breast cancer pictures

A friend of mine (a young friend - she’s in her early 20s) was diagnosed a couple of months ago with a form of sarcoma. When she was diagnosed, the cancer had already reached stage 4; her survival chances are low, and she’s already gone through several dangerous complications which, even if she survives them, will leave her permanently crippled.

Incidentally, she recognized the symptoms of this cancer nearly a year before she was diagnosed (she didn’t recognize it as cancer, but had been in and out of doctor’s offices for a year before one finally recognized it as sarcoma - and she’s not the type to complain idly) - most of her previous doctors assumed it was some kind of back problem, and she had been sent to chiropractors a couple of times. It was finally recognized as cancer when it started to migrate near her breasts, where abnormal tissues started to serve as warning flags for doctors.

Another family friend died a few years ago of lung cancer; it was also stage 4 when diagnosed. Incidentally, she was given extremely high survival rates when it was first diagnosed as breast cancer; these rates plummeted when her doctors realized that the mass was sitting a little further back than they first found.

It seems that the medical community files cancer into about four categories: breast cancer, prostate cancer, “the patient’s own fault” cancers (e.g. lung cancer and liver cancer, which are assumed to be caused by smoking or drinking, even if they aren’t), and “other” cancers (which, not being as politically popular as breast cancer or prostate cancer, draw very little funding and attention from medical specialists). If you’re unfortunate enough to have a type that’s not breast or prostate cancer, your doctors either actively think you deserve to die, or they’re just completely in the dark about diagnosing and treating your cancer.

Has anyone else suffered losses from the politicization of cancer? Does it p*ss anyone else off that people with the wrong kind of cancer tend to have dismal chances of being diagnosed or treated properly, because cancer has become politicized so all the resources go to the types that can be used to help our little “boys vs. girls” fights?

Seeing as my evidence of temporal causal relation of breast cancer by an increase since feminisms inception, and a spatial causal relation of focus on a career instead of having children before 30 which feminism promotes..

Thus meaning feminism causes breast cancer.

Could not be logically refuted on here, I thought I’d add this:

HOUSEWORK CUTS BREAST CANCER RISK
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2522050,00.html
[ Hot picture in the top one. ]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/6214655.stm
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/12/29/nhsewk29.xml

Basically feminists are suicidal, is that it? Are you all just lemmings trying to run off that cliff thinking the open space is freedom?

I must ask then, if asked to underwrite such irresponsible behaviour:

Does one care more about a rodent’s butt or a lemming’s breasts?
Rebel F:

1. Breast cancer risk is increased by no children before 30 & no housework.
2. Feminism promotes no children before 30 & no housework.
3. Feminism causes breast cancer.

It’s a completely logical syllogism. The only way it could be faulted is if I was saying there were no other causes, but I’m not. There are other causes, it’s just that feminism is behind a 50-81% rise.

And you’re not men’s equal if you do silly, suicidal things are you? You will be mocked. For good reason. At any rate no surprises here, but with a prevention program well at hand, feminists and the women who listen to them can pay for their own prevention programs and treatment.