James Van der beek died! 48 yo :(

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Everyone should get colonoscopy at 40

My dr didn't even recommend it until I was 49 and even then she said to just sh*t in a box and send it through the mail, not a colonoscopy.

[Anonymous]

Im devastated with this news. He was so young and had so many beautiful children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So sad for his six children and his wife.

Me too. It seems like Kimberly has never worked (at least since she married him). I hope he had good life insurance. Raising six kids and maintaining a big farm in Texas (or anywhere, really) must be incredibly expensive. I have a feeling they weren't in a good place financially since James was auctioning off memorabilia from his football movie.

Wife has already started a gofundme

Lol the rich persons go to. She can't work?

Her husband isn't even buried yet. She and her kids are in mourning. She has a farm/ranch to run. Her youngest child is 2 or 3 years old. She hasn't worked since 2010 because she's been a SAHM.

All of this is true, but most people don’t have this luxury when their spouse dies. But she’s already collected 522k in just a few hours so it’s good to be famous.

https://www.gofundme.com/f/support-for-james-van-der-beeks-family

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Everyone should get colonoscopy at 40

My dr didn't even recommend it until I was 49 and even then she said to just sh*t in a box and send it through the mail, not a colonoscopy.

If your doctor recommended cologuard, you need a new doctor.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I don’t believe he got them as he should have:

- he was unaware that the screening age had dropped from 50 to 45

- he had changes in his bowel habits and attributed it to caffeine intake rather than speaking to a physician

What?

Who cares if he knew the screening age if he still got one at what turned out to be the recommended screening age?

People have changes in bowel habits for myriad reasons. I hope you don’t suggest that one go running to the doctor or for a colonoscopy as the first step every time? In addition to being impractical on a personal level, it’s impractical on a system level.

He was diagnosed at 46. He did not get screened at 45 and had publicly said he didn’t know screening was recommended at 45. I am suggesting people get tested when recommended and discuss changes in your status with your physician.

This is the medical equivalent of being pedantic.

It was 17 months after he turned 45 before he was screened AND he was not asymptomatic. Certain cancers cause things like oily or floating poop. This is not just caffeine makes me go. He had unexplained weightloss (another cancer indicator) and fatigue as well as abdominal pain.





So I completely disagree.

Okay. I’m sure that you need to tell yourself he died of cancer at 48 freaking years old because HE f—ked up somehow.

Hopefully that will make you feel more in control.

Wtf? No, I am simply saying he had symptoms like abdominal pain and bowel changes, unexplained fatigue and weight loss- which he blew off as caffeine related. If you think those combined symptoms don’t warrant finding out what is going on, that’s likely the minority. It isn’t blaming someone to simply say that those symptoms should have resulted in talking to a doctor sooner than he did and he himself said I was late getting a colonscopy. It’s not blaming him…it’s correcting people who say it’s pedantic to get a colonscopy right when it’s due (and ignores that he was symptomatic).

I would imagine even he wld have said he shld have moved faster. Only you think it was just fine to ignore everything.

Where the hell did you read that? Link please. All James said was bowel changes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I don’t believe he got them as he should have:

- he was unaware that the screening age had dropped from 50 to 45

- he had changes in his bowel habits and attributed it to caffeine intake rather than speaking to a physician

What?

Who cares if he knew the screening age if he still got one at what turned out to be the recommended screening age?

People have changes in bowel habits for myriad reasons. I hope you don’t suggest that one go running to the doctor or for a colonoscopy as the first step every time? In addition to being impractical on a personal level, it’s impractical on a system level.

Yes, and one of those can be colon cancer. It's specifically a warning sign that warrants a visit to a doctor.

I'm not posting that to blame Van der Beek for his diagnosis, but because it's apparently something that a lot of people are unaware of.

By my math, he was 46 at diagnosis. It's not clear how much his prognosis would have changed if he had gone a year earlier at 45, given that colon cancer is typically slow growing.

No one knows how long he had symptoms. No one knows had he done the colonoscopy sooner whether it would have made a difference. What is highly likely, however, is that had he spoken to a doctor when his symptoms began, a colonoscopy would have been ordered (due to his age, abdominal issues, issues with stool habits) and because of his symptoms (unexplained weight loss, unexplained fatigue, pain) it is also highly likely that his symptoms would have been treated very seriously. As mentioned elsewhere, unexplained weight loss is a concern. If he had any rectal bleeding, this is all even more true.

So while we don't know if it would have helped had he done it at 45 OR had he done it when symptoms started, we do know that it could have been caught sooner and at least that gives better chances generally. For example, with pancreatic, surgery is an option if the cancer hasn't spread; if it has, it is not. Months can absolutely matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I don’t believe he got them as he should have:

- he was unaware that the screening age had dropped from 50 to 45

- he had changes in his bowel habits and attributed it to caffeine intake rather than speaking to a physician

What?

Who cares if he knew the screening age if he still got one at what turned out to be the recommended screening age?

People have changes in bowel habits for myriad reasons. I hope you don’t suggest that one go running to the doctor or for a colonoscopy as the first step every time? In addition to being impractical on a personal level, it’s impractical on a system level.

Yes, and one of those can be colon cancer. It's specifically a warning sign that warrants a visit to a doctor.

I'm not posting that to blame Van der Beek for his diagnosis, but because it's apparently something that a lot of people are unaware of.

By my math, he was 46 at diagnosis. It's not clear how much his prognosis would have changed if he had gone a year earlier at 45, given that colon cancer is typically slow growing.

No one knows how long he had symptoms. No one knows had he done the colonoscopy sooner whether it would have made a difference. What is highly likely, however, is that had he spoken to a doctor when his symptoms began, a colonoscopy would have been ordered (due to his age, abdominal issues, issues with stool habits) and because of his symptoms (unexplained weight loss, unexplained fatigue, pain) it is also highly likely that his symptoms would have been treated very seriously. As mentioned elsewhere, unexplained weight loss is a concern. If he had any rectal bleeding, this is all even more true.

So while we don't know if it would have helped had he done it at 45 OR had he done it when symptoms started, we do know that it could have been caught sooner and at least that gives better chances generally. For example, with pancreatic, surgery is an option if the cancer hasn't spread; if it has, it is not. Months can absolutely matter.

Where are you reading he had rectal bleeding and weight loss? All I read was that he felt something was off and he thought it was due to caffeine so he did go see a doctor. Here: ""I was healthy. I was doing the cold plunge," he said. "I was in amazing cardiovascular shape, and I had stage 3 cancer, and I had no idea."
The one symptom that he did experience was a change in bowel movements, which the actor chalked up to an effect of his coffee consumption."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is typically a beatable cancer. (I’m a colon cancer survivor).
Get your colonoscopy. Follow your med team’s recommendations of gold standard treatment.

He chose to treat the cancer “holistically” and tried “a bunch of different things”.
It’s 100% his choice and decision. But others should not take a stage 3 colorectal cancer diagnosis as a death sentence. Statistically it’s a beatable cancer dx.

He's given interviews regarding how he chose to treat his cancer. This was his response: that he was trying "a bunch of different things". Other sources have said "holistically".

He also had traditional treatments, like chemo.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is typically a beatable cancer. (I’m a colon cancer survivor).
Get your colonoscopy. Follow your med team’s recommendations of gold standard treatment.

He chose to treat the cancer “holistically” and tried “a bunch of different things”.
It’s 100% his choice and decision. But others should not take a stage 3 colorectal cancer diagnosis as a death sentence. Statistically it’s a beatable cancer dx.

You’re horrible. You have no idea how he treated his cancer as he didn’t go into details publicly. Shame on you. And late stage colon cancer is often a death sentence no matter what.

His may have recurred and became stage 4.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is typically a beatable cancer. (I’m a colon cancer survivor).
Get your colonoscopy. Follow your med team’s recommendations of gold standard treatment.

He chose to treat the cancer “holistically” and tried “a bunch of different things”.
It’s 100% his choice and decision. But others should not take a stage 3 colorectal cancer diagnosis as a death sentence. Statistically it’s a beatable cancer dx.

You’re horrible. You have no idea how he treated his cancer as he didn’t go into details publicly. Shame on you. And late stage colon cancer is often a death sentence no matter what.

His may have recurred and became stage 4.

+1

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I wasn't blaming him. We (society) need to be aware, we need to be proactive. We need to stop making regular screenings mountains to be fretted over and avoided. Everyone has a body and that body needs care, which includes immunizations (HPV), colonoscopies, mammograms and pap smears for women, and prostate checks for males. These shouldn't be taboo, scary things.

Enough with the lecture. He just passed away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I don’t believe he got them as he should have:

- he was unaware that the screening age had dropped from 50 to 45

- he had changes in his bowel habits and attributed it to caffeine intake rather than speaking to a physician

What?

Who cares if he knew the screening age if he still got one at what turned out to be the recommended screening age?

People have changes in bowel habits for myriad reasons. I hope you don’t suggest that one go running to the doctor or for a colonoscopy as the first step every time? In addition to being impractical on a personal level, it’s impractical on a system level.

Yes, and one of those can be colon cancer. It's specifically a warning sign that warrants a visit to a doctor.

I'm not posting that to blame Van der Beek for his diagnosis, but because it's apparently something that a lot of people are unaware of.

By my math, he was 46 at diagnosis. It's not clear how much his prognosis would have changed if he had gone a year earlier at 45, given that colon cancer is typically slow growing.

No one knows how long he had symptoms. No one knows had he done the colonoscopy sooner whether it would have made a difference. What is highly likely, however, is that had he spoken to a doctor when his symptoms began, a colonoscopy would have been ordered (due to his age, abdominal issues, issues with stool habits) and because of his symptoms (unexplained weight loss, unexplained fatigue, pain) it is also highly likely that his symptoms would have been treated very seriously. As mentioned elsewhere, unexplained weight loss is a concern. If he had any rectal bleeding, this is all even more true.

So while we don't know if it would have helped had he done it at 45 OR had he done it when symptoms started, we do know that it could have been caught sooner and at least that gives better chances generally. For example, with pancreatic, surgery is an option if the cancer hasn't spread; if it has, it is not. Months can absolutely matter.

You are a total liar. James made no mention of weight loss or fatigue. He simply said bowel changes. You are making things up to fit your narrative. Go away you insensitive a$$hole.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I don’t believe he got them as he should have:

- he was unaware that the screening age had dropped from 50 to 45

- he had changes in his bowel habits and attributed it to caffeine intake rather than speaking to a physician

What?

Who cares if he knew the screening age if he still got one at what turned out to be the recommended screening age?

People have changes in bowel habits for myriad reasons. I hope you don’t suggest that one go running to the doctor or for a colonoscopy as the first step every time? In addition to being impractical on a personal level, it’s impractical on a system level.

Yes, and one of those can be colon cancer. It's specifically a warning sign that warrants a visit to a doctor.

I'm not posting that to blame Van der Beek for his diagnosis, but because it's apparently something that a lot of people are unaware of.

By my math, he was 46 at diagnosis. It's not clear how much his prognosis would have changed if he had gone a year earlier at 45, given that colon cancer is typically slow growing.

No one knows how long he had symptoms. No one knows had he done the colonoscopy sooner whether it would have made a difference. What is highly likely, however, is that had he spoken to a doctor when his symptoms began, a colonoscopy would have been ordered (due to his age, abdominal issues, issues with stool habits) and because of his symptoms (unexplained weight loss, unexplained fatigue, pain) it is also highly likely that his symptoms would have been treated very seriously. As mentioned elsewhere, unexplained weight loss is a concern. If he had any rectal bleeding, this is all even more true.

So while we don't know if it would have helped had he done it at 45 OR had he done it when symptoms started, we do know that it could have been caught sooner and at least that gives better chances generally. For example, with pancreatic, surgery is an option if the cancer hasn't spread; if it has, it is not. Months can absolutely matter.

Where are you reading he had rectal bleeding and weight loss? All I read was that he felt something was off and he thought it was due to caffeine so he did go see a doctor. Here: ""I was healthy. I was doing the cold plunge," he said. "I was in amazing cardiovascular shape, and I had stage 3 cancer, and I had no idea."
The one symptom that he did experience was a change in bowel movements, which the actor chalked up to an effect of his coffee consumption."

+1,000,000 Eff off, PP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Please get your colonoscopies! 45 with no family history, younger if you you have a history.

James got his. Feels like you are blaming him.

I wasn't blaming him. We (society) need to be aware, we need to be proactive. We need to stop making regular screenings mountains to be fretted over and avoided. Everyone has a body and that body needs care, which includes immunizations (HPV), colonoscopies, mammograms and pap smears for women, and prostate checks for males. These shouldn't be taboo, scary things.

Enough with the lecture. He just passed away.

+1

[Anonymous]

RIP

Sadly I know too many people close to his age that have cancer, in some cases with a terrible prognosis. How awful for his wife and kids.