Breast Cancer Into the Google

¶ … breast cancer" into the Google internet search engine, and it will return over 21,000,000 web addresses. Of those, some offer practical information and advice, others have an agenda to push, others try to sell a product, and still others are well-meaning but misinformed. How overwhelming this must be for someone who is already distraught as a result of a cancer diagnosis.

Fortunately, the first web site that one comes upon during a Google search on "breast cancer" is BreastCancer.org, an easy-to-navigate site packed with information on risk, prevention, diagnosis, treatment, and life after treatment. Several treatment options are discussed including surgical, hormonal, radiation and chemotherapy, as well as more holistic therapies that strive to connect mind, body, and spirit. This site impressed me with its calm, matter-of-fact language, broad range of options, and the fact that it contains a list of doctors who helped put all the information together. If I were a cancer patient, and this were the first site I hit, I probably wouldn't feel the need to go much further.

Also high on the top of the Google list are the National Breast Cancer Foundation and the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation. Both of these sites are partially there to raise funds, but they do offer some useful information. The National Breast Cancer Foundation, for instance, provides early warning signs of breast cancer and prints updates from JAMA on topics such as hormone replacement therapy. The Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation site includes message boards where cancer survivors can tell their own stories and request feedback from other survivors. It also offers extensive information on treatment.

A little further on down the Google list, one comes to Breast Cancer Action, a group that believes that not enough is being done about breast cancer and encourages members to, "Do something besides worry. Educate. Agitate. Organize." This site offers little in the way of diagnostic or treatment information. It states that current research monies are scattered, disorganized, being given to the wrong people and being used inappropriately. For most breast cancer survivors, the pink ribbon is a symbol of hope and survival; to Breast Cancer Action it is an infuriating representation of the status quo. They place the blame for the increase in breast cancer solely on environmental problems. Little or no information is offered about warning signs, diagnosis, treatment, etc. The Breast Cancer Action site is a good place to rant and feel angry, but it really doesn't have much statistical evidence to back up its claims. If I were a cancer patient, I would also find this site a little down-heartening. When you're ill, you want to believe that the system works.

So far in my Google search, I had found some sites that were better than others, but I hadn't found any that were truly bad enough to be invalid. Then I typed in the words that many real life cancer patients might try: "breast cancer cure." A few of the sites that came up were valid fundraising sites, and sites talking about cure percentages with certain standard treatments.

Then I came across a site entitled, "Curing Cancer," which claimed, "If you clean your body, your diet, your thoughts, your mind, your spirit, and your closest environment, your body naturally cures cancer" (Cancer Curing Protocol, Paragraph 3). The site urges people to stay away from being "cut" (having surgery) or "poisoned" (receiving chemotherapy). Instead, it takes readers on a nine-stage process to cleanse body and soul. Some of the steps include "Cleanup and detoxification," "cancer recovery diet," "psychotherapy," "support group," and "meditation/visualization." Although I thought the prognosis this site offered was a bit cocky, as was the advice to avoid all traditional medications, many of the therapies suggested are no different than those a doctor or nurse in traditional care would prescribe. After all, who would object to his or her patient praying or meditating? Or joining a support group? Or eating a better diet for that matter?

The next site I came upon, though, did strike me as invalid. The page is entitled simply, "Focus on Health," but the subheading reads: "Cancer Cures: Natural, Safe, Effective & Scientifically Proven Results -- Cure for Cancer!" The "cures" turn out to be Cessiac and Yuccalive, two Canadian herbal formulas, allegedly first used by the Native Americans and scientifically proven to work in many studies conducted under the Ministry of Health in China. There are even links to these supposed studies, which have myriad problems (lack of random selection, lack of controls, small numbers, etc.). Perhaps most telling of all, though, is the statement on the clinical index page: "These formulas, then, shall not be promoted as 'medicines' in North America, nor any medical claims shall be made [sic]" (Paragraph 2). Furthermore, the sight obviously exists not to offer unbiased information but to sell its own dubious product. This can safely be declared an invalid site.