PJ Hamel

RhondaH · 11-19-2009, 06:14 AM

http://www.healthcentral.com/breast-...ntly?ic=506011

StephN · 11-19-2009, 11:50 AM

Did you actually READ this woman's blog?
She speaks from both sides of her mouth. Couching her "reluctant" support of the task force guidelines in "supporting rights" in general. (Huh?)

Here she answers one of her reader's questions:

You misunderstand me, Michael. I support the government's right (and responsibility) to develop guidelines. That doesn't mean I endorse those guidelines. It's like we say about democracy – I don't agree with what you say, but I support your right to say it.

Yes, these new guidelines are a step backwards for women's health; and I'm VERY uncomfortable supporting the guidelines in print, because I don't want to be seen as agreeing with them. I simply wanted to point out that, looked at with a cold, calculating eye – which right or wrong, is how the government assesses things – they make sense.

But looking at them as a woman... they make no sense at all. - PJH

BTW SHE admits to having a mammogram find HER breast cancer, but not at what age. ??? But now she will allow herself to be viewed as a government number ... except when she is feeling like "a woman."

hutchibk · 11-19-2009, 12:45 PM

Thanks Steph. You rock.

RhondaH · 11-19-2009, 01:55 PM

yes Steph , I did READ this blog and like everyone else am VERY concerned about these guidelines, but at the risk of being GREATLY persecuted and politically stoned, I am trying to get ALL the information from ALL sides (this is why I only posted the link and provided no comment as some find crazy, I am still trying to wrap my head around everything...yes, "WHAT THE HELL IS WRONG WITH ME, WHY IS MY PITCHFORK NOT OUT"!!!! and while it may very well come to that, I want to get a grip on the whole situation and look at ALL sides...I'll be honest, I'm so FRICKING tired of EVERYTHING being political (I'm flipping tired of BOTH sides and tired of having to "call my congressman" for the right to shit, personally I don't see ANY of them doing ANYTHING for ANYONE and damnit I live in Michigan so I KNOW how F-Ed up the system is), but I want to be informed and was only trying to provide a DIFFERENT point of view...sorry for not losing my mind like everyone else...Joe I won't darken HER2's doorstep anymore...

Laurel · 11-19-2009, 08:07 PM

Rhonda,

Darken anytime. Stay and help sort this for us all. I think this is very scary on many levels. To be honest, we have got to face some hard facts. Can we as a nation provide health care at it's present standard to all persons within its borders, legal and illegal. The answer? No. Who will be expendable? All of us.

I wonder why we find ourselves in this position? Isn't there a system that addresses the present weaknesses of our current system, but retains its marvelous delivery of care? Is the answer socialized medicine, or something else?

I feel rushed, and manipulated, and afraid. I am a cancer survivor. How big is the target on my back? Am I expendable? Will I be treated if I recur? How long will I wait for the treatment the government will grant me? Will I die waiting?

I am not a number! I am a daughter, a sister, a friend, a wife, and a mother. I want to be a grandmother. I am a fighter. I am not expendable. I am valuable.

Lien · 11-20-2009, 02:24 AM

The system that has been proposed has been in place in my country, the Netherlands, for years. Our overall survival rates are not significantly worse. BUT we have a different Health Care System. ALL of us have obigatory basic health insurance, which covers mammo's for diagnostic purposes. This means that we have easy and fast access to good healthcare if we find a lump or any other symptoms that could point to breastcancer.

My tumor was found at age 44 because I went to see my GP when I felt a lump and was sent for a mammo.

So the guidelines may be right in a country with excellent care close to where people live, in combination with a good health insurance system. We all have a GP who is trained to check for health problems and refers people to specialist care when needed. That way the specialists only do the complicated staff and no routine checkups.

These new guidelines may not be the right thing for the US, where there's more poverty, more poor quality health care and where hospitals are further away from where people live. Not to mention the whole insurance issue.

Just my 2 cents

Jacqueline

11-20-2009, 07:07 AM

There are 13 threads going on this subject and now StephN and hutchibk are
suggesting that Dr. Love is supporting the new guidelines because it may open
the door for some new procedure that she is involved in????? Do you also think
that the woman has now grown horns????? Drop the pitch forks ladies ... I think
I need a shovel ....

11-20-2009, 08:00 AM

dated 2003:

http://caonline.amcancersoc.org/cgi/.../full/53/3/141

StephN · 11-20-2009, 12:57 PM

Regarding the question of whether I think Dr. Love has grown horns. Certainly NOT.

My "itch" with her is that she may be avoiding full disclosure as to her interest in backing the revised guidelines. On her Army of Women website under the Research tab the information is there about the Intraductal Approach symposiums and even announces the next one in 2011. There is a grant application for anyone who would like to do more research in that vein, so it is still being encouraged and funded. Bravo, go for it.

My compassion for a whole generation of women out there leads me to question further what and who is behind the announcement, as well as attempting to peer into the void to discern alternative possibilites.

I would LOVE for a new method of detecting breast cancer that is not invasive and gives no radiation to become the norm. I know there are also blood tests being studied, because I have participated in blood screening research for 6 years! My understanding is that the preliminary of that study was presented at ASCO this year and futher data will be presented next year.

As for me, I am way past the group of younger women who may be denied screenings in the future. I will always have screenings as I only had lumpectomy and still have breasts, keeping me at risk for more cancer.

11-20-2009, 02:19 PM

Does Susan Love have to have an "interest" in supporting the
new guidelines or does she have to have a "reason"????? She
has already explained the reasons .....

Laurel · 11-21-2009, 08:01 PM

Hmmm.....but what reason does she have for not advocating the continuation of breast self exams, especially in young women? The teaching of self breast exams is discouraged. Why?

Seriously, why?

hutchibk · 11-21-2009, 10:23 PM

Unregistered: if you read the responses on Dr. Love's blog about her reasons to agree with the Task Force, you will notice quite a few who ask curiously about her motivations and her company Pro-Duct Health which she sold to Cytyc in 2001 for over $150 million. I don't think she has grown horns at all, I respect her knowledge, and I reserve the right to disagree with her. I haven't accused her of anything, but Steph's musings spurred me to remember a trial she was talking about last year that she was deeply involved in, and it made me curious about potential disclosure on her part regarding her research. I have had a more focused and skeptical eye on her for two years since sitting in on her assessments of research and the ensuing discussion with other professionals on panels at SABCS the past two years. I have found her to be strong in some areas and disappointing in others.

My breast surgeon is also tremendously knowledgeable and important. He hasn't written a definitive book about breast cancer, and he's not a celebrity researcher, but he is a rock star in my book. He was interviewed the day these Task Force recommendations hit the news:

Dr. Ames Smith, chief of surgery at St. David's Hospital, says he is not changing any of his procedures based on the recommendations.

"There is clear data that shows there is a survival benefit in women that have regular screen mammography between 40 and 50," he said."In my practice, I've seen a number of women in their 40’s who have had very early cancers detected, in some cases, even before they've become invasive cancers.

"It's very similar to picking up a colon cancer before it becomes a cancer by removing a polyp," he says. "In those particular patients, there is no question they are glad those things are detected."

Dr. Smith says he also advocates women do self breast exams in conjunction with regular exams by a physician and possible mammograms.

"The thing that's dangerous about breast cancer is not just the size, but it's its biological potential to spread or metastasize, and by finding these cancers before they're invasive, it means we've found them before they've had an opportunity to metastasize, so that's a huge advantage."

Dr. Smith says he is less resistant to the task force's recommendations that mammograms be given every other year to women older than 50.

"That would be something would be easier for me to go with," he said. "I think that in general, women that are older than 50 tend to have biologically less aggressive tumors."

But he says until there is more research, he will continue to recommend annual mammograms for women 40 and older.

The Susan G. Komen for the Cure foundation, the largest private foundation in the world devoted to fighting breast cancer, is also advising caution when considering the new recommendations.

"Mammograms are the best tool we have for early detection, and right now we should stay the course and wouldn't want to impede any woman from detecting her breast cancer early," says Ramona Magid, executive director of the Austin Komen affiliate.
She says Komen is not changing its recommendations or its funding for annual mammograms.

"Even with today's guidelines, a third of the women who should be screened are not being screened due to lack of access, so Komen will continue to focus on that area," Magid said.

http://www.kvue.com/news/health/Aust...-70410852.html

DianneS · 11-21-2009, 11:16 PM

Why isn't anyone talking about Meditherm, digital infrared thermal imaging, or DITI? It's a 15 minute non invasive test of physiology. It can help detect early stage breast disease or changes in physiology. It can give better detection of breast disease than BSE's, doctor exam, or mammo alone. There is no radiation involved, no contact with the body, it's FDA approved, (for whatever that counts for). Whole body imaging can also be done. The cost here in Canada for DITI is around $200 and is not covered under our national healthcare plan yet, at least where I am in B.C.

I'm wondering why these Meditherm scans are not being talked about by Dr. Love, etc? They are interpreted by Thermologists (MD's certified to read thermal imaging scans). If these can detect breast ca early on I think they are invaluable. They weren't out yet in my area when I was dx'd in 2008.

Dianne

Rich66 · 11-21-2009, 11:58 PM

Well...Hutchi's surgeon seems reasonable. And the Komen rep seems reasonable. And Dianne seems reasonable suggesting better imaging to counteract the "anxiety" of mammogram's deficiencies. It's at least a good goal. Although..I am much more interested in tests to detect abnormal shiite in the blood. I have read enough articles suggesting cancer patients have abnormal serum indicators that I think that level should be rapidly and thoroughly investigated. Morphological indiactors come too late in some of the cancers. Yes..it's a cancer family, not a breast cancer clique. I've been forced to view various cancers and I, despite researcher's desire to ghettoize, feel strongly that the common grounds should be pursued foremost. Of course..for now...use what screening tools we got and don't use the past to paralyze the future...of young women. They are probably using stats gathered 5 yrs ago. How many treatment options have become next steps for those who thought they were done? How many tomorrow? The rear-view mirror won't show.

hutchibk · 11-22-2009, 11:26 AM

I absolutely hope that technology and research guide us to the perfect diagnostic science, but we aren't there yet. My question is why would we marginalize and discount one of the best tools we currently have before the next "more perfect" technology is developed and proven? DITI and Thermal sound fantastic, and I hope the can prove to be more perfect... but what I read about it and about ductal lavage all recommend that they be used not as a replacement for mammo, but in conjunction with mammo as diagnostic tools.

It seems we just aren't there yet.

Interesting to learn today on Sunday talk shows that one of the two primary directives of the Task Force was to study cost savings when determining recommendations.

alicem · 11-22-2009, 01:33 PM

To Quote PJ Hamel:

"Then there’s the financial cost. Billions of dollars will be saved on screening and treatment if these new guidelines are followed. And let’s not be disingenuous here; the bottom line is where it’s at, for many of our lawmakers."

It is ALWAYS about the money it seems. What value should there be placed on 1,000 lives saved . . . on 100 lives saved . . . on ONE LIFE SAVED? Yours, mine, your loved ones?????

I just cannot buy the argument that unnecessary biopsies and screenings causes harm. What a bunch of #^@(!!*@&^#*&^@! You are right Brenda, we are stronger than that.

And for another quote from her article . . .

"And the cost and pain of treatment for stage 0 breast cancer (in situ, non-invasive cancer). Many researchers feel that even without treatment, the majority of such cancers would remain dormant throughout a woman’s lifetime, never threatening her health."

When my cancer was first diagnosed, that was exactly my results. What wonderful words, "stage 0"; "in situ"; "non-invasive". My oncologist told me I was fortunate - no chemo, everything caught early, I would be virtually "cured" with its removal. I even felt guilty that I was so lucky! Then came the mastectomy and the discovery of an invasive tumor - and chemo - and no "cure" - good odds but still a chance of recurrence. MY GOODNESS, IF I WOULDN'T HAVE HAD THE "COST AND PAIN OF TREATMENT" THIS MONSTER WOULD HAVE KEPT GROWING INSIDE OF ME!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WHAT A SCARY THOUGHT!!! I'd give anything to go back to that original diagnosis and that treatment plan. I'd give anything to never have to poison my body with chemo. Sure, there are DCIS cancers that never do become invasive. But the ?"unnecessary"? cost and the treatment of those cancers far outweighs waiting to see if they become invasive, become stage 2, 3, or 4 and then trying to treat it. Which one of you here with stage 2, 3, or 4 would refuse to trade places with a "stage 0" cancer patient if you could???? Comparing the cost of removing the initial cancer to the cost of treating the invasive cancer with chemo is like night and day. If just one cancer could be found at stage 0, it would be worth it to me, but that is not even the case. Thousands are found every year, and the trauma and expense of chemo are avoided and lower survival odds are achieved.

GIVE ME A BREAK, REALLY!!!!!!!!!!