there are companies that do some really cool "coffee or tea" of the month deals. I've gone through quite a bit of coffee since I began...

Here are some really awesome books: House of God, Emperor of All Maladies, and Complications to name a few.

I wouldn't recommend getting her a stethoscope/medical supplies because they can be very personal. Sure, they're all roughly the same but it's an instrument you're going to be using for many years to come. "This is my stethoscope. There are many like it but this one is mine..." Just my 2 cents, at least.

I hope that helps! If I come up with any others, I'll post them here.

u/mbartosi · 7 pointsr/technology

>Emperor of All Maladies

There's fascinating book under the same title: https://www.amazon.com/Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography-Cancer/dp/1439170916 and I also recommend this (if I remember correctly 7 part) series "A note from history: landmarks in history of cancer" https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20960499 (can be downloaded for free).

u/AJs_Sandshrew · 6 pointsr/biology

If you interested in biology/cancer research, read The Emperor of All Maladies by Siddhartha Mukherjee. I really is a fantastic read, even if you're not interested in cancer.

u/e_swartz · 6 pointsr/labrats

following up here, but take a look at The Emperor of All Maladies for a little history into how cancer became a huge marketing, PR, and money-raising machine in the mid 20th century, led largely by Mary Lasker.

This coincided with radical changes in breast cancer surgery from the mid to late 20th centuries. Breast cancer surgery used to be a mutilating procedure that would remove the entire breast and inner chest cavity, despite barely any differences in real outcomes. It was easy to champion breast cancer research partly for these reasons and partly because it was one of the first cancers in which we understood the biology of certain types (namely, BRCA genes as well as HER2-positive cancers that could be treated with tamoxifen). This gave the public added confidence in their money going to research which was leading to tangible improvements in cancer outcomes.

u/kommandarskye · 6 pointsr/AskHistorians

On cancer, I can strongly recommend Siddhartha Mukherjee's The Emperor of All Maladies, which (among many other things) is a history of cancer and the ways we have treated it. (That is my source for the purposes of this comment, in any case - actual historians of science and medicine may be able to do better!)

One of the earliest cases Mukherjee talks about is recounted in Egyptian hieroglyphics, the tale of a woman with a breast tumor around 2000 BCE (very roughly). In that particular case, the physician recommended no treatment, but contemporary records suggest that surgery (to remove such tumors) was known of, though you can imagine what the prognosis for patients was like before the (very modern) age of antiseptic techniques.

So cancer's been around for a very very long time; part of the increase in frequency we see for such illnesses is a consequence of the fact that we are living so much longer, due to better nutrition and control of other infectious diseases. Mukherjee writes quite elegantly about the underlying nature of all cancers, their untamable desire to grow and expand and colonize, as a twisted reflection of the very processes that take us from fetus to infant to child to adult.

If I were to go on, I'd just continue summarizing his book, and it's eminently worth reading for yourself if you're interested enough in the topic.

Enjoy!

u/QuentinTNO · 5 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

I am going to come right out and say I am not an oncologist and this is getting to the periphery of my clinical knowledge.

The easy answer is that the cancer cells produce chemical that trick your body into growing blood vessels toward and supply it with nutrients. There is a lot of research into blocking these signals. One example is VEGF or Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor

To get to the second part of your question, our immune system does mop up the majority of mutated cells. What we end up seeing as clinical cancer is actually the small subset of mutated cells that can both a) recruit support for growth and b) avoid the immune system.

For anyone looking to get a (relatively) accessible lesson on cancer and it's medical history, I recommend The Emperor of All Maladies.

u/aaj_ki_kitab · 5 pointsr/india

The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer - Siddhartha Mukherjee

WINNER OF THE PULITZER PRIZE

The Emperor of All Maladies is a magnificent, profoundly humane “biography” of cancer—from its first documented appearances thousands of years ago through the epic battles in the twentieth century to cure, control, and conquer it to a radical new understanding of its essence.

http://www.amazon.com/Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography-Cancer/dp/1439170916/ref=la_B003SNL6EA_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1397799083&sr=1-1

u/maismione · 5 pointsr/booksuggestions

The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer by Siddhartha Mukherjee This book presents how our understanding of cancer evolved over time, from Ancient Egypt until the present. Not only does the human and societal element keep the science interesting, but it also gives you an understanding of the experimental method, the (sometimes cringe-worthy) history of medicine and how clinical research works. As someone who is equally interested in science and the humanities, this book was awesome.

u/perdit · 4 pointsr/Stoicism

I'm sorry. I know what you're going through is really hard.

Cancer is part of the reason I started reading Stoic philosophy tbh. To calm that animal fear of death we all carry.

I'm coming to that moment in my own life as well. Someone I love very much is very ill and I suspect it will come to this sooner rather than later in our family.

I was thinking, I'll probably be the last of my little family to die. Everyone I love will die before me.

My mother will die- she's very ill.

My husband is much older than me.

My sister is older w approaching health issues of her own.

And my younger brother is struggling w mental illness.

I'll probably have to bury them all one by one someday. I dunno that anyone will be left to bury me.

On my worst days I'm sad about it. I feel sorry for myself. Why me? I never asked for it.

But then on other days, I'm grateful for the opportunity. It's one final duty to discharge, one last chance to honor someone very special in my life.

Who else would I want to shoulder my burden?

If I'm not the one to bury them all, then it'll fall to my brother. I love him but his life is a mess even in the best of times. Leave my sister to do it? Her big heart might crack under the strain.

We shared a little bit of time together and it's been lovely. I can do my part.



The funny thing is I'll be dead soon, too. Whether it's a week from now or 100 years it doesn't much matter I guess. I must've read it somewhere but can't recall where (Marcus Aurelius probably):

'We're all dead already, we just haven't been buried yet.'

I try to live my little chunk of time in a way that will leave people around me with a good memory and a warm feeling in their hearts.

Take my blessings with you. I wish you well! Say hi if you see me somewhere on the other side.

Edit: I'm a big reader. These are the books that helped me through the worst of it. Maybe they can help you, too.

  • Meditations of Marcus Aurelius, free online ebook

  • The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer by Siddhartha Mukherjee. It's a super interesting read, all about how cancer has dogged the human race for millenia. How treatment has stumbled and how it's advanced. It really put things in perspective for myself and my mother. Cancer is just one of those human things we all might become subject to

    wiki, author discusses book, Amazon

  • The Immortal Life of Henrietta Lacks by Rebecca Skloot. It brings up interesting questions about what it means to live and what it means to die. Like what are you? What's the smallest part of you that is still you? Are you dead if parts of you live on? What if all your DNA lives on and gets replicated over and over for decades, resulting in more biomass than you ever were. What if your DNA goes all over the world, into space even, long after you've succumbed? Are you really dead? How should your family think of you if the last 60+ years of medical research hinge upon the fact that "you" never really died at all?

    wiki, Amazon
u/gooey_mushroom · 4 pointsr/biology

If you have any interest in cancer at all - The Emperor of all Maladies is an amazing book. It's titled a "biography" of cancer and tells how scientific advances have changed how doctors/patients/society have dealt with cancer through history, and ultimately guides the reader towards a modern understanding of the disease. It sounds dry but really isn't - it's a compelling book, and I especially loved how the science wasn't "dumbed down".

u/Quadrophenia404 · 3 pointsr/genetics

The Emperor of All Maladies, by Siddhartha Mukherjee

It is literally a biography of Cancer. Its a bit slow during the first 50 pages but really picks up at the end.

http://www.amazon.com/Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography-Cancer/dp/1439170916/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1425782502&sr=1-1&keywords=emporer+of+all+maladies

u/sloam1234 · 3 pointsr/todayilearned

If you want to read more about it, check out the book Emperor of All Maladies, it's an absolutely fascinating story.

u/orthostatic_htn · 3 pointsr/medicine

The Gawande books are good. Another one I've liked recently was "The Emperor of all Maladies" - it's essentially a biography of cancer.

u/teifighter · 3 pointsr/publichealth

Agree with The Ghost Map. The Emperor of All Maladies is good if you are interested in cancer-related health and public health.

u/stirwise · 3 pointsr/biology

Now that I'm at home I've looked at the bookshelf and would like to add:

Almost Human -- written by a primate researcher about her experiences studying baboons in the wild. I read this book several years ago and still think about it regularly. Lots of interesting lessons about primates and people in here.

The Emperor of all Maladies -- a history of cancer, won a Pulitzer for best non-fiction.

u/RunningPath · 3 pointsr/running

Not fiction, but I'm reading The Emperor of All Maladies. It's spectacular -- definitely one of the best books I've ever read. I can't figure out why I never read it before, considering my career (I diagnose cancer every day).

I also tend to forgo sleep when I'm reading really good fiction!

u/notamadscientist1 · 3 pointsr/IAmA

Have not seen that app. What we are learning now is that cancers may share similarities with other cancers that were not previously known. For example, certain lung cancers may be more similar to cervical cancers or melanomas due to the mutations they share. So I do think it is possible that one treatment may help treat other cancers. Good book here http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography/dp/1439170916

u/Crabrubber · 2 pointsr/AskReddit

Read "The Emperor of All Maladies". It explains why there's no such thing as a cure for cancer.

u/Createx · 2 pointsr/books

I quite enjoyed The Emperor Of All Maladies: A Biography Of Cancer. It's mostly about the fight against it starting 2000 years ago till tday, very well written.

u/ishjohnson · 2 pointsr/answers

If you don't mind a read, this book is excellent and will answer any and all cancer-history questions you could possibly have:

http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography/dp/1439170916

u/verbatim2242 · 2 pointsr/PoliticalVideo

This is such a hard promise to make. Anyone who knows anything about how cancer operates, has a full understanding that we simply don't have the overall knowledge, yet, to cure it.

The simple truth is there are too many forms of cancer to have a cure all for the ultimate human disease. We simply don't know enough about what causes it, how it happens, why it happens and the right avenues of treatment to be able to eradicate cancer on all levels.

It should be mentioned, a great read about the subject is "The Emperor of all Maladies". For anyone looking to understand the human history of cancer and why it is so hard to eradicate, it is well worth your time. - http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography/dp/1439170916

I think President Obama set a good goal in suggesting we, as a nation, cure cancer. Yet I also think the smarter bet, one which we are closer to, would be to fully tramp out AIDS and HIV. For the interested, look at the recent Vice report on AIDS which HBO ran a bit ago.

http://www.vice.com/read/watch-the-trailer-for-the-vice-on-hbo-special-report-on-the-fight-to-end-aids-009

Cancer is a great goal. One to strive for and continue to fight against. It is, without question, the ultimate of all human disease. In a way, cancer defines us. But defeating AIDS, I believe, is a more concrete goal which can be reached.

u/thevach · 2 pointsr/booksuggestions

The Emperor of All Maladies -- an amazing book about cancer.
Also, Into the Wild, if you're the adventurous type.

u/BigRonnieRon · 2 pointsr/cancer

Read Emperor of Maladies. It's a history of cancer and cancer research. Quite good. It won all sorts of awards.

u/speedycat2014 · 2 pointsr/AskTrollX

I know there have been some, but my memory is terrible.

I did read "The Emperor of all Maladies: A Biography of Cancer" recently (that's not a referral link or anything). While it was not uplifting, necessarily, as someone who has been surrounded by cancer in family and friends since the age of 9 (34 years ago) I learned so much that I could not put the 600+ page book down. It really, thoroughly blew my mind.

I don't necessarily recommend reading it if you're in a heavy emotional state due to dealing with the illness. There are some unappealing facts and truths in the book that hurt to read, because my mother is currently fighting lung cancer. I advised my dad not to read the book, for instance.

But for me, knowledge feels like power in a world where ultimately I can't do anything.

And for me, the book hit so close to home. I lost my sister to leukemia, I was a bone marrow donor for her, and I never truly understood our place in history. The author actually uses leukemia as a starting point for explaining about cancer, describing it as "cancer in liquid form". And the history was fascinating because I was a part of it. He writes about research in Seattle, WA on bone marrow transplants. My sister and I were some of the first to participate in bone marrow transplants in the late 70's out in Seattle. We may very well be a footnote in his research, I don't know. Reading the book helped me feel like my sister and our transplant was 'immortalized' a bit in history, even though she didn't survive due to the radiation treatments. (And I never understood why they had to perform radiation on her brain for leukemia. The book explains why.)

It's truly gripping, and a book I will never have too far away. I bookmarked and highlighted that book on my Kindle more than any other book I have ever read in my life.

u/Deradius · 2 pointsr/biology

Sure.

If evolution is of interest to you (and if you have interest in the intersection between theology and science), Finding Darwin's God by Kenneth Miller explores both sides of the debate and debunks many common misconceptions about evolution. I first read it in a college biology topics course.

If you like the topic of 'creationist attempts to dispute or disrupt the teaching of evolution in the classroom', Summer of the Gods, about the Scopes Monkey Trial, is a great book (although not explicitly about science).

You may find The Selfish Gene by Dawkins worth a read.

Books by Mary Roach can be fun; I've read Stiff and enjoyed it, and Packing for Mars was pretty good as well.

I have heard good things about The Emperor of All Maladies, though I haven't read it myself.

Our Stolen Future, about contamination of the environment by artificially produced estrogen and estrogen analogs, is dated but interesting.

The Discovery of Insulin by Bliss is a great story about how science happens and how scientific discovery occurs, and it lays out what may be the most important discovery in medical science during the 20th century.

Were those types of books what you were looking for?

u/homegrownunknown · 2 pointsr/chemistry

I love science books. These are all on my bookshelf/around my apt. They aren't all chemistry, but they appeal to my science senses:

I got a coffee table book once as a gift. It's Theodore Gray's The Elements. It's beautiful, but like I said, more of a coffee table book. It's got a ton of very cool info about each atom though.

I tried The Immortal Life of Henrieta Lacks, which is all about the people and family behind HeLa cells. That was a big hit, but I didn't care for it.

I liked The Emperor of all Maladies which took a long time to read, but was super cool. It's essentially a biography of cancer. (Actually I think that's it's subtitle)

The Wizard of Quarks and Alice in Quantumland are both super cute allegories relating to partical physics and quantum physics respectively. I liked them both, though they felt low-level, tying them to high-level physics resulted in a fun read.

Unscientific America I bought on a whim and didn't really enjoy since it wasn't science enough.

The Ghost Map was a suuuper fun read about Cholera. I love reading about mass-epidemics and plague.

The Bell that Rings Light, In Search of Schrödinger's Cat, Schrödinger's Kittens, The Fabric of the Cosmos and Beyond the God Particle are all pleasure reading books that are really primers on Quantum.

I also tend to like anything by Mary Roach, which isn't necessarily chemistry or science, but is amusing and feels informative. I started with Stiff but she has a few others that I also enjoyed.

Have fun!

u/nkstr · 2 pointsr/suggestmeabook

I quite enjoyed The Emperor of Maladies and Detroit: An American Autoposy. Obviously the book about Detroit isn't about a world issue, it's a pretty localized one but it's a great read.

u/StardustSapien · 2 pointsr/AskScienceDiscussion
u/funnygreensquares · 2 pointsr/explainlikeimfive

I read The biography of cancer which is very insightful, and as you put it, accessible. It went into the background of cancer, and the background of everyone at the most important moments of its history. So it's a bit of a read but a very interesting one if you're looking for a long chew.

u/andtheodor · 2 pointsr/wine

I like to always have a book on hand and try to read some every night in lieu of TV or internet. I'm fairly scientifically minded so it's generally stuff like Brian Greene, Oliver Sacks, Michael Pollan, and recently lots of Stephen Ambrose. A close friend has been dealing with ongoing cancer and I found The Emperor of All Maladies to be a great read, and pretty germane since few of us have lives not touched by the disease somehow.

I actually had a 5 year affliction with Scrabble and played hours every night at isc.ro, a primitive looking but great place to play real Scrabble online. I actually got obsessed enough that it was a problem in my marriage so I don't really play much anymore. Some favorite plays EIGHTVO, ANT(IN)OISE, DIaZEP(A)M, FANTAs(I)E(S), THR(I)LL(I)NG, EOBIONT, and a 176 point 3x3 PEREG(R)IN.

I loved The Wire, and just finished Breaking Bad last night, haven't watched True Detective yet - but just got a Nexus and Chromecast which totally rock and facilitate some catching up! I'm so far behind in most shows that I don't go anywhere near special subreddits for fear of spoilers. I recently got my Sansaire, so honestly most of my time is spent tinkering in the kitchen, glass of wine in hand, Do Make Say Think or TV on the Radio blasting from the aforementioned stereo.

u/theladygeologist · 2 pointsr/UpliftingNews

I'm halfway through The Emperor of all Maladies and not only is it an amazing read, but it kind of deals with the questions you are asking.

But the very tl;dr version of what you are wondering is that cancer rates are higher in developed countries because people don't die more from other things instead. A few kids dying from cancer is insignificant when there are hundreds dying from parasites, that sort of thing.

Link to the book for anyone interested - I highly recommend it.

u/PURE_FINDER · 1 pointr/OldSchoolCool

They were also naked. That's whey the cancer rates were so high due to the direct exposure to the scrotum.
Check out the excellent The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer
<https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/1439170916/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1504813210&sr=8-1&pi=AC_SX236_SY340_FMwebp_QL65&keywords=cancer+history&dpPl=1&dpID=51qcgiTZOiL&ref=plSrch>

u/barthrh · 1 pointr/AskReddit

I think that there is also a very big historical factor. During the 60s/70s a "war on cancer" was launched with huge political pressures (full page adds calling Nixon out) to build a national cancer program that would eventually eradicate cancer. Over the years, researchers learned that there are different types of ways to get their "war on cancer" numbers to be positive; namely, prevention and cure.

Breast cancer stood out for a few reasons. Concurrent with all of this research led to mammography and the discovery of how effective it was in prevention. The result: Huge pushes to get women to have regular mammograms. Similarly, discovery of correlations between estrogen and breast cancer with concurrent discoveries of medications that affected cells and estrogen led go cures. I may have some of the facts here slightly wrong (source: The Emperor of all Maladies ) but this is generally the situation. Breast cancer could get those numbers up and was therefore a key cancer to promote prevention and cure.

Other factors: Momentum from this has carried. Another important factor is that there is a much larger group of female volunteers because many more women choose to stay at home. While they are also vulnerable to other cancers, none is as prominent as breast cancer.

u/Rmorgeddon · 1 pointr/books

I loved
The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer by Siddhartha Mukherjee
I listened to it on Audiobook and it was truly an experience. Gave me so much hope, but also really reinforced how arbitrary and randomly lucky finding these cures and treatments can be.

u/dominicaldaze · 1 pointr/books

This will probably get buried but I am reading The Emperor of All Maladies right now and am continually saddened, surprised, and inspired by the history of cancer and its treatment. This should be required reading for everyone IMHO.

u/[deleted] · 1 pointr/IAmA

I think you could use a good read on cancer and cancer treatment. The Emperor of All Maladies is an excellent Pulitzer Prize winning book on the subject. It answers (and provides citations) for all the issues you seem to be having with cancer treatment.


First thing to understand is that cancer is not a single disease, and that the best course of treatment for different patients is not going to be the same, and will depend on the type of cancer, the stage it is in, and the age of the patient, among other things. For some cancers, chemotherapy might be useless, while radiation or surgery is curative, and for other cancers it might be the opposite. For some cancers, especially in later stages, surgery, chemo, and radiation might all be ineffective. Again, they are all basically different diseases, and must be treated differently.

You want proof that chemotherapy works? The effectiveness of chemotherapy has been nothing short of amazing in some cancers. Childhood Acute Lymphoblastic Leukemia treated with intense combination chemotherapy sees cure-rates between 70-90%:

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0140673691907336

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310283291801

Hodgkin's Lymphoma see's similar cure rates with chemotherapy treatment:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199211193272102

Many, many leukemias enjoy similar success stories with chemotherapy used as the main curative treatment. These cancer's don't have solid-mass tumors, which is one reason why chemotherapy is so useful. However, some solid-mass cancers, like testicular cancer (lance armstrong) and anal cancer enjoy high-success rates using primarily chemotherapy.

For other cancers, where chemotherapy alone isn't very effective, it is still very effective as an adjuvant treatment. Usually that means they treat it with something else first (like surgery) to remove or reduce the solid tumor, then follow up with chemotherapy to prevent further spreading. Breast cancer is one disease where this type of treatment is particularly useful:

http://www.nejm.org/doi/pdf/10.1056/NEJM198101013040103

I understand that using carcinogenic agents like radiation and chemotherapy to treat cancer might seem counter-intuitive, but they often work against many different types of cancers. The reason they work is that they damage cells in a way that prevents rapid growth. It just so happens that cancer is a disease of rapid, uncontrolled growth. And, for biochemical reasons, in their rush to grow as rapidly as possible, cancerous tumor-cells can take certain shortcuts in the growing process that leave them more vulnerable to damage from chemotherapy and radiation than normal healthy cells.

Nobody is claiming that radiation and chemo are THE answers, however. They are nothing more than a stand-in, until true cures can arrive. Drugs like Gleevec are what people are looking forward to: low-side-effect treatments with high cure rates (>90%).

Really though, I recommend you read that book. It shows all the pitfalls of traditional treatments, the mistakes we've made, and where we're going with future cancer research.

As for your alternative treatments... there is nothing stopping people from refusing treatment. I think not seeking traditional treatments is a perfectly valid choice, especially in those situations where the prognosis is grim. But the only way alternative treatments should be funded publicly is if they have some scientific evidence supporting them.

edit: sorry, my links were broken

u/Always_positive_guy · 1 pointr/premed

For what? If you want something health-related and vaguely fun, try The Emperor of Maladies: A Biography of Cancer. If you just want a book, the last ones I've read have been Anathem by Neal Stephenson, one of the craziest authors of all time and the most recent installment of George R.R. Martin's A Song of Ice and Fire.

u/MiffedMouse · 1 pointr/AskHistorians

Not books, but I recommend CGPGrey's videos on topics such as the formation of the commonwealth for some anecdotal discussion of how modern states are structured. Crash Course World History is another good series that gives extremely quick (~10-15 minutes) overviews of a variety of topics historians like to discuss.

As for books - many of the more interesting books are on specific topics. Guns, Germs, and Steel is an interesting discussion on why some societies do better than others. Stuff matters is a neat discussion of how modern materials came to be. Honestly, I think it is more fun to pick a topic that interests you and dig into that topic specifically. You will probably learn about other things as necessary along the way. One of Dan Carlin's Common Sense podcasts, Controlling the Past, discusses this very idea.

Some of my favorite "history" books aren't even sold as "history" books. The Emperor of all Maladies is a fascinating look at the history of cancer. As a kid I loved David Macaulay's Building Big, which discusses large structures in America. And an embarrassing amount of my knowledge on other countries comes from folktale anthologies.

If you are interested in international politics specifically, I would suggest looking for books on the UN and NATO (two of the biggest international organizations right now).

u/hplssrmantcxox · 1 pointr/medicalschool

http://www.amazon.com/Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography-Cancer/dp/1439170916/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1458615678&sr=1-1 Emperor of All Maladies is a great biography of cancer :) it's basically the history of cancer, really excellent.

Also any New Yorker articles and books by Atul Gawande - my favorite books by him are Complications and Being Mortal. There's also a great (albeit really sad, warning you) Frontline documentary based on Being Mortal - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/being-mortal/

Another interesting Frontline documentary is The League of Denial - http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/frontline/film/league-of-denial/ it's a documentary about the neuropathologist that Will Smith played in the recent movie Concussion and the real story with the NFL behind that movie.

The movie "Wit" with Emma Thompson is also a fantastic movie but it's incredibly depressing (she plays a professor with stage 4 cancer) and it's about her stay in the hospital. Couldn't stop crying when I saw this movie lol.

u/jxj24 · 1 pointr/cancer

It's easy to fall into this mindset, because our brains are wired to simplify complex topics. And here, the mistake is thinking that "Cancer" is some monolithic disease that can be understood and combatted with reasonable effort.

Unfortunately, cancer has been described as thousands of diseases with one label. The complexity is simply stunning, requiring expertise from genetics, physiology, pharmacology, immunology and many other disciplines to even grasp the bare essentials.

A fantastic book that will give an overview of the history of cancer treatment and the processes involved is "The Emperor of All Maladies".

u/DontRunReds · 1 pointr/TwoXChromosomes

So my non-medical person opinion after reading The Emperor of all Maladies, learning about various biases in cancer statistics, and having a family member die very quickly from an aggressive cancer is that it doesn't make a whole lot of difference. Unless there is a family history of a specific cancer, I don't think early screening is worthwhile as it can lead to over-diagnosis and over-treatment which is harmful. Plus, a truly a nasty cancer is going to kill you regardless whereas a less aggressive cancer may go into remission even if caught later. So for me personally, I err on the side of less/later screening.

Really it is a personal decision and you are the one that has to be okay with the consequences of whatever choice you and your doctor make. Your body, your rules.

u/ollokot · 1 pointr/books

The Emperor of All Maladies: It was the best non-fiction book I read all year. I was a little intimidated at first because of the size of the book and subject matter. I assumed it would be more than a little over my head since I do not have a medical background. But it really was amazing. The author deserves praise for making this book and its subject interesting from beginning to end and accessible to nearly all of us.

u/CMOS222 · 1 pointr/MensRights

I think there are some good historical, justifiable reasons for it. Prior to the 70's breast cancer was not talked about in public very much, there was a tendency to regard it as too embarrassing or shameful. As a result, women who experienced it did not have much of a support group to turn to. A common form of treatment for it at the time was radical mastectomy, which was (and is) still considered very disfiguring.

In the U.S., Mary Tyler Moore helped to break the taboo against talking about breast cancer with the TV-movie, "First You Cry" (CBS, 1978), where she earned an Emmy nomination for her portrayal of a reporter battling breast cancer. Since that time, society has (rightly) become much more open about providing public discussion and support for people with breast cancer.

However, as Barbara Ehrenreich describes below, sometimes breast cancer support and public discussion has taken some bizarre turns:

http://www.barbaraehrenreich.com/cancerland.htm

Recently I read Siddhartha Mukherjee's The Emperor of All Maladies: A Biography of Cancer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siddhartha_Mukherjee
http://www.amazon.com/The-Emperor-All-Maladies-Biography/dp/1439170916

One thing I took away from it is that society as a whole is STILL groping towards dealing with cancer - of all forms - in a rational, compassionate and mature manner. So even though I'm very MRA, I think the problem with breast versus prostate cancer issues is that the whole issue of cancer, and how society responds to it, is still very confused, rather than being a situation of deliberate double standards. As an issue you can't get much more personal than cancer - so it's natural that people are going to look at it as to how it affects them, rather than how it affects other people.

u/dannyofbosnia · 1 pointr/cringepics