Wednesday, May 23, 2012

Dr. Visit Today

I mean absolutely NO offence by this blog post.  This is strictly my point of view.  So if you don't like what I have said in the past don't read this.

I want to write this while my visit is fresh in my mind.  Like I have said before, I have complete respect and love for my Dr here.  He is amazing and I am thankful that he has my best interests in mind.  We had a really good chat today about these "spots" that have shown up in the PET scan.

Apparently Ken and I misunderstood our first chat with Dr so I apologize for that.  Dr explained everything to me today and pretty much said all of this...

"Differentiation between malignant and benign pulmonary nodules is a common problem encountered by radiologists which has provided the impetus to explore alternative imaging techniques. Accurate diagnosis can reduce unnecessary thoracotomies in patients with benign diseases. Metabolic imaging with 2-(18F)-fluoro-2-deoxy-D-glucose positron emission tomography (PET) is being used more and more to differentiate benign from malignant focal lesions and it has been shown to be more efficacious than conventional chest CT. It has a unique ability to differentiate benign from malignant nodules, and it offers a different approach to the diagnosis of chest diseases because it exploits fundamental biochemical differences between benign and malignant cells.

However, fluorodeoxyglucose (FDG) is not a cancer-specific agent, and false positive findings in benign diseases have been reported in active inflammation or infection, causing false-positive results. In addition, the malignant tumors with low metabolic activity or tumors smaller than 1.0 cm in diameter often show false negative results. Furthermore, the accuracy of FDG-PET scans in detecting pulmonary metastases in patients with cancer has not yet been established.

Awareness of the conditions and the mechanisms by which false positive and negative results occur will help radiologists interpret PET scans more accurately and also will help to determine the significance of the findings."

Meaning, just because it lit up in a PET scan doesn't mean that it is cancerous. 

This moved us onto the greatly debated biopsy.  Check out my image as follows:

You will have to excuse my computer graphics... as you see, I have none.  I am not sure if you can read what I wrote there or not but I will explain it for you.  The black area is malignant and the white area is normal tissue.  As was explained to me again today, if they go through the white area, but don't go in far enough, then they can assume that the growth would be benign, even if it was just a portion of the cancerous growth that was "ok". 

We already went through this exact scenario when I had my biopsy done on my lymph node.  The first test came back inconclusive and Dr wanted another test to be done because there wasn't enough node tissue in the sample.  Thankfully she is the brains behind this situation and asked for another one to be done because from that we determined that the node was positive and so the two ahead of it would also be positive thus making the important decision to not just to a lumpectomy with a sentinel node biopsy.  Had we just done that we would have missed the other 3 out of the 21 that were positive!

Back to the drawing, Dr said if we change the angle at which the biopsy would be done, then we would easily be able to get the sample that is malignant because you would be going at the growth from the bad side.

I know what he is thinking, the same thing Ken is thinking, "Why don't we just do the biopsy to see what we are dealing with and save us a pile of money that we don't necessarily need to be spending on treatment if isn't malignant?"  I completely agree with this BUT this is my body, and both of these men understand and respect that it is my decision even if it seems a little silly to them.

I know that from doing a biopsy you can seed the malignant cells as you pull the needle back out.  I have been reassured that this doesn't happen very often and more specifically only happens with certain types of cancer.  Well, you can't figure out what kind of cancer it is unless you have a biopsy or have the tumor surgically removed and have a pathology report done on it.  Then what?  "Sorry, it was a crappy type of cancer that can and does seed... again, sorry."  That isn't a great answer for me either.

I was also told that IF it does clear up doing any sort of alternative therapy, it was probably a benign growth in the first place or it was a misdiagnosis.  No room for miracles here?!

I guess what I am getting at is - I have fasted, prayed, read and researched and prayed some more and then some more.  Unless I do a biopsy, I will never know whether or not it was cancerous.  But even if I did a biopsy would I really know if it was anyways??  Depending on angles and such.  I have to trust my instinct, my own personal answers to my many, many prayers and the bit of knowledge that I have attained.  If the growths do clear up then what do I have to loose?  Have I wasted money?  Am I further behind because I never really knew what I was treating? 

I believe that cancer, like many diseases, needs to be treated from the inside out (I know what I believe is not what a lot of other people believe, so let's just agree to disagree.  Arguing around and around doesn't solve anything anyways.  Just frustrates us all.).  We can take drugs for all sorts of things to mask our problems, but if we never really heal the root of the problem are we any farther ahead??  Again, I know that there are modern medical miracles that could only be possible with the advancements in medicine.  If I got hit by a car am I going to ask to be taken to my naturopathic doctor?  No, I am pretty sure I would go right to the hospital.  If I had a baby stuck in my crotch (LOL sorry, hate the "v" word), would I ask my midwife to say a prayer and hope it comes out before either or both of us die?  Again, no, I am going to head off for surgery.  If I had a rapid growing flesh eating disease would I just put oil of oregano on it and hope for the best?  Nope to that either.  See what I am getting at, it all has it's place.  I can only trust my Father in Heaven and his hand, that I feel, is guiding me.


  1. Love it G, and I totally agree. I love that you have opted for a treatment that will combine modern with natural, that is how God intended it I am sure...

    But consider yourself warned, between your blogs and forks over knives, and my natural desire to eat hippy, I am going to be so mad if I turn vegan! No ice cream? Not sure God wants that!

  2. Good for you for following you heart and trusting your feelings and judgement!!! You know you better than anyone. I think of you every day Kiddo!!! Thanks for keeping us posted on your progress! Love you!!!
    <3 Linda xoxoxo