A solution to the Ails of Chemotherapy?
600,000 deaths. That’s how many casualties were estimated in 2021 by a foe we can’t so much as see with the naked eye: cancer. The dreaded illness that, since the foundation of modern medicine, humanity seems unable to tackle and extinguish permanently. Despite the advancement of technology (specifically in the medical sector), it seems as if we are a ways off from adequately dealing with it on a global scale.
That isn’t to say that there aren’t methods to deal with this disease. Chemotherapy for instance is one such remedy. It decimates cancerous cells, but does so with a massive risk to the body it’s done to, through also killing the necessary (good) cells humans need in the process. This treatment results in patients becoming immunocompromised. This label not only increases the risk of people contracting diseases, but it also increases the potential for these common ailments (such as the common cold or the flu for instance) to quickly turn to a hospital visit because of a life-threatening concern.
Described by those who administer chemotherapy as a double-edged sword, it appeared doubtful that the negative effects of chemotherapy could ever be reduced. After all, it took so long for this treatment to even be discovered according to modern medicine, reinforcing the notion that humanity’s war against cancer seems to have arrived at a stalemate.
Then came a new discovery: stem cell transplants. This method seemed to solve the problems that chemotherapy generated by administering stem cells to the vein. This enables the cells to travel to the bone marrow and then become new cells that are necessary for human health, such as platelets (which help out with blood clots), to white blood cells (which assists the immune system and helps the body fight infection) to even red blood cells (which helps facilitate oxygen throughout the body).
Proponents of this method claim that this is an instrumental tool for humanity in its battle against cancer due to its ability to assist cancer patients after chemotherapy, which is widely considered to be the most prevalent form of cancer treatment. Although it may not be the final product, it does certainly pose questions that may pave the way toward achieving even more technological advancements in this war.
That’s not to say that there aren’t those who are against this method however. Some argue their stance as one where this treatment excludes the common man: stem cell transplants are incredibly expensive due to their highly advanced technological nature. This high price tag prevents the vast majority of cancer patients from being able to access this potentially life-saving treatment, pushing the ethical dilemma concerning both wealth and the ability to save a life (if not multiple). Others who are against this cite that it too comes with some drawbacks much like chemotherapy in the form of side effects. From bleeding to increased risk of infection (which is what it’s partially designed to combat), it too poses a set of risks that cannot be ignored in the eyes of some.
Regardless of your stance on this matter, there is a middle ground: this innovation, despite all of its shortcomings, has advanced the battle against cancer in many ways beyond just one. Beyond helping people achieve some sense of normalcy in their lives through alleviating the impacts of chemotherapy, it also grants hope to those who have (or can obtain) access to this treatment. Modern medicine, just like how it conquered measles and rubella and countless other diseases, will hopefully beat this one too.