Is it possible that not all breast cancer is bad news?
Yes, it’s true.
Many women are overdiagnosed and treated for breast cancer that would never cause a problem for them throughout their entire lives if left alone according to a recent article published in the Medical Journal of Australia.
Associate Professor Robin Bell of Monash University in Australia, says:
“Overdiagnosis amounts to women having a small, slow-growing cancer being diagnosed and treated, where in her lifetime that cancer may not have required treatment.”
Professor Bell is calling for a more balanced approach to breast cancer screening which fully informs women of the harm of breast cancer screening/treatment versus the very small or negligible benefits of treatment for such slow growing, nonlifethreatening breast cancers.
A 2010 study found that for every 2000 women screened over a 10 year period, only one woman would have her life prolonged as a result of the screenings yet 10 women would be treated unnecessarily.
The results of this study certainly put in the spotlight whether mammography has any benefit whatsoever particularly given that the radiation exposing screening method causes breast cancer itself!
They certainly don’t seem like very appealing odds to me!
As a middle aged woman who has never had a mammogram nor plans to ever have one (following in the footsteps of my 86 year old mother who has refused them all her life), this study adds further evidence of the wisdom of such an out of the box decision.
It would behoove women given the dire diagnosis of breast cancer to delve into whether their breast cancer really and truly requires treatment or would in fact be better left alone. At the very least, a second or even a third opinion would seem warranted.
Sometimes bad news might not really be bad news after all.
UPDATE: A far better way to screen safely for breast cancer and avoid the misdiagnosis potential of mammograms is to get annual breast ultrasound screening. How to do this without a prescription and the 7 benefits to health in doing so are provided in the linked article. Breast thermography is another safe, effective, no radiation tool for cancer screening that does not result in overtreatment or misdiagnosis.
Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist
Sources and More Information
Benefits of Cancer Screening Exaggerated
Women Overdiagnosed with Breast Cancer
170 Scientific Studies Confirm the Dangers of Soy
The Dangers of Estrogenic Foods, Herbs and Supplements to Breast Health
Komen (Not) for the Cure: The Complete and Utter Pinkwashing of America
Thermography: A Perfect Alternative to Cancer Causing Mammograms?
Why Even Organic Soy Formula is so Dangerous for Babies
How the Birth Control Pill Can Harm Your Future Child’s Health
I decided many years ago never to have a mammogram, and that hasn’t changed now that I’m nearing the age when mammograms become standard.
Here’s the thing… I am sure that there are some people out there who have benefited from having one done. BUT how many more actually HAVE cancer because they had a mammogram done? If there are other alternatives, such as thermography, then shouldn’t they be offered as the standard instead?
I do hope that given the results of this latest study, I am not pressured into having mammograms done. (One hopes that the doctors stay abreast of such studies and realise that they’re actually NOT helping their patients by pushing them to have such dangerous screening).
When Breast Cancer Isn’t Bad News http://t.co/RoUBJt20
Underwires and excess estrogen are the two main causes of breast problems, besides medically-induced radiation poisoning. Underwires restrict the movement of lymph fluid through the breast, and estrogens (soybeans, flaxseeds, polyunsaturated oils, BPA, etc) stimulate the breasts’ estrogen-sensitive tissues…
Heard that breast cancer in Israel dropped dramatically when they banned insecticides (certain? all?), which are a potent source of xeno-estrogens…
-james
I don’t agree on all counts.
My mother would not be here today if she had not gotten a mammogram. Our family has never “believed” in them. My grandmother found a lump and that prompted the rest of my family to have a mammo done. If my mother had not, she wouldn’t be here today. She had a very invasive form of cancer, that was more like sugar crystals than a lump (undetectable by self-exam). She had not been feeling well for quite some time and was going downhill. It had spread and without detection and treatment, she would have died. A friend of mine died a few months ago actually, from a reoccurance from breast cancer. She had waited too long to treat that first time and it had spread throughout her body. Cancer does kill and it knows no age. I’d just hate to think that people would be swayed to do nothing by reading this particular post.
Having said that, radiation and chemo are obviously not good for us either. I don’t think getting yearly radiation is healthy. I know they cause cancer. I wish they had a better treatment. They are not always as effective as we’d like them to be, but then again no medical technology really is. These things can even cause us MORE problems. My grandmother wishes she had not have underwent radiation now b/c of side effects (but her cancer was not as invasive as my moms). She very likely would have been fine without it, with just removing the area. But my mom? No way. She wouldn’t be here today.
Our physicians do not inform us on the possible side effects either. If you ever do have breast cancer….make sure to tell them NOT to take all of your lymph nodes out. They seem to automatically do this and often in vain, but it can give you lymphodemia later on in life (think elephant man). My risk is real high and if I ever had a lump that was not an invasive form (biopsy), I would just have it removed a couple nodes taken to ensure it hadn’t spread. I would opt out of chemo and radiation all together.
I think it would be very foolish though to assume that if you have breast cancer you’ll be fine without treatment. Although I’m not a proponent of radiation, if breast cancer is treated really early, there have been many many people who survived it with no reoccurance. If you do haev it and don’t find it early though (either by not doing self-exams or mammo’s),…..then it doesn’t seem that you’re likely to make it no matter what you do (radiation or not).
I’ve known forever that the radiation from breast scans can actually cause cancer itself. It still amazes me that people don’t know this and continue to line up at the doorstep of Big Pharma’s profit machine. Cancer has always been big business.
I love your blog, Sarah. Your never afraid to shake things up.
Wait a minute, the stats seemed a bit screwed up. Out of that 2000 patients screened over 10 years, what percentage actually had cancer (regardless of stage/life threatening potential)? And how many were actually treated?
I have to say when my mother was diagnosed with cancer for the 3rd time, she was told by her dr that she had at most 30 days to live. She immediately stopped all chemotherapy and radiation and lived for a year and a half after that. I think if she would have continued her treatments of chemo and not being able to eat even a grape, that she would’ve died in those first 30 days or less.
Nathalie-I know right?! I am only 24 and I’ve already decided I will never do a mammogram. If anything, I’ll get a thermography scan, but the risks of mammograms outweigh the benefit.
Oh, and I should say that the oncology team gets concerned when I don’t show up for my twice yearly mammogram. I do not intend to show up for those, as I will opt for a thermogram. I might do it every couple of years, but I feel like it’s risky to go through the procedure, as it puts my flesh through uneccessary trauma.
I was diagnosed at 41 with DCIS, with a 2mm tumor in my duct. Yes, a 2mm tumor. I was treated by lumpectomy, where they found no evidence of cancer, as the stereotactic biopsy had removed the portion of the duct which had that 2mm mass.
Since that time, I have regretted accepting the radiation treatment. I took it because my “oncology team” strongly asserted that though I was refusing Tamoxifen, I should do radiation to ensure that no stray cells had escaped. I regret that choice daily, as it was over my left breast, directly on top of my heart. I received radiation to the heart for 6 weeks straight because of that choice. The docs really play up the risk for DCIS (even low grade like mine), and women make poor choices out of fear. If I knew then what I know now, I would have refused the radiation. I probably would have done the lumpectomy just to ensure that the cells were removed.