What do you think about the Title?

[a9436]

I think the title is a cliche, as the phrase is now so overused (also see e.g. winning the war on drugs / terrorism etc.).

I was definitely thinking the same thing!

Me too. It is rather sensationalist too and I think it is a shame that people might dismiss the book just based upon this title.

[Zimall]

The title sounds optimistic. I have seen people dying of this disease and i was happy to see such a hopeful book out there.

[briellejee]

I think the title is a cliche, as the phrase is now so overused (also see e.g. winning the war on drugs / terrorism etc.).

I was definitely thinking the same thing!

Me too. It is rather sensationalist too and I think it is a shame that people might dismiss the book just based upon this title.

People may find the title a bit doubtful and like a sting on a wound (like me), but I think it's not a ground on dismissing the whole book. I read it still because I was curious enough and was hopeful for a moment too. But at first glance, it was that feeling which reminds you of old pain of losing that war rather than winning.

[MsTri]

I am so sorry for your losses and feel for your pain, but I'm one of the ones in the "I like it" camp. I think it sets a positive tone to the tome.

[Zimall]

The title sounds optimistic. I have seen people dying of this disease and i was happy to see such a hopeful book out there.

It does sound optimistic, but I also feel that the title pronounces the book as an absolute way of overcoming what it claims to have overcome; the war against cancer. Of which, I still have my doubts.

I have my doubts as well thats why i haven't read this book yet. Sometimes i feel like reading it and on others i don't like it. May be i will read this and hope it will clear our doubts.

[Don Pwai]

The title gives hope to all cancer patients. Cancer is a curable disease. I developed interest in the book just from looking at its title.

[briellejee]

I am so sorry for your losses and feel for your pain, but I'm one of the ones in the "I like it" camp. I think it sets a positive tone to the tome.

I'm beginning to see the positivity everyone is talking about though. And the reason for it too.

[Rodrigo Niguez]

On the contrary, I loved the author's positive approach in coming up with this book. It gives hope to cancer patients.

[jgraney8]

I am curious as to what your reaction in seeing the title. As for me, I lost loved ones because of cancer; and seeing the "Winning the War on Cancer" as the title of the book made me not want to read the it since it sounded like it claims that its like a done deal, that we are actually winning it when in truth there is only an alternative that may or may not work.

I appreciate the author's intention of being positive using the word "winning", especially to those who are still battling with it. But for me, who had loved ones that lost to the war, it sounded a bit ridiculous to say "winning". I think it could have been "In Trying to Win the War on Cancer". A little longer but at least a bit practical.

What about your thoughts on the title? Do you think it's fine the way it is? Or do you think it gives a bit of false hope to some, especially in the later stages of cancer?

Perhaps the author or whoever makes these decisions thought the title would gain more readers, but I agree with you. I have had cancer and don't feel much like we are winning. I see progress, but I don't see winning.

[Bookreviewer19_ke]

The title is okay to me because the word winning in this context impllies an activity that is continous and whose realization is dependent on eliminating a obstacle.

[Anthony__]

The title makes me want to know more about the content of the book. I guess the purpose was to attract readers to the book. "Winning the war..." the winning alone passes a great message of overcoming, why "war" on the other hand makes it challenging factor but victory is guaranteed at the end!!! That's how I understood the title.

[Stormwolf14614]

My reaction when seeing the title was initially very skeptical, as, as other repliers have commented, having lost numerous family members to cancer, it sounded "overly-optimistic". However, after contemplating the title for a little while, I came to the realization that, and maybe this is digging too deep into it, that the "winning" that the title refers to can, for some, indicate the emotional side of cancer, that initially is very bleak, but by helping change the outlook and manage the symptoms, such as some naturalistic medicines that are talked about claim to do, cancer no longer becomes a controlling factor in ones life. Naturalistic medicine and alternative medicine forms show evidence of helping a persons emotional state, and while the physical aspect of it needs evidence of effectiveness, some forms, like acupuncture, have proven to help relieve pain to a point where the symptoms no longer take a major role in a life. Sometimes, from someone's perspective who did not then developed an incurable disease, it was difficult to understand how cancer patients get relief, but the definition of "winning" changes when dealing with regular pain or discomfort, so sometimes "winning" can be as simple as a change to a positive atitude or simply a reduction in symptomatic pain, at least in my case.

It may be all about perspective in some cases.

[AndrewZachariah]

I think the title was actually meant to be a play on the words from Nixon's speech that was mentioned in the book. The US has been at war for nearly the entirety of the country's history, and I think that using the phrase "winning the war" not only nods towards Nixon's speech, but is also befitting of the history of the country. Furthermore, as cancer is always seen as a series of battles in an ongoing war, I think the author is acknowledging how her father's work has helped people in the past, and how the path and treatments she lays out could be the way out of this ongoing battle. I don't think the title is meant to give false hope, and personally, as someone who struggles daily with over a dozen chronic illnesses, I don't think it is up to anyone but the person who is ill to determine what will and will not give them hope. Medicine, illness, and treatment are extremely personal, and one can never say what is and is not fair to anyone on their journey. If nothing else, the evidence collected regarding the treatments the Beljanski Foundation has discovered will provide a more comfortable and less painful path as patients deal with their diagnoses. Personally, even if I would never be cured of my illnesses, being in less pain would certainly be a win for me.

[briellejee]

I am curious as to what your reaction in seeing the title. As for me, I lost loved ones because of cancer; and seeing the "Winning the War on Cancer" as the title of the book made me not want to read the it since it sounded like it claims that its like a done deal, that we are actually winning it when in truth there is only an alternative that may or may not work.

I appreciate the author's intention of being positive using the word "winning", especially to those who are still battling with it. But for me, who had loved ones that lost to the war, it sounded a bit ridiculous to say "winning". I think it could have been "In Trying to Win the War on Cancer". A little longer but at least a bit practical.

What about your thoughts on the title? Do you think it's fine the way it is? Or do you think it gives a bit of false hope to some, especially in the later stages of cancer?

Perhaps the author or whoever makes these decisions thought the title would gain more readers, but I agree with you. I have had cancer and don't feel much like we are winning. I see progress, but I don't see winning.

I was hopeful at first but after reading the book, I also didn't see winning. Hopefully we will win someday. Thanks for sharing!

[Khrysalis]

I can certainly see why you or others might not like the flavor of the title. Seeing the title provoke different reactions, rooted in a person’s own experiences with cancer and balanced by what they know about how it's treated, is fascinating.

I thought the title was clever myself in that regard. See, the concept of a “war on cancer” was put forth and signed into law respectively by President Nixon and Mary Lasker in 1971. Which, incidentally, was also the same year that the war on drugs was declared by the same administration. The war is not a suggestion by the author, but an expansion of it.

A more informative title as to the nature of the book might have read, Fighting the War Against the Medical Industry that Parasitizes those who are Stricken with Cancer Instead of Trying to Actually Heal them and also Persecutes and Silences or Kills Men of Science who are Developing Alternatives that are More Effective than Drugs, Radiation, and Surgery, Which is all that is Being Taught or Allowed in Western Society and Implanted into the Consciousness of the Public as Their Only Way of Fighting for Their Lives even Though these Treatments are Obviously Destroying their Bodies Even Faster Than the Disease Itself.

...but that is much too long and doesn’t quite roll off the tongue as well.

This book isn't about peddling hope where there is none. It's about exposing a truth there is a better way, as well as revealing that there are those who find this truth unprofitable or even threatening. Just think about it. Why should government-controlled medicine want the sick to be cured? Illness generates billions, but wellness doesn't!

I’ve lost loved ones to cancer as well. Withered away like cut flowers no matter how tightly I tried to hold on, I did see a truth or two, even through the haze of grief.

You see, if someone casually asked me how my maternal grandfather died I would, to be brief, answer, “Cancer.” But that’s not precisely true. He had cancer; it was spread throughout his body. He had even been forced to allow them to amputate a leg a couple of years before his death. But the reality is that he died under the knife because of complications during surgery—the fourth time the doctor had hauled the old man’s emaciated and chemo-weakened body onto the operating table to carve him up like a ham. Cancer didn’t have time to kill him—the treatments got him first. If he had not had surgery that day, he would not have died that day. He would have had more days. Maybe a little more, maybe a lot more. We’ll never know now.

Many people might admonish me that these treatments under which he suffered were the only chance he had of fighting his cancer. That all that was done was in pursuit of that goal. It is all right to believe this, but is it all right to believe it without ever questioning whether it's really true, or whether or not things can change for the better? Whether or not we can try anything besides drugs, chemo, and surgery, over and over and over again in an unending cycle?

Even if you take the stance that real cancer research is not being suppressed in favor of medicine as a business, this book will get those mental juices flowing. Might make you question exactly what is "in truth" after all.

It's worth a read, just for that.