I am the 1. Are you?

I fit the criteria.  I was 42 when my breast cancer was found.  I had mamograms every six months for two years because of calcifications, and then I had a biopsy. Maybe I was saved.

But, maybe not.  Why isn't the death rate going down given the extensive use of mammograms?  That's what happened with colonoscopies.  There were fewer advanced cases and fewer deaths because the cancer was caught early. This just hasn't happened with breast cancer.

Is it possible that I could have lived with my breast cancer for the next 40  years?  The bottom line is that there needs to be more research into how to distinguish those cancers that will not cause harm from those that will.  Mammograms often don't detect the fast growing breast cancers in time.  Mammograms may cause slow growing breast cancers to be over-treated. We don't know. I am glad that my cancer was found and treated, but it would be better if I knew for sure that it needed to be.

I was diagnosed at age 42 by a mammo that indicated a cluster of microcalcifications that turned out to be invasive breast cancer.  There was nothing ont he previous years' mammo.  I do not know if I could have lived until age 50 or not with my  IDC and I do not care to find out.

I will always be an advocate for early detection by the best tool we have available - mammograms.

I was diagnosed Stage III, grade 3 at 44.  My tumor was 5.5 cm.  Can you imgaine how large it would have been if I didn't have a mammogram until I was 50?

I am the one, too.  Though I had a huge red flag on my family history, my OLD (I don't go to him anymore) ob/gyn told me not to worry about it.  You see, I had a grandfather who had bc.  My old Ob/gyn told me it doesn't go from males to female. (A lot he knows)  But he did send me for a baseline at 38. (almost 39)  At 40 it was time for my next one, so I went.  I did not think they would find anything but I wanted to go anyways.  Well, on my routine mammogram they found microcalcification that were then biopsied and showed a microinvasion.  I then tested BRCA2+. Then a double mastectomy and SNB.  Which found a micrometastisis in my lymph.  Stage 2.  So, if it wasn't for the mammogram, I don't know where I would be at 50.  But my guess is it wouldn't be very good. 

I am 1 too.

 Found my lump when I was 29, January 2007. Doctor dismissed it. August 2007. 30 yrs old,  "lump" was 8cm ...mammogram got it.

 I'll never forget the look of the x ray techs face when she came back to tell me that I needed a biopsy ASAP.

I am the one also. 

I am the one also.  I found one of my IDC's when I felt the lump doing a BSE.  I had done other BSE's so I knew what felt right to me and what did not. These are the same BSE's that this panel are not only saying do nothing, they are DISCOURAGING them.  They are actually saying that doctors should discourage women from knowing the feel of their bodies.  DISCOURAGE.  Wow how about we are just taken outside and shot.  I was 36 by the way when I felt my lump. If I had waited til 50, well that is ridiculous, there is no way I would have made it to 50.  By 40 I would probably have been stage IV.  I also did not have a doctor that said that I was too young or put me off.  Quick diagnosis got me into chemo one month to the day of my mammogram.  I know that my ONE life affects many others that would have their lives devastated if I left them. If mammograms are not the answer then what is the alternative, or better yet, the solution?  This is the second leading cancer killer of women.  I think it is  what, 80% or more that are diagnosed have no family history and are not considered "high risk"?  Who do we give these precious under 50 screenings to then? 20% of people that have had a close relative that had BC?  I have known other women that have had one of these "traumatizing" benign biopsies and none of them seem to be lying in the fetal position afraid to move.  They are just fine because they were told it was benign.  Something that any one of us would have loved to hear.  If it becomes that insurance companies do not cover them anymore and women have to pay for them then more women will die.  We all know  that most are not willing or able to pay out of pocket for something routine. Sorry this is so long but I truly thought any recommendations about BC screening would LOWER the age not raise it.  This is beyond comprehension.

I am the one, too.  I am not a statistic, either.

I am the on too!  I found my lump with SBE at 42.  Because my OBGYN had me start mammograms at 38 for a baseline they were able to diagnose me early (Stage I) and saved my life.  My cancer was triple negative and grade 3.  No doubt, if I'd waited to 50 I'd be dead.  I too had no family history of BC.

I am the one too.

I was 43 when I was diagnosed.  I found my lump myself.  Is my life worth it?  Ask my daughters, ask my husband, ask my sister, my nieces, my mother, my grandmother, my friends.  You bet your ass I'm worth it.

I am the One.  My husband, daughter and siblings are so grateful that I am.  I am OFFENDED by the recommendations as well. I found my cancer at the age of 45. I am alive now because of SBE. How can anyone justify telling women it's a waste of time? It doesn't cost a dime... maybe that is the problem. No one has figured out how to make money off of SBEs. Instead of settling down with time I am getting more and more angry and offended. Unbelievable.

I'm the one that if I "waited" until I was 50 for my first mamo instead of 35, my stage 0, DCIS, would have been at a much higher stage, and need more than a lumectomy and rads. Do they think by saving $200 a year would be alot "cheaper" than spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on multiple surgeries, chemo, radiation, and God knows what else? How could they even think about putting a price tag on our lives!

I also think that my 12 and 16 year old nieces are the "ones" that if they wait until they are 50, who knows if they would even be alive to have their first mamo.

Although I am horrified by the new recommendations, I have to say that my tumor was not seen on the mammogram.  Even though it was felt by me, my doctor and the technician.  She put the ring on it to highlight it on the mammo, and still not seen.  I had my first real real fit in a medical office and insisted on an u/s (due to a snafu on the form, they hadn't scheduled it automatically).  Thankfully, a tech gave up her lunch to do it.  One week later I was in for the u/s guided biopsy, and the whole cancer cycle started.  I am 44, with Stage IIa, Grade 3 IDC.  I don't think I would be here if they disregarded my BSE.

You know what works?  MRIs.  See if they'll recommend that.  HA!  Yes, it gives false positives.  But we are saved from unnecessary radiation.  But, evidently, too expensive (even though they would save money on the more expensive treatments that later stage BC requires).  U/S works.  Can't imagine it is that much more expensive than mammo.  It does take longer.  

We all see that younger and younger women are getting this.  Discouraging them from getting the diagnostic tools needed IS JUST CRIMINAL!!

Laura