FDA approves first 3-D mammography device

Discussion in 'Up to the Minute' started by Dark Knight, Feb 14, 2011.

  1. Dark Knight

    Dark Knight New Member

    Messages:
    21,642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
  2. Loading...


  3. JBean

    JBean Retired WS Administrator

    Messages:
    52,752
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I wonder if necessary, do they offer a 3-DDD mammogram?

    hehe.

    Seriously, I think this is great. I have a GF with the marker and she keeps going back and forth trying to decide if she should be proactive and have her breasts removed before she gets cancer. I wonder if something like this could buy her some time by getting her a more accurate mammo every 6 mos?
     
  4. Kimberlyd125

    Kimberlyd125 Softball is for everyone. Fast pitch is for athlet

    Messages:
    16,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :woohoo:
    Great news. Early detection is the key. Looks like this will help that out.
     
  5. Dark Knight

    Dark Knight New Member

    Messages:
    21,642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If they do, I wanna administer them! :crazy:
     
  6. kgeaux

    kgeaux New Member

    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You are too funny, my friend! OF COURSE you'll volunteer, ALL MEN would stand in line, wouldn't they????

    I hate, hate, hate being a nay-sayer, but the article points out that there is only a 7% increase in the discovery of tumors using this technology---but 100% of the patients are hit with TWICE the radiation!

    Since radiation is a cause of some cancers, I'm not convinced that this new detection device is more helpful than it is harmful......
     
  7. Fairy1

    Fairy1 Divided We Fall

    Messages:
    9,883
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Just so ya know DK, in my experience, the standard mammogram hurts like a MOFO! I have held a very dim view of every technician that has administered mine over the years.

    Now, the anesthesiologists....LOVE, LOVE, LOVE them! They should be required for every mammo, IMO. And they should be Chippendale dudes on the side - just for good measure!

    IDK why they can't come up with a better, less painful way to detect breast cancer early on!!!
     
  8. T-Rex

    T-Rex New Member

    Messages:
    1,299
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm with you Kgeaux. Doctors themselves are coming out against full-body scans, saying they detect things that would never have become a problem, but, once detected, must be treated for liability's sake. I think all the ever-more-sensitive diagnostic tools like this fall somewhere on that same continuum. They may turn up more cancers, but will that translate to fewer deaths, or just more people treated?
     
  9. kgeaux

    kgeaux New Member

    Messages:
    7,598
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0

    You know what is interesting? If you have a mammogram---which I agree can be quite painful---and a problem is detected, you are called in for an ULTRA SOUND. The relatively painless ultrasound will then determine if the suspicious area is truly a tumor or not. The ultrasound test is considered to be definitive in both picking up problems and ruling out problems.

    Since learning this, my question has been, WHY don't we start off with the ultrasound? I believe a lot more women would be tested regularly if they could skip the pain! And how wonderful to know something is NOT a problem right away, instead of living in fear until you can get to the ultrasound! Plus you get to skip radiating part of your body!

    I've asked the mammogram techs this question, and they cite expense as the reason, but I don't buy that. It has to be more expensive to maintain TWO sets of equipment, plus double test every woman whose mammogram shows a problem area.

    I meant to ask my gynecologist but I cracked a joke early in the exam and we were laughing so much that the question about mammograms just flew right out of my mind!
     
  10. IWannaKnow

    IWannaKnow New Member

    Messages:
    1,725
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I couldn't agree more kgeaux! How many tumors are being caused by all this irradiating of breast tissue I wonder. I have had one mamo and I'm not having another unless it is proven I have a problem that needs that irradiation. Even then I think I will ask for the ultrasound instead.....
     
  11. drip~drop

    drip~drop kiss a fuzzie

    Messages:
    4,633
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    :floorlaugh:That just cracked me up. I can just have seen my daddy as a Chippendale dude!:floorlaugh::floorlaugh:
     
  12. Fairy1

    Fairy1 Divided We Fall

    Messages:
    9,883
    Likes Received:
    174
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I didn't mean all anesthesiologists should become Chippendale dancers, but I don't see why Chippendale dancers couldn't become anesthesiologists! It would certainly be a great distraction when you're getting a mammo! :crazy:

    On a much more serious note....my best friend died of breast cancer at the age of 37, and my mother-in-law at the age of 52. I'm a huge advocate of mammograms and early detection. That said, I do believe more women would have testing done if it wasn't so painful and if the readings were more accurate. I've had 2 scares following mammograms. First time they followed up with an ultrasound; second time, another mammogram. With the ultrasound, I thought, "Jeez, why don't they just do this in first place?!?" Second time, I really had to build up my courage to get another mammo.

    Just sayin - one of my best friends absolutely refuses to have a mammogram, and she is in her 50's. She will not do it.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice