Radiation necessary in an early stage cancer

mdb · September 2008

easyquilts wrote:

"mdb......I repeat...You are arrogant and, I think, bitter. And...You are dangerous, because some new women may forgo a valuable treatment because of your forceful opinions.

You have disrespected many women...All of us who have dealt with early stage cancer. And yes, we have had cancer..........even those of us with DCIS....I know you do not agree with this, but cancer is ancer....no matter how early the stage or low the grade...."

Sandy, I am neither arrogant OR bitter. Or dangerous.

I've made a tottally perfect decision, for myself. And I'm just here, relaying that decison.

I'm certainly NOT telling YOU what, to do. You've already made, your decision. The radiation, will benefit, you.

I say, the radiation has no benefit, for me. And I've refused it. And I'm just saying that. To the women, on this board.

While you, and worried hubby, seem to be trying to "justify" your decisions. To DO the radiation, for a non-cancer. Stage 0. Although, I think worried hubby's wife, had a Stage 1 cancer.

Sorry, you sound like me. As I've said, I kept going back to the rad onc, docs, trying to get them, to agree with me. That I did NOT need, the radiation. But they never, would.

Because, that is their, outdated, "standard of care."

And Sandy, I will never agree, with you. And I'm NOT dangerous. All that I'm doing is pointing out, another choice. A choice YOU disagree with.

In my view, people read your experiences and they read, mine. And then, make their own, decisions.

As I've said, for me, it just took reading MarieKelley's decsion to NOT do the radiation, that formed my choice. Yet, I already did NOT want, to do it. Again, I was post surgery, major hematoma. just needed that tiny boost, from MarieKelley, to make the correct decision, for myself. Because, I didn't want it. And it was VERY difficult, with this universal press, for it.

Like it's this "automatic" thing. When, in fact. It's NOT.

You've "bought into" the entire, thing. So, good for you. You'll never get any cancer, ever again. Because you had this breast radiation, for a Stage 0 cancer. Which isn't even, cancer.

All that I'm saying ... It's NOT right, for everyone. It was NOT right, for me.

And aren't you doing the same thing, you're accusing me of? YOU think, I should have HAD this radiation. Because, that's what YOU elected.

And many women probably read about YOUR choice, and do the radiation.

For my part, I've read, everything, and no breast radiation, for me. Ever.

Worried Hubby can call me, insane, and you can call me an idiot, and I'm "negatively influencing" all of these women, out there.

Huh?

Do you think all women, are idiots? And can't think, for themselves?

I just think, I need to get the info out there. That 90% of the time, this "radiation" is meaningless. And even more so, it's a WASTE of medical resources. It's resources, taken away, from people that are REALLY sick.

I really hope that you do NOT move on. Even though, we totally disagree. Yet, I haven't seen much as you said, "to respect the opinions and decisions of others....."

You certainly haven't respected, my opinion.

mdb

NYCarol · September 2008

I am one of those women who was diagnosed with BC stage one back in the spring of 2002. In the fall of 2007 I was diagnosed with lung and chest mets. I am stage 4 now, and undoubtedly this cancer will end my life.

I am an active member of the Mets board here on BC.ORG. We are a close group and every month BC kills some of us. I just want to say this; you only get one chance to get this right.....if you are stage 0 or stage 1 and your Dr. believes you should have radiation, hormonals, and/or chemo, think many times before ignoring his/her advice. Get a second opinion or even a third if you are concerned about over-treatment. Remember, you want to give yourself the best chance for survival. You don't want to jump from stage 1 to terminal stage IV as some of us have.

Best of luck to all of you,

Carol

MarieKelly · September 2008

Carol,

Did they ever do a biopsy on whatever it is they saw in your lungs? If not, just wondering how they know for sure that it's not really a primary lung cancer in an elderly smoker rather than metastatic breast cancer ?

Jan 17, 2008 01:04 am, edited Jan 17, 2008 01:10 AM by NYCarol

NYCarol wrote: Best of luck with your scans. I am having a chest/lung scan tomorrow to decide if they can do a biopsy on my tumors yet. 3 in one lung, one in the other. Pet scan positive for cancer, but waiting to find out if mets or lung cancer. Pulmonary doc says not lung cancer 99% sure, but onc does not agree.

pinoideae · September 2008

Metastatic breast cancer refers to cancer that has left the breast and spread to distant sites. The most common sites are the lungs, liver, bones, brain, and skin. Cancer can appear in these areas years after the initial diagnosis. Metastatic breast cancer is not curable, although women can live many years with the disease.

MarieKelly · September 2008

Summer, thanks for that bit of information, but that doesn't answer my question. Just because someone has a history of breast cancer does NOT automatically mean that lung nodules are mets from the breast cancer They could be caused from a primary lung cancer too, as well as from an assortment of other non-cancerous conditions. That's why I'm asking if a biopsy was done on the lung lesions and if not, wondering how they know for sure it's not really a primary lung cancer rather than metastatic disease from the breast.

easyquilts · September 2008

Tomatojuice.....That's my point.....You just can't take anything for granted once you have started down this road.....Nothing is really "for sure"......That's why I believe in throwing everything you possily can at it....You HAVE to give yourself every advantage...

Sandy

Anonymous · September 2008

MDB, you still don't get it. Not only are you not very smart, but you have a suspect personality that appears to thrive on mocking cancer patients. I'm willing to bet you have never had a guy in your life fall in love with you. And I say that because you are obviously the type of person who likes to hurt other people, and you have to wonder why you are so "bitter", what has happened in your life to make you like you are.

Nico1012 · September 2008

Worriedhubby et al ~

Why don't you all just PM each other with your vitriolic crap. The rest of us come here hoping for intelligent, insightful information and are getting frankly bored with this slugfest that resolves nothing. Or without an audience would there even be a dialogue between you?

Nico

NYCarol · September 2008

I had fluid removed from my lung, and it contained breast cancer cells. That is how I was diagnosed with mets from my breast.

Carol

Anonymous · September 2008

Her mocking of cancer patients is public so my "vitriolic crap" will remain public also. She is one of the most incredibly offensive posters I have ever read, mocking stage one and stage 0 cancer patients for not having a real disease worthy of medical treatment. Cancer is one of the toughest things my wife (and I) went through after twenty years together when she was diagnosed and I'm sure equally tough to many others here, and to have this piece of crap of a person come mock us as not having a serious disease??? Screw her and screw any of you who don't like what I have to say about it.

badboob67 · September 2008

As someone else living with mets, I would like to remind you all that this is NOT just an intellectual conversation. That's the thing with any stage cancer: there is incredible pressure on us and our medical team to make the "right" choice. You can wail and rail against the medical community and suggest that treatment recommendations are based on financial considerations only..you can subscribe to conspiracy theories...or, like some of you, you can suppose that you are so much more intelligent than the physicians, researchers, and the rest of us. You can fool yourselves into believing that cottage cheese and flaxseed, yoga, and positive thinking will keep the cancer at bay. You can convince yourself that just changing your diet is a better choice than taking a proven cancer treatment.

Many of you have been extremely disrespectful to others who are suffering with the uncertainties of cancer and those who love them. We all would hope that everyone is proactive in their treatment decisions and that they research other options. The thing is, everyone ISN'T. I know I've seen posters come to the message boards here at bco thinking their question(s) were being answered by medical professionals. Some people have been conditioned to believe the doctor is always right and some people believe everything they read without considering the source. In an ideal world, we would all be able to still the whirling chaos in our heads after hearing the words, 'You have cancer," and would know how and where to exhaustively research our options. I can't imagine anyone newly-diagnosed who has not suffered fear, confusion, and yes--even grasping at straws to avoid treatments like radiation and chemo that are frightening to many. I frequently have contact with people who have not been intiated into the world of breast cancer and its treatments and have found that even reasonably intelligent people don't understand the difference between radiation and chemo. How many of you knew anything but "early detection is the key" before you were diagnosed? Did you know about DCIS, LCIS, IDC, ILC, IBC, and METS? If you have not been close to someone who has been diagnosed with cancer or are not in the medical community, why would you have any reason to know anything about cancer and its treatments other than what you've seen in films or in books? How many of you knew that there was more than one type of chemo? What I'm trying to say is that you all need to try to take your minds back to the place when you were newly diagnosed or even just worrying about a diagnosis. Think about how much you *didn't* know about cancer...then think about the fact that breast cancer does not discriminate: it can hit the highly logical, methodical thinker as well as the highly illogical, emotional thinker. It hits the ignorant and the educated. Please think about what impact your words might have on someone who is frightened, in shock, or someone with poor reading comprehension who is desperately afraid of going through what might be the appropriate treatment for him/her. Don't fool yourselves that everyone with cancer automatically knows or is even capable of the same level of research as you are. Consider that someone may, indeed, base their treatment decisions on posts they read on this message board. After all, this board is touted as one of the most informative and reliable.

edited at moderator's request

prayrv · September 2008

Shirlann,

I'm sorry if you almost lost it! I'm just a little confused as to why my post was removed though?

Gentle Hugs to all,

Trish

Anonymous · September 2008

For what it is worth, not only were my posts deleted by the moderators, but my authorization to post here under my original name was terminated. Obviously the moderators don't like contentious debates on this board and feel free to censor what they don't like, and obviously some of the women here who didn't like me felt it necessary to whine to the moderators. But I do agree with you Bad Boob, that the mocking tone of MDB's posts (I assume she too had her posting privileges revoked and will have to reincarnate herself) to those suffering from cancer were simply as offensive as can be and hopefully she won't be posting here anymore. I know that I now have a sour taste in my mouth for this board, probably because I despise censorship and I despise whining. Anyway, if I was one of the ones who you found offensive, I apologize. My posts were always directed to MDB. As for MarieKelly, she always appeared, at least on the surface, to be far more intelligent and educated than MDB and because she does have a medical background as a nurse oncologist (or so she says), her opinion is worth a little more weight imho.

Moderators · September 2008

We apologize to many of our members for the deleting of your posts. However, all posts making reference to the ongoing dispute in this topic were deleted to allow for a fresh beginning and not to offend or unnerve new members.

Upon joining the breastcancer.org community, you are asked to review and agree to the Rules of Conduct that have been carefully established to protect all users of these boards.

Thank you to those who tried to help appease the situation.

Best,

Melissa and Tami

FEB · September 2008

Melissa and Tami

Thank you for cleaning up this forum!

TenderIsOurMight · September 2008

This press release just in based on demographic research to be presented at tomorrow's American Society of Clinical Oncology Breast Cancer Symposium. With a tip of the hat to Reuters to allow the topic post.

Black women less likely to receive radiation after lumpectomy

Posted: September 3, 2008

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Black women are significantly less likely than white women to receive standard radiation therapy after lumpectomy for early-stage breast cancer. These disparities vary widely by region of the United States, according to research presented Wednesday ahead of the 2008 Breast Cancer Symposium, which opens Friday in Washington, D.C."We don't know if fewer black women are receiving radiation therapy because it is not offered to them, because they decline the treatment, or because they are unable to complete a whole course of treatment," said study leader Dr. Grace L. Smith of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston.Dr. Smith and colleagues studied the Medicare records of women aged 66 or older who were treated with conservative surgery for early-stage, newly diagnosed breast cancer in 2003. Among a total of 37,305 women, 34,024 were white and 2,305 were black.They found that 74% of white women received radiation therapy after lumpectomy, compared with only 65% of black women - a significant difference.Even among women younger than age 70, Dr. Smith noted, "in whom radiation would be expected to be most common," the racial disparities persisted, with only 71% of black women receiving radiation after lumpectomy compared with 81% of white women."This difference is concerning given that radiation treatment after lumpectomy is generally considered standard therapy," she added.The data also show significant geographic variation in the degree of racial disparities in how often women underwent radiation therapy after lumpectomy. The most pronounced racial disparities in radiation use were seen in the East South Central region of the US, the Pacific West, and the Northeast."Only slightly more than half (55% to 58%) of black women with breast cancer living in these regions received radiation after lumpectomy and this compared with 70% to 72% of white women living in these regions who received radiation after lumpectomy," Dr. Smith said.Dr. Eric Winer, director of the breast oncology center at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston and moderator of the press briefing noted that "for all but the oldest and sickest women, radiation should be considered standard after lumpectomy -- so it's actually quite surprising that the rates of radiation across the board are as low as they are and this is something that has been seen in other studies as well.""We need to identify and correct the obstacles that are causing these disparities, and work to increase awareness about the benefits of radiation therapy following lumpectomy," Dr. Smith concluded.The Breast Cancer Symposium is co-sponsored by the American Society of Breast Disease, the American Society of Breast Surgeons, the American Society of Clinical Oncology, the American Society of Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology, the National Consortium of Breast Centers, Inc., and the Society of Surgical Oncology.

MarieKelly · September 2008

badboob67 wrote:..It is also extremely insulting to see that mariekelly took the time to "investigate" NYCarol's assertion that she has mets...What exactly are your credentials, mariekelly? "

Why on earth would you find that insulting?? If you're suggesting that I didn't believe she had the mets, then you couldn't be more wrong. I just wanted to know how they were sure what she has was BC mets rather than a lung primary, but I wasn't questioning the fact that she had them.

Maybe you have no interest in knowing the specifics when people are talking about their breast cancer, but I certainly do. Knowing these specific variables about the heterogeneous nature of people's breast cancer is in part responsible for helping me make my treatment decisions. When Carol posted on this thread that she was diagnosed stage 1 and then ended up stage 4 years later, my mind instantly wanted to know many things; age, grade of the tumor,, how wide the margins were, size of the tumor, hormone receptor status, Her-2 status, the presence or absence of lymphatic or vascular invasion, what kind of surgery was done, what treatment she had etc etc etc. Since she didn't have a profile running across the bottom of her posts, I had to either 1) ask a bunch of questions that maybe she wouldn't want to answer or 2) try to find the information for myself - which is what I chose to do.

In the course of my search for this information, I came across a statement made by her saying she was 62 at diagnosis and had a smoking history... and also that there was some question among her doctors, especially early on, whether the stuff going on in her lungs was metastatic breast or primary lung and considerations about not doing a biopsy. Since I couldn't find any reference to that biopsy ever having been done, and being a smoker myself, this interested me... and so I asked the question.

Maybe you're one of those people that doesn't seem interested in knowing what makes someone become metastatic and someone else not, but I definately WANT to know all about it. Maybe your seemingly lack of interest is because you believe in the crapshoot theory and so therefore it's essentially irrelevant to you? But if there's one thing I know for sure, it's that there is no 100% certainty and although there are sometimes surprises, it's definately not a complete crapshoot. Someone telling me they went from a stage 1 to a stage 4 tells me nothing relevant without also telling me the nature of their disease. So if you find this kind search for clarifying information threatening or "insulting" in some way, then all I can say is that you need to ask yourself why it bothers you so much.

And as for my "credentials", I've stated them here before a few times and I think the latest time was somewhere here on this very thread. So rather than repeat it all, why dont you just go do a search on my name in this thread and you'll find it. I promise I won't be offended.

easyquilts · September 2008

Badboob....Thank you for your thoughtful and calming post

I think that my greatest worry re. this thread is the affect it will have on new members, who are still in that awful place we have all been....They are scared to death, and naturally afraid of what could be life saving treatments I know I was afraid of radiation. I had heard awful things about it, and really didn't want to do it...But..I realized...after cosidering the options I had.....that radiation was an important part of my treatment....Everyone has to make their own decision about this.

My resoning was that I wanted to do everything I could to prevent a recurrence....which I knew ould be worse than my original pure DCIS.....Tamox was not an option for me, so..

I do not prescribe to the theory that the doctor is always right...but....Early on, I decided to listen to them, knowing that they have years of experience, and I have none....I had to trust them, and for te most part, I did and do. I have felt genuinely cared for by my doctors.

The decision of whether or not to have radiation for early stage cancer belongs to the patient and her/his doctor...no one else. My own rad/oncol told me that only women who had had mastectomies should forgo radiation...and I have to admit that I agree with him...except possiblly for some heart patients who have left breast cancer. Why not get rid of as many of those nasty cancer cells as possible? I was glad to go to radiation treatments every day..I kept imagining those suckers being burnt to a crisp!

Sandy

Dejaboo · September 2008

Im Like Marie Kelly In her post 2 above.

I always like to know specifics...Especially if someone was Stage I & then stage IV.

I ask lots of Questions...Some may think that is Nosey & none of my Business...But alot of this board is Q & A & helping one learn about bc. I learn alot more if I ask Questions.

I did not want Radiation. My Surgeon said on the 4th day after my DCIS DX that I would HAVE to have radiation...So I went home & read & Read & Read. I did not just read here...I looked upp Studies & More studies...I have over 700 favorite places from when I was 1st DX.

Within 2 days I had decided on a BLM. He tried to disuade me from that-Said it wasnt necessary- Yes- I knew it wasnt necessary. But I felt that that was best for ME & it was my way of doing all I could to prevent a Recurrance. And also avoid the radiataion I did not want to my Left side. He also told me Radiation does not effect your Heart & Lungs AT ALL. I strongly do not believe that.

Others May find a different decision the right choice for THEM.

4 weeks after that discussion I learned I had Heart Problems a PFO & ASA...I cant imagine what Rads would have done to me. All my Drs new of my Subtle Symptoms-TIA, SOB & Fatigue that I had had for 10 years...But none of them listened to me...If I wouldnt have spoke up to my Onco about my TIA & he hadnt requested the right test for my heart- a bubble Echo...

I saw 5 Specialists the year before my bc DX - Not one found my heart problem.

Pam

Anonymous · September 2008

Easyquilts, I will be honest that I am a little dumbfounded women would come to a board like this and request advice about whether they should take the advice of their team of doctors as compared to other women who have neither training nor experience in evaluating or treating breast cancer. It truly makes no sense to me. I've been on other medical boards before and people are always asking if anybody else has had similar symptoms to themselves and how the condition was treated. I don't believe I have ever been to a board though where posters are flat out told to ignore medical advice. Advice to get a second or third opinion is of course warranted. Advice to completely ignore your doctors is advice I don't understand and I don't understand why other women would give it a second of consideration. But then I need to be careful voicing opinions here because the moderators are apparently overly sensitive about the content here.

NYCarol · September 2008

MarieKelly, if you had asked I would have gladly told you about my history. ER 98% positive, PR+, HER2 negative. Surgery performed by an experienced breast surgeon. She did a lumpectomy leaving 10+mm margins. Tumor was <1cm, grade 2. Node negative. No lymphatic or vascular invasion. K turnover very low. Three years after my lumpectomy, I actually had a breast reduction on the other side so my two breasts would be the same size and I could wear a regular bra again. I was confident that the BC was gone from my body.

I didn't include the tumor information in my original post because I really didn't want the post to just be about ME. I wanted to point out that I am nothing more than an example of the many women who find themselves in stage 4 unexpectedly. There certainly is no right path that works for everybody, but if the women here don't trust their oncologist or radiologist then I urge you to find one you do trust, because your life could depend on their advice.

Best to all of you,

Carol

MarieKelly · September 2008

Thank you Carol. I do appreciated your sharing of this information with me. Now that I know you were a grade 2, I know that your breast cancer was not the same as mine. Histological grade 2's can go either way depending on their molecular profile and act like either an aggressive grade 3 with a high risk of recurrence and/or mets or a non-aggressive grade 1 with low risk of the same.

I think a lot of other people wonder about the same things I do when they read a story like yours but don't know the specifics about the cancer - "Was hers like mine? " "Could that happen to me too?" And of course it could happen to any of us, but the odds of it happening are far less with a grade 1 tumor and I think it's VERY important that people understand that.

One last question if you don't mind, actually two - Did you have radiation after the lumpectomy? Did you have chemotherapy"?

MarieKelly · September 2008

Dejaboo wrote:...4 weeks after that discussion I learned I had Heart Problems a PFO & ASA...I cant imagine what Rads would have done to me. All my Drs new of my Subtle Symptoms-TIA, SOB & Fatigue that I had had for 10 years...But none of them listened to me...If I wouldnt have spoke up to my Onco about my TIA & he hadnt requested the right test for my heart- a bubble Echo...

And that's similar to the problem I had too... my first rad onc wouldn't listen to me either. He sat there with this little arrogant smirk/grin on his face and then cut me off before I could even finish explaining my reasoning for not wanting the radiation. Of course, this is all AFTER he had already announced his plan to radiate me. He completely dismissed my concerns about my valvular heart disease and left breast radiation as being non-existent and also my concerns about smoking history. I knew he was chock full of crap, the moment he did that and especially when he tried to tell me I wasn't in menopause by just looking at me without even bothering to do a lab test. And the most frightening thing is that if I hadn't already known better, I might have believed him...as I'm sure many with similar concerns do. I held my tongue and composure (although I really wanted to slap him) said no thank you and walked out. But the anger I feel towards him lingers to this day.

I also had the same type of problem with the first oncologist I saw. This one I already knew was a jerk ahead of time because I had worked for him for a while, but I agreed to see him anyway just to hear what he had to say. He chuckled with that same type of turd eating grin the other guy had (they're buddies) and tried to tell me that there are no significant side effects with tamoxifen after I raised concerns about clotting issues. I had suffered two episodes of brief, temporary vision loss in one eye due to a condition called amaurosis fugax which is most often caused by tiny plaques shooting off one of the carotids and getting stuck in a retinal artery. Sometimes, as in my case, it's also caused from tiny little plaques dislodging from a bad heart valve. I have been taking daily aspirin because of this (and it's never happened again since taking it), yet this A-hole oncologist completely dismissed my concerns about it. He too tried to tell me I wasn't in menopause, yet didn't order a test to prove it. I later went to another oncologist who agreed with me that tamoxifen would not have been a very good idea considering the ocular issues. He at least didn't try to tell me I wasn't in menopause because he had the brains to order a blood test that told him I definately was.

mzmiller99 · September 2008

NYCarol -

Thank you for giving me the courage to advocate for myself. My oncologist has decided against chemo, genetic testing, and oncotype dx. I may not need anything more than the surgery and radiation, but I will seek another opinion. I don't want to look back and wished that I had done more.

Thank you for sharing and many prayers.

Susan

badboob67 · September 2008

nope...don't read much. hurts my head

NYCarol · September 2008

MarieKelly, No more comparisons. My post was not about comparing you with me, or anybody else. It is doubtful any of us are exactly the same. My posts are about each woman making the decisions for her care that will give her the best chance to defeat the cancer found in her breast. These decisions need to be made carefully with EXPERT opinions weighed thoughtfully.

Coming to these boards and discussing these decisions with other women, often helps cut the anxiety down to size. It also gives compansionship and suddenly many of us found we are "not alone" anymore. I don't believe anybody here should try to convince another breast cancer patient to ignore her physician's advice. As I said before, if you don't trust your doctors, go find ones you do trust and follow their advice.

Susan, I'm so happy you are going for a second opinion. It can make all the difference in your treatment (or not). I am about to go to Fox Chase for a second opinion and am very hopeful.

Best to you all,

Carol

mdb · September 2008

Sep 4, 2008 12:23 am, edited 14 hours ago by Moderators_Tami-Melissa

mdb wrote:

This Post was deleted by Moderators_Tami-Melissa.

Goodbye, all. I'm never coming back here, again. I've been thrown out, apparently.

Probably, good riddance, to most of you. You're all happy to have your total breast radiation, for your non-invasive DCIS, or Stage 1 cancer.

HOW that can help, is beyond my imagaination.

This is just ... burning, the books. Do you really think, "burning the books," is going to make any difference? I guess, provide people with LESS infomation, and so so they'll just "go with the party line."

That It's going to make MY OPINION, go away? That I don't believe in this Breast Radiation.

I actually have a domain name, registered. It's called "medicalindustrialcomplex.com."

Eisenhower, first coined the term; The Military Industrial Complex. And Ike meant, the military,existing, to just exist.Today, it's just ... rampant. Ike would be appalled, at our military.

And in my view, that's what's happened in the medical realm. The Radiation "industry" exists, to just exist. And I'm not focusing, on Breast Radiation.It's just a part, of a total disconnect, in the medical field.

But then, nobody will read this message. Because, "This Post will be deleted by Moderators_Tami-Melissa."

Good luck, to you all.

I've never been happier, in my life! NOT doing, the radation.

And maybe, someday, soon, medicalindustrialcomplex.com will be online.

And NOBODY will delete, my posts. And I'll continue to tell the truth, about this bogus radiation, In my view, for early stage breast cancer.

Again, good luck, to you all.

I'm hoping that Moderators_Tami-Melissa do NOT delete, this post.

And give people, a chance, to speak.

mdb

Anonymous · September 2008

Don't feel bad MDB. This censorship is the one area I agree with you. I'm now on Worriedhubby4 because my other accounts were all terminated by the moderators; I guess a few women here got their dander up at my comments and whined their way into convincing the moderators that I was a terrible, destructive influence on this board and had to be done away with :-). I suspect if they were male moderators the outcome would have been different. But of course I disagree with everything else you have to say about the issue.

Anonymous · September 2008

Don't feel bad MDB. This censorship is the one area I agree with you. I'm now on Worriedhubby4 now because my other accounts were all terminated by the moderators. I guess a few women here got their dander up at my comments and whined their way into convincing the moderators that I was a terrible, destructive influence on this board and had to be done away with :-). But of course I disagree with everything else you have to say about the issue.

Anonymous · September 2008

Well MDB, let me try again. We finally agree on something. Censorship should be banned, even in a contentious debate where the debators do not like each other. Even if other members of a board get upset by the posts. Nobody is required to read any thread they choose not to read. But some people do, and then they go complaining to the moderators. A very anti-American, anti-free speech attitude if you ask me. We disagree on everything else.

Regards,

Worriedubbies 1-4 :-)

Radiation necessary in an early stage cancer

Comments

Categories