It is a dilemma to decide whether or not to fully inform cancer patients of their true condition. Some physicians advocate full disclosure in the first instance, arguing that this is an internationally advanced practice that reflects the patient’s full “right to know”. This may be true for other diseases, but it is inappropriate for cancer because many patients die of psychological fear and disappointment after being fully informed. Most physicians and patients’ families choose not to inform and conceal at all, bringing with them the problem of patient non-cooperation and non-adherence to treatment. A summary of effective countermeasures has resulted in the advocacy of the “principle of appropriate information”: “the right part of the story, in the right way, at the right time.” Scholars believe that this is the most appropriate response to the Chinese situation. By “appropriate time”, we mean that after 3-5 months of treatment, the period when patients are most sensitive, most vulnerable, and most likely to suffer from psychological “shock” due to the knowledge of cancer has passed, and more or less the patient feels that his or her condition is different from the general one, so it is possible to The purpose of doing so is to let the person feel that his or her condition is different from the normal one, so that he or she can be “informed in an appropriate way of the appropriate part”. The purpose of this is to allow the person to cooperate more actively with the long and often painful process of treatment that follows. Research has shown that proper patient information clearly contributes to subsequent treatment and good outcomes. Moreover, informing at this point is the least psychologically damaging for the patient. Of course, the key here is the way to inform: straightforward is the most appropriate for some higher level of education and better psychological quality; however, it is not a good method for those who are doubtful and emotionally unstable. Moreover, the so-called “appropriate part” refers to the severity of the disease to be informed, which depends on the patient’s psychological acceptability and possible prognosis. Except for those with simple and mild disease, it is generally not advisable to tell the whole story, especially prematurely. As for the elderly tumor patients, our general principle is that it is better not to inform them or to inform them less. Because we do not advocate invasive treatment for them, it is always relatively easy to let them cooperate with some less toxic Chinese medicine and immunotherapy. After informing, it adds a point of danger and possibility for the elderly to be frightened, so why bother?