Suzanne Somers statement on the Rosie Show

Options
135

Comments

  • sewingnut
    sewingnut Member Posts: 1,129
    edited March 2012
  • dancetrancer
    dancetrancer Member Posts: 4,039
    edited March 2012

    Thanks Mods!!!

  • 3monstmama
    3monstmama Member Posts: 1,447
    edited March 2012

    Thank you mods

    It really gets scary when crazy people like her go off spouting nonsense about medical matters.  I always worry for the poor women who are already scared of getting a mammo, hear or read something like that garbage and use it as an excuse NOT to have their exam.

  • Beesie
    Beesie Member Posts: 12,240
    edited March 2012

    Mods, thank you!!

  • dlb823
    dlb823 Member Posts: 9,430
    edited March 2012

    For whatever it's worth, I don't dislike SS -- in fact I think she's a very savvy business woman. And how much "work" she's possibly had aside, I think she still looks better than a lot of women her age.  But I also feel she's far from qualified to give medical advice about bc, and the odd terminology she uses has even made me wonder about the real extent of her bc experience, because my doctors and bc-friends just don't use terms like "full body cancer" or "oncology school."  But, that said, I was really curious where this newest of her claims re. mammograms spreading bc might have originated, and one of the first things I came across is this quote on a website for the Cancer Prevention Coalition:

    Cancer Risks from Breast Compression 

    As early as 1928, physicians were warned to handle "cancerous breasts with care— for fear of accidentally disseminating cells" and spreading cancer (7). Nevertheless, mammography entails tight and often painful compression of the breast, particularly in premenopausal women. This may lead to distant and lethal spread of malignant cells by rupturing small blood vessels in or around small, as yet undetected breast cancers (8).

    I don't know yet if there's any more recent info to support her contention that mammos spread bc, but I had to laugh if this is where the idea came from --  medical knowledge circa 1928 about handling cancerous breasts with care!      Deanna

  • Wren44
    Wren44 Member Posts: 8,585
    edited March 2012

    I remember people saying that if you let the doctor operate, it will spread your cancer. Of course, back in the 50's, they usually didn't find cancer until it was too late. Personally, I'll take the risk of a mammo 'bursting my tumor' over the risk of not finding it. I agree that people are being pretty irresponsible to let her go on without a countering medical opinion.

  • MizMarie
    MizMarie Member Posts: 332
    edited March 2012

    In my book, Suzanne Somers ranks right about even with Tom Cruise and Jenny McCarthy when it comes to being a source of trustworthy medical knowledge. 

  • Chickadee
    Chickadee Member Posts: 4,467
    edited March 2012

    Oprah has announced the cancellation of the Rosie show due to low ratings.

  • voraciousreader
    voraciousreader Member Posts: 7,496
    edited March 2012

    I guess Rosie's bookers did a lousy job.....

  • invisible2
    invisible2 Member Posts: 105
    edited March 2012

    She is a danger to all women.  I think we should take away her 'woman' card.  

  • lago
    lago Member Posts: 17,186
    edited March 2012

    That's why Rosie just sold her home in Chicago and moved back to NYC

  • annettek
    annettek Member Posts: 1,640
    edited March 2012

    MizMarie- YOU SAID IT! I have had well-intentioned but deluded friends offer both Suzanne S (for BC) and Jenny McCarthy ( for my son's autism).....it amazes me...truly...the only time I blast people is when they won't let my decline graciously and keep badgering me....Jenny, I understand a bit, for any parent of an autistic child wants them *cured*- but her boy is young .....mine has made huge strides throughout his life...and I share ancedotal info on what I did and what I surmised from different avenues...but, like my take on BC, it is all underscored as MY experience and not handed out as "Do this, it is right".

    Suzanne Somers is indeed savvy when it comes to business, unfortunately she has trivialized the whole thing by her in your face proclamations. There might be some good tidbits in there but for the most part she has no credibility based on her outlandishness and could even be dangerous. Declarations of her *facts*.....all made to sound as if you don't follow her pied piper it is your loss and you did not try. I could kick her butt. All she is trying to do is remain somehow relevant. And what is more relevant than BC? It makes me sick. It truly does.

    But charltans have been around for so long they won't go away. All with just hints of small truths in their bullsh*t. And they are not all celebrities. Some people want the money, some people want the power.

    At my 13 year old brother's funeral (died from a very rare - at that time-cancer back in the 60s) my friggin aunt walked up to my grieving mother who had gone to the ends of the earth to save her son's life and started shouting at her

    "He would still be alive if you had fed him spinach. See, I told you."

    Even as a little kid I knew the crazy b*tch was just that. So all of these buttheads are just variations of my Aunt Rose.

  • cp418
    cp418 Member Posts: 7,079
    edited March 2012

    annettek - Well said about the "buttheads"!!!!  So totally agree.... 

  • otter
    otter Member Posts: 6,099
    edited March 2012

    In an attempt to put this thread to rest, I'd like to dispell another myth.  That pic Beesie posted on page 1... you know the one:

    ... is, technically, not a jelly donut. It's a delicious ethnic pastry called a "Paczki".  Made in Poland and in Polish communities elsewhere in the world, a paczki has richer, sweeter dough and more complicated and varied filling than similar jelly-filled pastries (jelly donuts, "Bismarcks", etc.). 

    Paczkis are a seasonal delicacy, hitting the bakeries and store shelves (and home pantries) right before Lent and then disappearing on Ash Wednesday.  There's a reason for that, and it can be found here:

    http://easteuropeanfood.about.com/od/holidaysfestivals/a/paczkiday.htm  and

    http://edailyupdate.com/how-many-calories-in-a-paczki/851597/  (with Beesie's pic)

    I discovered all this when Mr. otter and I happened upon some Paczkis in a bakery back in early February, while traveling through a Polish community in the upper-midwest (U.S.).  Thinking they were Bismarcks, I bought one... and got my sugar load for the next full week.

    otter

  • exbrnxgrl
    exbrnxgrl Member Posts: 12,424
    edited March 2012

    Could be sufganiot ...an Israeli jelly donut often consumed at Hanukah in lieu of latkes ( or in addition to). What would Suzanne Somers say?

    Caryn

  • Beesie
    Beesie Member Posts: 12,240
    edited March 2012

    otter, thanks for clarifying that.  I should have caught it - I live in a neighbourhood where there are a lot of Eastern Europeans and most of the bakeries and even the supermarkets carry Paczkis.  The ones I'm used to are a bit darker on the outside so I didn't make the connection.  But you are absolutely right that the picture was not of a traditional jelly donut, so I stand corrected.

    But could it be a sufganiot and not a Paczkis?  Hmmmm..... maybe I'll have to find a place to buy both and compare!

    For the record, here are a couple of proper jelly donuts.  They still kind of look like breasts, don't you think?

     

    Since Lago has rightly pointed out that Suzanne Somers seems to believe that our breasts are similar to jelly donuts, can I put out there the supposition that perhaps Suzanne Somers' brain is similar to a Paczki? Or would it be a sufganiot?

  • otter
    otter Member Posts: 6,099
    edited March 2012

    Beesie and Iago, I do think you've come up with the perfect image to accompany the medical advice Ms. Somers has provided.

    As for Ms. Somers, I just don't know... Originally, I was going to speculate that perhaps she had eaten too many Paczkis in her early days, but I retracted that comment before I hit "submit".

    I've never heard of sufganiot.  Wow.  The things I learn here!

    otter

  • kcshreve
    kcshreve Member Posts: 1,148
    edited March 2012

    Suzanne Somers did not make up this idea on her own, there is a wide group of non-traditional doctors who wonder what makes cancer spread, and this is just one of many ideas they toss around.  They have much more scientific reasoning, and who knows how it will turn out in the end.  I do know that I resent SS being a breast cancer representative, since she speaks in such simplistic and inaccurate ways to the point of confusing everyone and helping no one.  It is just my opinion that on all sides there is a lot of "pseudo science" going on, appearing to be real science, and that includes the traditional/pharm influenced world.  I would love to seem them all get on the same side and get this all figured out once and for all, rather than being on opposing sides, arguing about it.  One thing suggested by those on SS's "side" is the use of thermograms instead of mammograms.  A thermogram can detect a spot earlier than a mammogram and don't squeeze any part of us.  The centers having this service are small and spread out.  They are increasing in popularity, but they are up against a very big cancer/mammogram machine, and most traditional doctors are less familiar with their use, so have little to say about them. The process itself is pretty impressive.

  • Chickadee
    Chickadee Member Posts: 4,467
    edited March 2012

    Have not heard of thermography before so I googled it. This paper,



    http://www.ajronline.org/content/115/4/811.full.pdf



    concludes that thermography can be helpful to identify asymptomatic patients who should then follow up with a mammo. Interesting.

  • Myleftboob
    Myleftboob Member Posts: 1,469
    edited March 2012

    Suzanne Somers got her medical degree where?  Must have missed what oncology school she went too.  Her appearances on these shows is nothing more than a marketing campain to sell the products she does on her website.  I checked it out today and was amused by the number of posters to her blog where there was no response from her?  I see she's invented a new sweetner, would love to see the ingredients since she's touting it to be be more natural than agave.  Sugar is sugar, unrefined is better yes but its still sugar no?

    What makes her as dangerous as any scumbag televangelist is that she is preying on those that are desperate and perhaps not savy enough to do their own research.  If she was more forthecoming about her own disease I would be more apt to listen to what she has to say but she's not. 

    There is room for alternatives, holistic methods and new findings through research? Of course, without it we wouldn't have the life saving drugs we today for many life threatening diseases.  Am I going to take medical advice from a washed up celeb that has basically made her fortune schlepping her products on The Shopping Channel, nope.

  • Wabbit
    Wabbit Member Posts: 1,592
    edited March 2012

    What always amazes me about this stuff is that it is marketed as 'natural'.  There is nothing 'natural' about taking a hundred manufactured supplements and injections of manufactured replacement hormones as SS does. 

    Natural would be allowing your body to decrease it's hormone production as nature intended.  Natural is eating a good, balanced diet to provide your body the nutrients it needs.  All the rest of it is man made tinkering ... whether you are using prescription drugs or unregulated supplements and potions. 

  • bedo
    bedo Member Posts: 1,866
    edited March 2012

    http://www.oprah.com/own-rosie/Suzanne-Somers-Discusses-Mammogram-Alternatives-Video

    "This one 'brain' surgeon told me that in medical school they were told that if you feel a breast mass you stop right there and don't touch it, ...... mammos would break it open they're very fragile and break easily...and they metastasize"  Sounds like hearsay or the telephone game.  Sources??

    I don't understand, She "had them (mammos) every year since she was 40 but her's didn't metastasize" BUT Mammograms "Dont's feel right to her when they're doing it" and 'cause the tumor to spread.' Heck blood draws, pap smears don't "feel right" either.

    I guess the Restylane or whatever is in her cheeks felt "right"  Hey I'm not against cosmetic enhancement, but let's stay with one theory, Chrissy, you contradict yourself so much!  Oh, well, luckily, I would never listen to her, or I would take hormones and shorten my life.  

    Sorry paraphrased I couldn't stand to go back and write the whole thing word for word.  I think this is part of the "don't let anyone punch you in the breast, it causes breast cancer theory. .

    Chrissy was never known for her brains.

  • crazy4carrots
    crazy4carrots Member Posts: 5,324
    edited March 2012

    kcshreve -- Breast thermography has been studied for over 30 years at leading research facilities around the world.  It was truly hoped that thermograms (which are painless) could replace mammograms (which usually hurt, as well as emitting radiation).  Many, many women are flocking to these thermography outlets in order to avoid mammograms.  But the  piles of research clearly show that anyone relying solely on a thermogram to detect cancer probably also believes in fairy tales.  However, the folks who own thermography clinics are raking it in......

  • jancie
    jancie Member Posts: 2,631
    edited March 2012

    White Rabbit - agree totally!  I knew years ago I would never take HRT and that was before I was dx'd with BC. 

    OT - LOVE THE AVATAR!  I personally think you should use this one all of the time!

  • CoolBreeze
    CoolBreeze Member Posts: 4,668
    edited March 2012

    Somebody mentioned the Cancer Prevention Coolition as if they were legit.   According to Quackwatch, they are listed as untrustworthy based on ten criteria.

    You can read it here if you are interested: http://www.quackwatch.com/04ConsumerEducation/nonrecorg.html 

    It won't convince the unconvincable.  Simplicities such as "mammograms squish cancer" seem obvious and yet show zero insight into how the body works.  Ms. Sommers has the right to say whatever stupid thing crosses her pea-sized brain, as do we all.  I just fear for any silly woman sitting at home with a lump in her breast, afraid to get it checked because she just heard on Rosie that the mammogram machine will cause mets.  Oh well, if one or two women die because of Suz's comments, at least a few extra thighmasters got sold!

  • Beesie
    Beesie Member Posts: 12,240
    edited March 2012

    One down, one to go.  I bought a Paczkis.  Not sure if it will be dessert tonight or breakfast tomorrow.  It sure looks good.... and healthy! Okay, "Not" on the healthy part but it's the sacrifice I'm willing to make in the name of research. I do love research, after all.  Now I just need to find myself a sufganiot. 

    WhiteRabbit, I agree with you about all the "natural" stuff.  I'll add that there are two common misconceptions/misunderstandings about natural products. First is that the word "natural" on a product label is meaningful.  It's really not.  It's way over-used and abused and put on products that most of us probably wouldn't consider "natural" at all.  That's because the FDA doesn't have a definition for what is "natural".

    "What is the meaning of 'natural' on the label of food?
    From a food science perspective, it is difficult to define a food product that is 'natural' because the food has probably been processed and is no longer the product of the earth. That said, FDA has not developed a definition for use of the term natural or its derivatives. However, the agency has not objected to the use of the term if the food does not contain added color, artificial flavors, or synthetic substances
    ." http://www.fda.gov/AboutFDA/Transparency/Basics/ucm214868.htm

    Second is the belief that if something is natural, it is safe and good for you. That's not necessarily true. Just because something comes from nature doesn't mean that it is beneficial and that it can't hurt you. Arsenic, cyanide and mercury are all natural.  So is hydrogen peroxide. Those are just 4 examples - there are lots more.  I recall reading an article that talked about how some "natural" ingredients in make-up are as harmful or more harmful than some synthetic ingredients.

    Plastic is made from oil, and oil is natural.  So plastic is natural.  And that might explain why Suzanne Somer's face and body looks the way it does.  All plastic, all natural!

  • SpecialK
    SpecialK Member Posts: 16,486
    edited March 2012

    Just wanted to throw this out there on thermography:

    http://www.fda.gov/MedicalDevices/Safety/AlertsandNotices/ucm257259.htm

    My only experience with thermography was with a friend who had relied on them for screening.  By the time she was diagnosed and treated with conventional screening and medicine she was stage IIIC. The thermogram she had just before dx did not show the severity of her situation.  I know this can happen with mammography as well, just wanted to point out that thermography is equally flawed.

  • Leah_S
    Leah_S Member Posts: 8,458
    edited March 2012

    Beesie, I've been known to say that I have used a yew tree extract to treat cancer (Taxol) and in the future might consider sea sponge extract (Halaven). Who says I don't use natural healing?

    As far as finding "a" sufganiot - you can't. Sufganiot is the plural, sufgania is singular. Of course, you should try sufganiot - why stop your research with only one? They're available all over here at Chanukah time. So you should apply for a research grant to bring you here next winter.

    Leah

    P.S. for those who don't read the side bar - "here" is Israel.

  • otter
    otter Member Posts: 6,099
    edited March 2012

    So, this whole debate is likely based on a comment Ms. Somers made on a now-cancelled daytime talk show, where she recalled something told to her by a "brain surgeon"-acquantance, who remembered having been taught as a medical student that breast masses are fragile and break easily so should not be touched.  Wow.  Seriously?

    And, this is the type of information that's supposed to guide our decision-making?  (Please understand that I'm directing my sarcasm toward Ms. Somers, not toward the O.P. who was just asking a question.)

    It looks as if my clarification of the whole jelly-donut thing did not slow things down. All it did was add some calories to Beesie's Sunday meal plan -- way to go, Beesie!!!  So, I'll jump back in with this:

    Three things:  1) Not everything we're taught in school is true. Really.  Some teachers just don't have a clue.  (I was a college teacher for 25 years.  I get to say that.)  2) Some students mis-remember what they've been taught, even if it was correct as taught.  And, 3) regardless of #1 and #2, students tend to remember the oddities (like jelly-donut breasts).  Their minds can even embellish those stories with features that weren't part of the original lecture.

    There are malignancies that are very fragile. The technical term is "friable".  Even gentle pressure can rupture the mass and stuff spreads everywhere.  My dear dog (may she RIP) had one of those, in her spleen.  After being palpated by two senior veterinarians, a resident, and half a dozen 4th-year students, the mass began to leak into her abdomen.  Hemangioscarcoma -- already a lethal malignancy in dogs -- because acute peritonitis with disseminated intravascular coagulopathy.  Bad stuff.  Nothing would have made any difference, in her case; and I took some comfort in knowing that a few veterinary students might have improved their palpating skills that day.

    Hey, maybe if all men thought women's breasts were as fragile as jelly donuts, they'd be a bit more careful with them.  Just sayin'.

    otter

    [Edited to switch to a more relevant story.]

  • hrf
    hrf Member Posts: 3,225
    edited March 2012

    It's interesting as well that initially Suzanne Sommers did not announce that he had breast cancer. She was outed when she was seen going for liposuction. She then claimed that she had the lipo to fix the problems created by rads. I think then she saw there was money to be be made by being a bc "expert" and she is definitely making money. The only thing I like is that she went public with her breast recon using her own fat and stem cells ... that is definitely a positive thing for women who want recon and that isn't bogus. Except for that, I agree she should keep her mouth shut.

Categories