I voted AND had my first mamogram!

[evangundy]

I get mine in about 3 weeks. I consider this one of life's "necessary evils". It only hurts for a little while and you get chocolate afterwards at our clinic :-)
Edna

[snapdragen]

I've been getting them since I was 34 -- sometimes they hurt, sometimes they don't. I think it depends on the technician.

I'm due for one, but I'll wait until the neck collar comes off.

[Aggie_Ama]

Kudos to you Brandi!

Haven't had one but when I need one I will schedule it promptly. I will also have my first colonoscopy the week I turn 40. What is worse breast cancer or the mammogram? Colon cancer or the colonoscopy? Having seen two of the dearest men in my life fight colon cancer I will take the scope anytime. I guess I will never understand why people play Russian Roulette with their health over temporary pain or discomfort?

[Pax]

I hate em, I've had breast reduction surgery and having the scar tissue smashed is ridiculously painful.

[oxysback]

I started getting mamos at 35 because my mom died of breast cancer. I remember being really, REALLY nervous the first time, but it ended up to be no big deal.

As Aggie says...I'd rather have my boobs squished for a little bit and maybe actually LIVE through cancer if I get it, than not have any advanced warning at all.

[SadieKate]

I hate it but I do it because I have Fibrocystic Breast Disease (and 3rd generation in my family with it and I was diagnosed at 22 yrs old). The pull on the muscles in my neck is very painful and the last time the idiot tech grabbed my left arm and yanked it into position before explaining what she was doing, followed by an audible popping sound and me exclaiming OW! To which she told me I should have told her I had an injury. Well, I didn't have one before her assault.

I should have immediately notified the hospital but didn't because I didn't realize how much damage she did. Here I am almost two years later intermittently participating in the PUP thread -- all due to her incompetence.

Just make sure you don't let the techs do anything without explanation first. You'd think this was a no-brainer.

[snapdragen]

sk - after my stay in the hospital, I wonder about some healthcare professionals. All of the nurses (3 shifts) were great, as were the aids, except for one moron. She worked the night shift; came in every hour to take my blood pressure, temperature, and oxygen levels. Could have been done in 5 minutes, except she'd stand around and watch television while in my room. Then she decided to check my catheter, shoving my legs around and pulling at tubes - I yelled ouch. "Oh, these can hurt sometimes, do you need something more for pain?" I looked her in the eye and said "Nothing hurt until YOU started in....."

[OakLeaf]

What is worse breast cancer or the mammogram? ...I guess I will never understand why people play Russian Roulette with their health over temporary pain or discomfort?

If you really want an answer to that I'll PM you. I did lots and lots of reading this summer It's not about whether the mammogram is uncomfortable... it's about whether the benefits outweigh the known harm and potential risks.

[crazycanuck]

I'm confused now..Why is it that they only suggest mammos for women over 50? Do you only have to have a history of BC to have one at a younger age?

[Blueberry]

I'm confused now..Why is it that they only suggest mammos for women over 50? Do you only have to have a history of BC to have one at a younger age?

I think it's over 40 here, unless you have a history of BC. And I think it's risk/benefit (please correct me if I'm wrong), but it is radiation...

CA

[OakLeaf]

I'm confused now..Why is it that they only suggest mammos for women over 50? Do you only have to have a history of BC to have one at a younger age?

In the US, most organizations now say age 40. That's different from the rest of the developed world and I'm not even going to get started about the reasons why. Also, in the US, after 50 women are recommended to get one every year, as opposed to every 2-3 years in the rest of the developed world.

Screening radiology carried out on mass populations with no known risk, signs or symptoms, is different from diagnostic radiology where someone who might be younger would have a mammogram because of a high genetic risk or suspicious clinical signs (lump, discharge, etc.).

The reason they're not supposed to start screening younger is because the radiation can induce cancers, and also false positive mammograms (very common - statistically EVERY woman who follows the screening recommendations will have at least one false positive in her life) lead to invasive procedures. Although biopsies are obviously minor from a surgical standpoint, they're extremely stressful and significantly painful, and they also involve exposure to large doses of radiation to localize the incision and sampling. Pain and protracted stress have their own consequences for physical health. Also, it's hypothesized but not known whether healing after a biopsy can trigger pre-cancerous lesions to build a blood supply and become an invasive cancer, when it might have remained benign if surrounding blood vessels had been left intact.

Because most breast cancers are slow growing, the risk of harm to younger women is just too great to outweigh the benefit of screening mammograms.

(The flip side to that is, because most breast cancers are slow growing, and the treatments destroy heart and lung tissue as well as making life miserable for a temporary period during which a woman isn't getting any younger - is there a real benefit to older women in duration and quality of life? That's a decision that every woman has to make for herself, but personally I'm no longer going to have any screening done unless I first consider what might happen if it's positive, and whether the benefits of treatment outweigh the harm.)

There's lots and lots of information out there, but it can be overwhelming. Anyone who's interested, I'd suggest going to the HON Foundation site (code of ethics for health-related websites - lets you screen out the sites that are covert advertising for drug and imaging companies, as well as the sites that are just patients like me sharing their personal experiences and opinions) - and search on "breast cancer overdiagnosis" and "overtreatment." If you look at sites that you find by other means, make sure they carry the HON Code seal - and that it's an active link to the HON site, not just a pirated copy of the image.

[Tuckervill]

Thanks for that information, Oakleaf. I tend to think there's so much money tied up in breast cancer prevention that it has become its own industry, one that now may have a vested interest in delaying or preventing an actual cure. Not a conspiracy theorist, but it's informative to imagine what might happen to all the companies selling pink floor cleaners if suddenly all the breast cancer in the world was eliminated by a single pill.

Karen