The Assertive Cancer Patient

What Happened to One in 8?

It wasn't all that many years ago that "breast cancer advocacy" organizations, like Komen, were scaring American women silly by telling them that their breast cancer risk was one in eight.

Well, to cut to the chase, that number was NEVER right, and American women's risk was never that high. But it sure got our attention. 

Then, as critics continued to point out the problems with that figure, the organizations modified their line to "a one in eight LIFETIME risk," which was confusing, because they rarely explained what they meant by that. 

Now, for the most part, no one is claiming one in eight anymore. 

What's the truth? 

Well, the one in eight figure came from earlier stats from the National Cancer Institute that said if a woman lived to be in her 80s and didn't die of something else first--say heart disease, stroke, or lung cancer--then she had a one in eight chance of developing breast cancer--NOT of dying of it. 

Now, data from the NCI says that, if you are 25, your chances of developing breast cancer in your lifetime are one in 19,608. 

If you are 35, your chances are one in 622.

If you are 45, one in 93. 

And so on, until you reach the age of 85, when your chances of getting breast cancer are one in nine!

So why don't we worry about something else for a change? All this "awareness" has raised women's fears about breast cancer to an all-time high, according to some doctors, with not much of a gain in long-term survival for those of us who are unfortunate enough to actually be diagnosed with breast cancer. 

Let's shift the attention to domestic violence--perhaps as many as one in three American women will be the victim of domestic violence in their lifetimes. One in three. 

And October is Domestic Violence Awareness Month. Why aren't I seeing displays of Domestic Violence Awareness Campbell's soup when I go to the grocery store? Or Domestic Violence Awareness Mixers from Kitchen Aid? Not that I'm an advocate of this kind of retail therapy as a solution to the world's problems.

Shopping never cured a disease. And don't let Komen tell you differently. 

@ Jeanne Sather 2008. 

  

Sunday: More Cancer Myths

Here are the top 10 cancer myths, according to Discover Health: 

Top 10 Cancer Myths

I actually have a bone to pick with Myth No. 5, which says that treating cancer with surgery causes it to spread throughout the body. 

False, says Discover's expert, Dr. Ted Gansler of the American Cancer Society. 

I believe that the stereotactic biopsy--which punched out 10 "worms" of tissue from my breast, leaving lots of bleeding and bruising--that I had when my cancer was diagnosed may have released cancer cells into my blood stream. 

My cancer did not spread through my lymph nodes--I've never had a cancerous node--so it must have spread through the blood. 

I think that oncologists think that any cancer cells that are floating around after this kind of procedure or after surgery will be killed later by chemo, but not always. 

I need to check in with my own cancer experts about this one. Stay tuned. 

Read more: 

Cancer Myths

@ Jeanne Sather

Sunday Reading: The Cancer-Prone and Other Myths

My "favorite" cancer myth is the one about having a cancer-prone personality. Thank goodness, researchers debunked this one!

Of course, that makes me wonder about something I take for granted, which is that being an assertive cancer patient can help you live longer. And have better quality of life. But maybe I'm mixing peaches and pears here?

One that bothers me more, because I've lived it, is the cultural myth that all you need to do is get a terminal illness to fix all your family relationships. The movie "Life as a House" plays to this one. 

The "Cancer Myths" section of my blog is looking a little thin, so please send me your favorite cancer myths: jeanne.sather@gmail.com

Read more: 

Cancer News, Myths, and More

Life as a House

More Cancer Myths

@ Jeanne Sather 2008. 

Cancer News, Myths, and More

First of all, let me say that I didn't know about the myth that this study has debunked. Blissful ignorance, that's me.

If I had known, I would have been mad, because it falls, yet again, in the "blame the victim" category: The idea that women with certain personality traits are more likely to get breast cancer.

Of course, that assumes that your personality is within your control, and I'm not so sure about that.

Anyway, according to a report from Reuters, some researchers in the 1980s had advanced the idea of a "cancer-prone" personality with such traits as stoicism and difficulty in expressing emotions.

The new study, done in the Netherlands, measured women for 11 personality traits and then followed them for 13 or 14 years to see who got breast cancer.

You will be happy to know that they found no link.

"... women with breast cancer should not worry that their character might have contributed to the development of their disease," the researcher who headed the study was quoted as saying.

OK, I'm going to stop here, because I could go in so many directions with this. Let me note that the study didn't say anything about assertive women having higher rates of breast cancer. Whew!

Read the report:

Study debunks personality link to breast cancer

Tell me what you think: jeanne.sather@gmail.com

One for the Guys
It was a busy week for cancer news. I also saw a report on Reuters about testosterone and prostate cancer risk.

I don't know if this one qualilifies for cancer myth status. Some two dozen studies looked at testosterone levels and prostate cancer risk, and the findings were inconclusive, according to the new report.

See: Testosterone seen unrelated to prostate cancer risk

@ Jeanne Sather 2008.

Life as a House, 2001

When I watched this film, I cried.

Of course I cried. The entire film was designed to make me cry.

I did, however, identify with George’s desire to build his dream house before dying of cancer. I think most of us who have this disease discover that we want to leave a legacy, be it a dream house or a blog.

A couple of things that will annoy real-world cancer patients:

It is clear that George has cancer and is not expected to live more than a few months. But the film never makes it clear WHAT KIND of cancer. And of course we want to know.

We especially want to know because George does not undergo cancer treatment, and he says at one point that his doctors did not offer him treatment. Just some really good pain killers.

What kind of cancer was that?--I can’t help but wonder, and it does spoil the movie for me. Because in the real world, even when the prognosis is not good, doctors pretty much always offer treatment.

Other annoying things: The house that George builds, of course, is on a lot overlooking the Pacific Ocean in Orange County. Kind of unrealistic that he can afford to do this after being fired from his job.

Everyone in the film is beautiful.

As one critic wrote: "No worse than any disease-of-the-week TV movie, and no more moralistic than any Lifetime drama."

Except, and this is a big EXCEPT: the film buys into the cultural myth that all you need to do is get a terminal illness to fix all your family relationships: ex-wife falls in love with you again; estranged, drug-using son ditto … even the neighbors (with one exception) love the new George.

Those of us who are living with cancer know that it’s not that simple.

Read more: The Assertive Cancer Patient Reviews 'Cancer Movies'

@ Jeanne Sather 2008.

More Cancer Myths

A friend e-mailed me this myth:

One cancer myth that I consider outdated but that unfortunately persists is the myth that a person who is very likely or perhaps certainly dying from cancer can't face this reality and that family/friends should "shelter" the person by pretending it's otherwise.

Case in point: A 40-something woman who was about to introduce me to her father, a man who was standing outside the room and would become my patient in a health care setting moments later, explained to me he had liver cancer and then, with a look of doom, whispered that it had metastasized, as if he shouldn't hear this. From what I know about his situation, I trust he did know. But the woman's manner reinforced the myth nonetheless: "We are not to acknowledge these things in front of the people most directly affected by them; it's too much for them to face." 

I think this myth is more a reflection of the difficulties many of us have coming to terms with death in general, than it is about cancer in particular. But is there something about cancer that prompts this reaction moreso than other conditions expected to be terminal?

Certainly there's a place for sensitivity and for optimism and -- heck! -- for denial at times. But we do a disservice to anyone when we decide on their behalf that they aren't capable of dealing with something that's happening in their lives. I'd rather see us all try to be with each other through whatever happens than try to pretend it isn't happening.

I couldn't agree more! Thanks for sending this in.

For more Cancer Myths, go to my earlier post Send Me Your "Cancer Myths", and scroll down to the comments section.

Send Me Your "Cancer Myths"

I just wrote a post about "Christmas in July," and in writing it I realized that celebrating a holiday out of season for the sake of someone who is seriously ill with cancer is part of the cancer mythology of our culture.

I like that term, "cancer mythology," and I want to expand on it.

Amorette posted a comment to my blog the other day that includes another cancer myth.

She wrote:

Mom and I just watched "Christmas with the Kranks" (which, in my opinion, is one of the DUMBEST movies ever made). Even in the comedies, they have to sneak a cancer patient in for poignancy. I hate that. This was a neighbor who had cancer for the "3rd time, and we think this might be it." Of course, the woman is a veritable angel, given how close to heaven we assume she is. Never a harsh word out of her, she's the gentle and kind long-suffering victim. ...

I'm a little tired of being fed off of as a self- esteem-building charity case.

Amorette points to what I'm calling "The Myth of the Noble Cancer Patient"--long-suffering, never complaining ...

I'd like to expand on this idea, so please send me your cancer myths. Add a comment to this post, or send me an e-mail, jeanne.sather@gmail.com, whichever is easier for you.

Thanks.

@ Jeanne Sather 2007.

Surviving the Holidays: Christmas in July?

The family of a woman who died of cancer in October was talking about celebrating Thanksgiving early, so that she could be there.

But she died before they could do more than discuss the idea.

Another blogger, whose 20-year-old daughter died, also in October, also of cancer, just a week before her 21st birthday, asked his daughter if she wanted to celebrate her birthday early.

"No, that's cheating," she said, and her father respected her wishes. I don't know what he did with all the party decorations and gifts he had already bought. Threw them in the trash? Gave then to Goodwill? It's a painful thought.

Celebrating a holiday out of season for the sake of someone who is seriously ill with cancer is part of the cancer mythology of our culture. But I, for one, don't really understand it.

And, for the record, I do not want to celebrate my birthday, Christmas, or any other holiday "early" when I am dying.

@ Jeanne Sather 2007.