Shop for herbs and other supplements on Amazon

To mammogram or not?

#1

(04-01-2016, 07:26 PM)GingerMaxim Wrote:  
(04-01-2016, 05:13 PM)jannet.duff Wrote:  Very impressive, I would love them. But, if it was me growing that big in a such a short time I would be asking my doctor for a mammogram. Please tell me you have been for one ?

Hi Julie, Umm well why do you say that???

I do see my Endo in just a short while so maybe once I see him that
he will suggest it for me. But I will ask him.

I feel no abnormal pain other then growing pains.

I constantly play with my breasts and don't feel any abnormal lumps.

With my involvment with a transgender group, a few of the girls were sent for mammograms after going to only a "B" in 12 months, like theirs you probably are in the lucky few that gets great results, but it is worth getting checked out. You can never be too careful.
Reply
#2

(04-01-2016, 05:13 PM)jannet.duff Wrote:  Very impressive, I would love them. But, if it was me growing that big in a such a short time I would be asking my doctor for a mammogram. Please tell me you have been for one ?

Please tell me you HAVEN'T!!

https://youtu.be/Z9t_gCSTrrE
https://youtu.be/3MCKNxYCUpM
https://youtu.be/lr829uWlYYI
https://youtu.be/aYUkwLhZXGQ
Reply
#3

(05-01-2016, 08:05 AM)WantAPair Wrote:  
(04-01-2016, 05:13 PM)jannet.duff Wrote:  Very impressive, I would love them. But, if it was me growing that big in a such a short time I would be asking my doctor for a mammogram. Please tell me you have been for one ?

Please tell me you HAVEN'T!!

https://youtu.be/Z9t_gCSTrrE
https://youtu.be/3MCKNxYCUpM
https://youtu.be/lr829uWlYYI
https://youtu.be/aYUkwLhZXGQ

I disagree. My wife is alive today because a mammogram caught a stage 1 breast cancer, and she is among many thousands of similar cases. Of course, mammography is not a perfect tool, but until something better is available, it is the best choice.
Reply
#4

Sonograms should be the first step, then maybe mammography. Not the other way around.
Reply
#5

Sonograms have their own big downside -- they are not very effective at finding breast cancer.

I would not rely on the videos linked above for sound information. One is of a guy who has made a career out of touting "healing ionized water." (See http://www.apswater.com/article.asp?id=198&title=Alkaline+Water+Hoax+It+is+Simple+Science.) Another died young despite marketing his own life-extension diet plan. He also wrote a discredited anti-vaccine book. Another one is a a consummate scammer and internet quack. See http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Leonard_Coldwell

Only the first link seems informed by real science, but to a modest extent misconstrues the Canadian study relied upon.

Mammagrams have significant downsides, no doubt, and should not be overused. Still, together with self exam, they seem like the best alternative.
Reply
#6

(05-01-2016, 09:46 PM)spanky Wrote:  Sonograms have their own big downside -- they are not very effective at finding breast cancer.

I would not rely on the videos linked above for sound information. One is of a guy who has made a career out of touting "healing ionized water." (See http://www.apswater.com/article.asp?id=198&title=Alkaline+Water+Hoax+It+is+Simple+Science.) Another died young despite marketing his own life-extension diet plan. He also wrote a discredited anti-vaccine book. Another one is a a consummate scammer and internet quack. See http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Leonard_Coldwell

Only the first link seems informed by real science, but to a modest extent misconstrues the Canadian study relied upon.

Mammagrams have significant downsides, no doubt, and should not be overused. Still, together with self exam, they seem like the best alternative.
If it wasn't for that "quack", my mother would've been dead 3 years ago!! Because of him and his ilk, I cured mom's cancer twice!! Beat that!!
Reply
#7

(05-01-2016, 12:44 PM)spanky Wrote:  I disagree. My wife is alive today because a mammogram caught a stage 1 breast cancer, and she is among many thousands of similar cases. Of course, mammography is not a perfect tool, but until something better is available, it is the best choice.

I don't know the specifics so I could well be wrong but the odds are your wife is alive today in spite of her treatment for this discovered "cancer" not because of the treatment. Read the following:

Abolishing Mammography Screening Programs? A View from the Swiss Medical Board

"Under normal circumstances, the Swiss Medical Board reported that for every breast-cancer death prevented in US women over a 10-year course of annual screening beginning at 50 years of age:

490 to 670 women are likely to have a false positive mammogram with repeat examination
70 to 100, an unnecessary biopsy
Three to 14, an over-diagnosed breast cancer that would never have become clinically apparent

This lack of clear benefit, and evidence of apparent harm, was enough for them to recommend abolishing mammography-screening programs."

The Cochrane Collaboration was kind enough to put out a Mammography screening leaflet in multiple languages outlining the science in layman's terms (find the English leaflet available for download here.) The summary of the leaflet reads as follows:

"When we first published this leaflet in 2008, the Summary was:

"It may be reasonable to attend for breast cancer screening with mammography, but it may also be reasonable not to attend, as screening has both benefits and harms.

If 2000 women are screened regularly for 10 years, one will benefit from the screening, as she will avoid dying from breast cancer.

At the same time, 10 healthy women will, as a consequence, become cancer patients and will be treated unnecessarily. These women will have either a part of their breast or the whole breast removed, and they will often receive radiotherapy, and sometimes chemotherapy.

Furthermore, about 200 healthy women will experience a false alarm. The psychological strain until one knows whether or not it was cancer, and even afterwards, can be severe."

These numbers were derived from the randomised trials of mammography screening. However, since the trials were performed, treatment of breast cancer has improved considerably. More recent studies suggest that mammography screening may no longer be effective in reducing the risk of dying from breast cancer.

Screening produces patients with breast cancer from among healthy women who would never have developed symptoms of breast cancer. Treatment of these healthy women increases their risk of dying, e.g. from heart disease and cancer.

It therefore no longer seems beneficial to attend for breast cancer screening. In fact, by avoiding going to screening, a woman will lower her risk of getting a breast cancer diagnosis. However, despite this, some women might still wish to go to screening.
"

(05-01-2016, 09:46 PM)spanky Wrote:  Mammagrams have significant downsides, no doubt, and should not be overused. Still, together with self exam, they seem like the best alternative.

What does "should not be overused" even mean? Either they are beneficial or they're not. The fact that mammography is overused is the heart of the problem.

Self exam doesn't help either. Even the United States Preventive Services Task Force has stated, "The USPSTF recommends against teaching breast self-examination (BSE)." Specifically they say, "The USPSTF recommends against the service. There is moderate or high certainty that the service has no net benefit or that the harms outweigh the benefits." and that we should, "Discourage the use of this service."
Reply
#8

Apologies for the inconvenience, it was necessary to create this thread from the OP, (who btw, has departed). However, the thread took a different direction from being a program post, thus, the need for the change.

Please continue the conversation in this new section/thread.

Thanks, Lotus.
Reply
#9

(07-01-2016, 03:30 PM)WendyA Wrote:  
(05-01-2016, 12:44 PM)spanky Wrote:  I disagree. My wife is alive today because a mammogram caught a stage 1 breast cancer, and she is among many thousands of similar cases. Of course, mammography is not a perfect tool, but until something better is available, it is the best choice.

If 2000 women are screened regularly for 10 years, one will benefit from the screening, as she will avoid dying from breast cancer.

Self exam doesn't help either. Even the United States Preventive Services Task Force has stated, "The USPSTF recommends against teaching breast self-examination (BSE)." Specifically they say, "The USPSTF recommends against the service. There is moderate or high certainty that the service has no net benefit or that the harms outweigh the benefits." and that we should, "Discourage the use of this service."
1. Nobody HAS to die from ANY cancer!! There are nearly 400 known NATURAL CURES for cancer!! Radiation and chemo are NOT on the list!! Most of them can be had by going to your grocery store!! Or, if you are a certain type of farmer, just going into your back yard and picking the cure from a tree or bush!
There's a "race" of people in Tibet,, I think, that live to be a very ripe old age in mostly perfect health and they NEVER get cancer!! The also don't have money!! They consider their wealth to be how many apricot seeds they have!! They eat them ALL the time and, because of this, NEVER get cancer!! How easy is THAT to keep everyone over here from getting it?? But, does "modern medicine" tell you anything about that? Of course not!!!! They're only interested in lining their pockets with your money!!
Check the internet, YouTube in particular. There's a PLETHORA of doctors out there that tout NOT using chemo & radiation because it's bad for you, it CAN kill you and it CAN GIVE you cancer!! Start out with a movie called, "Cancer: The Forbidden Cures", and you'll begin to see how doctors that CAN cure cancer are demonized and even put in jail for daring to keep conventional doctors from getting the money you might pay them for chemo & radiation!! Dr. Burszynski (sp?) HAS a proven cure, and has been in court numerous times BECAUSE he can cure cancer!! They want him to stop doing it!! How sick is that??? Vitamin B17 has been practically outlawed BECAUSE it cures cancer!! And they're going after Vitamin C, next for the same reason!!
There's NO reason ANYBODY HAS to suffer from cancer!!!! Even stage 4 can be cured in a matter of weeks/months!!
But, you disbelievers just go right ahead and do whatever you want. take that chemo & radiation, as opposed to some fruits, nuts, veggies and/or vitamins!!
Reply
#10

This discussion seems way off the track to me. In my wife's case, it is simply wrong to state or assume the her cancer was caused by the mammogram that in fact identified the lesion that, on biopsy, turned out to be malignant. Mammography has been the firat step in diagnosing many, many thousands of breast cancers. Indeed, she was first diagnosed some 23 years ago based upon a self exam. That cancer was treated and she recovered beautifully. Some 20 years thereafter, her second lesion was found, this time by mammogram. Again, she was treated successfully.

I am not going to get into a prolonged debate with those who want to go with what they have found on the internet. More power to them! I, however, prefer to go with the concensus of medical professionals.
Reply

Shop for herbs and other supplements on Amazon




Users browsing this thread: 2 Guest(s)



Shop for herbs and other supplements on Amazon


Breast Nexus is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for us to earn fees by linking to Amazon.com and affiliated sites.


Cookie Policy   Privacy Policy