{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.011475409836065573, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003278688524590164, 'mean_word_length': 5.298969072164948, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Cancer and quackery

The Internal Medicine Journal published an article by two senior oncologists who were contesting the supposed miracle cure of a cancer survivor. This paper draws on the history of medicine to explore the conflict between biomedicine and alternative therapies. I suggest that the Internal Medicine Journal article, written about an episode that occurred more than 30 years ago, can best be explained by some oncologists' discomfort with losing their authority to dictate patient choices. I propose a compromise that rejects paternalism but accepts the possibility of worse patient outcomes.