Question re: Spleen Cancer.

[Aileen W. Donovan]

Hello Good People. I am a lurker here on this wonderful list. I read
here in awe at your depth of knowledge and dedication to Homeopathy. I
recieved a few hours ago a very devastating diagnosis of 'spleen cancer'
(a mass the size of a large orange)for my 8 year old German Shepherd
Dog. My allopathic vet has suggested immediate removal despite the
'riskier' surgery due to also just confirmed case of an 'enlarged
heart'. My question is this...Do you think this case can be dealt with
on homeopathy alone + his natural raw diet, or do you believe actual
surgery is his only hope? I sincerely thank you for a moment of your
time, and a drop of your vast knowledge. Aileen W. Donovan.

[Dr. R. Swift]

Aileen,

I would go the nutrition and homeopathy route, personally. The main short
term concern is internal bleeding from the spleen should a tear occur. If
that happens, surgery may be the only option to prevent bleeding to death.
Fortunately, that rarely happens quickly so you would need to keep an eye
out for that possibility and respond accordingly if it happens.

be well
Russell Swift, DVM
Classical Homeopath
phone 561-391-5615
email drswift@therightremedy.com
www.therightremedy.com

"Allopaths have protocols, Homeopaths have principles."

[jules288us]

- Thank you sincerely Dr. Swift for responding. Is there a homeopathic
remedy noted for it's ability to shrink splenic hemangiosarcomas? My
allo vet says the orange size tumour looks 'contained' and if the
spleen looks like a 'banana'(if you allow) then the hemangiosarcoma
has attached itself to the top tip.

Could my ignorant use of a prescribing ( sadly Clinical)Homeopathic
Vet's multiple(12) remedy (10ml x twice per day)for Shane's hip
dysplasia have helped cause this spleen tumour to 'appear'? One of
the remedies in this 'mix' is Silicea 9ch of which there has been much
talk about here on the list lately about 'drawing things out'. Thank
you very sincerely for your time in a response. Aileen.
-- In minutus@yahoogroups.com, "Dr. R. Swift" wrote:
short
occur. If
death.
an eye

[Dr. R. Swift]

Aileen,

As in any other condition, the similimum should be given. As for
polypharmacy, I do believe it can create additional problems. If the formula
you gave "helped" with the symptoms of the arthritis, it may be you are
seeing the result of suppression.

be well
Russell Swift, DVM
Classical Homeopath
phone 561-391-5615
email drswift@therightremedy.com
www.therightremedy.com

"Allopaths have protocols, Homeopaths have principles."

[Shannon Nelson]

Ah, but at the same time, how likely is this...
Especially unless either it was given very aggressively, very long-term,
and(/or?) the dog's vital force was already very weak.

Have there been any documented cases where remedies (even the dreaded
combos) lead to tumors???

Shannon

on 12/17/02 3:29 PM, Dr. R. Swift at drswift@therightremedy.com wrote:

[Dr. R. Swift]

I think if we see a symptom improve significantly or disappear entirely and
then a worse symptoms appear, we can conclude that suppression occured with
a fair amount of confidence regardless of dose size, frequency, multiple or
single remedy, etc. It is interesting that most homeopaths I know would be
faster to conclude that a shot of steroid was suppressive given the same
outcome than they would a "homeopathic" remedy, which of course is also
allopathic or antipathic unless it is similar.

be well
Russell Swift, DVM
Classical Homeopath
phone 561-391-5615
email drswift@therightremedy.com
www.therightremedy.com

"Allopaths have protocols, Homeopaths have principles."

[Shannon Nelson]

Hi Russell,

Not sure if you're addressing my remark (could you leave a bit of the post
you're replying to?), but I'll reply.

My reasons for doubting would be (a) so far as I know, the remedies are not
*that* powerful, except on an already very weak vital force, and (b) usually
cancers are many years (perhaps months in a dog) in the making. Unless the
dog's spleen had had a clean bill of health shortly before he started
getting the combo, I do not think we can make assumptions about what caused
it.

Also, very often what looks like "suppression" is actually just "progression
of the disease" in absence of effective treatment to stop it.

Best,
Shannon
on 12/18/02 9:00 AM, Dr. R. Swift at drswift@therightremedy.com wrote:

[George Kaplan]

Dear Dr Swift,

You wrote:
This is most interesting. By polypharmacy are you referring to a
homotoxicological treatment, e.g. Dr Reckeweg, or do you mean something such
as sequential "timeline" treatment?

George A. Kaplan
My response was clearly stated that if the
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus

[Dr. R. Swift]

George,

This particular case under discussion involved a combination remedy.

[Shannon Nelson]

On that principle (small trouble goes away, and replaced by a worse one) I
certainly agree. The issue is whether it was "replaced", or not... The
situation as given doesn't seem to make it certain whether these two things
(one getting better and the other getting worse) were causally related, or
only temporally (i.e., coincidence of timing).

And, in the context of the "teaching" that comes out of this sort of case, I
guess I feel more comfortable about using it to "introduce issues", and
explain the concerns, e.g. the concept of suppression (and let the dog's
owner draw her own conclusion, or not), rather than saying, Yep, looks like
you gave your dog cancer!

Maybe she did, but as I said, I think it unlikely that a combo remedy would
do that. Perhaps not impossible, but unlikely; and I prefer to let her draw
her own conclusions about what may have happened *in this particular case*.
Without more info about e.g. the dog's prior state of vitality, how that
changed (or didn't) during the course of dosing with the combo, and
(importantly) for how long and how frequently the dosing was done...
Without all that at a minimum, I don't think we really have a basis for
coming to a decision, and I personally would prefer not to play "judge and
jury" on an issue such as whether a "parent's" (albeit different species!)
good intentions led to cancer. I just don't feel comfortable going there,
and I think we have done the necessary "teaching" already, without adding in
the level of guilt and blame.

Okay, there's my objectivity out the window...

Best wishes,
Shannon