Double mastectomy or not?

The latest fashionable breast cancer decision is to have a double mastectomy in a preventive effort. Well there was a super secret twenty year study going on about the benefits of that very same surgery.

Basically what it boils down to is that unless you have the BRCA gene or other hereditary breast cancer, there is no benefit to removing a healthy breast. And the potential complications of the surgery can have a negative effect on the patient.


"Tuttle and his coauthors used published data to develop a model for predicting survival rates over 20 years for women diagnosed with stage I or II cancer at age 40, 50 or 60.

According to the existing data, more than 98 percent of women diagnosed with stage I breast cancer will survive at least 10 years, and 90 percent will survive for 20 years. For stage II breast cancer, 77 percent survive for at least 10 years and 58 percent survive at least 20 years.

For all age groups and tumor types in the study, the risk of developing cancer in the opposite breast after diagnosis was less than one percent each year, the authors wrote in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute."

So this study shows that while some women may want an elective double mastectomy, there is no benefit. I was also pleased to see the ten and twenty year survival rates (which are difficult to find) for stage I and II breast cancer. I am moving away from the five year time frame and starting to think about the ten year time frame and longer. And no I didn't even consider a single or double mastectomy.

The truth is not inthe number of years for cancer patients

Last week a friend  announced rather publicly on Facebook that she was celebrating 34 years since her cancer diagnosis. I think I have mentioned her in posts previously. My first cancer's diagnosis is 33 years in August. The difference is she was stage IV ovarian cancer in 1980. I was stage I thyroid cancer in 1981. But am only at 7 years out from my more troublesome stage II breast cancer.

At first glance those number seem good. I mean we are still here. But they don't talk about the stress and the emotions behind it. We now have had years to learn to deal with it. By now being more open about celebrating, it is clear we are both doing that.

She has clearly defied the odds. But the numbers do not tell the tale of the life behind it.So we are still here but the truth is not in the numbers.

Then there's that survivor thing

I started this post in March of 2009. I keep a bunch of posts in draft format that because I change my mind, something else catches my attention, or I just forget (most common). They can sit for months or years and then the links I was going to write about go away or I change my mind and decide I am still inspired.

I know I have posted on this before. I do not consider myself a cancer survivor. I am someone living with two cancer diagnoses.  I am in a special little class of people (I like being called special. I like calling myself special. Its better than calling myself a survivor to me.) When asked, I do not say I am a cancer survivor. I say 'I've had cancer twice myself.' And only if I think its their business.

I think survivor was dreamed up by someone who isn't dealing with it. When you survive something you out last it. But if there is no cure, how do you survive it? Eventually something is going to do you in - maybe not cancer, maybe you end up on the Titanic or something... Mental note to self, do not take transatlantic trips during ice berg season.

My take is that I survived a bunch of doctor appointments.I am still surviving because I have an unending list of doctor appointments (which reminds me I need to fix some of them that were changed without my permission). That is my project for today, along with holiday cards, gift wrapping, cleaning, folding laundry, going to the gym and the grocery store. I will survive all that as well.

I used to get more aggravated by the use of the word 'survivor' than I am now. I know some people throw around the word survivor to describe themselves. I think I am okay with that. I think I get more irked by the organizations that start labelling people or the news broadcasters which start saying 'she's a SURVIVOR...' and 'as a SURVIVOR...'

I guess I am saying, people can label themselves but don't label others. Its the same if someone wants to call him/herself a fool, that is fine by me. But don't call someone else a fool - that's rude/mean, etc.

So no, do not call me a survivor. Call me someone special. It sounds better and makes me feel good.