TRIPLE POSITIVE GROUP

TonLee,

The page "messed up at Moonflower's comment, but it could well be from something the person maintaining the forums did or didn't do in keeping the flow going.

I agree, the bias and confusion is based on large part on the traditional male dominance in the medical profession and their lack of insight (or at least enough forethought and compassion) to provide full truly professional support services to females, but it also is based on the all-too-prevailing female dependency that is so obvious in the discussions about these issues -- including my own initial expectation that I would receive competent treatment from very reputable, hard-working, conscientious medical providers -- who are truly some of the most clueless people with 20-30 years of experience that I've met.

No one has been able to explain the "ethical basis" to me for the present professional practice of insisting that every new drug that might work better without chemo must always be given with chemo ad infinitum, since that in essence means that there would never come the day when a better drug than chemo could be used alone. As long as that is the case I know that the medical profession is still in the dark ages and abusing patients for its own convenience.

That is why I believe that for early stage bc some oncs are now offering the standard therapy of chemo plus trastuzumab in order to protect themselves from being accused of not following standard practice, and then if the patient refuses the chemo, the onc is able to offer the trastuzumab alone. I believe some oncs do understand that true ethics requires proof that the trastuzumab alone isn't adequate, and without the clinical trials for that, humans are being pushed into doing treatment that has never been fully justified.

I support anyone who chooses to do chemo, and I support anyone who chooses not to. I think that is far more ethical than the current medical standard of practice. I am appalled to see the push to make chemotherapy standard for smaller and smaller tumors for HER2+ patients when they have never bothered to define the breaking point for where trastuzumab used alone may be adequate for adjuvant treatment.

A.A.

Oh, great, I broke the forum! LOL

The posts at the top of the page are in a box for some reason.

LOL@Ashla!

previous page still loopy - never seen that before

The really funny thing is my view was NOT messed up at all. I think you are all imagining things.......

TonLee, I knew you were younger. I was just teasing. I am just a few years older. Thank God my eyesight has just become blurry enough for me not to be able to scrutinize your workout pics super closely because I would probably need to throw my saggy by comparison butt right off a cliff. I did have to read through the posts twice to figure out what the heck was going on.



Hey, how come no smileys pop up for me to use : /

Ipad strikes again probably!

Ok, if weird things are going on here, they are on my lab tests too. My blood glucose readings have been high, haven't come down after my last chemo like they should have.Fasting is Running about 170,.159. Normal is 100. So went to my pcp, and he did an A1C test, a long term glucose test. So why is it LOWER than its ever been, a 6.5? My lowest before chemo was 7.1. For diabetic control they want below 7. I just don't get it. Of course I have not been eating normal due to diarrhea, but I am eating basically white foods, ALL bad for diabetes. And, yes, I DID change the battery in my glucose meter! LOL another mystery, but one I love. Just don't know how I will explain all this to my do! LOL, hello think I am crazy, or a hypochondriac. Oh, wait, this is my pcp, I actually said to him once after seeing him for the third time in a month. "you must think I am a hyoochondriac." He looked at me and said, " No, hypochondriacs have nothing wrong with them, you, you are just unlucky!". LOL

I did have anemia, but my count is coming up, its 9.9, so getting better. Way better than 7.9. Could be the transfusions I needed caused the low a1c. well, that's one explanation that makes sense. Thanks Specialk. at least I know I am not crazy (just unlucky) ROFLMAO!!!!

Mysterious, complex, and FUNNY!

What's all this news about violins on tv? That is my favorite Roseann Roseanna Danna segment where she goes on and on about taking violins off the television. She was funny.



I have not had the sexuality conversation with my onc.He is a really spiritual guy and I would feel weird for anything other than basic prescription needs for that topic. However, when I saw my ob/gyn, he just dove right in, so we had a great conversation. And my friend the nurse practitioner has had much the same problem as me, only hers has been longer since it started after her hysterectomy several years ago. She prescribed pretty much the protocol that Lago was on. I think I would have been walking this same road whether I had BC or not. I have a lot of friends with the same complaints. Most have chosen not to do HRT just based on the findings. I'm a big fan of Replenz, and KY intense.



I think I mentioned it before, but in the packet of information that I received from Genentech, congratulating me on finishing Herceptin, it has a paragraph on follow-up and notes that your onc should follow your heart for two years, so apparently things can happen well after we are done. I will have an echo in September which will be my six month check.

FLUFF, my favorite was "endangered feces"! LOL RIP Gilda! I am curious, is the formula for scream cream close to the formula for intense? Inquiring minds want to know.



Specialk, consider goal well met!

LOL, that does seem to be a common complaint. LOL

My BS gave me a script for my 6 mo PS mammo for the left breast in late Sept. But my yearly both breast mammo is due in mid Oct when I was DXed. I asked my new MO how this works and he told me my SO is in charge of my breasts.

The name for the cream...mucha...cha!

I'm taking my anastrozole now.