Polite Explanations are Welcome....

VR, re: "Some how i think Lucy will tell us that the NCCN doctors are engaging in Groupthink. Ditto for ALL doctors in EVERY specialty that create guidelines."

You're probably right.  Of course groupthink comes into play to some extent, but I'd rather have the NCCN groupthink over some anonymous "secret study group" with a clear political agenda and very anti-science groupthink advising me on breast cancer treatment.  

VR, I completely agree!  

Here are a few direct quotes from the NCCN guidelines that again dispel the notions that there is any such thing as a one-size-fits-all treatment plan or that doctors are "bound by the guidelines," etc.  (bolding mine)

"These guidelines are a statement of evidence and consensus of the authors regarding their views of currently accepted approaches to treatment. Any clinician seeking to apply or consult these guidelines is expected to use independent medical judgment in the context of individual clinical circumstances to determine any patient's care or treatment. "

"Treatment should be individualized with consideration of comorbid conditions."

"The selection, dosing, and administration of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities are complex. Modifications of drug dose and schedule and initiation of supportive care interventions are often necessary because of expected toxicities and because of individual patient variability, prior treatment, and comorbidity. The optimal delivery of anti-cancer agents therefore requires a health care delivery team experienced in the use of anti-cancer agents and the management of associated toxicities in patients with cancer."

"These estimates may be utilized by the clinician and patient in their shared decision-making regarding the toxicities, costs, and benefits of systemic adjuvant therapy."

Re: "the doctors don't read the NCCN guidelines' fine print or footnotes.....And even if they do read them....they will find a way to ignore them!"  Those doctors should be reported, sued for malpractice, and stripped of their license if found guilty.  I'm still wondering whether AA has taken any action against her lying, cheating, negligent, sabotaging doctor.  

Re: "Heaven forbid there be transparancy....imagine an enlightened patient who understands their treatment options that includes alternatives..."  I know, right? 

What was the result?  

Oh brother.  I deleted my post above because you (AA) clarified that you DID take action against your rotten, negligent doctor  so my post was no longer relative.  

Basically my post said that complaining without action isn't particularly useful.  

What was the outcome of your action against the doctor?   

AA - what was the outcome of your complaint?

Does anyone see a pattern here? AA will claim that SOME women are not told what choices they have regarding treatment. BUT, in her mind she believes MOST women are not given enough information. So, when someone points out that they were pleased with their treatment decision process, AA will back track and say, "Well,this is what happened to me.". And in a magnanomus tone she will then remind EVERYONE that what happened to her TEN YEARS AGO could still happen, sooooo EVERYONE needs to be alerted to unscrupulous doctors and researchers. And don't forget...(mind you, I haven't forgotten..)..she admonished us that if you choose chemo, which she referred to as "consumer demand" then YOU the patient are enabling those unscrupulous doctors from finding better treatments with fewer side effects.





If anyone thinks I left anything out.... By all means, feel free to comment.



Am I being polite enough? Probably not. But I refuse to permit AA to back track and appear magnanimous. I don't appreciate people who talk out of both sides of their mouths. Disingenuous comes to mind.

I don't understand why OA would be considered a less invasive choice than any chemo or hormonal pills.  Thats essentially the amputation of perfectly healthy body parts.  There is some feeling that Ovaries serve a protective function separate from producing estrogen.  In other words, there is a cost to removing them, a permanent cost.  In contrast chemo and hormonals are temporary (yeah, I know they can have last effects, but OA is always permanent).

Maybe I'm missing something. 

I'd say that some "out of the box" thinking is called for, AA.  Really reminds me of fungal world, I hate to say, where everything is just a bit topsy turvy.  

Just repeat to yourself out of the box, out of the box, AA. 

I was told I didn't need chemo. However, I was also told if I wanted it, then that was okay too. Then I was also given the alternative of O/S.



I got all the necessary info to make an informed choice. I'm telling you all.... AA is shocked that many us made informed choices.





Has anyone noticed that she STILL hasn't told us the outcome of her complaint against her provider?? V

AA... O/S IS MENTIONED IN THE NCCN GUIDELINES. How much more open do you want it to be?! Perhaps it should be attached to the Goodyear blimp?!