# October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month!



## TICA (Oct 2, 2013)

Time for the annual exam Ladies!!


----------



## Jambi (Oct 2, 2013)

*Mammograms cause breast cancer*



> Is mammography an effective tool for detecting tumors? Some critics say  no. In a Swedish study of 60,000 women, 70 percent of the  mammographically detected tumors weren't tumors at all. These "false  positives" aren't just financial and emotional strains, they may also  lead to many unnecessary and invasive biopsies. In fact, *70 to 80 percent of all positive mammograms do not, upon biopsy, show any presence of cancer*.



Learn more:  http://www.naturalnews.com/010886.html#ixzz2gav2oAUn
​


----------



## Pappy (Oct 2, 2013)

My old hometown firemen support breast cancer month.


----------



## SeaBreeze (Oct 2, 2013)

I stopped getting them years ago...http://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20130302


----------



## Diwundrin (Oct 2, 2013)

I only had one.  It was excruciating and the results were described as 'inconclusive' due to the fat nodules confusing the image.  I figured if they couldn't see the damned thing they were looking for then what was the point of doing it at all??

The Xray radiation risk didn't enter my thinking really, just the pain, inconvenience and futility.  
It was well over 20 years ago, and I'm still here so no regrets.


----------



## Jillaroo (Oct 2, 2013)

_I know of a woman who had a mammogram and all was clear, she was still worried and had a Cat scan and it showed she had breast cancer, so don't have much trust in the mammogram machines_


----------



## Pappy (Oct 3, 2013)

Guess I respectively disagree gals. A mammogram saved my wife's life. The cancer did show up on her test and was caught in time enough to treat with chemo and radiation. 7years cancer free now.


----------



## TICA (Oct 3, 2013)

It certainly isn't perfect, but I also had a lump detected with a mammogram.  It turned out that it wasn't cancer, but it could have been.  In my mind, it's better than nothing.


----------



## JustBonee (Oct 3, 2013)

TICA said:


> It certainly isn't perfect, but I also had a lump detected with a mammogram.  It turned out that it wasn't cancer, but it could have been.  In my mind, it's better than nothing.



I agree TICA. ..  Nothing is perfect, but some testing is better than no testing.  Those cysts (oil gland deposits) appear as lumps many times and can be left alone when detected.  But testing has saved lives.  
My last mammogram was about 2 years ago - will probably get another one in a year or two.


----------



## Warrigal (Oct 3, 2013)

I have a mammogram every two years plus an ultrasound. The risks for me are not high except for my age but I think it is silly not to check for breast cancer when it is easy to pick it up early. 

Any woman who smokes and who has never breastfed is at increased risk and should be watchful. Family history is something else that should be taken into consideration.


----------



## GDAD (Oct 3, 2013)

Ladies, On tuesday I attended my Mates wifes funeral. I had Known her for 50 years. Any screening that may find cancer in the early stages so that
a positive outcome can be achieved is worth it. Patrica was 64 she was found to have breast cancer in February 2012 she passed away 20th. september 2013.
Another thing don't hesitate to have a Masectomy if it would save your life. Believe me I would rather have my wife with no breasts *THAN DEAD.*


----------



## Jackie22 (Oct 3, 2013)

Pappy said:


> Guess I respectively disagree gals. A mammogram saved my wife's life. The cancer did show up on her test and was caught in time enough to treat with chemo and radiation. 7years cancer free now.



.....also saved my mother's life.  I have mammograms and ultrasound done yearly.


----------



## Diwundrin (Oct 3, 2013)

Warrigal said:


> I have a mammogram every two years plus an ultrasound. The risks for me are not high except for my age but I think it is silly not to check for breast cancer when it is easy to pick it up early.
> 
> Any woman who smokes and who has never breastfed is at increased risk and should be watchful. Family history is something else that should be taken into consideration.



No family genetic history of it and that smoking and breastfeeding thing?  I can't think of any smokers among the women I've known who have had it and all but one had children so that's an iffy stat.  

I'm not advocating that women don't have mammographs by any means, just pointing out that in my case it didn't seem to have any benefit if they couldn't detect it.  I was big gal, women with smaller, less fatty breasts probably have more chance of a cancer being picked up and should get the tests done.


----------



## That Guy (Oct 3, 2013)




----------



## SeaBreeze (Oct 13, 2013)

*Cancer Fundraiser Ponzi Schemes (opinion)*

Cancer fundraiser Ponzi schemes, what they really do with the money donated...http://www.naturalnews.com/042464_br...ndraisers.html


----------



## Old Hipster (Oct 14, 2013)

I know a lot of women who have had breast cancer and some have died.

I always get my exams every year like clock work. I had some pre-cancerous growth detected by my yearly pap smear 11 years ago and it was taken care of before it turned cancerous and hasn't returned yet. 
We have had a lot of cancer in my family and I feel much better if I get exams/test when I should.


----------

