Loading ...
Why is woo dangerous? I could pontificate for pages, but instead let’s look at a more-than-worthy example of some serious woo woo that is putting a child’s life on the line:
… A 14 year old girl, Tamar, was recently diagnosed with liver cancer which required immediate and aggressive chemotherapy. But her parents have shunned conventional treatment in favour of “mud” therapy. A team of oncologists at Princes Margaret Childrens’ Hospital advised that a seven week course of chemotherapy would give Tamar a 50-60% chance of survival. Despite the treating hospital pleading with the parents to consent to chemotherapy, eventually seeking the involvement of the WA legal system, the parents fled Australia to El Salvador.
Their preferred treatment is tea made from herbs, and red clay gathered from around the hills near their house in El Salvador. Tamar’s mother says that “Clay is basically the right medicine for any kind of illness, (it can cure) anything”. She went on to say, “..it dries up anything that is causing the illness in your system”.
(source)
You’ve got to see the footage to believe it:
During the news report, the visibly ill, listless girl is asked whether she preferred her parents’ natural remedies over the choice of chemotherapy. Her father asks her if she’s ever felt pressured into this choice and reminds her about the side effects of chemo (like hair loss). She said that “yeah” she thought mud and tea were a better option than chemotherapy because she didn’t want to lose her hair.
Of course she didn’t want to lose her hair. Of course she would pick something easy and painless over something difficult. When her parents told her there was a simple way to get well, she took the easy route. Why? Because she trusts her parents and wants to avoid hardship. We can’t fault her for that. She’s 14! If she believes that something pleasant could benefit her health just as much as something unpleasant, who can blame her for picking the natural remedies?
The problem is, her parents are dewoosional. They don’t understand science, and instead trust in superstitions, faith, and old wives’ tales over demonstrated, practical reality. They make shit up to comfort theimselves instead of dealing with the plain truth that sometimes life screws you over, people get sick, and loved ones die.
With full knowledge of what multiple experts say about Tamar’s terminal condition, they’re refusing to acknowledge anything but their wishful thinking. These parents are stubbornly killing their daughter.
(via @AtheistinWA)
Tuesday, October 13th, 2009, 5:01 pm | 
Your Daily Woo, science, skepticism and freethought | 
RSS feed
| 
Respond | 
Trackback
October 14, 2009 at 1:10 am
why?
why are people some damned stupid that they would destroy the life of their child in such a way?
if the parents wanted to forgo chemo for mud, that is one thing, but treating your own child, who will believe anything you tell them (its an evolutionary trait) like this is monstrous.
i weep for that poor little girl who will never get to experience life because of her parent's delusions.
October 14, 2009 at 1:36 am
Hmm… They sure trusted science to fly them to El Salvador… Criminals.
October 14, 2009 at 1:44 am
Hello,
Many see that these parents are, in essence ruining their child's life. I see them as protecting and upholding all that is good about their child's life. And I am an atheist. I do not believe in prayer or use homeopathies. I am a registered nurse who works in a pediatric hospital. Were I to find myself in the same situation, I'd flee the country too. Not for mud therapy, but to not allow the medical establishment to perpetrate the worst kind of child abuse. I would accept the legal consequences. I'd rather go to jail than prolong my child's suffering.
The sad reality is that the little girl will die no matter what you do. I've seen what chemotherapy does to a person. Doctors say there is a fifty percent chance of survival but they often conceal the real numbers, because they are ingrained with the "fight for life at all costs," mentality. The costs in severe cancer treated with chemotherapy are horrific. It's hard to appreciate unless you've been a witness to it. I hope none of you ever have to.
Parent's make every choice for there child. From diet to after-school activities, walking home from school to riding a bike. Some parental decisions, like sports or field trips could lead to the death of their child. The law is not called when a parent decides to let their kid drive a car and there is a tragic accident. Why is the refusal of health care in a grave situation not treated as a parental choice? I don't understand this. Why do Doctors insist that they know best? Because they have an ego the size of Montana and they are not the ones in the bed.
I don't understand why people feel everyone has to be treated the same. Do we run to third-world countries demanding that they take modern medicine or have an appendectomy. No. Why, then, just because a person lives in a country with medicine does our legal system demand they take it.
These parents are heros in my eyes. They are not stupid, or ignorant. They know what they are up against and they've chosen what they feel is best for their terminal ill child.
October 14, 2009 at 9:56 am
I see them as protecting and upholding all that is good about their child's life.
And what, precisely, is that?
Were I to find myself in the same situation, I'd flee the country too. Not for mud therapy, but to not allow the medical establishment to perpetrate the worst kind of child abuse.
What!? Are you honestly and seriously suggesting that the application chemotherapy is not just child abuse, but the worst kind of child abuse? How can anyone take what you say seriously? To make such a claim is not only delusional, but a grave and abominable insult to all children who have been victims of sexual, physical, emotional and any other type of assualt.
I'd rather go to jail than prolong my child's suffering.
Gaol is where you belong precisely because you would be prolonging your childs suffering by avoiding a treatment like chemo.
The sad reality is that the little girl will die no matter what you do…Doctors say there is a fifty percent chance of survival but they often conceal the real numbers
So, given your medical expertise in cancer during childhood (after all, you are a paediatric RN) what are the real numbers. Is this anectdote, or peer reviewed research findings? And unless the rate of survival is 0%, then your first claim is obviously wrong.
Some parental decisions, like sports or field trips could lead to the death of their child. The law is not called when a parent decides to let their kid drive a car and there is a tragic accident.
There are levels of risk. To suggest that the risk of death from the activities you cite is equal to the risk of death for administering chemotherapy is absurd.
Why do Doctors insist that they know best? Because they have an ego the size of Montana and they are not the ones in the bed.
I don't understand why people feel everyone has to be treated the same.
But not everyone is treated the same. People are treated based on individual circumstance.
Do we run to third-world countries demanding that they take modern medicine or have an appendectomy.
Demanding? Try advocating. And we advocate modern medicine because it works a hell of a lot better than non-modern medicine. Or do you think it pure coincidence that health is, on average, better in nations that use modern medicine than those in which it is not?
These parents are heros in my eyes. They are not stupid, or ignorant. They know what they are up against and they've chosen what they feel is best for their terminal ill child.
They are most certainly not heroes. They may think they are doing what is best for their child, but they are ignorant and stupid, and do not know what they are up against. They are foolish and idiotic, and are condemning their child to a slow and painful death.
October 14, 2009 at 10:03 am
Why do Doctors insist that they know best? Because they have an ego the size of Montana and they are not the ones in the bed.
Perhaps it's because they have training and expertise in their field that qualifies them to make medical decisions. Yeah, that could be it.
And even if they did have egos the size of Montana, that wouldn't alter what we know based on the findings of medical research, reasearch based on that thing commonly known as reality.
October 22, 2009 at 9:16 am
"These parents are heros in my eyes. They are not stupid, or ignorant. They know what they are up against and they've chosen what they feel is best for their terminal ill child."
You have got be joking me Heather. These parents are irresponsible and deluded and completely ignoring good evidence. How are they acting in the poor girl's best interests when the only evidence-based clinically proven therapy for her is to receive chemotherapy specific for her tumour type? That chemotherapy has side-effects is why specialists ie. oncologists need to make a clinical judgement about the risks and benefits in every individual case. Hair loss may be a side-effect, but at least chemotherapy has proven efficacy unlike mud.
And why are you labelling the girl's condition as terminal? It may very well be if the parent's don't act swiftly (unfortunately they don't seem to be), but you are essentially saying it is OKAY for all children with cancer to die and be left to die and not be offered the one therapy that might save them.
November 5, 2009 at 9:14 am
Hi Heather,
I am with you we are going through chemo and radiation with my daughter at the moment and it is horrible, we have never believed in it and we are wanting to stop, we know it is up to the doctor to agree with us , if we refuse they can take our daughter off us.
she is only three and half
do you know of any other thing that we might be able to use in our favour to help him agree with us to stop the treatment
thanks michelle
October 14, 2009 at 2:50 am
Heather,
What these parents are doing is consigning the child to a painful death. In all likelihood, this girl is not even going to have the benefit of proper palliative care, although I can't say that with any certainty.
Human euthanasia is not legal in this country. Perhaps unfortunately, but that's an argument for another time. If it were legal and the parents (AND THE GIRL) had chosen to use a painless method to end her life so that she did not suffer, I wouldn't have too much of a problem with it (although I might be rather uneasy given the odds of recovery that have been quoted). This seems to be more or less what you're arguing for, despite the fact that it's not really analogous to this situation.
The parents are stupid and ignorant, and there is nothing heroic about them. They are not opting to knowingly end their daughter's life; they are choosing a bullshit therapy over one that might do something because they are either misinformed or in willful denial.
October 14, 2009 at 4:10 am
There is no amount of morphine that eases the pain of chemotherapy treatment and cancer. And you're right, she may or may not be receiving palliative care. And we don't know for sure how informed they are. The parents do not claim any allegiance to any group that advocates for complete refuse of all modern medicine. I don't know for sure but it appears that they are refusing only the chemo and since they would be forced by the legal system to ravage their daughters body they fled.
I am not advocating for euthanasia. I am advocating for parents the right to refuse an extremely harmful therapy with a low probability for recovery. We don't know what the 50/50 is, it could be 50/50 for one year.
I'm sure I am in a major minority in regards to this case. My career as a nurse has made me so, I can't help it.
The sad part is that the child will die which she would likely do with the chemo and the parents will be thrown in jail.
October 14, 2009 at 1:41 pm
I will agree with you that the situation is grim either way it's handled, but if there is a possibility of it being less grim, I would want to try it.
October 14, 2009 at 1:41 pm
I will agree with you that the situation is grim either way it's handled, but if there is a possibility of it being less grim, I would want to try it. Thus, I would be trying chemotherapy.
October 22, 2009 at 9:22 am
I am sorry your career as a nurse has made you such a twisted individual with a vendetta against chemotherapy and a complete disregard for the evidence.
Chemotherapy can sometimes be the only life-saving option.
If this girl is not yet terminal, how should she be treated? In your world, she should be left to die.
October 14, 2009 at 4:55 am
I feel sick.
October 14, 2009 at 5:40 am
I think the hardest part of the video for me to watch was when the father repeatedly and obviously pressed his daughter for positive answers and actions to prove to the critical eye of the camera that she felt fine. I feel so terribly sorry for her.
October 14, 2009 at 12:57 pm
This just breaks my heart, that girl is obviously suffering and her parents are being ignorant of the reality. They're not protecting her by having the clay treatment, only condemning her to a slow, painful death.
October 17, 2009 at 4:56 pm
This is tragic and crazy. There's a line where parental rights must be judged against the well-being of the child. They're way beyond that point.
October 22, 2009 at 8:19 am
This is absolutely tragic. A perfect example of how woo and religion can kill. God decides her fate?
And @Heather, you should be ashamed. You are a paediatric nurse for crying out loud. Clearly your personal crusade against "patriarchal doctors" and the "medical establishment" is clouding your judgement about what is in the best interests of this poor girl. You say "The sad reality is that the little girl will die no matter what you do. I've seen what chemotherapy does to a person" – how do you know she is going to die? Do you know the prognosis of her condition? Are you medically trained to understand that?
Chemotherapy saves lives. Yes, of course, it can and does have side-effects, frequently severe. These need to be considered. If a person's medical prognosis as assessed by an oncology doctor (not a nurse, who has NO training to do this) is terminal , then good palliative care needs to be offered – this is good medicine to know when not to be overly aggressive with therapies when the chance of survival is so poor. To someone who is also in the medical/health profession, I find your comments completely irresponsible.
"The costs in severe cancer treated with chemotherapy are horrific." Well Heather, the costs in severe cancer without any sort of therapy is usually death.
October 29, 2009 at 8:40 am
I have to agree with Heather.
Those who feel that chemotherapy is the better or proven treatment for cancer should take a closer look at the statistics. Especially those not affiliated to industries that gain economically from the multi billion dollar chemotherapy treatment. It i true the survival or cure rate for chemotherapy is not 0%. The most recent study looking at survival rates in 22 types of adult cancers showed that while in Australia the survival rate is 60%, chemotherapy only helped to 'cure' 2.1% of this. In the US it's estimated at 2.3%. So it's not 0% it's 2.1%. For all the pain, suffering and cost, and the side effects that can kill you, nevermind the cancer!
I would guess that mud might have as good a chance!
The religious element was thrown into this ' documentary' purely for emotive reasons – and I can see from this forum that it's got the response it was after. A lot of religion vs science mumbo jumbo if you ask me. This family made this decision because this is the treatment they chose for their daughter, they didn't want chemotherapy. That they happen to be religious and follow a certain faith is by the by. Had they chosen chemotherapy, they would be using the same justifications about God's will.
You may think mud or tea or herbal treatment is mumbo jumbo, and it might well be. And you might think that belief in God is mum jumbo, and it might well be. But what the facts seem to be that this family truly believe in the curative properties of this mud and tea treatment, as some of you truly believe in the curative properties of chemotherapy. The difference is, mud hasn't been proven ineffective, but chemotherapy pretty much has! Except in a very small percentage of cancer patients.
October 29, 2009 at 3:11 pm
Your line of reasoning doesn't make any sense, Kim. Lots of potential "treatments" for cancer haven't been proven ineffective, simply because there's no logical reason that they would be effective. I could just as easily say, using your argument, that suspending people by their ankles for days at a time is a valid treatment for cancer, as the effects of suspending people for days at a time by their ankles has never been proven ineffective at curing cancer. In the same way, I could make up any quack treatment, from shaking chicken feet over the patient to smearing them with feces, and by applying your argument, prove that they are valid treatments because they have never been proven ineffective.
October 29, 2009 at 12:16 pm
Kim, you don't provide a reference for your data, but I presume that that you are refering to the findings in the paper "The contribution of cytotoxic chemotherapy to 5-year survival in adult malignancies". The ~2% figure is derived from a meta-analysis, and it has been criticised. For instance, it covers a range of cancers rather than specific, individual cancers. The type of cancer one has is important in determining the effectiveness of chemo. See here for one critique.
Trackbacks
October 13, 2009 at 6:45 pm
October 13, 2009 at 7:24 pm
October 14, 2009 at 6:56 am