Reply to If 1/8 women will get BC, why aren't preventative mastectomies more common?

Forum Index » Health and Medicine

Reply to "If 1/8 women will get BC, why aren't preventative mastectomies more common?"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Because men. Same reason we're not allowed to have our tubes tied. Some man somewhere might want access to these parts. So even if you're a lesbian, you've got to keep them ready for a someday man, you just haven't found him yet.

Patriarchy, basically. [/quote]

No. Mastectomies usually do not increase survival rates. It would be silly to get one if it did nothing. [/quote]

Having just been through this, I think it is not correct to say, "mastectomies do not increase survival rates"

I think it is more correct to say that the data is that mastectomies provided as a surgical treatment for breast cancer do not result in a better (or worse) survival rate than breast conserving surgery (BCS) with radiation.

I recently chose double mastectomy over unilateral BCS with radiation, and my surgeon (correctly) made it clear that the double mastectomy provided me with no advantage in terms of survival or recurrence. But, I choose the double mastectomy for other reasons.

There are, however, situations in which the breast cancer patient isn't eligible for breast conserving surgery and mastectomy is the higher survival rate option.

The calculus is different for women who have genetic indications for preventative mastectomy (BRCA gene and many more). Preventative double mastectomy can reduce the odds of breast cancer greatly (50-90% depending on what genes). So the risk/benefit calculus favors mastectomy, whereas in patients, absent cancer genes, the risks of major surgery outweigh any benefit. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics