Really fast reactionary webcomics are the best things ever
Seems a bit drastic, I mean there wasn't even confirmed cancer.
Colon cancer runs in my family, both of my parents have/had it, along with other cancers. But I'm not about to rip out my colon and start shitting in a bag because I -might- get it in the future.
If you know you have a high chance of cancer, have tests done every year. Cancer -can- be treated, and going for the last resort before you even have the problem just seems like pure insanity to me.
And no, I'm not some butt-blasted dipshit that was obsessed with her breasts. I forgot she even existed until the news stations started talking about this every 10 minutes.
Not flaming. I just think this was a poor choice, especially since my family has been afflicted by various cancers over the years and managed to pull through without immediately going to the absolute last resort.
Good on her for doing so. Extremely good decision.
However, she should release a picture of her completely shirtless as an RIP to the world
[QUOTE=Lupin;40646391]Seems a bit drastic, I mean there wasn't even confirmed cancer.
Colon cancer runs in my family, both of my parents have/had it, along with other cancers. But I'm not about to rip out my colon and start shitting in a bag because I -might- get it in the future.
If you know you have a high chance of cancer, have tests done every year. Cancer -can- be treated, and going for the last resort before you even have the problem just seems like pure insanity to me.
And no, I'm not some butt-blasted dipshit that was obsessed with her breasts. I forgot she even existed until the news stations started talking about this every 10 minutes.
Not flaming. I just think this was a poor choice, especially since my family has been afflicted by various cancers over the years and managed to pull through without immediately going to the absolute last resort.[/QUOTE]
She's not a 18-20 something young girl in her peak of fertility, she's a 40 year old mother.
Her breasts in their natural state don't really serve a purpose anymore, and AFAIK shes not rearing anymore children. 87% risk of cancer is too high to fuck around with something that is essentially now just a lump of flesh on your chest and can easily and safely be replaced cosmetically by implants.
You're comparing breasts to a colon. Do I really need to explain how dumb that is??
How come she gets to know about POTENTIAL cancer and even gets a % evaluation. I've never heard of that happening to anyone middle class. Its usually POST cancer.
because it's genetic
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;40647008]because it's genetic[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;40646996]How come she gets to know about POTENTIAL cancer and even gets a % evaluation. I've never heard of that happening to anyone middle class. Its usually POST cancer.[/QUOTE]
Genetics (which also means the mutation could be dormant this generation cycle) and past family diagnosis of breast/ovarian cancer and some maths brings you to a risk percentage.
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;40646996]How come she gets to know about POTENTIAL cancer and even gets a % evaluation. I've never heard of that happening to anyone middle class. Its usually POST cancer.[/QUOTE]
Did you read the article?
She has a faulty gene that has been singled out as a causative factor. Thats rare for people to get a chance at knowing with certainty.
And why does it surprise you that someone with a shitload of money has the means for more thorough and regular testing???
[QUOTE=Elecbullet;40637594]I don't mean to imply otherwise. I have to respect her decision.
Once upon a time, wasn't she considered a sex symbol, though? Quite a fall from that, I suppose.[/QUOTE]
So what you're saying is, with smaller breasts she is no longer "sexy"? Man that's shallow.
I have heard some people complaining that she is not a role model for women who have to deal with this because she had enough money to afford the tests and the surgery, etc.
Brad Pitt is such a nice guy!
Nothing like in fight club!!
[QUOTE=MisterMooth;40638462]holy fuck she needs surgery for her own personal health and all you guys can talk about is her looks[/QUOTE]
as a sexual icon that should be expected from a forum full of teenagers
not to say i agree with that but are you seriously going to act so surprised
so what i have gathered from this thread is that it is against human moral code to say that i previously found someone attractive when they have done a thing that dramatically changes their appearance, and it's not ok to say i found them attractive because the reason their appearance changed was a serious thing
ok whatever you say guys
(angelina jolie has/had a nice chest and all but i think cancer prevention is more important than having said nice chest)
It's such a shame that people resort to cutting their body up to try and cure or prevent a cancer like this. Having had my mum go through breast cancer, It's really awakened me to alternative treatments that actually WORK... The doctors told my mum she had at best a year to live, as it was a pretty aggressive form of cancer. She wasn't prepared to go cutting parts of her body off as it's just barbaric nonsense, and after we investigated a few alternatives, settled on a treatment that's only available in the US (Australia refuses to acknowledge any treatment other than the norm as they quite simply WORK and the doctors can't make money from it, so they actively waste time and money trying to shut it all down).
Anyway, it took many months, lots of specialised treatments and most of the money we had (we actually got the insurance to pay out the full death pay as the doctors happily confirmed for them that she'd be dead in a year), but she is now 100% cured and living a normal happy life, breasts intact.
But I do kind of get it - for most people, specially celebrities, you do what you're told is right and don't question it. I really wish more people would consider alternative treatments, it's sad :(
[QUOTE=Doomish;40647598]so what i have gathered from this thread is that it is against human moral code to say that i previously found someone attractive when they have done a thing that dramatically changes their appearance, and it's not ok to say i found them attractive because the reason their appearance changed was a serious thing
ok whatever you say guys
(angelina jolie has/had a nice chest and all but i think cancer prevention is more important than having said nice chest)[/QUOTE]
I don't think that's what's bothering people, it's more about the [URL="http://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1270429&p=40638513&viewfull=1#post40638513"]entitled[/URL] and somewhat dickish/insensitive way some people are saying it.
[QUOTE=Yahnich;40637743]it greatly increases the risk of ovarian cancer too if i read it correctly, is she planning on having an ovariectomy?[/QUOTE]
There hasn't been a lot of news on that so one would assume she isnt, although reading another article on the same thing I was surprised to see that 55% of the people in a program related to this decided to remove their ovaries and tubes, where only 27% removed their breast tissues, when the risk overall is about the same of both?
Ovaries control a huge amount of womens hormones and getting them removed would have a major effect, so I would think most women would be more hesitant to get into that one.
[editline]14th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Zenreon117;40646996]How come she gets to know about POTENTIAL cancer and even gets a % evaluation. I've never heard of that happening to anyone middle class. Its usually POST cancer.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=person11;40647510]I have heard some people complaining that she is not a role model for women who have to deal with this because she had enough money to afford the tests and the surgery, etc.[/QUOTE]
She got a genetic test done because she had a family history of breast cancer.
The test she got is provided free under health care to any woman with a family history of breast of ovarian cancer here in Canada, as is the surgeries to remove either breasts or ovaries if the gene is found.
Don't worry guys, she has implants now.
I never thought Angelina Jolie was attractive, body or face, still, good on her for making the sensible decision. It's a good job she didn't have a majority vote.
[QUOTE=MaxOfS2D;40646038][IMG]http://24.media.tumblr.com/101ddf748dc71061ead985e903b20292/tumblr_mmt9daWscy1qbtxv8o1_500.jpg[/IMG]
[IMG]http://25.media.tumblr.com/79c084180cb4f8b95980f57d6d1f4d7b/tumblr_mmt9daWscy1qbtxv8o2_500.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
Is there anyone actually acting like this?
[QUOTE=Hullu V3;40650550]Don't worry guys, she has implants now.[/QUOTE]
Didn't she have implants before too?
[QUOTE=Desuh;40664932]Didn't she have implants before too?[/QUOTE]
Sure did.
[QUOTE=SuddenImpact;40664875]Is there anyone actually acting like this?[/QUOTE]
these dudes
[QUOTE=MShinigaki;40637773]Not the boobies. :([/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Hullu V3;40637841]GOod thing there are still loads of pictures from the era when she still was hot and not anorectic.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=soulharvester;40638513]Because that's probably the biggest reason we know about her, because she's an actor who's been in a lot of movies, mostly because of her.. you guessed it, looks.
It's the biggest reason we even know about her, so yeah we'll probably talk about it a little bit, calm your nickers mitt.
I mean yeah she's a nice person and all, she donates to charities, and goes and visits other third world nations and adopts children in need, but those aren't why the vast majority of us know about her.
Also, because this surgery's main affect is, once again, on her looks, from our point of view. And she wasn't even diagnosed with cancer, just told she had a high risk.
What are you wanting us to do, ignore the main thing this surgery changes? praise things that are completely unrelated or unaffected by said surgery? Fuck off you, go away. We'll talk about things that make logical sense regardless of if you think it's appropriate. Stop posting.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Lupin;40646391]Seems a bit drastic, I mean there wasn't even confirmed cancer.
Colon cancer runs in my family, both of my parents have/had it, along with other cancers. But I'm not about to rip out my colon and start shitting in a bag because I -might- get it in the future.
If you know you have a high chance of cancer, have tests done every year. Cancer -can- be treated, and going for the last resort before you even have the problem just seems like pure insanity to me.
And no, I'm not some butt-blasted dipshit that was obsessed with her breasts. I forgot she even existed until the news stations started talking about this every 10 minutes.
Not flaming. I just think this was a poor choice, especially since my family has been afflicted by various cancers over the years and managed to pull through without immediately going to the absolute last resort.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=Lupin;40646391]Seems a bit drastic, I mean there wasn't even confirmed cancer.
Colon cancer runs in my family, both of my parents have/had it, along with other cancers. But I'm not about to rip out my colon and start shitting in a bag because I -might- get it in the future.
If you know you have a high chance of cancer, have tests done every year. Cancer -can- be treated, and going for the last resort before you even have the problem just seems like pure insanity to me.
And no, I'm not some butt-blasted dipshit that was obsessed with her breasts. I forgot she even existed until the news stations started talking about this every 10 minutes.
Not flaming. I just think this was a poor choice, especially since my family has been afflicted by various cancers over the years and managed to pull through without immediately going to the absolute last resort.[/QUOTE]
Unfortunately cancers are all different and even though we are getting better at "treating" them it doesn't mean every case is the same.
She could have easily developed cancer and had it rapidly spread within weeks with treatment being useless.
Your attitude is actually what got me into medical school. I hate that our country is reactive medicine and not preventative medicine.
So many people are willing to wait until a problem arises and take medicine to fix it. If we want a better country we need to prevent illness. Have you ever seen how cancer is treated? If you have never known anyone to go through the treatment it is hard to realize that it is killing the patient. Why even go through the pain and suffering of treatment when you can take a step to prevent getting cancer in the first place.
I know you aren't flaming and I know you aren't stupid. You were raised to think everything can be treated or cured. If you look at American healthcare and look at the number of PREVENTABLE illnesses you would be shocked. The amount of problems you can prevent by not eating too much salt, or by wearing sunscreen, and things simple as getting up to stretch periodically.
What she did is a step in the right direction for Americans and for everyone around the world. Take your life into your own hands, take steps to prevent injuries and illnesses. You can't prevent everything, but you can prevent most of the common things.
Interesting, another forum I post on has a doctor on it (I'm not sure of his specialty/focus, I did not ask) and this was his response to the article:
[quote]
Alternatives:
--Myriad Genetics provides the estimates of risk associated with the various BRCA1 deleterious mutations; 87% lifetime risk is probably a statistical quirk and has not been revised recently.
--Oophorectomy reduces lifetime risks by about 1/3; she is 38, and taking the ovaries soon makes sense anyway. She did not do this, I guess, because she wants to remain estrogenized, and hormone replacement therapy after oophorectomy would increase her risks of breast cancer.
--In her article she does not mention at all the possibility of surveillance. With MRI mammography, the cumulative 5 year risk for a woman her age with a BRCA1 mutation is more like 12% (not the previously surmised 20% risk). No excess mortalities are seen with such surveillance and appropriate treatment.
[/quote]
[editline]16th May 2013[/editline]
[QUOTE=Cone;40664980]these dudes[/QUOTE]
yeah except no one actually interpreted them as being serious about how she should've saved her breasts for cancer other than the reactionary feminazi retards on this forum.
And your last example is completely off point, he was saying she took what he perceived to be an unnecessary surgery, not lamenting the loss of her breasts.
[QUOTE=Yahnich;40637743]it greatly increases the risk of ovarian cancer too if i read it correctly, is she planning on having an ovariectomy?[/QUOTE]
Oophorectomy.
[QUOTE=JaegerMonster;40669659]other than the reactionary feminazi retards on this forum.[/QUOTE]
this really helps your credibility
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.