WAR ON CANCER

Dominion, Volume 28, Issue 230, 26 June 1935, Page 10

WAR ON CANCER

Sydney Doctor’s Opinion Combated SPECIALIST’S VIEWS “Negation of Research Experience” Dominion Special Service. Dunedin, June 25. Representative medical opinion in Dunedin has little or nothing in common with tlie views expressed in Wellington on Monday by Dr. C. C. C. Coghlan. of Sydney, on the subject of radiotherapy in the treatment of cancer. Inquiries made by a reporter to-day revealed a very strong disinclination to accept tlie statement that in the United States and Canada “very little importance was attached to radium treatment, and that surgery was preferred.” It was emphatically stated in more than one quarter that any disparagement of radium was a direct negation of the experience of cancer research specialists in nearly every country in the world. » Dr. A. M. Begg, who directs the energies of the cancer research workers in Dunedin, when asked to comment on the statements made by the Sydney practitioner, said that in bis opinion Dr. Coghlan was talking nonsense. ‘‘What he says is contrary to all my experience.” said Dr. Begg. “Of course we know,” he said, “that though radium cannot.be used in cases of cancer of tlie stomach, liver and other vital organs of the human body, radiology has definitely proved itself in the control and cure of cancer of the skin, lip, womb and similar parts of the anatomy. A point that should not be overlooked is that if the character of the disease precludes the use of radium treatment surgery canont be resorted to either.” Radium was undoubtedly a great aid to surgery in the treatment of cancer, enabling the patient to be treated without having to be subjected to the loss of a member or to disfigurement. It had to be admitted that radium did not cure all cases of cancer, but the same must be‘said of surgery. Tlie combination of radiology and surgery, however, had been proved to be very effective.

"I was greatly surprised to read the telegraphed version of Dr. Coghlan’s remarks,” he concluded, ‘‘and I ;fm at a loss to know what the sources of his information can be. The considered opinion of those engaged in cancer research in this country, and in almost every country of the world, is directly contrary to the views expressed by Dr. Coghlan.” Another medical practitioner with whom the subject was discussed disposed of the alleged preference for surgery rather than radiology by the remark that if a cancerous growth were so limited in extent as to be called operable, then it could generally, in proper hands, be eradicated by means of radium. If extensions of the disease from the primary focus rendered the growth inoperable, radiation methods might still be successful if the treatment was planned to deal with the probable paths of the extension of the disease.