Genetic Testing Cancer Risk

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I had it done. Revealed a genetic anomaly that led me to have a preventive double mastectomy.

I'm torn about whether I think I should've had it done, though. Now I'm flagged with a giant preexisting condition, and the monsters in control of the government are about to kill the ACA.

Are you kidding? Any genetic test results are much riskier if socialistst take over our healthcare. I will never get genetic testing for this reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had it done. Revealed a genetic anomaly that led me to have a preventive double mastectomy.

I'm torn about whether I think I should've had it done, though. Now I'm flagged with a giant preexisting condition, and the monsters in control of the government are about to kill the ACA.

Are you kidding? Any genetic test results are much riskier if socialistst take over our healthcare. I will never get genetic testing for this reason.

Serious question, in what way? Because if the ACA is repealed, it’s easy to imagine that for-profit health companies will label genetic issues as pre-existing conditions. What about a European-style health care system would worry you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had it done. Revealed a genetic anomaly that led me to have a preventive double mastectomy.

I'm torn about whether I think I should've had it done, though. Now I'm flagged with a giant preexisting condition, and the monsters in control of the government are about to kill the ACA.

Are you kidding? Any genetic test results are much riskier if socialistst take over our healthcare. I will never get genetic testing for this reason.

Serious question, in what way? Because if the ACA is repealed, it’s easy to imagine that for-profit health companies will label genetic issues as pre-existing conditions. What about a European-style health care system would worry you?

DP. Take a look at European cancer survival rates.

With the exception of lung cancer (Japan is better) and childhood leukemia, the US has the best cancer survival rates in the world. The UK rates are abysmal.

Socialized medicine is great for routine care, but it sucks if you need rare or expensive specialty care. The GOAL in the UK is to get you into see a cancer specialist for treatment within two months of an "urgent referral" and they miss that 25% of the time. People who are diagnosed in the US are upset if they can't get into see a specialist within a week.

This is from an article about improvements that they've made in NHS survival rates (it used to be worse):

"The latest NHS data for cancer waiting times in shows hospitals are continuing to miss their target to see patients quickly.

"The NHS in England is meant to start treatment within 62 days of an urgent referral by a GP.

"But currently nearly one in four patients wait longer, according to figures released on Thursday."


https://www.bbc.com/news/health-49661516#:~:text=The%20UK%20government%20said%20other,2001%20to%2072.8%25%20in%202016.

https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/research/articles/concord-2.htm

http://cancercomparator.abpi.org.uk/survival.shtml#:~:text=While%20the%20European%20average%20five,for%20this%20type%20of%20cancer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had it done. Revealed a genetic anomaly that led me to have a preventive double mastectomy.

I'm torn about whether I think I should've had it done, though. Now I'm flagged with a giant preexisting condition, and the monsters in control of the government are about to kill the ACA.

Are you kidding? Any genetic test results are much riskier if socialistst take over our healthcare. I will never get genetic testing for this reason.

I'm the poster with Lynch syndrome on page one. Yes, the state of the ACA is scary right now. But so is having a genetic mutation that's a ticking time bomb. I'd rather be going ahead with screenings, knowing this is the best way to stay ahead of the various cancers that I'm at higher risk for. Otherwise, they would likely be found at a later stage with a lower rate of survival.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kinds of cancers and the ages at death?

I'm a cancer researcher and my husband has a crazy family history two died in their 40s from brain cancer and melanoma of the eye. Two survived colon cancer and a third survived prostate cancer. Literally every member of his family on that side had cancer.

Unfortunately for my husband there is no clear pattern. His family could have something majorly wrong (tumor suppressor deletion) but I highly doubt anything would be definitively identified and if it were there wouldn't be a cure.

Cancer therapy is like a sledge hammer. Kill it before it kills you. I just encourage my husband to get early and often screenings.

My family has the BRCA 2 mutation and has had tons of different cancers, including pancreatic (both types, neuroendocrine and adenocarcinoma), colon, brain, skin, ovarian, lung, and liver. I am taking the sledge hammer approach myself. It’s just strange because BRCA is most often associated with breast cancer and we have none. I was shocked when we had a positive BRCA mutation in the family.

He did 23andme and was BRCA negative...

I’d recommend the Color test or a genetic counselor because 23andme only tests for the most common types of BRCA mutations (known as the “founder” mutations). Lots of people get false positives with 23andme.. my BRCA 2 mutation is not one of the ones it tests for. Dangerous stuff.

But unfortunately you are the exact example of why it wouldn't matter. Knowing you are BRCA 2+ won't save your life of any of those cancers...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had it done. Revealed a genetic anomaly that led me to have a preventive double mastectomy.

I'm torn about whether I think I should've had it done, though. Now I'm flagged with a giant preexisting condition, and the monsters in control of the government are about to kill the ACA.

Are you kidding? Any genetic test results are much riskier if socialistst take over our healthcare. I will never get genetic testing for this reason.

Serious question, in what way? Because if the ACA is repealed, it’s easy to imagine that for-profit health companies will label genetic issues as pre-existing conditions. What about a European-style health care system would worry you?

DP. Take a look at European cancer survival rates.

With the exception of lung cancer (Japan is better) and childhood leukemia, the US has the best cancer survival rates in the world. The UK rates are abysmal.

Socialized medicine is great for routine care, but it sucks if you need rare or expensive specialty care. The GOAL in the UK is to get you into see a cancer specialist for treatment within two months of an "urgent referral" and they miss that 25% of the time. People who are diagnosed in the US are upset if they can't get into see a specialist within a week.

This is from an article about improvements that they've made in NHS survival rates (it used to be worse):

"The latest NHS data for cancer waiting times in shows hospitals are continuing to miss their target to see patients quickly.

"The NHS in England is meant to start treatment within 62 days of an urgent referral by a GP.

"But currently nearly one in four patients wait longer, according to figures released on Thursday."


https://www.bbc.com/news/health-49661516#:~:text=The%20UK%20government%20said%20other,2001%20to%2072.8%25%20in%202016.

https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/research/articles/concord-2.htm

http://cancercomparator.abpi.org.uk/survival.shtml#:~:text=While%20the%20European%20average%20five,for%20this%20type%20of%20cancer.

The statistics don’t show what you’re saying. There’s not a huge disparity between us and other nations in terms of 5 year survival rates for major cancers. https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/dcpc/research/articles/concord-2.htm

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_quality_of_healthcare

And in those countries, they don’t worry about going bankrupt if they need treatment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kinds of cancers and the ages at death?

I'm a cancer researcher and my husband has a crazy family history two died in their 40s from brain cancer and melanoma of the eye. Two survived colon cancer and a third survived prostate cancer. Literally every member of his family on that side had cancer.

Unfortunately for my husband there is no clear pattern. His family could have something majorly wrong (tumor suppressor deletion) but I highly doubt anything would be definitively identified and if it were there wouldn't be a cure.

Cancer therapy is like a sledge hammer. Kill it before it kills you. I just encourage my husband to get early and often screenings.

My family has the BRCA 2 mutation and has had tons of different cancers, including pancreatic (both types, neuroendocrine and adenocarcinoma), colon, brain, skin, ovarian, lung, and liver. I am taking the sledge hammer approach myself. It’s just strange because BRCA is most often associated with breast cancer and we have none. I was shocked when we had a positive BRCA mutation in the family.

He did 23andme and was BRCA negative...

I’d recommend the Color test or a genetic counselor because 23andme only tests for the most common types of BRCA mutations (known as the “founder” mutations). Lots of people get false positives with 23andme.. my BRCA 2 mutation is not one of the ones it tests for. Dangerous stuff.

But unfortunately you are the exact example of why it wouldn't matter. Knowing you are BRCA 2+ won't save your life of any of those cancers...

I’m doing IVF to avoid passing it down, so it does matter. Plus I go to the Basser Center for BRCA in Philly and they screen me for some of the GI cancers, which is what my dad died of.

[Anonymous]

I found out after cancer diagnosis and was devastated. I was obviously already overwhelmed by the diagnosis and other stuff going on.

I'm okay now, but I did make more aggressive prophylactic decisions once I found out.

I also told my siblings and cousins. Despite her own cancer, my mother didn't get testing until after I did.

[Anonymous]

There's research that says these commercial genetic tests do not give accurate results with the BRCA and other genes. Please go to a national cancer center and get tested. Georgetown and Hopkins have plenty of options in our area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What kinds of cancers and the ages at death?

I'm a cancer researcher and my husband has a crazy family history two died in their 40s from brain cancer and melanoma of the eye. Two survived colon cancer and a third survived prostate cancer. Literally every member of his family on that side had cancer.

Unfortunately for my husband there is no clear pattern. His family could have something majorly wrong (tumor suppressor deletion) but I highly doubt anything would be definitively identified and if it were there wouldn't be a cure.

Cancer therapy is like a sledge hammer. Kill it before it kills you. I just encourage my husband to get early and often screenings.

My family has the BRCA 2 mutation and has had tons of different cancers, including pancreatic (both types, neuroendocrine and adenocarcinoma), colon, brain, skin, ovarian, lung, and liver. I am taking the sledge hammer approach myself. It’s just strange because BRCA is most often associated with breast cancer and we have none. I was shocked when we had a positive BRCA mutation in the family.

He did 23andme and was BRCA negative...

I’d recommend the Color test or a genetic counselor because 23andme only tests for the most common types of BRCA mutations (known as the “founder” mutations). Lots of people get false positives with 23andme.. my BRCA 2 mutation is not one of the ones it tests for. Dangerous stuff.

But unfortunately you are the exact example of why it wouldn't matter. Knowing you are BRCA 2+ won't save your life of any of those cancers...

Bold statement by a “cancer researcher” who doesn’t know that 23andMe isn’t a good source for genetic cancer risk testing. You seem like you’d be really knowledgeable about treatment options for high-risk individuals.