The Lesser of Two Evils
“The Good Doctor” was right after all. But even a stopped clock tells time perfectly twice a day. Unfortunately, the prostate cancer had metastasized since at least from last November 2018 following the biopsy. It is clearly visible on the bone scan I had done then. I assume the radiologist made an error and all the doctors I saw in Greece after that point, never looked at the scan itself they simply looked at the report that gave the all clear. No metastasis it said. Then they tried to convince me that chemical castration was the lesser of two evils. It did strike me as strange when I would take the scan to them and they would simply put it aside and simply read the report.
I knew in my quest for a natural treatment for prostate cancer, it was a gamble not to accept another injection of ADT (Androgen Deprivation Therapy) as the “lesser of two evils,” but the negative side effects were not acceptable to me. Also, I needed to be clean before I began the oleocanthal injections. I was late in finding the right cancer clinic and doctor to administer the oleocanthal injections. So many ethical hurdles to overcome. But when it comes to Big Pharma ethics get thrown out the window and we have standard therapy for prostate cancer is chemical castration. They call this modern medicine. They will tell you it has saved millions of lives. What they do not tell you is: at what cost? First of all wrong diagnosis. How many times has the wrong diagnosis led to death? Over medicating is causing severe health and social problems. But nobody seems to care. Its all part of the lesser of two evils philosophy they work under. But when it comes to trying something new suddenly everyone is up in arms and caring about me living as long as possible and the quality of life be damned!
This goes to the heart of what is wrong with our modern medicine. It is built on greed. The manufacturing of new medicines has been handed over to huge corporations whose motive is increasing shareholder value and not the well being of our citizens.
These are the people in charge of our healthcare. Prime example of big pharma corporate greed: https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/09/daraprim-turing-pharmaceuticals-martin-shkreli/406546/
The discovery of new medicines should not be in the hands of private for profit entities. It should be in the hands of research institutions and universities. By supporting a culture of excellence and innovation at the education level would support the discovery of more effective medicines and treatments. Research should be funded by taxes and not by vulture investors. The high prices for inadequate medicine is a tax on our citizens but its not a government tax it’s a private tax for private profit on behalf of vulture investors.
The Lesser of Two Evils has its roots in Homers’ Odyssey – “Between Scylla and Charybdis” is an idiom derived from Homer‘s Odyssey. In the story, Odysseus chose to go near Scylla as the lesser of two evils. He lost six of his companions, but if he had gone near Charybdis all would be doomed. Because of such stories, having to navigate between the two hazards eventually entered idiomatic use.
“Don’t vote for the lesser evil, fight for the greater good”.
Everyone who warned me about the danger was correct, but it does not mean they were right. “Right” is to be on the right side of history and evolution. The bright future will not arrive if we all simply accept out of fear, compromise out of need, or discourage someone who chooses to try something different.
The bright future will not arrive if we continue to accept the “lesser of two evils” philosophy as an excuse for not doing enough to discover better medicines that may not be as profitable but may be more effective.
I like the Green Party candidate Jill Stein who invoked this idea in her 2016 campaign in her slogan “Don’t vote for the lesser evil, fight for the greater good”. This is what I am fighting for; the greater good but it is the road less travelled… and it can get very bumpy…
Curiosity leads to solutions where fear leads to inaction or dead ends
Now we will have to modify the injections and substantially increase the dosage levels of intravenous injections or direct injections into the metastasized cancer. We were slowly increasing the dosage so we probably never hit that sweet spot where we can have a verifiable result. A few days after the latest treatment I had another biopsy done. I had no idea the cancer had already metastasized 10 months ago.
The biopsy may also have increased the rate of metastasis. This was a chance I was willing to take. My curiosity was greater than the concern for my safety, because curiosity leads to solutions where fear leads to inaction or dead ends. Then I found out the metastasis to the hip bone had already happened.
I have always rebelled against the idea of letting someone else make the important life decisions for me. Much easier to live or die based on my own decision making than someone else’s. I can live with my decisions because I made them; I have no one to blame. But if I accepted someone else’s decision out of the “lesser of two evils” doctrine as the correct one and it did not work out it would be unacceptable.
The medical establishment’s doctrine of “lesser of two evils” is based on greed and increasing shareholder value: “your doctor has determined the benefit of taking this medication outweigh the negative side effects.”
Medicine is not supposed to be a choice of the lesser of two evils.
Why is it? Because it is convenient to the pharmaceuticals and the pill doctors. This is the stark choice I was offered. The pressure to accept the therapy that was recommended for prostate cancer was firmly based on the concept of: “the lesser of two evils”. In my case it simply means hanging on to life regardless of the quality, is better than death.
Therefore, the pressure to accept the therapies presented seem at first glance to be on a very reasonable footing. “If you do not do this you will die” what “this” refers to is chemical castration as a first line response to my prostate cancer diagnosis. Then radiation or chemotherapy then surgical removal of the prostate itself. All this with only a 50% chance it may not re-occur or metastasize regardless of the castration, the radiation, the chemo and the surgery.
Their logic is: if you do not accept the established treatment methods offered to you then it means you are choosing death. There is enormous pressure placed on people every day who have a serious illness to accept the treatment regardless of the diminished quality of life. When does the diminishing factor become too much to bear? What do you do about it when it does? Do you succumb to the pleadings of your family or friends who do not want to lose you; or do you listen to your own mind and heart?
“There has to be a better way and if there isn’t, let’s create it.”
These are very complex questions and require a great deal of soul searching. For me this was the easy part. I have been soul searching all my life the choice was obvious: “there has to be a better way and if there isn’t, let’s create it.”
Although I tend to go up against the establishment, I am not anti-establishment. I simply expect them to be better. Whether they are doctors or politicians or olive growers or billionaires, or scientists. My life has been one of trying to find ways for us all to be better versions of a human being.
My quest continues for a natural treatment for prostate cancer.
Thank you all for the support it means a lot to me.
If you can, please donate and share our Aristoleo Prostate Cancer Study GoFundMe Campaign.