[Carolyns]

Hi Laurel,
I didn't get why they are telling women not to do self exams. I think that most women got that message and not the distinction of a formal self exam verses a "feel you boobies" free style exam.

Debbie, I am glad that you post your perspective but I am one of the folks who does not fit the cookie cutter approach and therefore can not agree with your counter argument perspective. I was put off for over a year by a doctor who was following the "guidelines" 21 years ago. I was too young for a mammogram. At Stage IV 18 years later scans were ordered which showed that I had a broken cervical vertebra. Well studies show that scanning or finding Stage IV earlier or later doesn't affect outcome... as a result many doctors would not scan. Well I can still stand upright rather than being in a wheelchair so who knows if I will live longer. Statistically speaking they may be right but there is more to the story. As far as evidence based medicine, there isn't any evidence to support the vast majority of treatments I have had as a Stage IV patient yet "anecdotally" they have all worked. I am not trying to be sarcastic but it burns me when my personal life experience is referred to as anecdotal. With these types of guidelines there are supposed to be work-arounds for Stage IV patients that don't fit the mold but they are straw men... just try to get compassionate use or expanded access if you need it... I hope and pray that no one ever gets Stage IV and needs access to compassionate use or expanded access... people are die every day waiting. I am a pleaser and I love to agree with authority figures but in this case it is life or death and I can tell you from personal experience if I could only get insurance to pay for treatment based on evidence I would be dead. You can see on the boards that many are already being denied Tykerb without Xeloda … this is a new trend since I came on this board. Anyway, I respect your right to speak your mind and it is interesting to read but I am fairly certain that if you were in my shoes you could see why I can’t agree with your counter arguments. PS - I don't mean this as a political statement. It is just not the right way to go about setting guidelines when experts in the field and patients are left out of the process or asked for input in the process. Numbers do lie and statisics are almost always way behind the current situation.

Brenda, I couldn't agree more with you... beautifully said,
"Statistics don't and can't take into account the individual human's cells, molecules, dna, spirit, internal constitution, fight, and that certain something that can't be tapped into. One size fits all stats just can't possibly fit all. They are too big for some and too small for others. Stats have their role, but must be mitigated with "individualism."

I certainly don't mean this to be sarcastic... but personally, I would rather be alive anecdotally than dead statistically."
Thanks, Carolyn