This forum is for questions about medical issues and research aspects of Hepatitis C such as, questions about being newly diagnosed, questions about current treatments, information and participation in discussions about research studies and clinical trials related to Hepatitis. If you would like to communicate with other people who have been touched by Hepatitis, please visit our new Hepatitis Social/Living with Hepatitis forum
Is it true that only 20% of people with Hep C go on to develop complications such as liver failure and liver cancer? Sometimes it seems that people on here talk as if everyone with hep c will eventually die from it. Just wondering.
Statistics do seem to bear out that approximately 1 in 5 patients with hep c will develop lethal complications. However, that being said, I would not qualify 20% of people as 'only' -- my husband is one of that 20% who has developed liver cancer.
Most people would consider playing Russian roulette pretty risky, and Russian roulette "only" has a 17% chance of killing you...
It's true, but as Eureka said when you or your loved one are the 20% the figure becomes meaningless. I was diagnosed 12 years ago and had three biopsies. I didn't treat until recently because the first two biopsies I had no liver damage after 20 and 25 years respectively. Another 5 years later and things changed. We don't know which one we will be, it's better to get rid of the disease early before damage has occured.
My apolgies. I am truly sorry. I should know about statistics. I am genotype 2 and had an 80% chance of clearing the virus and have relapsed. As I said I am sorry if I was insensitive to others with that question and good luck to you and uyour husband.
With great respect for Eureka, her husband and everyone else in here, we still arrive at conclusions, construct treatment plans, and formulate drug doses based on statistics. I agree that they can be misleading; and the old saw that suggests, “Statistics don’t lie, but only liars use statistics” is always in the back of my mind :).
I guess what I’m saying is I don’t see your question as being insensitive at all; although I can only speak for myself.
I don't think it was insensitive a question either but as someone who has watched three people die of the disease.....I know what it's like when you fall into the 20% and that Russian Roulette was not something I was interested in playing.
Of course.....that being said, yes unless you are in that percentage it SHOULD be fine. But as you know Agatha that 20% seems easier to fall into than people would ever think.
One other thing to think about... there are MANY people who are undiagnosed, and MANY of the ones who have been diagnosed were discovered accidentally because of being tested for some other illness. Hep c is linked to many other diseases, so it could well be that the percentage of those people would be higher.
Besides how many people is 20% of millions? A LOT OF PEOPLE.
I have a friend who is a bookie. I really do and this is really true.
He was about to undergo a heart catheterization and the doctor mentioned that there was only a 5% chance of any complications from the procedure. The bookie sat straight up and said to the doctor:
"Doc, I've been buried by 5% way too many F'ing times to hear that".
Another thing to keep in mind: they have only known about Hep C for about 20 years. That means they've only been able to compile statistics for a limited amount of time. As the big population with Hep C ages those statistics could change. I believe some doctors feel more people would eventually develop problems related to HCV given enough time... of course you could also die of something else beforehand.
I did not mean to be harsh -- no need to apologize :) -- I did not find your question insensitive at all. I simply wanted to convey (if a bit pointedly) that from my perspective 20% is a very significant percentage. There are those who agree, but there are certainly people who don't find it a significant enough statistic to pursue prevention aggressively. I'm sorry to hear that you are a relapser, it must have been a terrible disappointment, and I can certainly understand why you posted the question -- no one wants to end up being in that 20% -- it's natural to hope for the best when one is at risk.
I'm glad to hear that you at least gave that 20% a good whack, and my hope is that you will be successful in clearing the virus in the near future and not have to worry about further progression. With best wishes. ~eureka
yes many of those studies were done years ago and only went to 20 years - logic would dictate for a progressive disease that 30 years would yield a higher percentage - now were into patients who have been infected for 40 years - theres no way the progression would likely stop after any given time frame
Copyright 1994-2016 MedHelp International. All rights reserved.
MedHelp is a division of Aptus Health.
This site complies with the HONcode standard for trustworthy health information.
The Content on this Site is presented in a summary fashion, and is intended to be used for educational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be and should not be interpreted as medical advice or a diagnosis of any health or fitness problem, condition or disease; or a recommendation for a specific test, doctor, care provider, procedure, treatment plan, product, or course of action. Med Help International, Inc. is not a medical or healthcare provider and your use of this Site does not create a doctor / patient relationship. We disclaim all responsibility for the professional qualifications and licensing of, and services provided by, any physician or other health providers posting on or otherwise referred to on this Site and/or any Third Party Site. Never disregard the medical advice of your physician or health professional, or delay in seeking such advice, because of something you read on this Site. We offer this Site AS IS and without any warranties. By using this Site you agree to the following Terms and Conditions. If you think you may have a medical emergency, call your physician or 911 immediately.