Awhile back, after reading this article in Astrological Musings-- For Women Only, I decided to eventually write my own thoughts on the topic of mammograms. The subject is really not for women only as men can get breast cancer and should do regular self-exams for lumps.
On an early morning in May, I went for my approximately yearly mammogram. I thought about writing about it then because it's such a woman's world in there. The technicians, women in various states of undress, each of us hoping for the best results but hoping to catch the worst results before they grow into something catastrophic. The squish 'em all flat isn't comfortable, but it is not the worst part by any means for me. What I dislike is waiting for results. When they come out okay, as mine did again this year, it's such a relief.
On an early morning in May, I went for my approximately yearly mammogram. I thought about writing about it then because it's such a woman's world in there. The technicians, women in various states of undress, each of us hoping for the best results but hoping to catch the worst results before they grow into something catastrophic. The squish 'em all flat isn't comfortable, but it is not the worst part by any means for me. What I dislike is waiting for results. When they come out okay, as mine did again this year, it's such a relief.
I think it's good to evaluate what experts tell us about anything and have lived enough years to hear many medical opinions turn somersaults for what is good or bad. One year this is bad, next year it's so-so, and ten years down the road, it might be good. They do studies, release what they say are the results, and even 'other' experts scratch their heads and wonder-- now what does that mean!
Where it comes to mammograms, it has occurred to me that radiation might nudge a budding cancer to grow. It could be a factor for someone predisposed to getting breast cancer as could smoking, alcohol intake, certain foods, depression, lack of exercise, wearing a bra, using antiperspirants, and other possible radiation sources (microwaves, cell phones, computers, wireless systems, overhead power lines) etc.
The radiation amount received from a mammogram has been reduced with the newer machines. You have 2 in each breast yearly from 50 on with one every couple of years in your 40s. Small-breasted women, who skip mammograms and do self exams, probably have a better chance at detecting small lumps; but by the time anybody can feel a lump, if it turns out to be cancer, it can have spread to the lymph nodes. The idea of a mammogram is you catch it first and increase your odds of survival as well as have less intensive and unpleasant treatment. A lot of that depends on how aggressive your cancer is to start. Someone like Sheryl Crow, who caught hers in her early 40s, will have much increased her chances of surviving to die many years later of something else.
Where it comes to mammograms, it has occurred to me that radiation might nudge a budding cancer to grow. It could be a factor for someone predisposed to getting breast cancer as could smoking, alcohol intake, certain foods, depression, lack of exercise, wearing a bra, using antiperspirants, and other possible radiation sources (microwaves, cell phones, computers, wireless systems, overhead power lines) etc.
The radiation amount received from a mammogram has been reduced with the newer machines. You have 2 in each breast yearly from 50 on with one every couple of years in your 40s. Small-breasted women, who skip mammograms and do self exams, probably have a better chance at detecting small lumps; but by the time anybody can feel a lump, if it turns out to be cancer, it can have spread to the lymph nodes. The idea of a mammogram is you catch it first and increase your odds of survival as well as have less intensive and unpleasant treatment. A lot of that depends on how aggressive your cancer is to start. Someone like Sheryl Crow, who caught hers in her early 40s, will have much increased her chances of surviving to die many years later of something else.
To me, these recent results of reduced breast cancer rates in 2002-03 and trying to connect it to women having less mammograms from 2000 to 2005 can't be interpreted to mean mammograms do or don't increase breast cancer. If radiation increases risk, it would be cumulative over many years, not in two. The fear, in other articles I had been reading, was that the women still have the small cancers but now won't find them until later. That could be right or wrong.
The hormone replacement therapy's suggested connections to breast cancer are as confusing. For years tests didn't seem to indicate it increased the risk; then in the last study, where they started women on hormones, in some cases, who had their last period 5 years earlier, the results seemed pretty definite that it was a factor. They also have not yet collected test data on any of the herbal things women take nor bio-identical hormones. Evidently there is some evidence that women who have late menopause have slightly more breast cancer in their 60s which could mean something or maybe doesn't because what else is going on?
I think it is good for people to evaluate all information when they decide on what to do about any tests or treatments. I did that with mammograms. Where I have a family history of breast cancer in aunt and grandmother on my father's side and have been close to someone who died from breast cancer, I decided I'd rather take the risk it might slightly increase my odds of getting it but would definitely increase my odds of catching it early. For a woman such as myself, who has large breasts, I'd probably never find anything by self exam until it was too late.
Interestingly enough when I was looking at the information on this subject, it said fat women have less mammograms and they weren't sure why that would be. Discomfort greater? Dislike of going to doctors? A lot of women who don't go in for yearly physicals are certainly less prodded by their doctors to do a mammogram. My mother, who died at 85 of congestive heart failure, never had one and never had breast cancer, but her results can't be interpreted as having meaning for me either.
This is another of those areas where we receive a lot of information but have a hard time interpreting what it will mean for us. For women, it's a scary subject, but one about which I believe we should be as informed as possible taking responsibility for our choices.
This is another of those areas where we receive a lot of information but have a hard time interpreting what it will mean for us. For women, it's a scary subject, but one about which I believe we should be as informed as possible taking responsibility for our choices.
8 comments:
I agree, Rain -- it is scary but I go for my mammogram annually religiously. My mother, at 82, is a breast cancer survivor (with both breasts intact) because they caught it early. I'll take the risks and discomfort, thank you, because I'm more afraid of cancer than radiation. As we said when I was a kid -- I'd rather be a live chicken than a dead duck!
Very intertesting post Rain...The question is, with so much information that changes with the fashions, it seems, and none of it definitive...It is really a personal choice as to what you choose to believe based on all this conflicting information...Personal choice seems to be the only way to go, in my opinion.
For instance, the information on Hormone replacement----Estrogen, has swung back and forth and back again and forth again, etc., for years and years....I decided, NOT to take them. In my view, they flipped flopped tgoo much on this oint and I made my personal decision to NOT take them and that is where it still is, today...no matter what they say...Cause in two years or three or five, they will, once again, switch sides.
There is so much conflicting information - all one can do is just what you've stated - "be as informed as possible and take responsibility".
My mother died when she was 36 years old, from breast cancer that metastasized. Needless to say, I NEVER miss having a yearly mammogram. I've had three biopsies, and many years I've had mammograms every six months to 'watch' something. I'll do whatever it takes.
I elected years ago, not to take hormone replacement therapy, as I believe it increases the risk of breast cancer. I weighed that against the fact that it protects you from heart disease - and decided that there were other things I could do to protect my heart - but nothing else I could do to decrease my risk of breast cancer. It's all personal choices.
P.S. Reminds me of something I once heard. That if men were losing their testicles as fast as women are losing their breasts - they'd have a cure for breast cancer by now! I wonder.
I try to stay informed, but as you say, the information keeps changing. I have a mammogram every two years. That seems reasonable to me. Sometimes I wonder what other cultures prescribe. If I were living in Zimbabwe, how often would I have a mammogram? Is life in the US partly a factor in occurrence of breast cancers?
I have wondered that also, Robin. Even in this country, poor women or women without insurance don't get them either. The problem with the medical system is most testing is done to benefit a particular product that someone wants to market. There are so many things that could be factors in a lot of our diseases. We have to use commonsense but we are inundated with fear talk on all levels which makes that hard.
Thanks for the visit rain and your comment...You are so right. This aging thing stinks, but to try to do it as gracefully as possible without "augmentation" and despite this feeling that your body is betraying you---Well, that is the trick, isn't it? Betty G. is absolutely an inspiration!
Good point Robin. We have become so well off overall in this country that we are worrying about things that most of the world does not have time to deal with. Even the National Institutes of Health have a program on dealing with work place injuries because they have wiped out most of the diseases that they used to fight. And OSHA is dealing with ergonomics in desk chairs because most industries are incredibly safe compared to 50 years ago.
Hey Jackie I somewhat agree with what you said, but I have to take a small exception to it. They always say that if men had to go through labor there would be a cure for it by now. But Men do get Breast Cancer. It seems to be treated as a "womens" disease which is no less sexist than calling heart disease a "mans" disease. Now ovarian or prostate cancer is gender specific.
And as you know, from my recent post on mammograms, I choose only to go every other year. For various reasons.
However, as an RN, I've always told my patients check out the research (on any subject) be informed and bottom line....it's YOUR body. Make the choice that's best for you.
Post a Comment