to prevent breast cancer possibilities ...



I understand it on one hand ... BUT

what do you think about it ?




.
[Edited 1/28/10 18:32pm]

I've heard of it when something suspicious is found, but you mean without even the slightest cause for concern? Like as a general precaution??

well i think mach if their breasts are infected with cancer then they should be removed for health reasons even reduced size wise if they bother the woman

johnart said:

I am listening to a case where she does not have cancer but it ran in her family ...

retrodude said:

I can understand that

this woman has no cancer in her breasts

but if it has to be done.....I support it

I think this is mostly women who have a strong family history and have done genetic testing that shows their odds of getting cancer are pretty high so they have prophylactic mastectomies. I believe news anchor Rene Syler did this cuz both of her parents had breast cancer. If the indicators are there this makes perfect sense to me.

Former anchorwoman Renee Syler bids farewell to breasts

She doesn't have breast cancer. But she did have both breasts removed and reconstructed in January to ensure as much as she can that she will never develop the disease that has struck both her mother and father.

It's the dad connection that puts René Syler, former anchorwoman for The Early Show, at such risk for breast cancer. That and the dozens of microcalcifications -- these can indicate cancer -- that repeatedly revealed themselves on mammograms and the diagnosis of atypical ductal hyperplasia that increases the risk of cancer. And while cancer was never diagnosed for this woman who was sure the disease would one day catch up with her, Syler is no stranger to the world of biopsies. And her breasts -- misshapen, shriveled, collapsed, and scarred from so many surgical procedures -- were proof of her frequent rides on the breast cancer merry-go-round.

Now Syler's breasts are gone. And she is breathing a great big sigh of relief. She calls her new "girls" incredible. And she calls her new mood "good."

"I see now that the specter of breast cancer has been permeating my life," says Syler whose story appears in the April 2007 issue of The Oprah Magazine and whose book Good-Enough Mother will be published in April.

"I couldn't really live because I was always playing defense -- watching and waiting, wondering if this would be the year I'd be diagnosed."
[Edited 1/27/10 8:40am]

I'm surprised you're just hearing about this cuz it's getting more common.

What is prophylactic mastectomy?
Prophylactic mastectomy is surgery to remove one or both breasts to reduce the risk of developing breast cancer. According to the National Cancer Institute, prophylactic mastectomy in high-risk women may be able to reduce the risk of developing breast cancer by 90%.

Is prophylactic mastectomy right for you?
If you are at high risk for developing breast cancer, you might be exploring possible ways that you can reduce this risk. While prophylactic mastectomy can significantly reduce risk of developing breast cancer, this surgery is also a serious choice that can have a considerable impact on your life.

There are many factors to consider when deciding on a risk-reduction strategy, so take the time you need to talk to your doctor and family members about the different ways you can lower your risk.

You may be considering risk-reducing measures such as prophylactic mastectomy if:

You have a strong family history of breast cancer: Your mother, sister, or daughter had breast cancer, especially before age 50.
You’ve tested positive for BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations, which increase the risk of breast cancer.
You have a personal history of breast cancer, making you more likely to develop a new cancer in the opposite breast than someone who has never had breast cancer.
You have been diagnosed with lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS), which has been shown to increase the risk of developing invasive breast cancer.
You have had radiation therapy to the chest before age 30, which increases the risk of breast cancer throughout your life.
You have widely spread breast microcalcifications (tiny deposits of calcium in the breast tissue), or you have dense breasts. If your doctor finds a cluster of microcalcifications in your breast, it can sometimes mean that breast cancer is present. If you have dense breasts, it can be difficult for doctors to diagnose breast abnormalities and sometimes requires the removal of tissue samples to study under a microscope (biopsy). If a person has to undergo multiple biopsies because of many microcalcifications or dense breasts, the scar tissue that is created can complicate mammography and physical examination. While rare, some women with these conditions decide to undergo prophylactic mastectomy.

SCNDLS said:

I think one of my cousins had breast reductions because of this reason

bboy87 said:

I don't think a reduction reduces cancer risk tho.

My cousin's wife was diagnosed a couple years with cancer in one breast. They could have just done a lumpectomy with follow-up radiation and chemo. But she decided that, based on her family history and the fact that the kinds of cancers that occur in younger women tend to be more aggressive, she would go for a double mastectomy, hardcore radiation and chemo, and reconstruction afterward.

She is cancer free now - and we all hope she stays that way.

News anchor and journalist E.D. Hill(formerly of Fox News) has just been a guest on The View and she has just come out and publicly declared that next week she is having her breasts removed to prevent her from contracting breast cancer!!! I can understand it 2 a certain extent, but then theres a million 2 one chance that u will never ever get breast cancer!!!!!

Desire2006 said:

her sister had both removed as well BUT I think she had actual BC (?)

Seems a bit over the top.

Graycap23 said:

Over the top compared to what? Knowing the risks, ignoring them...and dying?

It's really sad but if you find it's the right choice for yourself then go right ahead...

I understand it, I have a strong BC history and 2 daughters, we all have very dense breasts, fibrous and full. My birth grandmother died of breast cancer when my birth mom was 12 which put her in her late 30's or early 40's when she died. I had a cousin who had 3 kids, breast fed them all and died of breast cancer at 31. My birth mom is a survivor she was 50 when she was diagnosed and had a double mast for precaution and got implants. So if I have the counseling and something turns up I may consider this procedure. They are breasts and I love them but I can get some more, and bigger As for my life, well I can't be replaced and I would rather be here with implants than not at all.

Genesia said:

Taking that step without being diagnosed.

Desire2006 said:

Ummm the women doing this are more likely to get cancer than not.

butterfli25 said:

Exactly! If the indicators show you're at an increased risk I don't see what there is to consider. Wait and see if you get it and survive vs taking steps to drastically reduce the odds of breast cancer and living. Seems obvious to me.

Graycap23 said:

By the time a woman with a genetic pre-disposition to breast cancer is diagnosed, it is often too late.

my mother in law had a mastectomy and lumpectomy in the other breast. my wife went for genetic testing to see if she had the "bad" gene for breast cancer.
before she went for the test, I said what will you do with the results?
her tests came back positive for breast cancer. she goes for extra mammograms and ultrasounds for ovarian cancer screening.
I told her that if she wanted to have a double mastectomy to give her piece of mind, I support her 100%, and that I would not love her less for it.
she hasn't gone that route..
one doctor told her that if this was about testicular cancer..how many men would have their balls removed preventitavely.
[Edited 1/27/10 15:04pm]

Mach said:

I know someone who was going to do this. I don't know if she actually did, but I think it is insane.

He mother died of it, but still, that just seems like putting the cart before the horse. Surgery is not without risk, either.

I dunno, I think that sounds extreme. Breast cancer runs in my family, but I'll be DAMNED if I get rid of the girls as a PREcaution. I'm not losing them without a fight.

Genesia said:

I understand but it still seems a bit extreme and a tough decision.

NDRU said:

Like I said I understand it on one hand

not so much on the other

Mach said:

that's crazy. having cancer in one's family is no guarantee that one will get cancer themselves. lemme guess...she's getting her breasts removed and replacing them with a nice set of implants. I've heard in some cases insurance will cover cosmetic surgery if cancer is involved. kind of like the free rhinoplasty if you say you have a deviated septum. I'm not saying this is the case each and every time but for this to turn into some sort of trend is disturbing to say the least. I mean damn, no sign of cancer or if there is a sign, they aren't going to bother with chemo?

DesireeNevermind said:

When women do this it's not JUST the cancer running in the family that is the issue. There are MANY factors combined that increase your chances exponentially besides JUST having it in your family. If all those factors add up against you, you are likely to get breast cancer that is more virulent and harder to fight unless you take drastic, preemptive measures.

Like I said, BOTH of Rene's parents had breast cancer and she had a host of other signs that left her real boobs chopped up to hell from all the biopsies. There's also a psychological component to consider when all these variables are present. Plus, when a woman's father has breast cancer that is a HUGE negative in her odds and is compounded by her mother also getting it. Under these kinds of circumstances, they could have my titties on a platter vs. me taking a wait and see and be constantly stressed out approach.

I think Christina Applegate recently did that.

SCNDLS said:

Well said.

I mean...does anyone actually believe these women just woke up one morning and said, "Gee...what should I do today? I know! I'll get my breasts removed. Just...you know...on the off-chance that I might get cancer." This has to be a gut-wrenching decision - and definitely not one that is made lightly.
[Edited 1/28/10 13:35pm]