What a question.

[Milzy]

A doctor told a cancer patient to eat and drink anything he wanted in any amount since he was going to die anyway. Is that ethical or even scientific?

 

[Regular.Cyclist]

I’m sure it was phrased somewhat differently from how you have written it so it is difficult to say without the exact wording, context and any previous interactions between doctor and patient.

 

[alicat]

In the right circumstances, it sounds like the perfect advice. If both the doctor and you know you're going to die from the cancer, then you may as well take what pleasure you can in the limited time left to you.

 

[Slick]

From my own limited but bitter personal experience I would say that was great advice.

Cancer is a horrible disease that eats you from the inside out. Being able to eat plenty will probably be the deciding factor on how long you are going to live.

 

[Slick]

If that's true, I'm going for live forever.

 

[Chris S]

Yes - if he's not got long to live.

 

[sleuthey]

I would, whether advised or not.

 

[Rusty Nails]

When my Dad was 89 and not too well his doctor told him to carry on smoking as that was not what was going to kill him, after smoking for 80 years. My father took his advice.

 

[Slick]

Thinking about this, I've also got a lovely bottle of Victoriana that would get it as well, maybe a wee box of cafe cremes.

 

[Accy cyclist]

I'd probably go with the drink anything you want bit as I've always like the affect of alcohol, in sensible (not always though) doses. Food wouldn't attract me as I've always been an eat to live, not live to eat type. I can't understand why a condemned to death man or woman would ask for 15 burgers, a bucket of french fries and a litre of their favourite ice cream, the night before they met their maker. I think if it was me I'd ask for a litre of whiskey or vodka. Though alcohol isn't allowed in prison. Mmm, maybe I'd ask for 15 sherry trifles.🤔

 

[Tail End Charlie]

I think it's fair to say it, if delivered in the right way.

The other side of the coin is what my mother in law was told. She's going a bit loopy (not sure if dementia or the effect of medication), she's 88 and recently has had a load of tests. One of these showed her as "pre diabetic" (I'm not sure what that means tbh) and as a result is fixated on not having any sugar at all. I was round recently and she was offered a biscuit, she just stared at it saying "too much sugar" over and over. She may well develop diabetes, but is unlikely to die from it, so why the big fuss about being pre diabetic, it has just given her stress, she's a worrier as it is.
In a similar vein, these tests have picked up "shadows" so she is constantly back and forth to hospital. The last time I was round she'd had three appointments, each at a different hospital. My father in law ferries her to all of these, but he is 88 too and the strain is getting to him.
I discussed this with a doctor friend of mine and he said "they're treating the condition, not the person" i.e. not looking at the bigger picture, impact on others etc.

 

[Andy in Germany]

I remember when my Grandma had a birthday party, the care home staff made a huge gooey cake, the sort that clogs arteries at 20 paces. My dad asked half jokingly if this was the healthiest option, to which the head carer said, "She's 103 love, there's no future to worry about".

She died three days later, and not from the cake. Not from starvation either, come to that.

 

[Dogtrousers]

It sounds a little like the transition from curative to palliative care.

I remember when this happened with my dad (he had inoperable kidney cancer). Eventually the medics had to admit defeat, that there was nothing they could do to rid him of the disease. At this point care takes a different path.

So indeed a message that you can eat and drink what the heck you like may be part of it.