Medical Choice' written by Angelina
MY MOTHER fought cancer for almost a decade and died
at 56. She held out long enough to meet the first of
her grandchildren and to hold them in her arms. But
my other children will never have the chance to know
her and experience how loving and gracious she was.
We often speak of “Mommy’s mommy,” and I find myself
trying to explain the illness that took her away
from us. They have asked if the same could happen to
me. I have always told them not to worry, but the
truth is I carry a “faulty” gene, BRCA1,
which sharply increases my risk of developing breast
cancer and ovarian cancer.
My doctors estimated that I had an 87 percent risk
of breast cancer and a 50 percent risk of ovarian
cancer, although the risk is different in the case
of each woman.
Only a fraction of breast
cancers result from an inherited gene mutation.
Those with a defect in BRCA1 have a 65 percent risk
of getting it, on average. Once I knew that this was
my reality, I decided to be proactive and to
minimize the risk as much I could. I made a decision
to have a preventive double mastectomy. I started
with the breasts, as my risk of breast cancer is
higher than my risk of ovarian cancer, and the
surgery is more complex.
On April 27, I finished the three months of medical
procedures that the mastectomies involved. During
that time I have been able to keep this private and
to carry on with my work. But I am writing about it
now because I hope that other women can benefit from
my experience. Cancer is still a word that strikes
fear into people’s hearts, producing a deep sense of
powerlessness. But today it is possible to find out
through a blood test whether you are highly
susceptible to breast and ovarian cancer, and then
My own process began on Feb. 2 with a procedure
known as a “nipple delay,” which rules out disease
in the breast ducts behind the nipple and draws
extra blood flow to the area. This causes some pain
and a lot of bruising, but it increases the chance
of saving the nipple.
Two weeks later I had the major surgery, where the
breast tissue is removed and temporary fillers are
put in place. The operation can take eight hours.
You wake up with drain tubes and expanders in your
breasts. It does feel like a scene out of a
science-fiction film. But days after surgery you can
be back to a normal life.
Nine weeks later, the final surgery is completed
with the reconstruction of the breasts with an
implant. There have been many advances in this
procedure in the last few years, and the results can
I wanted to write this to tell other women that the
decision to have a mastectomy was not easy. But it
is one I am very happy that I made. My chances of
developing breast cancer have dropped from 87
percent to under 5 percent. I can tell my
children that they don’t need to fear they will lose
me to breast cancer.
It is reassuring that they see nothing that makes
them uncomfortable. They can see my small scars and
that’s it. Everything else is just Mommy, the same
as she always was. And they know that I love them
and will do anything to be with them as long as I
can. On a personal note, I do not feel any less of a
woman. I feel empowered that I made a strong choice
that in no way diminishes my femininity.
I am fortunate to have a partner, Brad Pitt, who is
so loving and supportive. So to anyone who has a
wife or girlfriend going through this, know that you
are a very important part of the transition. Brad
was at the Pink Lotus Breast Center, where I was
treated, for every minute of the surgeries. We
managed to find moments to laugh together. We knew
this was the right thing to do for our family and
that it would bring us closer. And it has.
For any woman reading this, I hope it helps you to
know you have options. I want to encourage every
woman, especially if you have a family history of
breast or ovarian cancer, to seek out the
information and medical experts who can help you
through this aspect of your life, and to make your
own informed choices.
I acknowledge that there are many wonderful holistic
doctors working on alternatives to surgery. My own
regimen will be posted in due course on the Web site
of the Pink Lotus Breast Center. I hope that this
will be helpful to other women.
Breast cancer alone kills some 458,000 people each
year, according to the World Health Organization,
mainly in low- and middle-income countries. It has
got to be a priority to ensure that more women can
access gene testing and lifesaving preventive
treatment, whatever their means and background,
wherever they live. The cost of testing for BRCA1
and BRCA2, at more than $3,000 in the United States,
remains an obstacle for many women.
I choose not to keep my story private because there
are many women who do not know that they might be
living under the shadow of cancer. It is my hope
that they, too, will be able to get gene tested, and
that if they have a high risk they, too, will know
that they have strong options.
Life comes with many challenges. The ones that
should not scare us are the ones we can take on and
take control of.
Angelina Jolie is an actress and director.
- the Reality of Her Choice:
Promoting fear of breast cancer and offering a
'brave' choice to cut off healthy breasts, is an
unnecessary choice for the majority of women, which
serves only to benefit certain corporate profits and
patent monopoly, to the tune of trillions of dollars
- Myriad Genetics to be specific, based in Salt Lake
claims her doctor told her she has an "87% risk" of
developing breast cancer. But what she didn't tell
you is that this number doesn't apply to the entire
population: it's actually old data derived
almost exclusively from families that were
previously documented to have very high risks of
breast cancer to begin with. In a large room of 600
women, only ONE will likely have a BRCA mutation in
her genetic code. The actual incidence is 0.125 to
0.25 out of 100 women, or 1 in 400 to 1 in 800." -
Mike Adams, Naturalnews.com
Cancer tumors are
SYMPTOMS and not the CAUSE of cancer.
The cancer industry does not care. They want you to
spend 3-4 thousand dollars for a BRCA 1 test. If the
test is positive, they want you to have a "heroic"
double mastectomy, just like sex symbol Angelina
Jolie, afterall, if she can do it, so can you.
The cancer industry wants you to have a mammogram
every year, which emits ionizing radiation directly
into the breast and heart tissues, CAUSING cancer.
If you develop tumors, they want you to have chemo
and radiation, which causes cancer to proliferate as
well as further destroy the immune system, fog the
mind, and cause permanent damage to body organs.
THEY DO NOT WANT YOU TO BE HEALTHY AND CANCER FREE.
THEY REFUSE TO FIND AND ADDRESS THE CAUSE. THEY
REFUSE TO OFFER PREVENTION OPTIONS. THEY
REFUSE TO OFFER NATURAL CANCER CURES. THEY REFUSE TO
ADDRESS DIET. PROFIT FROM DISEASE IS THE ONLY THING
THAT MATTERS. YOU ARE A CUSTOMER,
TAKE A NUMBER.
QUESTION: If a man has an alleged high risk
factor for prostate cancer, or contracts prostate
cancer, does this mean he needs to cut off his
Do you have a risk of kidney cancer? Remove your
kidneys. A risk of colon cancer? Remove your colon.
Lung cancer maybe? Remove your lungs. How about
brain cancer? Remove your brain ... just in
If you allow fear to control you, the corrupt
medical and pharmaceutical corporations will get
exactly what they want.
At the end of the day, the choice is
yours. EDUCATE YOURSELF AND WAKE UP!
could be first to drop mammography - June
Is it the beginning of the end for mammography, the
screening technology for breast cancer? The Swiss
could be the first to drop it after independent
research revealed that the risks outweighed any
benefits - and that earlier research, which had
provided the evidence to launch national screening
programs in most Western nations, had been
Researchers from the Swiss Medical Board, an
independent health research group, first reported on
mammography’s shortcomings last February, and one
Swiss canton, Uri, is now reconsidering a move to
introduce it for routine screening.
Others may follow, and two of the board’s
researchers have spoken out this week because they
say it is ethical to do so. “It is easy to promote
mammography screening if the majority of women
believe that it prevents or reduces the risk of
getting breast cancer and saves many lives through
early detection of aggressive tumours. We would be
in favour of mammography screening if these beliefs
were valid. Unfortunately, they are not, and we
believe that women need to be told so. From an
ethical perspective, a public health program that
does not clearly produce more benefits than harms is
hard to justify. Providing clear, unbiased
information, promoting appropriate care and
preventing over-diagnosis and over-treatment would
be a better choice,” say Nikola Biller-Andorno and
Peter Juni this week.
In their earlier report, the researchers discovered
that nearly 22% of ‘cancers’ that mammography was
detecting were false (false-positives). Despite the false reading, many
of the women went through arduous cancer
treatment, including chemotherapy and even
mastectomies, or breast removal.
Early research, including a 50-year-old paper,
suggested that screening would save 80 lives per
1,000 women screened. However, the Swiss research
found that just one life would be saved by
Source: New England Journal of Medicine, 2014;
doi: 10.1056/NEJMp1401875) and wddty.com
NOTE: There is an alternative option to
mammograms, it's called Thermography -
radiation free, safer and more accurate
Checklist for cancer patients - Alternative and