Thread: Dr. Susan Love
View Single Post
Old 11-18-2009, 03:50 PM   #7
StephN
Senior Member
 
StephN's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Misty woods of WA State
Posts: 4,128
Exclamation Re: Dr. Susan Love

The PLOT thickens! If you weren't very mad about this before, prepare to be VERY offended!

Susan Love's foundation has a steering committee. On that committee is Fran Vesco, founder of Breast Cancer Action. These liberals are sticking together in more ways than one. Do I hear back scratching?

Breast Cancer Action supports and is in the thick of the new guidelines. Here is part of what they say on their web site - note the word TRUTH here:

The truth about breast cancer and screening:
  • There is no statistically significant evidence that screening women age 40-49 years reduces breast cancer mortality. The USPSTF now recommends against universal screening mammography for women aged 40 to 49 years.1 The Task Force changed their recommendation based on a systematic review2 of randomized clinical trials and on six statistical models of the risks and benefits of mammography screening.3 A major consideration for the change was the addition of recent results from the only clinical trial designed to specifically evaluate mammography in this age group. The Age trial4 found no statistically significant difference in breast cancer mortality between those women who were screened during their 40s and those who were not.
  • False-positive results and additional imaging as a result of mammography are most prevalent in women aged 40 to 49 years. When screening is started at age 40 years, about 60% more false-positive results have been estimated to occur than if screening is started at age 50 years.3
  • The evidence for a benefit of mammography after 50 is not strong. To reduce the harm while still maintaining the small benefit, the USPSTF now recommends biennial (every other year) instead of annual screening mammography for women aged 50 to 74 years.1 The USPSTF concludes that the benefit of screening mammography is maintained by biennial screening, and changing from annual to biennial screening is likely to reduce the harms of mammography screening by approximately 50%, based on the statistical modeling,3 a systematic review of randomized clinical trials,5 a population-wide screening program report,6 and on a community-based study.7
  • Mammography can miss cancers that need treatment, and in some cases find disease that does not need treatment, leading to overtreatment with toxic therapies. Harms for healthy women who do not have cancer can include unnecessary imaging tests and biopsies, unnecessary exposure to x-ray radiation, and psychological trauma and anxiety.
  • All breast cancers are not equal. Some patients will have fast-growing, aggressive tumors while others will have slower-growing, less aggressive tumors that are less likely to metastasize and, therefore, have a better prognosis. Screening is more likely to identify the slower-growing, less aggressive tumors because of longer asymptomatic periods. This “length-time” bias can make screening appear more beneficial than it is. “Lead-time” bias can also contribute to a misrepresentation of the benefit of mammography. If a lethal cancer is found earlier through screening, the patient would appear to live longer because of “lead time.” Screening is not helping patients in these situations live longer, it is only helping them find out about their cancers sooner.
  • Breast self-examination (BSE) is ineffective and potentially harmful. Two large, randomized, clinical trials of BSE, both found that women who did BSE were no less likely to die of breast cancer than those who did not do BSE. In both studies, the number of invasive cancers diagnosed in the two groups was about the same, but women in the BSE group had more breast biopsies and more benign lesions diagnosed than did women in the control group. 8, 9The USPSTF recommends against teaching breast self-examination.2
  • The USPSTF concludes that there is insufficient evidence to evaluate the benefit of clinical breast examinations.2
We encourage women to make informed decisions regarding screening based on the actual evidence. To learn more about the myths and truths concerning breast cancer and screening, and to find out how to take action against this disease, visit www.stopbreastcancer.org.
__________________
"When I hear music, I fear no danger. I am invulnerable. I see no foe. I am related to the earliest times, and to the latest." H.D. Thoreau
Live in the moment.

MY STORY SO FAR ~~~~
Found suspicious lump 9/2000
Lumpectomy, then node dissection and port placement
Stage IIB, 8 pos nodes of 18, Grade 3, ER & PR -
Adriamycin 12 weekly, taxotere 4 rounds
36 rads - very little burning
3 mos after rads liver full of tumors, Stage IV Jan 2002, one spot on sternum
Weekly Taxol, Navelbine, Herceptin for 27 rounds to NED!
2003 & 2004 no active disease - 3 weekly Herceptin + Zometa
Jan 2005 two mets to brain - Gamma Knife on Jan 18
All clear until treated cerebellum spot showing activity on Jan 2006 brain MRI & brain PET
Brain surgery on Feb 9, 2006 - no cancer, 100% radiation necrosis - tumor was still dying
Continue as NED while on Herceptin & quarterly Zometa
Fall-2006 - off Zometa - watching one small brain spot (scar?)
2007 - spot/scar in brain stable - finished anticoagulation therapy for clot along my port-a-catheter - 3 angioplasties to unblock vena cava
2008 - Brain and body still NED! Port removed and scans in Dec.
Dec 2008 - stop Herceptin - Vaccine Trial at U of W begun in Oct. of 2011
STILL NED everywhere in Feb 2014 - on wing & prayer
7/14 - Started twice yearly Zometa for my bones
Jan. 2015 checkup still shows NED
2015 Neuropathy in feet - otherwise all OK - still NED.
Same news for 2016 and all of 2017.
Nov of 2017 - had small skin cancer removed from my face. Will have Zometa end of Jan. 2018.
StephN is offline   Reply With Quote