Sign the Petition Against the new Mammography Guidelines
Comments
-
Debbie P - found mass (no lump) on routine mammo 2 days after 46th birthday - had clinical exam 3 mos. prior with no finiding - one lymp node involved, chemo, radiation & tamoxifen - dr. said I was not high risk - ha! If it would have been up to him, I wouldn't have had a mammo until age 50
0 -
Sharon Fryman, Dx: 11/5/2004 found a lump in my left breast (during my SBE), found DCIS in right breast, fast growing, lumpectomy, radiation, hysterectomy (ER/PR+), no family history. I have 3 years before I hit 50. My first cousin found lump in 2006 @ 37 from SBE, stage 3, bilateral mast. I was her family history. I beg to differ with the recommendation, as does the rest of my family!
0 -
These new proposed "guidelines" are so abhorrent to me, that I find it difficult to discuss intelligently. I usually end up just sputtering out 4 letter words when the subject is broached. I was 46 when I was diagnosed first time around, then 22 months later I had another turn around the dance floor. Have history in the family and VERY concerned about my 20year old daughter.
0 -
I was diagnosed at 47. My Dr. said I was a living commercial for mammograms because my cancer was deep and would only have been found by a mammogram. I am alive today at 59 years old because of that mammogram. We have to fight to make sure women have mammograms in their 40s or earlier if they have a family history.
0 -
I was only 17 when I found my first breast lump, A typical cells, The Dr removed it just in time since it was in a rapid state of growth. My Mother Died of Br cancer, She was diagnosed at age 48.Her sister also had to have both breast removed at age 48. My great Aunt was only 39 when she got Br cancer and her daughter died at age 39 from Br cancer. I have Five cousins that have survived Br cancer through screening. I myself have had an additional 3 lumpectomy because of A-typical cell bi. My family does not have the BRACA mutations but we are still at high risk. I am Appalled at the new recommendations. I'm sure my five cousins would agree with me.
0 -
Diagnosed at age 43 after fiance found lump which was comfirmed with mammogram. Routine mammogram at 45 revealed DCIS on other breast, leading to bi-lateral mastectomy. Can you imagine if I had not had a mammogram until 7 years after first diagnosis? Who are they kidding.
Robin Wendy L.
0 -
THREE SIGNATURES FOR ME!!!
Myself: DX age 39
My sister Debbi: DX age 29
My sister Kristi: DX age 44.
0 -
I am a 2 time breast cancer survivor. The first cancer was found at age 48 by mammogram and the second by ultrasound. Please do not change the current guidelines. Thousands of lives are saved by early screening. Why would you want to change that?
Shirley A
0 -
Your story could be mine - only I was 45. There is no doubt in my mind that I would be dead today if mammogram hadn't shown calcifications - and I was 6 months late for my mammogram - the Dr. told me those 6 months might have made a difference in my DX -
0 -
If Dr. Weiss is arguing for not chaging the guidelines so am I. Admittedly not well informed- but Dr. Weiss has made a difference to me & I'll support her in all of her endeavors.
0 -
Diagnosed twice -- once in 1995, Stage 1, Grade 3 -- at 45 years old and again in 2002, 2 cancers on opposite side, Stage 1, Grade 1. Began mammograms at 40. The first discovered BSE, confirmed by mammogram; the second found by mammogram.
Katherine Thompson
0 -
Debra Dumas. A mammogram found my cancer that was not there the previous year. Because it was found so early I did not need chemotherapy, a major plus. If I could only get mammograms every two years, I might have needed chemo by the time it was found. I also know women with agressive tumors that showed up after only a year since previous mammos. Delaying the diagnosis would have dramatically decreased their chances of survival.
0 -
Sandy Keller, diagnosed at 47 by mammography, MRI missed a 7mm invasive tumor!
0 -
I was diagnosed at age 42, with bi-lateral invasive lobular carcinoma, with no family history and little to no risk factors. I am a success story that would not be, if the same wisdom I received were not the prevailing wisdom anymore. I believe that this is the first, not so subtle toll of the "rationed care" bell. I have relatives in the UK who get such sub-standard care to what we have here and I am frightened for my daughter, if all the "changes" proposed by a Congress and Senate who have and will always have gold standard care, go through.
Christiann- Virginia
0 -
Mary Margulis-Ohnuma -- I have two friends in their mid-thirties battling cancer, both with young children. Breast cancer strikes women well under the age of 50!
0 -
I was fighting thyroid cancer and forgot about mammograms. When my family doctor insisted, it was too late. I had Stage IIIB invasive ductal breast cancer, several lumps, one over 4 cm. and it was already in my lymph nodes. Had a bilateral mastectomy on 12/19/06. If I hadn't had the mammogram, I wouldn't have been here at age 50 to have one!
0 -
Self exam - is how mine was found- mammogram still did not even show it. I am 48. If I had waited until 50 - I probably would not be here. It is in one lymph node that we know.
0 -
I disagree with the new mammography guidelines. However, the real problem is that mammography is not a good enough screening method for detecting breast cancer. It misses between 10-30% of breast cancers and especially the high grade/fast growing ones in dense breast tissue. We need to lobby for developing a better testing method such as thermography along with mammography. (for example, the PAP test is a much more accurate and better test at detecting cervical cancer or pre-cancerous conditions).Additionally, the majority of breast lumps (which may or may not turn out to be cancerous) are found by women themselves. I found my breast cancer (not the yearly mammograms x 10 yrs) as did 6 other women I know well. Now what are the odds of that?
0 -
Age 43 at diagnosis and doing well. What a different story I would be telling if I had had to wait 7 years to find this cancer!
0 -
A mammogram found my cancer, based on changes from the yearly mammograms I had through my forties. Where would I be now with the new recommenations?
0 -
I, Maria Bryant support this petition. I performed monthly self exams from the age of 31 after having a benign lump removed. I did this to acclimate myself to my "lumpy breasts" so I would know the "landscape" if something unusual were to show up. Thank God I did these because I found a lump at the age of 40 very close to where the previous biopsy was performed. This time I wasn't as lucky, it was invasive lobular carcinoma and growing rapidly. From the time I found it to the time it was removed (2 months) it grew from the size of a dried pea to the size of grape! What if I did not do self exams? I had NO previous family history, was NOT at high risk.
0 -
For myself, Sarah May, going through testing now at 27
For My grandmother Emilie Yassay Diagnosed in late 40's
For my aunt who died of secondary brain cancer before the breast cancer was ever found at 42
0 -
I am an RN in a Radiation Oncology Center and almost 20% of our breast cancer patients diagnosed over the last 5 years were between 40 and 50 years of age. For patients like these, SURVIVAL WILL PLUMMET if these changes are actually instituted!
0 -
As a breast cancer survivor of four years, I know the value of breast self exams and a yearly mammogram. The young girl I shared my hospital room with was 14 years old and had her left breast removed because of cancer. Because of her youth the cancer was very aggressive. She was terrified.
The tax and spend democrats who want to push through a health care bill that their constituents do not want, will end up rationing health care to everyone. This issue with the mammograms is just the start of the rationing. Why doesn't the Congress and Senate have the same kind of health care that their constituents have? Could it be that they don't want it? Why not Ms. Fancy Nancy?
0 -
The new 'guidelines' is the most RIDICULOUS thing I have ever heard spewed forth from a news reporter's mouth, and I am willing to fight for our right to keep the current guidelines set forth by the ACS. We are losing way too many YOUNG women (before age 40) to this horrible disease--why in the world would we want to tell women to wait another 10 years before their first screening mammo? As stated above, it's just RIDICULOUS, and more importantly, it's WRONG!!!
0 -
Diagnosed at age 56 after finding lump during self-exam. Confirmed with FNA. Removed with lumpectomy. But 2nd tumor not visible wtih mamography, even digital mamo, found with MRI. Lumpectomy couldn't get margins, so mastectomy recommended. All this in breast that had calcifications and had been watched with regular mamograms. I am alive, NED, and thankful. Please don't tell women not to do self exams. Please keep mamograms for women age 40 & up. Please allow multiple tests. With a strong family history - my mother, my father's sister, my husband's sister - I am scared for my adult daughters. Susan Moore
0 -
I deeply believe in mammography beginning at age 40. I was diasnosed at age 51 with very early stage. Had it not been for my history of mammograms the radiologist would not have noticed the change. My prognosis is now excellent I also have a friend and sister-in-law that would not be alive today had they not been having mammograms in their 40's.
0 -
New guidelines would cause more than a 3% increase in mortality. The numbers are much larger as it would cause even greater amounts of damage to the many young children of those mothers lost to the disease.
Early detection is a tool that we can't afford to throw away!
0 -
Diagnosed at 47 IDC Early detection saves lives
0 -
Breast cancer at 46 did not have a family history.
0
