Dr. Blows Whistle: Chemo Is For Profit
(twitter.com)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (73)
sorted by:
A few other things completely blow my mind - women who get tested for the BRCA genetic blood test to see if they have mutations (changes) in their DNA which increases the risk for breast cancer. They believe this crap and are further told that about 50 in 100 women who have this mutation will get breast cancer by the time they are 70. NORMAL, HEALTHY WOMEN ARE OPTING FOR BILATERAL MASTECTOMIES WITH NEGATIVE MAMMOGRAMS. Most of these women have or had a close relative who had breast cancer, and feel the need to get tested.
There is also the breed of women who either detect a lump or it's discovered on their yearly mammogram (another asinine diagnostic test that is slammed down every woman's throat on a yearly basis). Regardless of how this "lump" is detected, a biopsy is ordered. That biopsy determines whether this lump is benign or malignant. If it is malignant it is further classified into stages. The higher the stage, the poorer the outcome, so they say. This is the kicker - I have known more than a few women who had a biopsy resulting in a benign diagnosis, meaning no further treatment is indicated...but, they have opted for chemotherapy BECAUSE IT'S OFFERED, to be on the "safe side." Many of these women love wearing a "badge of courage." They go to rallys and fund raisers, dress in pink, bare their bald heads or tie a flowery scarf around it, and feel liberated.
I hope I have not offended anybody by saying these things, and I'm a retired RN, who has seen it all and then some. The only time I have seen chemotherapy put anybody in a decent remission, depending on the overall health of the person prior to diagnosis, were blood dyscrasia cancers, such as the leukemias, lymphomas, and multiple myelomas...but, it depends on the stage of the cancer when it's diagnosed.
Using an x-ray that increases the risk of cancer to detect cancer. Brilliant.
Some of this recently applied to me. I have a history of thyroid cancer and melanoma in situ, so I’m treated as if I need every screening available - which I don’t do.
6 months ago I had an ultrasound of a breast lump (I don’t do mammograms), the lump was “suspicious”. I was rated as a Birad 4 and told I needed a biopsy. I didn’t understand 6 months ago what I do now so I scheduled the biopsy. They told me that during the biopsy they’d place a titanium marker to identify the lump. After doing research on the marker I told them I’d do the biopsy but don’t consent to the marker - they refused to do the biopsy without it. I was then told we can “wait and watch” by doing another ultrasound in 6 months, they also downgraded me to a Birad 3. If we could wait and watch why wasn’t I offered that to start? Rhetorical question. I then went to a breast specialist, she refused to do the biopsy without the marker but would remove the lump surgically. The hospital required a covid test since I am unvaxxed, I said no. Fast forward to this month, my 6 month follow up ultrasound showed no change. Very long story to demonstrate how they tried to scare me into an unnecessary procedure. If my situation was urgent why were they willing to deny me a biopsy because I refused the marker? I was also told I qualify for genetic testing which I said no to. I thought I was awake 6 months ago, but this was a new experience. I share this in the hopes that another woman facing this situation will give herself time to explore her options and not be quickly herded into invasive treatments.
I don't blame one little bit for refusing the marker. They have been using them since 1995 when they were approved by the FDA and there have been many complications.
It’s criminal that they still tell women the markers are safe and make us feel as if we don’t have a choice.