national

Cancer patients fear treatment makes them vulnerable to coronavirus

24 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© KYODO

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

24 Comments
Login to comment

After an operation in February, Prostatectomy, my doctor warned me to be very careful because my immune system was weak and I should even avoid going to hospitals and remain at home. I have mostly done that for the last 80 days. My health improves daily.

8 ( +9 / -1 )

Let me be clear. People with CANCER, one of the top causes of death all around the globe, are worrying about another illness that for the most part is asymptomatic or mild, even in cancer patients.

People's worries and priorities really don't make sense anymore in this new age of corona hysteria

-8 ( +6 / -14 )

CEMO puts you at risk of dying. Like 93% likely to die of it. Switch to Gerson. LIVE.

-12 ( +0 / -12 )

Not trying to downplay this, or be insensitive.

I don’t really understand why we shut down everything, open it back up again (because of money) and then basically everytime that happens, infection rates go up again.

There is no vaccine, and even if there is one, the distribution or withholding of it will be problematic.

It is easy to see allies not giving it to their foes, it becoming the ruling parties political card, even war.

Why don’t we shelter the vulnerable instead of all shelter???

I don’t get it. Old folks homes, anyone with illnesses and medical conditions should be paid and stay safe at home.

Other people can work and live and be, and then we can wait years for a vacc with less death.

2 ( +5 / -3 )

are worrying about another illness that for the most part is asymptomatic or mild, even in cancer patients.

Show the data for this, what percentage of infected cancer patients are asymptomatic or mild?

CEMO puts you at risk of dying. Like 93% likely to die of it. Switch to Gerson. LIVE.

False, depending on the cancer full medical therapy including chemicals or radiation can save most of the patients. Gerson is a money grab promising unbelievable things without one single report to prove it. They say they save people, but when asked for scientific proof they present nothing but the old "trust me".

Cancer is a serious disease, and treatment is a very tiring and consuming process that often leaves the patient with very reduced defenses against infection, so are people with organ failures, autoimmune diseases, genetic problems for some enzymes or very old age; that is why it is very important to protect those patients. Doctors and family can only do so much, and part of the solution is to keep the number of infections in the streets as low as possible. They depend on everybody doing their part.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

There are babies who have/had Covid-19. It's not only old folks.

More men than women. Over 70's largest group. More than 100 healthcare workers have also died.

"It is difficult to estimate the case fatality rate because we do not know how many people of all ages contract the disease. But the Journal of the American Medical Association reported that in Italy, the rate of death for 60- to 69-year-olds was 3% to 4%, while estimates of the fatality rate among patients older than 80 who contract the disease is more than three times as high at 13%. "

https://news.utexas.edu/2020/04/18/old-age-is-not-one-thing-in-covid-19/

0 ( +2 / -2 )

Not just coronaviruses, it makes them more vulnerable to infections in general.

2 ( +4 / -2 )

Of course cancer patients should be worried about corvid-19. They are in the high risk group due to their weakened immunity systems. If they are also over 70 and obese then they should be extremely worried about getting infected.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

My cousin's wife just went through surgery for Stage 4 breast cancer a few months ago and is in a very fragile state. My cousin is a manager of a Costco so he just couldn't take the risk of going to work with the mobs of customers. Luckily they gave him a 6 months break so she can be safe if he happened to catch something.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Why don’t we shelter the vulnerable instead of all shelter???

For several reasons.

For a disease that can be carried by people without symptoms it becomes impossible to shelter the vulnerable. The more people are infected the more likely the infection will reach them by the necessary contact with the people tending to their needs.

Vulnerable people need hospitals very frequently, with a full pandemic those become death traps for them.

Most importantly, lots of people get hospitalized with the disease, but are saved after treatment. If you let the disease run rampant there would be not enough hospitals and health workers to save them. For people older than 40yo the hospitalization rates go close to 10% and climb up with age. All those people would be at very high risk of death, as well as everybody else not infected but that still would need to use a hospital that no longer can receive them.

If there were 20 times more hospitals, doctors, nurses, etc. It could be an option (risky but an option) but there are not, so the only one we have left is to distribute the infections in the longest period of time possible.

3 ( +5 / -2 )

Separation is key. Separate totally treatment of covid 19 from that of cancers or other diseases. Separate hospital floors (ideally separate entire sections or facilities altogether). Separate healthcare staff members and equipment with no cross-section contacts being allowed. Despite arch-category of healthcare services, there should be two separate entities in operation.

Fortunately beds and equipment are enough available at ordinary hospitals, there's no shortage problem.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

If you are in the late stages of cancer, you will more frequently die from an unrelated infection because your immune system is too compromised by the disease and the treatment to fight it off.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

virusrex

It can’t be seen yes exactly my point.

Is it easier to effectively shelter 300,000 high risk people, or the other 10 million in the city?

It’s not true that its not possible to shelter them.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

Shelter the high risk people, you mean the over 70's. So who will take care of them? Other over 70's. In many care homes the infection was imported by care worker, delivery person. Many care home staff in other countries complained about the lack of PPE's.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

And virusrex already pointed out that the high risk people need to visit hospitals always.

That alone makes it extremely difficult if not impossible to shelter or isolate them.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Is it easier to effectively shelter 300,000 high risk people, or the other 10 million in the city?

That is the wrong question. What is easier, to shelter 300,000 high risk people from 10,000 infected people that you can't see, or from 5 million?

Anybody that have direct or indirect contact with them could transmit the disease without noticing, doctors, nurses, people delivering goods, cleaning or cooking staff, etc. With tests that become positive only after the person is already capable of spreading the virus, frequently fail to do it (and that take at least one day to be done) even testing every one daily would not prevent transmission.

And again, if all the hospitals are chocked full of patients and doctors have to take weeks or months off to recover from it (if they do) what is your solution? let high risk people die without medical attention? or let lots of young healthy people die from an infection from which they could have been saved in a hospital because you are keeping those hospitals and medical personnel unavailable trying to shelter other patients?

The more people that are infected the more difficult is to prevent that infection to reach high risk people, there is simply zero measures that can guarantee a 100% absence of transmission, so the most practical way to do it is to reduce the number of people that can transmit the disease as much as possible. If you say it is possible to isolate them perfectly but the professionals that work with them constantly say it is not, I will trust the professionals

1 ( +1 / -0 )

My hospital has all doors open, nurses check movement, compulsory hand cleaning and temperature check and doctors have protective stuff a little. Two masks a week. Social spacing of patients. Suspected covid19 patients can't enter and have to go to city hospitals with prepared procedures if beds are available.

If you have a serious condition, GO TO THE HOSPITAL!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Let me be clear. People with CANCER, one of the top causes of death all around the globe, are worrying about another illness that for the most part is asymptomatic or mild, even in cancer patients.

People's worries and priorities really don't make sense anymore in this new age of corona hysteria

I just lost my little sister to cancer.

Cancer treatments can wreak havoc on the immune system and leave patients way more vulnerable to stuff like this.

So the cancer might not kill them, or at least not kill them for several years, but getting this while they are weakened very well could.

They are right to be concerned. Educate yourself before you open your mouth, its easy for a healthy person to describe this as "hysteria" because you aren't likely to die if you get it.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Corona hysteria? 285,000 dead people (and still rising) from Covid 19 would like to talk to you.

But, well, they're dead. From Covid 19.

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

Cancer treatment makes a person vulnerable to a lot of things. You are basically taking your body to the edge of death, so the cancer is too weak to continue spreading before it is removed.

Yet, how can you be safe when selfish people wanted to simply herd immunize everyone without any protocols in place?

-2 ( +0 / -2 )

@rainyday.

I'm sorry about you sister. My mother has just competed chemotherapy and 7 weeks lockdown so far. Luckily she is OK.

i don't know your situation, but if things went bad for my mum, I could never visit her or go to a funeral.

i feel for you.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Wow all pretty bad ideas.

How would I shelter a nursing home against a invisible virus?? By not doing all the things you said.

The government should have THAT as a priority. Paying professionals a good wage to care for the elderly.

Test them and house them and take care of them and give them a large bonus!

As we come out of lockdowns around the world, infections will continue and the past lockdown wont be worth anything for the very old and ill THEN now would it?

I’m guessing your suggestion is just repeated sustained lockdowns till the virus disappears or the magical vaccine arrives?

Obviously another way will be implemented later for the vunerable and it wont be about the other 90% mostly, it should be mostly about them so we can meet their needs

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

You'd think anyone having some form of treatment,causing their immune system to be weakened would be vulnerable,no?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

CEMO puts you at risk of dying. Like 93% likely to die of it. Switch to Gerson. LIVE.

I'm a cancer survivor with pancreatic cancer stage 4 and I'm in my 3rd year of chemo and I've got to say this is complete crap.

Switch to Gerson. DIE. Now this is more accurate.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites