okay, this may be a dumb question, but since I am (was??) a young, premenopausal women with small, dense breasts and breast cancer, does density have anything to do with either the size of breasts or the amount of fat overall on a person?????? 

After getting breast cancer I always ask the technician if I can look at my digital mamo to see how WHITE they still are...I also ask for a copy of the report they send to my doctors (the nice little letter they send to my home tells me JACK SHIT!)

My mother was dx with breast cancer at age 69 and has dense breasts...her mamo did not find her lump.

My breast were also dense and the radiologist told me not to feel bad about missing my last three mamos because my breasts were so WHITE that a radiologist would have never seen the lump at a smaller size (then he showed me my cancer in this sea of WHITE.....there is no way a small speck would have been seen!)

So today my decision is to remove my other breast (I have wanted this ever since going through chemo) and knowing that I have a dense breast remaining.... only confirms my decision.

Love to all of my sisters,

Terry

I was told I had dense breasts a few years ago--after menopause. Lke a dope, I thought it was a good thing that they were still "firm." No doctor or technician ever told me about breast density obscuring detection on a mammogram. Are we expected to just know these things? Of course, it makes perfect sense now. I want to look at my digital mammograms. I just had my one year post lumpectomy mammo done in May and it was clear. But was it? Now I'm concerned. I've been taking Arimidex for a year and my breasts still feel dense. I don't even eat yams, or soy, or take black kohosh, or any plant estrogens and I only eat organic, hormone-free chicken and I've given up dairy. I take 5,000 units of D3 a day because mine was pitifully low at diagnosis. I am a little below average in weight for my age. If I am without estrogen, shouldn't my breasts be less dense now?

I am so happy that I came upon this board!  I had a biopsy done March 2009 due to a BIRADS 4C mammogram for calcifications.  I have kept all of my reports and just went back through them.  The Radiology report from March 2009 states "Adenosis and dense breasts may obscure any underlying lesion creating a false negative report".  It also says "The breast parenchyma continues to be dense and somewhat asymmetric".  My biopsy results were "Sclerosing Adenosis, apocrine metaplasis, columnar cell alterations, no atypia seen.  I was referred to have a follow up MAMMOGRAM in 6 months.  The results of that mammogram in Sept 2009 states "Otherwise, the parenchyma continues to be moderately dense".

I have been to my GP and two BS and no one has recommended any additional testing other than mammogram.  The first breast surgeon mentioned an excisional biopsy in passing but did not seem sincere about the real need for it.  I cannot believe SOMEONE hasn't suggested an ultrasound and MRI.  In September the BS told me to go back on my annual follow up mammograms in March because "Everything is now stable".  I put it off until the summer so I could get on a summertime annual routine.  I am going to go next week to the doctor to have my breast exam and annual mammogram ordered so now I am armed with a lot more knowledge.  I am going to first call my insurance company and find out what their position is on MRI and ultrasound in my situation.  What is wrong with our medical community?

I also came across a clinical trial being conducted by the Mayo Clinic regarding Molecular Breast Imaging as a screening tool for women with dense breasts at http://ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT00620373.  There is also a new 3D Mammogram machine in clinical trials awaiting FDA approval that found a woman in Houston Texas cancer that traditional mammogram missed.  

I am 53 years old and post menapausal.  I was told that sclerosing adenosis is normally found in younger women but was never given an explanation of why I would have it.  I have very lumpy, ropey breast, always have and most doctors give up halfway through my breast exam because of it.  I have had a sick feeling that they missed something ever since I got the BIRADS 4C report but thought I was just being paranoid.  Now I am going to be more agressive with my questions at my next appointment.

Great Post!  Every time I see a woman with great big tits I know it is nothing for any one to envy.  I spent years of my life getting biopsy after biopsy because my doc was so concerned the fibro disease which made me dense could be hiding bc.  It was that year that my mammo came back "negative" that luckily my gyn found the lump.  They always checked me thoroughly and told me to check myself but I never knew what to feel for!  So I went several times a year just to get the docs to check me out.  I NEVER felt if I ever got bc it would be found on a Mammo.  However, after they felt the lump and sent me for an Ultrasound (which now my insurance would pay for since they had cause) it showed the lump clearly! 

Such is the nature of our medical insurance system.  You want women to march or something against this?  I think we need to march against the unfair insurance system we have in the US!  It should be a necessity for all women with dense or Fibrocystic breasts to be allowed to either have the Ultrasound FIRST or have both of them yearly!  However, I once read that the Ultrasound will not pick up certain lumps which a Mammo can so it really looks like we dense women need both!  Tell me where the "line" forms!