Re: Inflammatory Breast Cancer

lucretia borgia wrote:
On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 21:31:26 -0500, flitterbit <fricafrac@xxxxxxxxx>
opined:
No you didn't, nor did I say that you did. My objection was that you posted in a way that suggested that posting about inflammatory breast cancer at all was effectively an effort at scare-mongering.

I was not suggesting TM was making an effort at scare-mongering, but
the post generates fear in many people, probably needlessly.
>
I took issue with your pouncing on someone's kindness and effectively
accusing them of scare-mongering, and then suggesting that women who
didn't know about this form of cancer were somehow lacking. No, you
didn't use those exact words, but what you did write implied as much, at least to my eyes.

Now we come to the crux of the matter - 'to your eyes' - many who know
me here from over the years know exactly how I write and what I mean.

I've been reading this group, albeit not actively participating, for a little over 7 years, but I don't read everything posted every day. I have seen a lot of conflict here from time to time, and perhaps let that colour my perceptions; I really don't know. However, "to my eyes" is the only way I *can* perceive what's posted.

Easy to tell you have lived here all your life !

You had no idea where I lived until I told you, yet now you can tell I haven't lived anywhere else but Canada? Okay.

Yes because if you lived in many really poor countries, you would know
our medical situation is vastly different to much of the world.

Okay, I understand now, and see your point.
>
Did I say you should not ? Did I say you should not have another
POV?

No you didn't, nor did I say that you did. This whole thing started because you effectively accused the OP of scare-mongering, when all they were trying to do was inform. The fact that a number of people in this group gained information they previously lacked seems to have been beside the point from your perspective.

That is your opinion, versus my opinion. I did not accuse TM of
scare-mongering but did suggest people not get alarmed since this
cancer was very rare. Did you know there are people who read stuff on
the net and then spend days worrying about it ?

Yes, I know people do this.

I wrote, "BTW, I've also been told by a doctor that "breast cancer doesn't cause pain"

To which you responded,

"Neither does ovarian cancer, nor I believe cervical (judging by a
friend who had it) but usually it is the owner of the breast that
finds the lump."

Now I don't have the right to comment either ??

That's not what I meant at all, I was simply trying to provide the
context in which your statement was made.

"Surely any woman worth her salt today is up on these matters ? For
instance, no longer should one assume that because breast cancer is
not in your family, you are pretty much immune. It is hitting far
younger women than previously and very randomly. This might be
because in NA we are not tough like consumers in Europe who long ago
made soap companies remove an ingredient from laundry detergent that
is a known carcinogen. When the Pres of P & G was asked why they
didn't remove it here in NA as well, he really did not have an answer.
So there are many much more pressing matters one could calmly talk
about in relation to breast cancer."

So I gather you don't think that is true ?

Not at all, I think it's entirely likely that various environmental
toxins -- ingredients in consumer goods, etc. -- could be contributing to not only the apparent increase in disease occurrence, but also behind the apparent decrease in age of first occurrence; for instance, aren't girls generally reaching puberty earlier, and aren't estrogen analogues being blamed, at least in some cases? However, I don't have any solid information on any of that, so chose not to elaborate at the time.

I also think it's entirely possible that North American consumers aren't
as inclined to take manufacturers to task as are European consumers;
there doesn't appear to be the level of activism on this continent that
there is in Europe.

The discussion originally was about *inflammatory breast cancer*, which is, in your words, "very rare", but doesn't produce lumps, isn't revealed by mammogram, and primarily presents as pain in the breasts, at least in the early stages. The discussion was not about the form of breast cancer whose symptoms most women are trained from an early age to know about, ie, the kind that produces identifiable breast lumps.

Never mind; this is starting to feel like a Monty Python sketch. I
think it's best if I chalk it up to a misunderstanding resulting from a
lack of visual and aural cues and leave it at that, since we're simply going round and round. I apologize if I misconstrued your intent.

I don't think you need to apologise for your POV anymore than I for
mine, though I do feel you were taking my words and making them mean
something that I never intended.

I'm not apologizing for my point of view so much as for not spending enough time re-reading what you wrote and instead sending off a reply without first making entirely certain I understood what you meant, ie, I apologize for over-reacting to what you wrote and seeing insult where none was intended.
.

Relevant Pages