[SC]Steve Jobs opted for alternative treatment over potentially life-saving operation

Dave!

Jobs 'refused' life-saving surgery

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2011/1021/breaking16.html

Apple co-founder Steve Jobs refused potentially life-saving cancer surgery for nine months, shrugging off his family's protests and opting instead for alternative medicine, according to his biographer.

When he eventually sought surgery, the rare form of pancreatic cancer had spread to the tissues surrounding the organ, biographer Walter Isaacson said in an interview with 60 Minutes on CBS, to be aired on Sunday.

Jobs also played down the seriousness of his condition and told everyone he was cured but kept receiving treatment in secret, Mr Isaacson said in the interview.

The biography hits bookstores next week and emerged from scores of interviews with Jobs. It is expected to paint an unprecedented, no-holds-barred portrait of a man who famously guarded his privacy fiercely but whose death ignited a global outpouring of grief and tribute.

The book reveals Jobs was bullied in school, tried various quirky diets as a teenager, and exhibited early strange behavior such as staring at others without blinking, according to the Associated Press, which said it bought a copy yesterday, without disclosing how.

In his CBS interview, Mr Isaacson confirmed details that had been speculated upon or widely reported, including that Jobs might have been cured of his "slow-growing" cancer had he sought professional treatment sooner, rather than resorting to unconventional means.

Jobs deeply regretted putting off a decision that might have ultimately saved his life, according to the author.

"He tries to treat it with diet. He goes to spiritualists. He goes to various ways of doing it macrobiotically and he doesn't get an operation," Mr Isaacson said in the interview.

"I think that he kind of felt that if you ignore something, if you don't want something to exist, you can have magical thinking," he said. "We talked about this a lot."

Jobs announced in August 2004 that he had undergone surgery to remove a cancerous tumor from his pancreas. In 2008 and 2009 - as his dwindling weight stirred increasing alarm in Silicon Valley and on Wall Street - he said first he was fighting a "common bug," then that he was suffering from a hormone imbalance. In 2009, news emerged that he had undergone a liver transplant.

Jobs died on October 5th, aged 56. Outpourings of sympathy swept across the globe as state leaders, business rivals and fans paid their respects to the man who touched the daily lives of countless millions through the Macintosh computer, iPod, iPhone and iPad.

He had never revealed much about his life or thinking - until he commissioned Mr Isaacson for a biography he hoped would let his children know him better.

The book shed new light on how Jobs' relationship with longtime friend and ex-Apple board member, then-Google chief executive Eric Schmidt - unraveled when the Internet search giant chose to go toe-to-toe with Apple in the smartphone arena.

According to AP's account of the biography, Jobs went on an expletive-laced rant against what he called "grand theft," after Google launched its Android mobile software on phones made by Taiwan's HTC Corp in 2010.

"I will spend my last dying breath if I need to, and I will spend every penny of Apple's $40 billion in the bank, to right this wrong," Jobs was cited as saying in the book, according to AP. "I'm going to destroy Android, because it's a stolen product. I'm willing to go thermonuclear war on this."

Experts say Apple and Samsung Electronic's legal patent battle - spanning at least three continents - was really an attack on Google's 3-year-old software, now the world's most-used smartphone operating system.

Details also emerged about Jobs' life away from the world of business, which by all accounts had consumed most of his time.

Adopted as a baby by a family in Silicon Valley, Jobs met his biological father - Abdulfattah "John" Jandali - several times in the 1980s without realizing who he was, according to Mr Isaacson.

Mr Jandali had been running a restaurant in the area at the time. But Jobs never got in touch with him once he found out the restaurateur was his biological father, according to an excerpt from the TV interview posted on the CBS website.

The technology icon also revealed he stopped going to church at age 13 after he saw starving children on the cover of Life Magazine , the AP cited the book as saying.

Jobs spent years studying Zen Buddhism and has famously traveled through India in search of spiritual guidance.

He talked in his biography about his love for design and called Apple's design chief Jonathan Ive his "spiritual partner"; Mr Ive had "more operation power" at Apple than anyone besides Jobs himself, according to AP.

Jobs, who counted The Beatles among his favorite artists, came up with the name of his iconic company while on one of his fruitarian diets. He had just returned from an apple farm and thought the moniker was "fun, spirited and not intimidating," AP cited the biography as saying.

Knew about this before, but it gives more details now. The cancer seemingly spread as a result of him not getting the operation, and he regretted having done so.

Another one to go under "What's the harm?"

easychair

Dave! wrote: »

Knew about this before, but it gives more details now. The cancer seemingly spread as a result of him not getting the operation, and he regretted having done so.

Another one to go under "What's the harm?"

The article doesn't give much detail of his diagnosis, and maybe the clue is in the liver transplant. If his cancer had spread to the liver, then his prognosis was unlikely to be very good.

Many cancer patients decide to tell no one else, as they don't want others to feel awkward around them, or want the simles of sympathy and pity which so many adopt on learning someone has cancer.

Additionally, many patients decide to have no treatment rather than spending their last months being made even more ill and uncomfortable which some treatments may cause.

I'm sure many of us can understand that.

Zombrex

Such a shame, pancreatic cancer is normally incurable but Jobs had a rare form that gave him a chance that he squandered on New Age nonsense.

What ever about doing that to yourself it must have been so frustrating for his family.

maccored

I dont think theres anything 'new Age' about it - according to the 60 mins documentary, Jobs believed his clean living vegan lifestyle would make the difference. He didnt want to be cut open in case the cancer spread. I dont remember yer man saying much about new age medicine.

easychair

maccored wrote: »

Jobs believed his clean living vegan lifestyle would make the difference.

It's often been noted how unusual it is that someone who can be so successful in one area of life can be so stupid in another.

The modern fallacy is that to be physically fit equals being healthy, and that disease can be caused ( and in this case apparently cured) by eating certain foodstuffs.

Oryx

easychair wrote: »

It's often been noted how unusual it is that someone who can be so successful in one area of life can be so stupid in another.

The modern fallacy is that to be physically fit equals being healthy, and that disease can be caused ( and in this case apparently cured) by eating certain foodstuffs.

Disease is caused by what you eat. Diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol. All affected by diet. Not to even start on the number of foods that are said to be carcinogenic. And do you think being fit shortens your life, then? Now I know being fit does not mean you are immune to disease, but done right it certainly doesn't hurt your health.

I know some people who feel the cure for cancer is worse than the disease, some people will refuse treatment on that basis alone. It might mean they are foolish, but it is their choice. I have more of a problem with those flogging 'natural' cures without pointing out the lack of evidence and/or testing that such cures work.

Zombrex

maccored wrote: »

I dont think theres anything 'new Age' about it - according to the 60 mins documentary, Jobs believed his clean living vegan lifestyle would make the difference.

Which is a very new agey type of thinking.

easychair

Oryx wrote: »

Disease is caused by what you eat. Diabetes, high blood pressure, high cholesterol. All affected by diet.

You complete post more or less illustrates perfectly the muddled thinking of which I was talking.

You seem to be unaware of what is mneant by "cause" and by "affect". While no one can argue that diabetes (high blood pressure and cholesterol are not diseases but conditions) might well be affected by diet, it is not caused by diet.

Oryx wrote: »

Now I know being fit does not mean you are immune to disease, but done right it certainly doesn't hurt your health.

Again, this perfectly illustrates the muddled thinking to which I referred.

Jim Fixx is the man popularly credited with starting off the modern trend for jogging. He himself was incredibly fit, and so fit he was he ran every day and often ran whole marathons, and was in the middle of running a marathon when a heart attack brought his life to a premature end.

This perfectly illustrates the point that fitness and health are two entirely different things.

Oryx

Look around you. The people who are dying of heart disease, diabetes, and all other diet related illnesses are, by and large, unhealthy. By that I mean on a poor diet, or lacking in exercise. Sure you will give me examples like a guy who wears his heart out running. But that does not change the fact that fitness does go hand in hand with general wellbeing. I'm not talking the extremes of the scale here. To go back to Steve jobs, do you think it is wrong for him or any other sick person to clean up their diet and improve their general health (ie fitness) in order to fight disease better? Are you saying that does not work, even psychologically? This is an aside to the main argument of ignoring conventional treatment, which I don't think anyone should do.

easychair

Oryx wrote: »

Look around you. The people who are dying of heart disease, diabetes, and all other diet related illnesses are, by and large, unhealthy.

My point was that that fitness and health are often confused. You now say that those who die of heart disease are unhealthy, and that was my point. They are not necessarily "fit" or "unfit" but are unhealthy.

Oryx wrote: »

To go back to Steve jobs, do you think it is wrong for him or any other sick person to clean up their diet and improve their general health (ie fitness) in order to fight disease better?

In the case in which you mention I can't think anyone can claim that it was good for him, and it certainly didn't improve his health as he died.

meryem

I think Steve Jobs picked wrong options at wrong time. If he was not worried about the pain in chemotherapy and related treatment for Cancer in Allopathy system of medicine than he should have gone for it...

maccored

Thinking a healthy lifestyle might help in being healthy is "a very new agey type of thinking" ? Wow, I'm obviously out of step with reality.

Zombrex wrote: »

Which is a very new agey type of thinking.

Dave!

Thinking a healthy lifestyle might stop the spread of cancer is "a very new agey type of thinking", yes, and yes you are obviously out of step with reality.

maccored

Oh right. The only way to deal with cancer is to take drugs. and they always work. Yeah Dave ... I'll gladly stay out of step if the only option is to limit how I think.

Dave!

Nope, there are several treatment options available depending on at what stage the cancer is at, and they have varying degrees of success, also depending on how long you leave the cancer before starting the treatment.

They have a better success rate than "do nothing", though.

maccored

I hope ridiculing a man who died of cancer makes you feel better Dave.

Dave!

Ah, I see you're going the emotional route, so I gather you've conceded the argument.

FWIW I'm more concerned with people who peddle this nonsense and try to turn patients away from conventional medical treatments, rather than the patients themselves, who are the victims.

Oryx

Dave! wrote: »

Ah, I see you're going the emotional route, so I gather you've conceded the argument.

FWIW I'm more concerned with people who peddle this nonsense and try to turn patients away from conventional medical treatments, rather than the patients themselves, who are the victims.

Complimentary (in addition to rather than replacing regular therapies) treatment I dont have a problem with, as long as it does no harm. If a healing treatment calms someone, or makes them feel like they are doing something to actively help themselves, then ok.

Alternative therapies which discourage conventional treatment should be subject to the same rigours as regular medical practice. Show proof of efficacy or get banned. Anyone who claims to be able to cure cancer or other serious disease by untried, untested methods just for a nice tidy fee should be prosecuted.

Dave!

I image that's the attitude most doctors would take... If your CAM makes you feel better, and doesn't interfere with your primary treatment, then go for it. A happier or more relaxed patient will probably fare better than a stressed one.

i71jskz5xu42pb

maccored wrote:

He didnt want to be cut open in case the cancer spread.

Wut?

Do people really think that if they are cut open the cancer will jump out, and move to a different part of their body?

Zombrex

maccored wrote: »

Thinking a healthy lifestyle might help in being healthy is "a very new agey type of thinking" ? Wow, I'm obviously out of step with reality.

Thinking a vegan diet is going to cure cancer is very new agey type of thinking.

steddyeddy

Zombrex wrote: »

Thinking a vegan diet is going to cure cancer is very new agey type of thinking.

This is a problem with skepticism. You just dismissed a vegan diet out of hand by labeling it as new agey. Just because something is not currently recognised by science you cannot dismiss it based apoun percieved notions about those who advocate it.

Diet plays a big part in DNA methylation. DNA methylation plays a huge part in the cell cycle, cell differentiation and because of the connection to the proceding biochemical events it is linked to cancer. There are no explicit studies on DNA methylation and cancer in connection with a vegan diet but just because science hasnt currently got concrete proof of something as of yet doesnt mean there is none.

Its about likely hoods and heres where skepticism is important. Many people say certain illnesses are not food related, Im extremely skeptical of that hypotheisis. Its more likely that food plays a big part in cancer rather than not playing a part in cancer.

A vegan diet wont cure cancer (that we know of) but Its not an unrealitsic aproach in conjunction with other therapies.

steddyeddy

Just to clearly state my position. I do think that steves jobs alternative treatments did shorten his life considerably.

Zombrex

steddyeddy wrote: »

This is a problem with skepticism. You just dismissed a vegan diet out of hand by labeling it as new agey.

Groan. I can't tell if you and maccored aren't listening or are you purposefully ignoring what I'm saying while trying to start another rant about skepticism.

I did not dismiss a vegan diet as new agey.

I dismissed thinking that a vegan diet would cure cancer as new agey, as I just explained already in the post above that you yourself quoted (but clearly didn't read :rolleyes:)

steddyeddy wrote: »

Just because something is not currently recognised by science you cannot dismiss it based apoun percieved notions about those who advocate it.

What? Vegan diets are not recognized by science? What are you talking about?

steddyeddy wrote: »

Diet plays a big part in DNA methylation. DNA methylation plays a huge part in the cell cycle, cell differentiation and because of the connection to the proceding biochemical events it is linked to cancer. There are no explicit studies on DNA methylation and cancer in connection with a vegan diet but just because science hasnt currently got concrete proof of something as of yet doesnt mean there is none.

So what you are saying is that there is no established link between vegan diets and curing cancer, but some people for some reason believe there is.

Umm, I wonder why they believe that. Maybe because of new age silliness.

steddyeddy wrote: »

Its about likely hoods and heres where skepticism is important. Many people say certain illnesses are not food related, Im extremely skeptical of that hypotheisis. Its more likely that food plays a big part in cancer rather than not playing a part in cancer.

It has been established for the last 40 years that foods play a role in cancer. This was discovered through that thing, what doe they call it, man always forgetting, oh yes ... science

You apparently don't know this (since you have already denounced science as not knowing everything), which would lead me to question why exactly you said you think it is more likely that food plays a role in cancer? You appreciate that only being skeptical of on side of a discussion does not a skeptic make.

steddyeddy wrote: »

A vegan diet wont cure cancer (that we know of) but Its not an unrealitsic aproach in conjunction with other therapies.

you mean the other therapies that have actually been shown to cure cancer ...

Rob Humanoid

Just shows you... That smart people can be so dumb and taken in by 'alternative' nonsense.

Oryx

necro thread... closing.