Comments on: Jane McGrath and a word of caution on screening http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/23/jane-mcgrath-and-a-word-of-caution-on-screening/ now with extra source Sun, 22 Nov 2009 04:04:11 +1100 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Dr John James http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/23/jane-mcgrath-and-a-word-of-caution-on-screening/#comment-17210 Dr John James Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-17210 The loss of Jane McGrath is certainly felt by all who had come to know her quiet strength and dignity. Early screening is an important and difficult issue but of more importance still is PREVENTION.<br />What risk factors can we identify? Breast cancer incidence in Wesern Indurtialised nations is rocketing up. To what can we attribute this surge? Identifiable factors include age, family history, country of birth, oestrogen exposure, progestin exposure, INDUCED ABORTION and ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE USE in young women. The last two factors are especially critical for women before completion of their FIRST FULL-TERM PREGNANCY.<br />Induced abortion is the elephant in the room that the abortion industrial complex and their allies simply refuse to address. <br />How timely then that Senator Bartlett introduces a bill to stop the use of health dollars through Medicare for the destruction of unborn children through second trimester abortion. He will save the lives of many mothers and children. The loss of Jane McGrath is certainly felt by all who had come to know her quiet strength and dignity. Early screening is an important and difficult issue but of more importance still is PREVENTION.
What risk factors can we identify? Breast cancer incidence in Wesern Indurtialised nations is rocketing up. To what can we attribute this surge? Identifiable factors include age, family history, country of birth, oestrogen exposure, progestin exposure, INDUCED ABORTION and ORAL CONTRACEPTIVE USE in young women. The last two factors are especially critical for women before completion of their FIRST FULL-TERM PREGNANCY.
Induced abortion is the elephant in the room that the abortion industrial complex and their allies simply refuse to address.
How timely then that Senator Bartlett introduces a bill to stop the use of health dollars through Medicare for the destruction of unborn children through second trimester abortion. He will save the lives of many mothers and children.

]]> By: Lupeluce http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/23/jane-mcgrath-and-a-word-of-caution-on-screening/#comment-17211 Lupeluce Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-17211 Have any of you read the China Study by T Colin Campbell distributed by Wakefield Press S.A. ?<br />If so your answers for ' Western Society Diseases ' icluding cancer , diabeties and heart disease maybe given some scientifically researched direction with some benefit to all the silent suffers.<br />If not, and you suffer, maybe worth a read. Have any of you read the China Study by T Colin Campbell distributed by Wakefield Press S.A. ?
If so your answers for ’ Western Society Diseases ’ icluding cancer , diabeties and heart disease maybe given some scientifically researched direction with some benefit to all the silent suffers.
If not, and you suffer, maybe worth a read.

]]> By: Dominique http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/23/jane-mcgrath-and-a-word-of-caution-on-screening/#comment-17212 Dominique Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-17212 Sorry Melissa, but I can't agree with you. Give us some statistics about the number of biopsies performed and the number of breast cancer cases detected from early (unnecessary?) screening and then we can have a discussion. <br /><br />In 1998 at the age of 24, after Belinda Emmett was diagnosed, I discovered a lump which was biopsied, and thankfully benign. Another lump was found in 2003 - there was no biopsy, I was sent straight into hospital (terrified) to have both lumps removed. Thankfully benign again, but I would go to hospital again rather than live with the fear that a lump may be malignant. Is that a waste of resources? I paid my way through the private system because I have health insurance. I recall Belinda, a beautiful young woman who is sadly no longer with us, saying that she didn't act on her lump straight away, thinking (hoping?) it was nothing serious. I acted straight away because of what she said.<br /><br />What does it matter if it's a celebrity that makes a person act? It's the fact that people are taking charge of their lives and being aware of their bodies that is important. Jane McGrath wasn't a celebrity when she was diagnosed. She went public with her news to make young women aware that breast cancer is not just a disease for old women. Sam Newman's recent prostate cancer is another case in point. Sorry Melissa, but I can’t agree with you. Give us some statistics about the number of biopsies performed and the number of breast cancer cases detected from early (unnecessary?) screening and then we can have a discussion.

In 1998 at the age of 24, after Belinda Emmett was diagnosed, I discovered a lump which was biopsied, and thankfully benign. Another lump was found in 2003 - there was no biopsy, I was sent straight into hospital (terrified) to have both lumps removed. Thankfully benign again, but I would go to hospital again rather than live with the fear that a lump may be malignant. Is that a waste of resources? I paid my way through the private system because I have health insurance. I recall Belinda, a beautiful young woman who is sadly no longer with us, saying that she didn’t act on her lump straight away, thinking (hoping?) it was nothing serious. I acted straight away because of what she said.

What does it matter if it’s a celebrity that makes a person act? It’s the fact that people are taking charge of their lives and being aware of their bodies that is important. Jane McGrath wasn’t a celebrity when she was diagnosed. She went public with her news to make young women aware that breast cancer is not just a disease for old women. Sam Newman’s recent prostate cancer is another case in point.

]]> By: Dr Harvey M Tarvydas http://www.crikey.com.au/2008/06/23/jane-mcgrath-and-a-word-of-caution-on-screening/#comment-17213 Dr Harvey M Tarvydas Thu, 01 Jan 1970 10:00:00 +0000 #comment-17213 Thank you Melissa for an extremely timely and wise article.<br />Dominique’s position I understand and her actions are totally appropriate.<br />She doesn’t realize she’s talking about something else and isn’t the expert on the many nuances this subject launches into the easily terrifying psychological atmosphere engulfing any woman who has to consider the possibility of the disease at any age. Chasing and biopsying benign lumps and early diagnosis of breast cancer are different endeavours more so the more high the quality of expertise applied. Meaning, that with no expertise one would remove all breasts. <br />The understanding of the aetiology of breast cancer is advanced compared to that of ovarian cancer which is almost the same monster size killer and specialises in taking beautiful young women of about 20 years and then again letting lose at about the menopause and later. Preventing breast cancer significantly is a very unrewarding subject currently but ovarian cancer can be completely prevented in the young and older women alike at virtually no expense but isn’t happening. <br />Dominique is only worrying about half her body and half of the boogies waiting to take her to death while young and beautiful. <br />Is the difference a subconscious (SC) expression of male influence supremacy dancing the tango with the SC Breast obsession? Note that male influence supremacy does nothing for prostate cancer (the male breast cancer equivalent) so it needs to have a sexy partner like the breast subconsciously. In this context the ovary does nothing for men (in fostering such a SC partner) and note neither for women so both sexes have ignored the disease. <br /><br />Psychology, psychology, psychology is everything <br /> Thank you Melissa for an extremely timely and wise article.
Dominique’s position I understand and her actions are totally appropriate.
She doesn’t realize she’s talking about something else and isn’t the expert on the many nuances this subject launches into the easily terrifying psychological atmosphere engulfing any woman who has to consider the possibility of the disease at any age. Chasing and biopsying benign lumps and early diagnosis of breast cancer are different endeavours more so the more high the quality of expertise applied. Meaning, that with no expertise one would remove all breasts.
The understanding of the aetiology of breast cancer is advanced compared to that of ovarian cancer which is almost the same monster size killer and specialises in taking beautiful young women of about 20 years and then again letting lose at about the menopause and later. Preventing breast cancer significantly is a very unrewarding subject currently but ovarian cancer can be completely prevented in the young and older women alike at virtually no expense but isn’t happening.
Dominique is only worrying about half her body and half of the boogies waiting to take her to death while young and beautiful.
Is the difference a subconscious (SC) expression of male influence supremacy dancing the tango with the SC Breast obsession? Note that male influence supremacy does nothing for prostate cancer (the male breast cancer equivalent) so it needs to have a sexy partner like the breast subconsciously. In this context the ovary does nothing for men (in fostering such a SC partner) and note neither for women so both sexes have ignored the disease.

Psychology, psychology, psychology is everything

]]>