Have you been tested for the cancer gene?

[shootingstar]

Maybe I'm the last to know, but I have never heard of this gene test.

Obviously I've never been tested for this. But then I'm clear after my last breast examination over 6 months ago.

Does your friend have any confirmed malignant tumours? (Aside from this gene test.)

[KnottedYet]

I haven't.

While the type of breast cancer that runs in my family is likely genetic, there isn't a test for that one yet. (it's the one that is linked with malignant melanoma)

As soon as there is a test for that one, I'm getting it. And if it is positive, I'm getting a double mastectomy. I've already had the malignant melanoma, and I have watched the suffering from the breast cancer in the maternal side of my family.

I love my boobies, but not that much.

If your friend is very active, I'd suggest she not do tram-flap reconstruction. When those cause trouble, they are a real pain to rehab.

Edit to Add: oops! There is a test for my family's brand of breast cancer, it's the BRCA2 test. (I knew about the BRCA1 linked to ovarian cancer.) Ahh, ignorance is not bliss. Time to make an appt with my doc... http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/BRCA And if my insurance company balks, I can try this: https://www.23andme.com/health/all/

[roadie gal]

My sister, who died last fall from breast cancer, was BRCA-2 positive. I have made the decision NOT to get tested because I don't want the insurance companies to refuse to pay because it was a pre-existing illness if I have the gene and someday end up with breast cancer. I know it's illegal for them to do that, but I don't trust them as far as I can spit.

I've discussed this with my gyn doc. Each year we test me as though I do have the gene: mammogram and pelvic ultrasound. I think it's the best way to go for me.

[shootingstar]

I have made the decision NOT to get tested because I don't want the insurance companies to refuse to pay because it was a pre-existing illness if I have the gene and someday end up with breast cancer. I know it's illegal for them to do that, but I don't trust them as far as I can spit.

It continues to amaze me about the pre-qualification 'problems' and private health care insurance companies in the U.S.

But another whole topic in itself which doesn't address itself's friend's dilemma.

[OakLeaf]

I know my thoughts on the subject are unpopular.

But I've had the chance to get friendly with my mortality, and I've come to a place of believing that that is a good thing.

I think we should all make these decisions from a place of strength and not a place of fear. That is, as my sig line a few weeks ago said, "ask the next question." Decide what you will choose at each step BEFORE you decide to have any tests. If this is positive, then what? If I choose this treatment, then what? After the treatment is "complete," then what? This doesn't only go for cancer testing of course, but because that is such a huge fear-driven business in the USA, it's one of the kinds of testing that we think about most often, and when a test comes up positive or equivocal, it's so easy to let abject terror and the directions of outsiders drive our decision-making.

Understand at each step what quality of life you would be giving up (including the emotional quality of life). Study the statistics and understand what your real chances are of a greater quantity of life. When you're healthy and before you have any tests of any kind, make a decision as to what quality of life is acceptable to you and what you're willing to give up for the chance of a longer lifetime. Enshrine these decisions in your Living Will, and in specific, preferably videotaped discussions with your doctor and your family.

[KnottedYet]

When you're healthy and before you have any tests of any kind, make a decision as to what quality of life is acceptable to you and what you're willing to give up for the chance of a longer lifetime.

And decide if your goal is less suffering, or a longer life. Sometimes the two are not the same, and it's important to be clear in your directives.

[Trek420]

Paternal side: Dad & Grandfather died of cancer, Grandmother survived breast cancer and lived to be a very active 100 , an aunt survived skin cancer.

Maternal side lost an aunt to lung cancer.

Both aunts were possibly enviornmental causes but who knows.

No smokers by the way.

I've had my own scare with skin cancer. A check up and biopsy revealed some moles to be pre-cancerous.

I don't have information on my family further back than grandparents. But the pattern seems to be there and maybe close family is all I need to sense there may be a pattern.

I second concerns about insurance companies and even employers establishing a track record of a pre existing condition. I think it's crazy that we can't take every effort to be informed and take control of our health without concern.

I get my breasts smooshed every year, this reminds me I need to get a pap smear and most important find a new skin doc. The one I go to has to be prodded and nagged to really look at all the skin.

Dude, you're a dermatologist, this is why you went into the specialty!

After my first check up I took to riding my bike to appointments so I'd be wearing shorts, he'd have to check the legs. I need to get to Seattle and Knotts doc who checks everywhere.

[Grog]

I am sorry to hear about your friend, itself.

A few years ago, there was quite a bit of discussion on prophylactic mastectomy, i.e. prevention measures against breast cancer. At that time, what I gathered (but I wasn't paying extreme attention) was that the benefits of such preemptive measures were not all that obvious, and that it was still possible to get breast cancer despite having had one's breasts removed.

Now, the treatment might have evolved in the meantime, I don't know.

In any case, I would never get genetic testing myself, for any disease that I can think of.

But, seeing it from a distance, I also see the gene testing like an industry, a fear-driven industry, so I am naturally suspicious...