Medical record: what would you do

NatsFan

Tarry - agree with what SheChirple said 100%. I had a similar problem with a PA whose notes did NOT reflect our conversation accurately. It was at a time when I was doing 3 month onc appointments, and I asked when did the onc normally move patients like me to a 6 month follow up schedule.  That got translated into the notes as "The patient requests that she be placed on a 6 month follow up schedule."  There were other similar mistakes.  I wrote a snail mail letter asking that the record be corrected and that my letter be placed in my file. I left that onc shortly thereafter because of continuing issues like that.

I hope you don't leave.  

Mandalala

Tarry, I think your doctor made a serious mistake, as she distorted what you actually said. I think what she did is abuse, and that you should have it changed. And what if this wasn't about alcohol, but about sugar? Would you be required to join SAA, Sugar Addicts Anonymous? "The patient declares that she is unwilling and unable to stop eating sweets. She is resistant to any and all interventions". 

cycle_babe

I just read through this thread and was not going to say anything but I think that would be an injustice for Tarry. I agree with Claire that the attack on her was very insensitive. While I have not been on BCO for long, I find it a great place to come to find love and support even during my darkest hours. I do not feel that Tarry was given that right. On behalf of all my sisters here, Tarry, I am sorry. 

Shechirple and Metfan - I agree with you ladies and think that Tarry should have the inaccuracies removed from her medical records. It seems that her onc already has a preconceived notion that she has a drinking problem and will most likely bawk at the request but Tarry deserves to have the facts on her records, not the twisted thoughts of this argumentive physician.

Tarry, I do not blame you for wanting to leave and am deepy saddened. You are going through so much now with this disease, your son and your job and do not need added anxiety from anyone here. It saddens me to see people who feel that they must be arugmentive for the purpose of looking intelligent or right.  This is the season to be kind to one another. We need not attack one another, that is a disgrace.

Claire - loved your take on the odds. It is nice to know that I am less likely to die from heart disease than from BC. I have no issues with having 2-3 glasses of wine a day and my treating doctors know this and accept this. My alcohol consumption is my personal decision. Kudos to you for posting some great information.

Blessings to all of you ladies and Let There be Peace here at BCO!  

barbe1958

I haven't seen an argumentative post here yet!! It has just been a discussion, a repartee of back and forth. No one is 'balking' at posting and that is a good thing. This is pure discourse and those of you who agree or disagree have just as much right to post as anyone! Starting a thread in a public forum leads to this kind of discussions. Get used to it. This is not the place to get smoke blown up your ass just because you are a fellow cancer patient. A question was asked and answered in many ways. If Tarry didn't want a discussion she shouldn't have posted here. If she leaves, it's because she has chosen to not discuss her personal matters publickly. I'm sure an 'almost 70' philosophy professor can handle it....aren't you???

Bren-2007

I'm with Barbe on this.  I didn't read any attacks on the OP.  She asked specific questions and got answers to those questions.  I encouraged her to get her record changed yesterday.  

I didn't see her last post before she deleted it ... I imagine she posted that she was leaving and she thought we were picking on her.  Not the case.  No one was argumentative or brash with her.

So ... a blanket apology from me isn't in the cards.  I didn't write anything out of line and I answered her questions in my own opinion.

I wish nnn well and hope all works out for her.

Bren

exbrnxgrl

Since this medium of communication, i.e. Message boards, forums etc. is relatively new, most of us didn't grow up with it, we have to remember that when you post in a public forum you may get responses you don't like. I didn't see any attacks either, just opinions and concern both regarding the medical record issue and alcoholism . The OP changed her user name from tarry to nnn, so hopefully she's still around. Caryn

Octobergirl

We all have a list of factors which may affect BC recurrance...alcohol, nutritional choices, BPA and toxin exposure, exercises, various supplement, aromatase inhibitors, etc. Determining what actually affects recurrance is more of an art than a science at this stage in the game. It is a process for each of us to weigh risks with benefits and determine what more we are willing to give up to BC in our daily lives. Part of our dignity lies in our right to make those choices, I believe.



I am most concerned about the dr. comments in her medical records...in any of our medical records. I know many of you have insurance through the workplace. But you need to know if the time arises - - even many years down the road - that you have to change insurance, get individual coverage or have a medical record review, the insurance company can compare any statement in that record to any other form in their possession and deny or cancel coverage. In Tarry's case, an insurer can use the dr's comment saying she admits to being alcoholic to charge that she lied on any form or application on which she checked the NO box for alcoholism or drug addiction. This can happen about any contradiction in your record. It is important that the record is accurate and to use discretion when sharing information that may end up on your medical record. It's unfortunate but that's the way it is under current regulation.

dreaming

Your doctor has to cover herself that she warn you about having to have alcohol every night, wine, beer or whatever, it is her job to inform you and it is up to you to listen or not.

Also all doctors ask about smoking and drinking. Doctors not only write about what is going on with the patient, but also perception.

To remove something from a medical record, it usually will have to be recorded that "patient wants to remove record about conversation on daily consumption of alcohol".

I work in a hospital and I document medical encounters, and  write for example "Explain to parents, but there was a resistance to information",  or" mother drinks 2 beers at home everyday,"I do it if there is a problem with medication, lack of care, I make sure it is in writing that we advise not to do it,if they continue , it is their responsibility, not ours

I make sure to cover myself legally, in case they say, they were not told.

Lets say you are in an accident and being sued,  and you had that night your drinks,no one can say" her doctor should have told her, to limit her nightly drinking to some glasses per week". Your doctor is covered.

I have many patients that have had success with AA, and also the groups for families of alcoholics.

I do not believe it is easy.

cycle_babe

I certainly understand the importance of a debate. And perhaps rhe use of the word "argumentive" was not accurate. I do however feel that Tarry has been bullied. She does not want her doctors to think she is always drunk, she said that. I would be so angry if a doctor disrespected me in this way. I just feel that many of you ganged up on Tarry in making an incorrect assumption. And again, she asked if she should switch onc's. Yet so many gals seemed to make the assumption that she IS an alcoholic.  I do understand the importance of accurate documentation of office visits but feel that Tarry's doctor was dead wrong to make the assumption she has a problem. My DH is a drug and alcohol counselor and agrees with me that having two drinks a day is not alcoholic behavior. It may be frowned upon in the BC world, but having two drinks a day does not make AA the place to be.  And again, to drink or not to drink is a personal choice.

Octobergrace, you said it so well, this gal was burnt by her onc. She then comes here for comfort and it bullied yet again, I just find that appalling but that is only my opinion which I also have a right to have. I have no time for contraversy and particularly no time for people who seem to think that debating is the sole purpose being here. Again, only my opinion.

Merry Christmas and Blessings to all who are suffering.

BikerBabe1

I just saw this thread and I haven't read through all the responses but I have read your questions, nnn.   I try to view doctors generally as one part of the information-gathering equation in a long road of information-gathering.  And I control the journey.  Each Dr. has their own perspective on the information they impart and I don't always agree with them nor are they always right .  About the chart note: can you ask the doctor to clarify or is there an avenue to add a comment to your chart? Sometimes I think you can add a comment for the record (although I am not sure about that--I know you can in your personnel file).  

For me, when I was faced with some similar questions and choices about alcohol, it was hard, hard, hard. It came down to considering to what degree my drinking was affecting my life, i.e., was I able to be emotionally present for my children and my husband when they needed me? Could I really leave it for a day or week or month? Was it affecting my health?).  I was surprised by the answer to the question of emotional availability---I thought I could be more emotionally available with a  few drinks in me every night  That is my experience.  Everyone is different.

These are questions that only you can answer. For me, it took a while to get to a place where I could acknowledge that, yes, it was messing with my life.  The good part--and there is a good part---is that we know much more about treating alcoholism than we used to.   There is a lot of professional help and education out there that is not AA (although I am big believer in the 12-step process). For me, life without drinking is a big improvement; I don't plan my day around when and how often I can have a glass of wine.

We know you have courage . . . because you put it out there for this community.  Wow.  Strength and courage.

On the issue of the increased risk with an increased intake of alcohol, I look at it similarly to the risk increase with weight gain.  I struggle with my weight even though I know that it increases my risk of recurrence. I do the best I can every day making better choices, but I am  far from successful with it. I make a huge effort not to beat myself up for it,  because I know that it is probably more of risk for me (emotionally and physically) to make myself sick with the blame and judgment that comes with that type of self criticism. 

  

Kimberly1961

NNN  -  I am medical transriptionist and look at my medical records  Oy.  Don't even want to say what I found for mistakes.  It made me a little crazier than I already am to know that mistakes would go on, one copied from the next.  I't's like the stupid kid copying off your paper  Damn Only they are copying the slow kids and the wrong answers.  Could you at least copy from the smart kids?

About AA, you would be better off with no treatment, sorry to say. All the hoopla is bullshit and if you can read scientific statistics, you would see it has worse rate than no treatment.  Sorry for the bad news, but scratch out AA if you want a cure.  The only real cure is wanting it to go away.  The rest is pure bullshit. There are studies that back that truth up. 

Do I correct my record?  Kind of. I am kind of afraid of calling my physicans on their mistakes.  Can I telll the big surgeon, you  confused left and right on my report. Can I tell the oncologist, ....whoah, Did you almost give me that....by mistake.  The pathologist, MF, don't even ask how much faith I have in that.  Did he say I had partial mastectomities?  Did my GP deprive me of needed meds because she was irritated.that I did not show up for labs on time?

NNN,in my heart of hearts, AA will not help.  You will either decide to change your path, or not.

barbe1958

I am still having to reiterate....NO one said the 3 drinks a day is an alcoholic. 2-3 drinks a WEEK is considered high compared by the ONCOLOGY world. Not the "real" world. If you are only have a couple drinks a day or week, you couldn't possibly be an alcoholic!!

AA won't help Tarry because she isn't ready, not because of any failing in AA.

j414

Tarry,

First, the rad onc put that in your chart to cover her own a**; if you have a recurrence, you won't be able to say (in the form of lawsuit), that your doctors didn't advise you of the potential breast cancer risks associated with drinking x amount of alcohol each day.  I don't think you should bother changing to a new rad oncologist - rads is over, you will probably follow up with her 2 -3 times and then she's off your appointment list.  Actually, I dumped my rads oncologist after the first post rad follow-up, I liked her, but my skin was healing well and felt the appointment was a waste (she did a physical breast exam and told my skin looked great),  My derm was also thoroughly checking the radiated area at our bi-annual mole check appointments, so I felt the rad onc was one appointment I could do without.

I'm going to comment on your daily wine consumption: perhaps drinking 1-2 glasses of wine each day is not the best plan b/c of the small increased risk, however drinking 1-2 glasses of wine each day with dinner does not make you an alcoholic and, quite frankly, the mere suggestion is absurd. I love wine, have a real appreciation for it, did week long vineyard tours in Italy and France a couple of years back, go to napa/sonoma every year (just came back last week). Come from a family that likes good food and good wine; my brother and I even got my father a case of very good cab for christmas, which he is going to love/love/love. Drinking wine with dinner, every night, is common; it's an aquired taste, it compliments a good meal. Some people get it, some people don't.

I've had the wine talk with my oncologist, who is considered to be one of the top oncs in NYC, and his take is 3-4 glasses a week is fine - and I was diagnosed at a "young" age and have a very strong family history. However, when I gained 13 lbs, he (and my gyno) told me to take it off because that increases the risk of BC. And I am in not overweight - went from about 116 to 129-130 at 5'5 when I was adjusting to tamox.  He also insist on at least 30 minutes of exercise each day and a more plant than meat based diet.

So the question is, how many of the responder's to Tarry's post are overweight? How many of you are eating 5 or more servings of fruits and vegetables each day? How much aerobic exercise do you do each day? Are you smoking or living with second hand smoke? There are many ways that we increase our risk for a recurrence, but it seems that everyone tends to get extra judgey and rude when it comes to alcohol.  

Momine

Just to cear up a small point. I am pretty certain that what made the doc suggest AA was not the quantity, but rather the fact that the patient thought she would be unable to cut back.

exbrnxgrl

Yes, momine is correct. The Op said she'd "...find it hard to give up." I think that's what triggered the docs concern as well as the concern of many who responded to the post. No judgment, no temperance union, just concern. Caryn

BikerBabe1

Kinberly1961:  

This is to provide a public counter statement to your statement "you are better off with no treatment."  It is important to give context about drug and alcohol addiction treatment and the "AA hoopla." And this isn't directed at "NNN."  

I am not writing this to endorse any particular method of treatment (for some, simple abstinence is possible--but that is the exception rather than the rule).  And for many people, the line between drinking, problem drinking, and alcoholism can be a difficult one to draw.

Addiction (which includes alcoholism) is difficult to treat, period. That has been true for centuries. So the "success rate" for any particular treatment for a very difficult and deadly disease to treat is "sobering." -- pun intended.  It has only been relatively recently that evidenced-based treatment has provided us with more data and insight about how to make treatment more effective. But there is still a very high relapse rate--which why statistics claiming low "success rates" rates can be at the very least misleading.  What is known, however, is for an individual who has relapsed or struggles with relapse, the more times that person seeks treatment after relapse, the greater their chances are for long term abstinence.  

While total abstinence for life is ideal, it is difficult for the majority of people in recovery or working at recovery. I believe the medical and drug and alcohol treatment community consider addiction a progressive and chronic health condition -- the overall goal for many is for longer and longer periods of abstinence and better quality of life.  

So, how "success" is defined is very important and relevant to the question of whether treatment and/or the "AA Hoopla" work.  If the measure of success is total abstinence forever, of course the "success rates" are low.  This is a disease that is characterized by relapse--and relapse happens, in part, because of proven physiological factors (like cravings), which addicted individuals struggle to get through.   

Ahat we do know is that NO TREATMENT, or some other type of intervention, for individuals in active addiction allows the disease to progress, which never has a happy ending for them and the people who love them.

AA is one type of treatment; there are other treatment options. The cost for some treatment programs can be prohibitive for those without insurance coverage, which is one reason AA and other 12- step programs are attractive . . . their free.   

cycle_babe

Nancy, thank you for seeing my point here. I still feel stongly that Tarry has been victimized by her peers. The purpose of BCO is to support one another, not belittle. I am so outraged.

I agree that we are all entitled to our opinions. With that said, I have a very strong opinion that "some" of you have too much to say and have much less knowlege of the facts than you think. Further, I do not like seeing one of the faces here and it is everywhere. I suspect that I will see that face around some more and if that happens, I will quickly move to another thread (if there is one she has not been on). I could go and and on but I am bigger than that but want to point out a few statements which I found  extremely contradictory.

 If you are only have a couple drinks a day or week, you couldn't possibly be an alcoholic!!ok, so Tarry is not an alcoholic, that has been established.

AA won't help Tarry because she isn't ready, not because of any failing in AA. so why would she even go if she is not an alcoholic??? 

J414, nicely articulated post. I am not looking to discuss this further as unlike some gals here, I am not looking for a "debate", I am here to get my fix of peace while supporting others with BC.

Blessings to you Tarry. And to all, have a Merry Christmas and a Happy, Healthy New Year!

OUT!

FLwarrior

Thank you cycle_babe for saying it so well!  I completely agree with you!

exbrnxgrl

Cycle_babe,

I'm not looking for a debate either nor do I have any professional credentials in substance abuse. I agree that anyone who is not ready to deal with their addiction will not benefit from AA or any other program. I will say from very personal experience spanning multiple generations that even 1 or 2 drinks a night can make someone an alcoholic if you need to have that every night. Not want, but need. I will add that most of those I know who started out this way eventually progressed but not all. It destroyed my family and the fact that family members marginalized it, has allowed to go on and on. I'm hoping and praying that it stops with my children.

Respectfully, Caryn

Bren-2007

exbrnxgrl ... Thank you for your post.  You took the words right out of my mouth.

I feel very strongly that Tarry has not been victimized by the posters on this thread.  Again, we were simply answering her questions.  Everyone agrees that she may want to get her medical record changed if it reflects statements that are not true.

I also agree there isn't much point to changing the rad onc if she's done with radiation.  I went for one follow-up visit after radiation and never went back.  I didn't see any point in it, even though 6 month visits were recommended the following two years.  I see my other doctor regularly and didn't need to see the rad onc on a regular basis.

Wishing Tarry all the best,

Bren

lalisa

Wow, so much judgement about the use of alcohol, I wonder where that is coming from? My gyn cracked me up and endeared herself to me forever when she was advising me on the clear liquid diet I had to follow last summer before my hysterectomy. She pointed out to me with a wink that vodka is a clear liquid, lol.

barbe1958

xbrnxgrl, it was ME who said that anyone not ready to face their addiction would not benefit from AA. Cycle babe was actually mocking me. She is quick to whip back wording, but doesn't realize she is cementing my points!!!

For her second point, IF Tarry is only drinking 2 glasses a day, she wouldn't be an alcoholic and could certainly quit cold turkey. Why is everyone insisting that Tarry has to drink?? What I heard from Tarry's post and further responses was a cry for help!! She has been named an alcoholic by her own words and is now fighting to get that taken off her record. Denial? Is everyone else in denial? Some of you do drink and are still telling Tarry the same things as those of us who don't drink.

There is a kind of alcoholic that 'only' has a couple drinks to 'prove' that (s)he can stop at any time. That's a seriously ill person.

I have taken a 6 months course in addiction (drugs and alcohol) as I was pursuing a different kind of career years ago. The fact that some women are getting hot under the collar by this discussion and  "so outraged" is very telling of their own personal issues.

I haven't seen one post that "belittles" Tarry!! Why is cycle babe so outraged???

exbrnxgrl

Hi Barbe,

Sorry, didn't realized you were being mocked. Similar to bullying, no? Clearly, my own and very painful experience colors my view of drinking and I will be the first to admit that. I also grew up in a family that rarely drank and frowned on daily drinking. The family I married in to were the ones who struggled with alcoholism. Despite the destruction it's caused across generations, denial is still their preferred coping method.I also apologize for making this about me but I do it to explain where I'm coming from.

For who celebrate, Merry Christmas!

Caryn

Claire_in_Seattle

This thread is enough to make me pour myself a double....no, make that a triple!!

What a brou-ha-ha to what was intended as a straightforward question.  And what a lot of malice towards Tarry!   No wonder she left.

She deserved better.

I am leaving this thread to join the Christmas festivities.  This will include a "little something" following Midnight Mass. I intend to celebrate.

Now off to my bath which I need after a long ride in the winter sunshine.  The most glorious day!! - Claire

BikerBabe1

Let me be perfectly clear.  My points were not directed at Tarry (I think I even stated that).  I was providing what I thought might be useful information.  It is my point of view. And I am not telling anyone else what to do.  Everyone's experience is different and we only face ourselves when making a decision about whether we drink too much.  

What I object to are broad sweeping statements about "success rates" when frankly there is still so much more to know.  Whether you are pro or against the 1-2-3- drinks a night, it is not our business to tell Tarry or anyone else whether they have a problem or not, People have to come to that on her own, if she wants to. But providing information is a good thing.   Either way,  Information is power.  We have a choice about what we think and do about it. 

 My posts were not accusatory and I was speaking from my personal experience. If you read my posts carefully, there was no judgment.  If people felt judgment, that is an issue to take up with themselves, that is about them, not about my post.   I hope that Tarry is in a place (and maybe others who read this thread) where she can take what resonates  and leave the  rest.

Wishing everyone a wonderful holiday.    

Kimberly1961

Barbe, I think she was more mad at me, like an AA supporter mind set, than she was at you.  I hope NNN clears her records.  I have so many mistakes on mine from multiple providers and that had nothing to do with alcohol, just general health record or cancer history.  I don't clear the old ones but I let the provider know, as softly as I can that I saw those mistakes and I want them to get it right next time.  The oncologist whined, "But the pathologist report says you had partial mastectomies."  I said "You have seen my chest.  Which part did you feel was left?"  I have had bilateral total.  I don't care what the pathologist report said.  I know they are both off.  "You saw my chest during physical exam."  That story just goes on and on, what my medical record looks like.  That's just one case of wrong information passed down.

Maybe NNN is alcoholic or maybe she is not.  Don't know.  The physician did seem to inflate the problem, but that she is resistant to stopping is a little bit telling.  I see why the physician wondered, perhaps prematurely made a diagnosis that was not accurate, or I don't know, did make an accurate diagnosis.  Don't know.

About AA.  I have tasted it.  It sure is free and you get what you pay for.  It is as dear to my heart for researching alcoholism as breast cancer is.  I have my own impression and results.  I have looked at their own internal look and the results because more alcoholics died with AA than no treatment.  And I have experienced AA.  That does not make me unable to interpret the data on cure rate.

Do more people get "cured" the more times they try?  I suppose.  Does that have anything to do with the effectiveness of AA or did their reason for stopping become stronger?  A cure that works, lets say like antibiotic on pneumonia or some such infection, it works, not like on 4% or less.  A cure works on 100% or nearly.  People will cure themselves at a larger rate with less morbidity than they have with AA, and that is the sad truth.  I have researched it quite a bit,  I wanted a cure myself and heard all the "hoopla" about the cure and only later found out it was worse than no treatment.  I can't believe the 12-step is so commonly used for such a variety of psych problems, later, experiencing it myself,

When the cure rate for this method isn't less than no treatment, when the morbidity rate even lessens 1%, I will start to listen to how effective you think it is.  Until then. I would love you to show me that you or even your significant other have a handle on the cure.  We wiould just bless all of you that YOU found it, and YOU can tell us, because YOU know.  Or is all you have to offer is less than normal rate of cure, with no treatment.  I repeat this, LESS THAN, on any other course. You could stick your thumb up your but and get the same results for treatment. Actually you might do better than AA, more success. AA killed more.  You go look back on the studies, AA's own intenral look-see. They wanted to prove they were riight and a little look-see on real life had facts that were different.

We get educated day by day. Hope you feel like going to school today.

Barbe. look at the "whoopla" comment.  She was trying to beat on me, not you  When she actually has to come up with facts, she will go face down in dirt. No worries.  Sad to say,facts on my side.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1WbQLNjTuTo
Diagnosis: 7/2011, IDC, 3cm, Stage IIa, Grade 2, 1/3 nodes, ER+/PR+, HER2-

Kimberly1961

Biker babe.  I bet you think you are tough and you ain't even been around the block yet and don't even know what you don't know. I wait for you to see it for yourself.  How to warn the child?  Sometimes you can't. I can't make you see if you refuse to open your eyes.

Beesie

Wow. I just read through this thread. I'm stunned. Why does anyone think it's okay to tell someone else what she should or shouldn't do to possibly reduce her risk of recurrence?  Why does anyone think it's okay to say/suggest/imply that someone else is an alcoholic, based solely on their own interpretation of someone else's words, without knowing that individual or her behavior?  How in the world did this turn into a discussion about AA and alcoholism?  The question was about what to do with misleading medical records. 

cycle_babe, J414, Claire and others who voiced a similar sentiment, I'm with you on this. Some of the responses to nnn were insensitive and inappropriate and accusatory and presumptive and simply way out of line.   

What did nnn actually say?  "I said that I have 1-2 glasses of wine a day, and I'd find that hard to give up.. I did also say that alcoholism runs in my family."  

1-2 glasses of wine a day:  How many people have a drink when they get home for work, or a cocktail before dinner, or sip a glass of wine while they prepare dinner, and then have a glass of wine with dinner?  Or maybe they have the before dinner drink or the glass of wine with dinner, and later on, a nightcap.  All those situations constitute 2 alcohol drinks a day and all of those situations are normal. Nothing excessive there.  

I'd find that hard to give up:  Yup, me too. I enjoy wine with dinner (and sometimes sip a glass as I prepare dinner) and I too would find that hard to give up.  In fact if someone told me that I had to give it up - based on the current very weak research findings about alcohol and BC - I'd tell them "No f 'ing way". But can I give it up?  Sure, if I wanted to.  If I believed that reducing or eliminating my alcohol consumption would really reduce my BC risk by a significant amount and improve my long term mortality, I could and I would give it up.  I don't need that glass of wine. Some days I don't feel like having it and on those days, I don't drink. If my DH is away and I'm eating by myself, I don't have wine. I volunteer to be the designated driver often. Saying that something is hard to give up is not the same as saying that one can't give it up.  I don't know nnn's situation.  To say that her being "resistant to stopping is a little bit telling" implies that she is unable to stop (and thereby may be an alcoholic) and that is presumptive beyond belief. 

I did also say that alcoholism runs in my family:  In the family. Not nnn herself. Why did so many (including nnn's radiation oncologist) jump to the conclusion that nnn is affected too? The fact that she mentions it suggests to me that she is aware that there might be a risk.  And that might suggest that she is cautious about her alcohol consumption to ensure that she does keep it under control.  None of us know nnn.  The positive conclusion that I draw from her statement is just as valid and just as likely to be true as the negative conclusion that others have drawn.  

Okay, what else did she say?   "My deepest feeling on the topic is that the whole situation is tricky because There are health benefits to having wine. Plus, I quit smoking very easily, relatively speaking, so I'll decide for myself what to do."  

You know what?  She's right.  There are health benefits to having wine.  Moderate consumption of wine has a positive impact on heart health and more women die of heart disease than of breast cancer.  Someone who is diagnosed with early stage BC (as nnn is; as I am) is likely to live a long full life beyond their diagnosis. As we age, the risk of heart disease increases; moderate consumption of wine can reduce this risk.  So we get to choose - what actions do I want to take to reduce my overall risk of disease and improve my mortality?  Alcohol consumption falls on the bad side of the fence if we look at breast cancer but it falls on the good side of the fence if we look at heart disease.  Some women, once diagnosed with BC, are so tied up in their fear of BC that they are blinded to all other risks that they face.  On this board we often see early stage women who push to have treatments that expose them to greater risk (health risks in general) than benefit (reduction of BC risk). Personally I made my treatment decisions by weighing all the benefits and risks (not just those that are BC related) but that's me. Everyone gets to decide for themselves.  And nnn and I get to decide for ourselves whether we want to prioritize BC risk or overall risk and what we choose to do about it.  No one has a right to judge or to suggest that their way of viewing and addressing risk is more correct than my way of viewing and addressing risk.

Lastly, about the research itself.  As someone who chooses to drink a glass or two of wine a day (most days), I try to read and understand all the research that comes out. I think there is evidence that there is a connection between alcohol consumption and increased breast cancer rates. However from everything I've read, it appears that the connection is weak - and for me, it's not compelling at all.

My first observation about all the studies to-date is the same as one made earlier by nnn - they are all self-reporting studies.  These studies are notorious for under-reporting consumption.  So if the recent studies say that anything more than 2-3 drinks a week increases BC risk, what's the real 'safe' level of consumption?  

Then there's a summary of the most recent alcohol and BC study, posted here on BC.org..  http://community.breastcancer.org/livegreen/alcohol-and-cancer-you-cant-drink-to-your-health/

The BC.org article says "The studies show that not everyone who drinks regularly gets cancer and not everyone who gets cancer drinks - only 3.5% of deaths from cancer worldwide are because of alcohol. BUT - and this is a big but - experts estimate that 90% of those deaths in men could be avoided if they limited themselves to only two drinks a day and 50% of the deaths in women could be avoided if they had only one drink a day."  If 3.5% of cancer deaths are because of alcohol, is it fair to say that about 1.8% of those deaths are women? And that 0.9% of those deaths could be avoided if these women limited themselves to only one drink a day? To me this suggests that eliminating or reducing alcohol consumption won't reduce risk by much. And if 0.9% of female cancer deaths are caused by alcohol, how many of those are deaths are from breast cancer? There are other cancers that have a much stronger connection to alcohol consumption so I would think that most of those cancer deaths are not from breast cancer.

There are many things that can lead to an increased risk of BC and BC recurrence; some are within our control but most are outside of our control.  There are so many other health risks that we face in our lives.  We each get to choose how we manage our lives and reduce our risks. Some of you choose to eliminate or reduce alcohol consumption. That's great. That's your choice. It's right for you. But that doesn't have to be my choice, or nnn's choice. We are not wrong or misguided or avoiding the truth and we don't have our heads in the sand if we choose to not eliminate or reduce our alcohol consumption.  The fact that I find it "hard to give up" my evening glass or two of wine says nothing about me except that I make different choices than you about how I choose to address my risk. 

As for nnn's medical record, personally I would be livid and I would write a letter of complaint to the hospital, saying that comments on my record misrepresent a discussion that I had with the radiation oncologist and that these comments are inaccurate and misleading and need to be edited or removed. 

barbe1958

Beesie, that's a pretty good wrap up of what this has all boiled down to.

BikerBabe1

Kimberly1961:

Tough is not how I would describe myself (certainly not on the inside) but I do know that sometimes people perceive me that way.  Really, I am not trying to judge here.   And, really, everyone has their own path.  But personal attacks are not necessary.   Whether I have been around the block or not doesn't change the information.  You don't have to agree. I understand that.  

 BTW, if you were born in 1961, I am actually older than you . . .