Sonja remembers February 9, 2020 with Phil

Sonja wrote on Facebook today: I miss my Philly B with every beat of my heart-he was the best friend a girl, like me, could ever ask for. [She was going through treatment for breast cancer and he for brain cancer. Her close friend Annie had just died of kidney cancer. All were members of UALC.]
2 years ago, this day, as he was in the battle for his life against Glioblastoma, his concern was for me, and my shattered heart on losing Annie, that is how Phil was.

 
The following are our text messages from the 9 & 10th of February 2020 [not included here] …I still treasure them to this day. He also “demanded” we take a picture together, which we then laughed and laughed, as we came up with the name for us “The Egg Heads”.

 
I went down and spent the 9th with him and then again, the following day, before I had radiation, as the Glioblastoma was kicking his ass, we ran some errands together, then picked up a pizza, and had lunch together. As we sat across the table from each other, we had a conversation that no besties should ever have, one of dying, it is still too personal for me to share, but it guts me every time I think of it…lots of beautiful silences, lots of tears, and most of all lots of pure love, that only two true friends can have for each other.

 
Phil made everything ok for me, he was my rock, a source great wisdom for me, my sounding board, and also my source of great belly laughs, especially when he would call me after work, and we would watch “Emergency” together. He had the biggest heart in the world, and it was also an ornery heart, which is probably why we were besties-ha! Not a day goes by that I don’t think of him…

Valentines Day is always hard, because that became [our] day, not for the reasons you would think, but because it was the day that we reconnected, oh so many years ago, and he “introduced” me to his meaning of it (and no, I won’t share that either, but it is hilarious), so every Valentine’s Day after that, he would wish me a “Happy VD Day” (and again, not what you think).

 
Damn, I miss him, I miss Annie…I hate February, I just hate it, and I hate it more that these 2 important people to my heart, have now been gone for 2 years. F*ck Cancer, just f*ck it to Hell, where it belongs.

Pray for Sonja and Phil

Sonja is battling breast cancer; our son Phil is fighting a malignant brain tumor.  These "kids" grew up together, attended the same church, UALC, and Upper Arlington High School in the 80s and they are friends on Facebook, encouraging each other. Let's keep the prayers coming.

 

My friend Sonja and her cancer blog

She’s rounding the bend, can see the end of her chemo.  It’s been a tough battle. http://sonjaness.com/milestone-day-last-day-of-embracing-the-suck-of-ac-chemo/

Happy Birthday, Carol

Happy 82nd birthday to my sister Carol who died in 1996 at 58. We still miss you. Photo is 1989 with her daughter and son. Last year we got to meet her great granddaughter who visited us at Lakeside with her grandparents. What a treat. Carol was the only one of my family with any fashion flair, and loved beautiful clothes, bright colors, stylish purses, shoes and jewelry. As an enterprising teen, she sold Avon products, and was one of the "number please" voices back when our home phone was 59-L. Although her primary career was in nursing with a degree from Goshen College, she did own a dress shop in Bradenton, FL, for large size women.
 
Never a snowflake, after high school graduation in 1955 Carol went into Brethren Volunteer Service and did incredible tasks for one so young, like doing church plant surveys in Denver, helping with clean up after flooding in Pennsylvania, teaching Sunday School and leading worship in Kentucky where she road horseback to services because there were no passable roads, and being a "healthy volunteer patient" aka guinea pig at NIH in Maryland. I wonder if she is one of the results cited in this article.  https://clinicalcenter.nih.gov/about/news/newsletter/2007/oct07/newsletter.html  
She was a survivor of childhood bulbar polio in 1949 and struggled with many health issues, but cared for many as a home health nurse in her last years.

You have to ask for this; expect resistance.

I noted this study about women doing their own breast compression during mammograms in WebMD with no citation except to JAMA Internal Medicine. So I looked that up, "Self-compression Technique vs Standard Compression in Mammography A Randomized Clinical Trial," Philippe Henrot, MD1; Martine Boisserie-Lacroix, MD2; Véronique Boute, MD3; et al., a French study using 549 women.

The results of this study echo earlier research that found allowing women to control compression during a mammogram doesn’t reduce the quality of the image but does reduce the level of discomfort women report during the procedure.

In September 2017, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration gave clearance to a digital mammography system that allows women to increase or decrease the amount of compression applied to the breast before the mammogram starts.

But before I located it, I found a 1993 article published in Radiology, vol. 186, no. 1 with the same results, using 109 women. And it may have been referenced in the literature—I don’t have access to the full text.   Think of the pain women could have avoided for 25 years if someone had paid attention and followed through. "Impact of patient-controlled compression on the mammography experience." P J Kornguth, B K Rimer, M R Conaway, D C Sullivan, K E Catoe, A L Stout, J S Brackett

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamainternalmedicine/article-abstract/2723076

https://www.breastcancer.org/research-news/less-pain-when-women-control-mammo-compression

https://www.radiologybusiness.com/topics/quality/self-compression-mammography-image-quality-pain

Abortion’s link to breast cancer

Women should be told about the relationship between induced abortion and breast cancer. And so should researchers who look only at race, income and social safety net. In the 1950s black women and white women were married at about the same percentage, but that changed with the War on Poverty and drastically by the late 1990s. Until the late 1950s black women had lower breast cancer mortality rates than white--even with aggressive segregation, more poverty, poor housing, and limits to education. And guess what else changed? Higher abortion rates for black women than white when Uncle Sam became the sugar daddy.

https://rtl.org/educational-materials/abortion-breast-cancer-link/

https://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/65/wr/mm6540a1.htm

http://media.hoover.org/sites/default/files/documents/0817998721_95.pdf

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2568204/

https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2730628

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/why-do-more-black-women-get-breast-cancer-more-black-women-get-abortio

Mammography and social justice

Who am I to question how medical research money is spent, but when I see this, . . . "research grants for scholars from backgrounds that are historically disadvantaged or underrepresented in research disciplines," I know I don't care about the skin color or ethnicity of the nurse or med tech who could possibly save my life. Wouldn't that money be better spent on a new drug, cutting edge technology or a cure rather than on social goals? And the same for raising yet more money through runs and walks for education and screening. Mammography is detecting more cancers, but hasn't reduced mortality.

Metastatic breast cancer

I got a sad letter this week begging me to warn the women in my life about metastatic breast cancer. So here's her story for the women in my life.

She's a member of my church, but living out of state while she settles the estate of her deceased daughter--nothing a woman in her late 80s would expect to be doing. I remember about 5 years ago her daughter came to Columbus to help her mom recover from a stroke. My friend's daughter had had annual mammograms for years, and nothing was found--probably due to very dense breast tissue and the location under her arm. But she did have a lot of pain the last 5 years and was being treated for arthritis. By the time she was properly diagnosed the cancer had metastasized to both hips, her spine, liver and lymph system. This cancer is not curable, and no one dies from cancer that stays in the breast, but if she'd been properly diagnosed 5 years ago, she could possibly be alive. That's not a given, however. 

All women have been educated about detecting breast cancer and screening--in fact, the lion's share of that money you donate and raise in walks, runs, and selling pink stuff, goes for education and not research that could actually save your life. I've looked at several websites about this and personal stories, and this one is pretty clear. Read the comments. 

False positive mammograms

Women with positive mammography screens ultimately judged to be false were still at significantly increased likelihood for developing invasive breast cancer within the next 10 years, a study involving 1.3 million women showed.

So what is happening? Lots of things. Read this:

http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/BreastCancer/54978?

Mammograms—do they help, hurt or save?

You may wish to download this booklet on screening for breast cancer.

"When we first published this leaflet in 2008, the Summary was:

"It may be reasonable to attend for breast cancer screening with mammography, but it may also be reasonable not to attend, as screening has both benefits and harms.

If 2000 women are screened regularly for 10 years, one will benefit from the screening, as she will avoid dying from breast cancer.

At the same time, 10 healthy women will, as a consequence, become cancer patients and will be treated unnecessarily. These women will have either a part of their breast or the whole breast removed, and they will often receive radiotherapy, and sometimes chemotherapy.

Furthermore, about 200 healthy women will experience a false alarm. The psychological strain until one knows whether or not it was cancer, and even afterwards, can be severe."

These numbers were derived from the randomised trials of mammography screening. However, since the trials were performed, treatment of breast cancer has improved considerably. More recent studies suggest that mammography screening may no longer be effective in reducing the risk of dying from breast cancer."

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/21/insider/aggressive-treatment-for-early-breast-cancer-reporters-notebook.html?_r=0

If you read the NYT article, be sure to read the comments.

Abortion—the real war against women

A new study again confirms the link between abortions and breast cancer, and also the link to delaying first pregnancy. “Any birth was protective (adjusted OR = 0.36, 95% CI 0.20–0.66). Each year delay in first pregnancy increased risk (adjusted OR = 1.13, 95% CI 1.01–1.27) as did induced abortions (adjusted OR = 2.86, 95% CI 1.02–8.04).” “Fifty-four of 67 epidemiological studies since 1957 report an abortion-breast cancer link (not counting biological and experimental evidence).” http://www.lifenews.com/2011/11/28/abortion-nearly-triples-breast-cancer-risk-new-study-finds/

Add to that the toxic nature of birth control pills, and Plan B being made available without prescription for young teens and you can see where the war against women really comes from.

If they won’t tell you the risks, I will

The National Cancer Institute, the American Cancer Society, the Susan G. Komen for the Cure, and other cancer non-profit/research organizations won't tell the public about the high risks to women for breast cancer, hormonal changes that affect their immune system and sex drive, and suicide caused by abortion and contraception. They won't tell the public about the risk for premature babies with altered health outcomes.

But I will.

Hormonal contraceptives affect women’s preferences in men and their children’s immune system. http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/275/1652/2715.full

Early, pre-term babies http://www.jogc.com/abstracts/full/201302_Obstetrics_5.pdf

Increased health risks for  babies

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22933527

Triple negative breast cancer risk

http://authors.fhcrc.org/236/1/MaloneKCEBP030909.pdf

The Democrat policy of pushing contraception and abortion even on very young girls is not only a war on the unborn, particularly African Americans, it is also a war on women's health.

Follow the money

The trial of Kermit Gosnell, the ghoulish late term abortionist of Philadelphia,  must have the pro-abortion folks worried. Even though the main stream media didn’t cover it, the news is getting around through social media.  As in photos of babies’ feet in jars, and of spinal cords snipped.  For the first time I can remember, I'm hearing radio ads on behalf of Planned Parenthood. The word abortion is never used; nor birth control; or even reproduction. Just access to health. Breast cancer is higher in women who abort their first pregnancy; suicide rate is higher for women who abort. Whose health? Planned Parenthood’s. Follow the money. Abortion is its money-maker. And minorities its target.

Planned Parenthood has ridden the waves of taxpayer funding to millions of dollars in annual surpluses. Last year [2012], like many before it, Planned Parenthood saw a very comfortable income, reporting excess revenues exceeding $87 million and net assets of more than $1.2 billion. The Foundry

The War Against Women—more breast cancer

Kill the babies; then make the women vulnerable to breast cancer and suicide.  Good plan, Democrats.

I was reading an article in JAMA (Feb. 27, 2013) about the increase in aggressive breast cancer among young women (15-29). Why the increase? Well, about the only suggestion offered was better imaging technology. No mention of oral contraceptives and abortions, which many studies have shown to create a problem for young women. Oral contraceptives are a class-1 carcinogen. Pregnancy and nursing protects breast tissue. Abortion increases breast cancer risk as reported in numerous studies. But then that would be both political and religious, wouldn't it, if the premier medical journal of an organization that has backed Obama 100% actually reported this?

Didn't AMA cover up tobacco risks and the Tuskegee syphilis study scandal? Isn't the journal packed with ads from pharmaceutical companies? The abortion that hurts the health of women the most is a first pregnancy abortion. I wonder if they are told that at abortion clinics? Clinics that are supported by the same government handing out oral contraceptives like they were lemon drops.

Obama’s real record on women

WomensHealth.gov is run by the Office on Women’s Health in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. There’s also GirlsHealth.gov, which covers issues on relationships, bullying and more. I haven't checked this, but based on how Obama is encouraging women not to procreate as a "health" issue, I wonder if these sites cover the substantial research on links between breast cancer and birth control pills, and higher suicide rates for women who have had abortions to say nothing of the STDs a promiscuous life style brings them. Aren't breast cancer and suicide health issues for women? Why fuss over hormones in meat or smoke in the lungs if you don't tell them about the hormones they are adding to their own systems?

In a 1999 legislative vote, then-Illinois State Senator Barack Obama was the sole state senator to not vote for for a bill that would protect sexual assault victims from having the details of their cases revealed publicly.

Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2012/10/25/flashback-obama-broke-with-colleagues-voted-against-protecting-rape-victims-in-99-state-senate-vote/#ixzz2AP6WnTN2

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2352979/pdf/bmj00571-0021.pdf

http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/surgeon-birth-control-pill-a-molotov-cocktail-for-breast-cancer/

Obama likes to have personal things made public, but only when it's other people's lives. He got into office by having his opponent's divorce unsealed--sound familiar, Gloria?

http://www.bostonherald.com/news/columnists/view/20221026globes_gloria_link_a_new_low/

Americans stalking health

Today Americans will stalk the aisles of a natural foods store for the freshest and least contaminated produce, they will worry about power lines and microwave ovens, but will pour strange
chemicals and hormones into their own or their daughters' bodies in the name of either destroying an embryo before it implants or blocking the natural path of an egg.

As a former academic medical librarian well acquainted with the research and publication route of scientific literature, I can assure you NO ONE will ever receive a federal grant to investigate the increase in obesity, autism, allergies, depression, thyroid cancer and early stroke and heart attack in women since the 1960s rush to birth control pills--and if it has been investigated through non-governmental funding, it will never make it into peer-reviewed journals. The "reproductive health" industry is far more powerful and well funded than the tobacco lobby. And it has killed far more people--over 52 million. 

If nothing else, researchers should at least be looking at our water supply with 41 million women taking extra hormones and chemicals that when they are excreted from the body, are flushed into our water supplies where they can’t be filtered out.

The increase in breast cancer caused by abortion and
contraception, however, is not denied, and the increase in abortions caused by the increased availability (vending machines, drug stores, Wal-Mart, etc.) of contraceptive hormones, chemicals and tools to insert in the body cavity or apply to the skin was again confirmed in 2011 in the journal Contraception.

Please watch this video--even if you don't buy the book,
you'll learn a lot. Librarians are 223:1 liberal to conservative, so I'm quite sure you won't find it in a public library.
http://www.ignatius.com/Products/AEAP-H/adam-and-eve-after-the-pill.aspx

Where is the real War on Women?

A recent study shows an increase in breast cancer with injectable and oral contraceptives and a decrease in others--but then, many studies have shown that. What surprises me is that the anti-life "reproductive health" industry (abortion/contraception) which is huge and probably more powerful than the tobacco industry even lets this stuff get in print. The link between abortion and breast cancer no one denies because it's so strong. Scroll down to see how I've been looking at the published warnings included with contraceptive chemicals and tools (which many women never read). It's enough to turn my gray hair brown again. Do you really want your teenage daughter or granddaughter starting this stuff, or having it available as over the counter medications with no input from doctor or parents?

Injectable and Oral Contraceptive Use and Cancers of the Breast, Cervix, Ovary, and Endometrium in Black South African Women: Case–Control Study
World Health Organization Data on Birth Control Pill and Estrogen Replacement Carcinogenicity
If you have a young woman in your life, and especially if you have breast cancer in your family or she has other risk factors like weight or smoking, please get this book into her hands. If you are her mom, she probably won't listen. But then, you should read it, or give it to her grandmother. They sometimes have avenues that moms don't.

Breast Cancer and Planned Parenthood goons

Breast cancer isn’t the biggest killer of women—I think heart disease is. But the point about what has been happening between Susan G. Komen and Planned Parenthood is politics, how women (and some men) are manipulated by the media in cahoots with big pharma and the government, and if you wish to broaden the range of the net, how powerful non-profits like Komen and Planned Parenthood have become.

I believe someday in the future, citizens and historians alike will be scratching their heads wondering why people of the late 20th century couldn’t figure out that if women began taking powerful hormones as teen-agers (sex education in schools and hormones for 12 year olds) it just might have an affect not only on their children, but their grandchildren and great grands through the cellular level. They might even by then decide there’s a connection to autism spectrum, allergies, hyperactivity, etc. and all those conditions we never saw in our classmates when I was growing up. Health officials of 20-50 years from now will be as puzzled as we are now when we wonder how the industrialists and farmers couldn’t know that the filth, manure and chemicals they poured into the water would be affecting people down stream because waterways are a living organism.

If poverty researchers and social workers of the future are smarter than the ones of today, they might even look at the soaring statistics for out of wedlock babies which parallels the increased use of contraceptives by unmarried teenagers and its relationship to poverty and low income. Although that’s almost too much to hope for.

The breast cancer industry, like the poverty industry, has some big players. And don't you forget it if you value your knee caps.

Komen for the Cure Donated $7.5M to Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz in 2009

"The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Foundation has long denied that abortion plays any role in elevating the risk for women of contracting the deadly disease.

That's despite a wealth of research over decades showing an average increased risk of about 40 percent for women having abortions compared to those who carry their pregnancy to term.

But the contributions Komen affiliates make to Planned Parenthood, which does more than 25 percent of all abortions in the United States and aggressively promotes abortion abroad, provide another sources of frustration for pro-life people who otherwise would support the group."

The excuse that this money goes to poor women without insurance for mammograms is pretty lame. That just means it frees up more of PP other money for abortions!



Komen for the Cure Donated $7.5M to Planned Parenthood Abortion Biz in 2009

To support breast cancer research--the pink glove dance

This is a great video. St. Vincent Medical Center in Providence. Love the final shot with the janitor.



When you donate for any disease cause, just be sure it really is for research and that the sponsoring agent isn't taking a huge cut. Education and information is nice, it's important, but it doesn't cure anyone.