Just a Reminder That Mammograms Can Cause Cancer - Page 10

Lotus · ‎03-09-2010

@fthunt wrote:
I'm so with you 'sister'. I'm well well well over 50 years of age and have never had a mammogram - to the disgust of several doctors I've had over the years. Just last week my doc brought it up again...and I replied in front of his nurse - - No, I don't believe in them. The young nurse was so taken back by my answer - she let out a sound.

However, IF you have a family history of this - or suspect something isn't right....then run to the doctor - don't walk. But to be feed this pressure 'you must have a mammogram at this age or that'...is not my belief pattern.
Thanks for your posting! More women should think for themselves.

Sorry to disagree. I am the first person in my family (going back as many generations as I could) who has developed breast cancer. Prior to being diagnosed, I had only had 2 prior mammos......but I have had a tremendous amount of stress in my life. There have been other cancers in my family history but never breast.

I am 62 years old and had my 3rd mammo in November of 2014. I had my first one sometime in my 40's....put off my second one until 2010. After having that mammo the radiologist wanted me to have a sono. They saw something and wanted me to have another mammo in 6 months. I never went (I know it was stupid).

I had to make a visit to my new Gyn (only saw her twice before) for some break through bleeding (turned out to be nothing) and she questioned me on the mammo (it had been 5 years) and encouraged me to go. "Something" told me I shouldn't wait.

This mammo, subsequent sono and biopsy show a small tumor that I NEVER would have felt with a self exam. Needless to say I was VERY lucky that I only needed a lumpectomy. They also took 2 Nodes and they were negative (Thank God). It was Stage 1 and I only needed radiation for 6 weeks and I am now on Arimidex for 5 years (possibly more).

The moral of the story is this mammo save my life! Yes, women can make thier own decisions, but IMO mammos have saved more lives than have killed pts.

"People with closed hearts will always feel as though they are at war with the world." ~My friend Nancy

Lucky Duck · ‎03-13-2010

When I was in my 40's, my Gyn advised that I get a mammogram just as a precaution. I kept putting it off. One day I saw the mobile mammogram and spontaneously had my first mammogram. I had no indication there was a problem prior to that. The results showed further evaluation was needed. As a result, I had a mastectomy just before I turned 50. I have had mammograms every year since then on my remaining breast. That amounts to 20 mammograms over the years and I have had no further problems.

In my case my breast cancer was not caused by a mammogram. I am thankful that I finally had my first one.

HerRoyaLioness · ‎03-13-2010

@june22 wrote:

@ID2 wrote:
I can't believe this thread was even started. I'm 100% sure mamograms save lives more than destroy them.

@ID2 There are always different viewpoints on serious issues involving life and death. Discussion is a good thing. People can read different viewpoints and decide for themselves what is best. No one is saying people should not have Mamograms. It is a choice a person makes.

Your opinion that mamograms save lives 100% is just as valid as any other opinion on this thread that does not believe that.
Actually just reading the title of this thread gives only one extreme view and some people may look no further, which can be dangerous to one's health.

She also said she was 100% sure mammograms saves lives, NOT "that mammograms save lives 100%. And she is 100% correct as evidenced by all the posts, including mine that mammograms can save lives in the fact that it catches so many breast cancers.

Lovethesea · ‎03-15-2010

Lannie, a mammogram could be "catching" breast cancer that was caused by previous mammogram(s).

Suziepeach · ‎03-10-2010

@Lovethesea wrote:
Lannie, a mammogram could be "catching" breast cancer that was caused by previous mammogram(s).

Do you have a medical license in medicine, are you either a radiation or medical oncologist, are you a radiation physicist, are you familiar with mammography standards and certification of breast centers and the equipment? What gives you the right to tell women to NOT have their mammograms because of stuff you've read on the Internet. I asked a moderator to delete this thread as its discouraging to women and you must be in some sort of natural medical holistic world. Please stop discouraging women..

Go VOLS
Rocky Top you'll always be home sweet home to me.. Good ole Rocky Top, Rocky Top Tennessee... Rocky Top Tennessee

Lovethesea · ‎03-15-2010

@orangegarnet wrote:
@Lovethesea wrote:
Lannie, a mammogram could be "catching" breast cancer that was caused by previous mammogram(s).

Do you have a medical license in medicine, are you either a radiation or medical oncologist, are you a radiation physicist, are you familiar with mammography standards and certification of breast centers and the equipment? What gives you the right to tell women to NOT have their mammograms because of stuff you've read on the Internet. I asked a moderator to delete this thread as its discouraging to women and you must be in some sort of natural medical holistic world. Please stop discouraging women..

Clearly you have not read what I have written here, including my originating post. I have not told women not to have their mammograms. What I have done is suggest that women think for themselves and consider that mammograms can cause cancer. I am not discouraging women and if you will bother to read through this thread, you will see that no one is discouraged by my comments.

ETA: As it is apparent that you have not read my originating post, I am including it here for your convenience:

"There are those who don't believe that mammograms can cause cancer, but I am one who believes they can. A quick google search will provide contrasting information on this subject, however, both Consumer's Reports and Dr. Mercola, among others, state that they can cause cancer.

Some recommend having mammograms annually beginning at age 40--others say 50!

Please, for the sake of your loved ones and yourself, be certain that you know the risks before you subject yourself to a/another mammogram."

Lipstickdiva · ‎03-10-2010

I said this in another thread. Family history has to start somewhere.

My sister was diagnosed with BC towards the end of last year. You don't get more healthy than my sister. Healthy eater, takes supplements and runs. She is at the lowest end of weight for her height and her BMI is perfect. Yet she was diagnosed. No BC history in our family.

She went 5 years with no mammogram because she kept putting it off and last year decided to have one done and thank goodness she did. She had to have a mastectomy but luckily no chemo or radiation. After much research she declined taking the recommended 5 years of Tamoxifen.

I work with a woman who refuses to get mammos and has thermagrams done. She swears by them. She gave me the information about them and I've done research on my own but everything I read in her pamphlet and on-line indicated they are to be used in conjunction with a mammogram, not in place of. I had a long conversation with my doctor about them and she said the research/results aren't as promising as they had hope for with thermagrams. My co-worker insists all this information downplaying thermagrams is out there because insurance companies won't allow anyone to talk about how good they are.

I also had a very long talk with my doctor and mammographer about having an ultrasound in place of a mammogram. Both said absolutely not. They said an ultrasound picks up a much smaller area than a mammogram and it would take forever for them to ultrasound the entire area of both breasts and more than likely, areas would be missed.

AkaGoldie · ‎04-14-2010

@Lannie wrote:
@june22 wrote:

@ID2 wrote:
I can't believe this thread was even started. I'm 100% sure mamograms save lives more than destroy them.

@ID2 There are always different viewpoints on serious issues involving life and death. Discussion is a good thing. People can read different viewpoints and decide for themselves what is best. No one is saying people should not have Mamograms. It is a choice a person makes.

Your opinion that mamograms save lives 100% is just as valid as any other opinion on this thread that does not believe that.
Actually just reading the title of this thread gives only one extreme view and some people may look no further, which can be dangerous to one's health.

She also said she was 100% sure mammograms saves lives, NOT "that mammograms save lives 100%. And she is 100% correct as evidenced by all the posts, including mine that mammograms can save lives in the fact that it catches so many breast cancers.

Lannie, you are right, and anyone with sound reasoning would opt for a mammo. But there are always people out there on the " fringe" . I agree with the poster that suggested the moderator take this thread down. It serves no purpose and could cause great harm.