Thanks for the responses. I think we all have the same difficulty in that this could be a full time job and I already have one of those.
I have asked for clarifying information regarding a couple of posts and people did respond with helpful info, but this isn't generally practical. My suggestion is that the registration be modified to include some basic non-intrusive details such as type of disease and treatment course. This info could then be appended (automatically) to any posts and allow readers to focus on the relevant posts rather than trying to guess relevance or go through searches of prior posts. Obviously the content of this would need to be carefully thought out.
The key issue is treatment possibilities with the pluses and minuses of each. This is extremely important given that the Oncology providers have very little to work with and no one seems to know what conclusions are coming from trials. I guaranty you that my Oncologist has no idea, as he has openly expressed his limited options, and that I am about out of them. I see this same thing throughout this forum.
I think this would be of value to researchers as well since I am not aware of any central clearing house regarding efficacy from health care providers. It seems the entire "system" (term used loosely) is running open loop and I think this is detrimental to our common goals. There was a great article in a recent Scientific American where this very problem was discussed. I am left with the feeling that there is a certain amount of tail chasing going on. I realize that this forum has nothing to do with the system other than being a place to vent about it.