Monday, March 31, 2014

Genetic Testing for Breast Cancer and Radical Mastectomy

Are Women Being Misled into a False Sense of Security?

This article is quite long so I'm splitting it up into
5 parts. The reason is it is an article that every woman
should read before they get themselves tested for cancer.

Life can deal a tough hand to play at different times. We
do not need money grubbing professionals that we trust
dealing us a bad hand just to line many peoples pockets.

With our medical profession coming under the control of the
Federal government, (IRS),that's more pockets to line. We
are the people that have to pay them at their discretion.
We are becoming slaves by far worse than 200+ years. This
slavery has no skin color. We all pay the master, our Federal
Government, and they pick what medical services that we can

We have to educate ourselves if we are going to have a high
quality of life that most of us strive for. This blog,
hopefully, is one tool to help educate as many people as
you and I can. Please pass this blog on to as many as you
can. It will make a huge difference in many peoples lives.


              The Solution For Disease FREE Health...

By Dr. Mercola

    Some days I wonder if this is all a bad dream. How
on earth have we come to this craziness? The latest and
greatest preventative strategy for women genetically
predisposed to breast cancer is amputation, which puts
the wheels in motion for this type of preventive surgery
to be covered by health insurance.

    I’m referring, of course, to Angelina Jolie’s recent
and very public decision to undergo a double mastectomy as
a prophylactic measure.  While she admits this is a very
personal decision, the impacts to the public could be quite
significant based on her celebrity influence.

    Her mother died from ovarian cancer at the age of 56,
and Jolie carries a hereditary gene mutation associated
with both breast and ovarian cancer. According to Jolie,
who revealed her decision in an op-ed in the New York Times:

   My doctors estimated that I had an 87 percent risk of
breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian cancer,
although the risk is different in the case of each woman.

    Only a fraction of breast cancers result from an
inherited gene mutation. Those with a defect in BRCA1 have
a 65 percent risk of getting it, on average.

        Once I knew that this was my reality, I decided to
be proactive and to minimize the risk as much I could. ...
I wanted to write this to tell other women that the decision
to have a mastectomy was not easy. But it is one I am very
happy that I made.

     My chances of developing breast cancer have dropped
from 87 percent to under 5 percent. I can tell my children
that they don’t need to fear they will lose me to breast

    It is nearly incomprehensible to me how any researcher
can give such precise predictions of future cancer risk
based on genetics. The only explanation is near complete
ignorance of the science of epigenetics and the power we all
have to change the expression of our genes.

Why Does US Recommendations Place Women with Gene Defects
at Even Greater Risk?

    The genetic test to check for mutations in the BRCA1
and BRCA2 genes (the BRCA stands for ‘breast cancer
susceptibility genes’) costs about $4,000 in the US, when
not covered by insurance.

    Ironically, if you discover that you carry the mutated
BRCA gene, the standard recommendation in the US is to get
a mammogram and an MRI scan at least once a year thereafter,
even if you’re under the age of 40. This is unconscionable,
in my opinion. If anything, should you have genetic
susceptibility for breast cancer, it would be wise to avoid
ionizing radiation as much as possible, not the other way

    Several European countries including Britain, the
Netherlands and Spain, have already altered their screening
recommendations for women with BRCA mutations, advising them
to get MRIs (which do not emit ionizing radiation) instead of
mammograms before the age of 30.

    Research has demonstrated that women with these genetic
mutations are more sensitive to radiation, and because the
genes in question are involved in repairing DNA, radiation
damage to these genes will subsequently raise your cancer risk.
For example, a study3 published just last year in the British
Medical Journal (BMJ), found that women with faulty BRCA genes
are more likely to develop breast cancer if they’re exposed to
chest X-rays before the age of 30. According to Cancer Research

    Women with a history of chest radiation in their 20s had
a 43 percent increased relative risk of breast cancer compared
to women who had no chest radiation at that age. Any exposure
before age 20 seemed to raise the risk by 62 percent.

    In response to these findings, Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy
chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society was quoted
as saying:

        "This will raise questions and caution flags about
how we treat women with (gene) mutations."

    And Anouk Pijpe of the Netherlands Cancer Institute, one
of the authors in the above-mentioned study, told CBS News:

        "We believe countries who use mammograms in women
under 30 should reconsider their guidelines. It may be possible
to reduce the risk of breast cancer in (high-risk) women by
using MRIs, so we believe physicians and patients should
consider that."

Genetic Defects Are Not a Major Contributor to Breast Cancer

    A key point for women to remember is that while women
with BRCA defects have a 45-65 percent increased risk of breast
cancer, only about TWO PERCENT of diagnosed breast cancers are
caused by BRCA faults. So this genetic defect is nowhere close
to being a primary cause of breast cancer. Clearly, other non-
genetic factors play a far more significant role.

    As pointed out by H. Gilbert Welch, a professor of medicine
at the Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical
Practice and a co-author of Over diagnosed: Making People Sick
in the Pursuit of Health, Angelina Jolie's personal story is
completely irrelevant to 99 percent of all women because they
simply do not have the BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations. In a recent
CNN article, he writes:

   Let's be clear, the BRCA1 mutation is a bad thing... It is
a powerful risk factor for these cancers... When people are at
very high risk for something bad to happen, preventive
interventions are more likely to be a good deal... When people
are at average risk, the deal changes... It is a fundamental
precept of medicine...Patients with severe abnormalities stand
to gain more from intervention than patients with mild ones.
Patients with mild abnormalities are more likely to experience
net harm from intervention, simply because they have less
opportunity to benefit.

        The vast majority of women don't have the BRCA1 mutation.
They are at average risk for breast cancer... They should not
have a preventive mastectomy.

        ...But there is a second question for women raised by
Ms. Jolie's piece: Should I be tested for BRCA1?

        She seems to believe the answer is yes, pointing to
the half-million women who die from breast cancer worldwide each
year. But she neglects to point out that 90 percent of these
deaths have nothing to do with the BRCA1 mutation. That's because
most women don't have the mutation and because most breast cancer
is sporadic.

    Furthermore, it’s also important to understand that even
if you do carry a defective gene, that in and of itself does
not mean that the gene in question is destined to be expressed.
In other words, having the BRCA defect is by no means an
automatic death sentence. As you will see below, there are
many things you can do to dramatically decrease your cancer risk
through the lifestyle choices you make, which have a profound
impact on your genetic expression.

Thank You  Dr. Mercola

                  Continued on 4/02/14

 God Bless Everyone & God Bless The United States of America.

Larry Nelson
42 S. Sherwood Dr.
Belton, Tx. 76513

Have a great day...unless you have made other plans.

No comments:

Post a Comment