Dr. Len's Cancer Blog

Expert perspective, insight and discussion

Dr. Len's Cancer Blog

The American Cancer Society

Patrick Swayze

by Dr. Len September 15, 2009

My blog yesterday about the miracles of survivorship focused on the happier news about the impact of cancer treatment.  The passing of Patrick Swayze reminds us all that the stories too frequently don’t have the ending we would like.

 

Even acknowledging that grim reminder, there is still much to be celebrated about what this man meant to so many not only as an actor, but as a cancer survivor as well.

 

Mr. Swayze made no secret about his diagnosis, and made no secret that he was going to do whatever it took to beat his illness.  He knew the odds were against him, but that didn’t take away his hope or his resolve to continue living his life.

 

I didn’t know Mr. Swayze personally, or even much of his reputation.  To me, he was a well known actor who had appeared in several highly regarded films.  But it soon became apparent that he was more than an actor.  He was devoted to his family and his friends.  He was a part of his community.  There was indeed much strength and meaning behind the celebrity façade.  His illness deeply touched those who knew him.

 

Then there was the battle he fought publicly and privately to live his life.  He continued his work as an actor in a television series, despite his illness and the side effects of his chemotherapy.

 

It is no secret that I was interviewed about Mr. Swayze several times during the early portion of his illness.  I distinctly recall one reporter asking for my comments about Mr. Swayze’s continued work.   The interview included details of what he was going through on the set while he was filming the television series.

 

Those details were sad to recount, and they were sad to listen to.  The nausea, the pain, the weight loss.  This was not the side of Patrick Swayze that was caught by the television cameras or the side that he wanted to present to the public.

 

My comments to the reporter were not dissimilar to what I wrote yesterday about Mr. Jobs. 

 

Despite his illness, despite his turmoil, despite his personal battle, Mr. Swayze fought to “go on”--not only with the show, but with his life.  My comment to the reporter was that as a celebrity, Mr. Swayze was a special person to so many of his fans and others.  More importantly, he was a cancer survivor who represented so many who had the same struggles every day, trying to do their best in the most difficult of situations.

 

When the interview calls continued as his illness progressed, I actually declined to say any more about what he was going through.  The need to respond to salacious details about how he dealt with his illness were—in my opinion—beyond what to me were socially acceptable bounds.  In the eyes of many, Mr. Swayze was a true icon, and there comes a point when everyone is entitled to some peace in their lives—the paparazzi and the reporters notwithstanding.

 

Despite his loss, in my mind Patrick Swayze is still an icon and a hero.  He is an exemplar for so many patients with cancer, who although they did not know him personally may well have had a close personal bond with his struggle and what he represented to them. 

 

I also know he will be long remembered not only for his acting ability, but who he was as a person, and how he bravely and defiantly kept moving on despite the odds, despite the pain, and despite the inevitability of his fate.

 

The thoughts and prayers of many are with Mr. Swayze’s family, friends, and legions of fans today as we mourn his loss.  But we should also  say a prayer of thanks for his being part of our lives—in times that were good, and in times that were not.

 

May Patrick Swayze’s memory be blessed, and may all of us share the message of the life he so bravely lived during his too short time on this earth.

Comments

10/2/2009 4:08:44 PM #

Jovanna

What Dr.Len wrote about actor Swayze is true, I am a cancer survivor myself and I feel that survivorship is a miracle let alone the treatment.I mean its a different life being a patient, making it to the end of the treatment.You go through so many emotions, and these emotions remain with you.I wish Swayze could have made it.God bless.

Jovanna

10/15/2009 10:16:14 AM #

Melissia Johnson

Patrick Swayze was not a cancer Survivor, he passed away. He didn't survive. What the hell are your talking about. The problem with Western Medicine is that no one ever says the patient is cured! It's always they have a survival rate of 5 years, or they are in remission, I know that there is a cure for cancer, and because CANCER is a BILLION DOLLAR BUSINESS, the american public will never see it. When it comes to breast cancer, Thermography is a better tool for detection, than mammography, but because Thermography can detect cancer earlier and with no radiation like a mammogram, mainstream american women will never see this tool being used. Here locally where I live, about tow years ago they advertised they would soon have Thermography available, and then when asked about it earlier this year, they said no, we won't be getting one any time soon because we would have to charge $2000 per scan, well I know that is bull *&%@, because my doctor in NV does them for $250. The AMA, ACS, FDA, Susan G. Komen should all be ashamed for letting the all mighty dollar keep the cure for cancer to them selves and their huge bank accounts.

Melissia Johnson

10/15/2009 1:30:12 PM #

Len Lichtenfeld

You are entitled to your opinion, no matter how insensitive your comments may be.  I would suggest you re-read the blog to see what I said about Mr. Swayze relative to survivorship.

As to thermography--and this the primary reason I am responding to your comments--you are ignoring the research that has been done for decades to evaluate this approach for breast cancer screening.  Simply stated, it doesn't work. At least that is what the evidence shows, and for most of us that is what counts.

Len Lichtenfeld

11/8/2009 3:06:16 PM #

Cheryl

What is the best breast cancer screening?

Cheryl

11/11/2009 3:19:21 PM #

Survivor Practitioner

Dr. Litchfield, you also are incorrect but in your defense, you are probably going on old information.  Thermography is relatively new and continues to advance through the years.  The evidence (30 years of research and over 8,000 published studies) actually shows that thermography can reduce the need for biopsy by 20% and increase the efficacy of a mammogram from 85% to 97% (using a combined approach).  Melissa has a point in that most western physicians (MD's, really, as DO's tend to be more open-minded) frown upon such simple protocols or new approaches.  (Thermography is used mostly outside the US.)  A mammogram is an anatomical test, while a thermogram is a physiological test.  Studies also show a thermogram to be equally as effective as a mammogram at 85%.  Moreover, it is an EARLIER method of breast cancer detection in that it can detect angiogenesis (for everyone else out there, it's the blood supply that forms to a tumor).  Keep in mind that a thermogram is a TEST, just like a mammogram is a TEST, NOT a diagnostic tool, and EVERY woman should be doing it.  I have personally seen breast cancer in thermograms when mammograms did not detect it, and if you knew you had a 10% chance of developing breast cancer - or worse, if you BECAME that 10% of women who develop BC - wouldn't you wish you had caught it at Year 2 instead of Year 8?  If it were your wife or daughter, wouldn't you wish she had done it?  Cheryl - the best breast cancer detection is a combination of thermo-mammogram and radiation-mammogram.  Thermo-mammograms are about $200 - $300.

Survivor Practitioner

11/11/2009 3:37:25 PM #

IntraMedHS

I'd add that there are lots of women who avoid mammograms b/c of the pain associated. MRI is even worse with dye injections and enclosures. So a thermogram is a great alternative for those women who would otherwise not have any test. It also sees the chest wall (where I had a mass that was undetected by mammo), underarms, and other areas that a mammogram cannot.  I'm happy to share images at any request.

IntraMedHS

11/18/2009 2:22:54 AM #

K. Richardson

Thank God someone is finally getting common sense circulated regarding thermography. Mammography is a dinosaur than should have been extinct. There are benefits for both genders. Money is the motivator in the medical community not efficacy.

K. Richardson

11/18/2009 2:24:16 AM #

K. Richardson

Thank God someone is finally getting common sense circulated regarding thermography. There are many benefits for both genders. Mammography is a dinosaur than should have been extinct. Money is the motivator in the medical community not efficacy.

K. Richardson

10/5/2010 12:31:48 PM #

Roxie

Thanks to all who wrote what they know re thermograms to help educate me:  I've opted to get one, instead or, or before, a mammogram: unfortunately, I can't find out where I can get one at a low-cost clinic (I'm unemployed) here in Minneapolis.  The most popular low-cost program for mammograms (Sage), not surprisingly, did not offer them; & the nurse (nor co-worker she checked with) did not know where I could get one.  

Roxie

Add comment


(Will show your Gravatar icon)

biuquote
  • Comment
  • Preview
Loading



About Dr. Len

Dr. Len

J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, MD, MACP - Dr. Lichtenfeld is Deputy Chief Medical Officer for the national office of the American Cancer Society.

MORE »

 

Recent Comments

Comment RSS