Loading...

"One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..." - Hallo friend WELCOME TO AMERICA, In the article you read this time with the title "One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012...", we have prepared well for this article you read and download the information therein. hopefully fill posts Article AMERICA, Article CULTURAL, Article ECONOMIC, Article POLITICAL, Article SECURITY, Article SOCCER, Article SOCIAL, we write this you can understand. Well, happy reading.

Title : "One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..."
link : "One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..."

"One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..."

"... a sharp increase from the one in 10 younger women with breast cancer who had double mastectomies eight years earlier, a new study reports."

The NYT reports in an article that attributes the decision to irrational fear.

But there's a link in the sidebar, under "related coverage," to a piece from last October, by the same reporter, Roni Carin Rabin, titled "‘Going Flat’ After Breast Cancer," about women choosing not to go through breast reconstruction after a mastectomy. This article — with many photographs — celebrates the post-mastectomy, unreconstructed look. But all of these women have had both breasts removed.

Putting the 2 articles together, I would guess that at least some of the women opting for a double mastectomy are at least partly thinking about the aesthetics of symmetry. The new article does have this:

Researchers initially thought that women would be more likely to choose a double mastectomy in regions where reconstructive surgery is more commonly done because they wanted symmetrical reconstructed breasts, but many states with high rates of double mastectomies do not have high rates of reconstructive surgery, and vice versa.

How about symmetrical unreconstructed breasts? I'm surprised Rabin doesn't consider this possibility, because the article she wrote last year shows women who are critical of the pressure to reconstruct:

For years, medical professionals have embraced the idea that breast restoration is an integral part of cancer treatment.... In promoting the surgery, doctors cite studies that suggest breast reconstruction improves a woman’s quality of life after cancer. But some women say that doctors focus too much on physical appearance, and not enough on the toll prolonged reconstructive procedures take on their bodies and their psyches. Up to one-third of women who undergo reconstruction experience complications. A systematic review of 28 studies found that women who went without reconstruction fared no worse, and sometimes did better, in terms of body image, quality of life and sexual outcomes.

"... a sharp increase from the one in 10 younger women with breast cancer who had double mastectomies eight years earlier, a new study reports."

The NYT reports in an article that attributes the decision to irrational fear.

But there's a link in the sidebar, under "related coverage," to a piece from last October, by the same reporter, Roni Carin Rabin, titled "‘Going Flat’ After Breast Cancer," about women choosing not to go through breast reconstruction after a mastectomy. This article — with many photographs — celebrates the post-mastectomy, unreconstructed look. But all of these women have had both breasts removed.

Putting the 2 articles together, I would guess that at least some of the women opting for a double mastectomy are at least partly thinking about the aesthetics of symmetry. The new article does have this:

Researchers initially thought that women would be more likely to choose a double mastectomy in regions where reconstructive surgery is more commonly done because they wanted symmetrical reconstructed breasts, but many states with high

Loading...

rates of double mastectomies do not have high rates of reconstructive surgery, and vice versa. How about symmetrical unreconstructed breasts? I'm surprised Rabin doesn't consider this possibility, because the article she wrote last year shows women who are critical of the pressure to reconstruct:

For years, medical professionals have embraced the idea that breast restoration is an integral part of cancer treatment.... In promoting the surgery, doctors cite studies that suggest breast reconstruction improves a woman’s quality of life after cancer. But some women say that doctors focus too much on physical appearance, and not enough on the toll prolonged reconstructive procedures take on their bodies and their psyches. Up to one-third of women who undergo reconstruction experience complications. A systematic review of 28 studies found that women who went without reconstruction fared no worse, and sometimes did better, in terms of body image, quality of life and sexual outcomes.

Thus articles "One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..."

that is all articles "One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..." This time, hopefully can provide benefits to all of you. Okay, see you in another article posting.

You now read the article "One in three breast cancer patients under 45 removed the healthy breast along with the breast affected by cancer in 2012..." with the link address https://welcometoamerican.blogspot.com/2017/04/one-in-three-breast-cancer-patients.html

Tweet

Subscribe to receive free email updates: