CFR's Jolie has both breast removed without yet having cancer. Didn't anyone slip her the memo?

reply to post by EllaMarina


EllaMarina, Exactly right! The breast tissue extends under the arm pits and neighboring areas of flesh and having both breasts removed does not guarantee that Cancer will not occur, unfortunately.

I have always liked and admired Angelina and I feel like she is a very strong woman and I can understand her motivation. Her mother had breast cancer as well as ovarian cancer and she will be having her ovaries removed also, I have read. I wish her all the best as she is a lovely person and seems to really love her kids and wants to be there for them for a very long time and I can find no fault in that. I just hope these types of procedures really do deliver all that is promised. Again, the breast tissue extends much further than the obvious areas we think of.

I am rooting for her and hoping she lives to be 100. As far as her and Brads private life elsewise, marriages/divorces and such, is their own business. I just worry that this isn't one of those over rated things that really doesn't tell the whole story and that higher risk still exits relevant to the under arm breast tissue and such...that ladies are not being misled or too much optimism isn't being employed. Heaven forbid! I hope that any woman that gets this radical procedure done will live to be a ripe old age! Will see.

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


So now she has fake boobs like the rest of Hollywood. So she really didn't lose anything. But on a bad note, inplants can hide a new cancer.

Plus the DNA testing labs for true diagnostic genetic testing are quite a bit different than those sites you mentioned.

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
Then it all became clear: Perhaps shes the poster-child of DNA testing / banking. 23andMe, the DNA databank social networking company, founded by Sergei Brins (Google cofounder) wife, came to mind...

It's all just another way of saying "come and give us your DNA and we can save you".

Jolie, 37, wrote in The New York Times that she decided to have the operation after learning that she had a "faulty" gene, BRCA1, which "sharply increases my risk of developing breast cancer and ovarian cancer".

Jolie to have ovaries removed

So what else was the MSM telling us that same day?

A Gold Coast woman who delayed getting preventative surgery despite testing positive for a high-risk gene disorder similar to Angelina Jolie's is now suffering from terminal ovarian cancer.

news.ninemsn.com.au...

TPTB are simply trying to scare people into giving them their DNA.

Originally posted by elouina
So now she has fake boobs like the rest of Hollywood.

Not exactly a negative thing for her acting career, is it?

reply to post by shrevegal


Of course people go crazy when its a celebrity and all sorts of mistruths and nonesense comes out. Same old.

Why do people go nuts for celebrity?

I think that its all their personal business not other peoples and frankly folk should leave them alone.

Of course if people respond to it then she is going to " milk" it .

This thread is about www.abovetopsecret.com... normal people! Not that they matter aye ..but anyways it goes into more details about the illness so normal females can prepare.

Originally posted by Alchemst7
Just to show how unusal of a publicity this is, I had my genetic testing done 8 years ago and had inherited from both parents the genes for colon cancer. I think I will have my colon removed to prevent me from developing colon cancer.

As defensive everyone is of Angelina to go public with this, I feel there is a hidden motive, promoting a new trend in preventing breast cancer. Let just get rid of our breasts?

Indeed, follow the money, first. The government, of cause will have to pay for it.

Apart from obvious, more nefarious reasons for this genetic testing, at the end of the day it is all about money and control. Too much money is spent on 'detection' rather than preventation.

On a more personal note; it disturbs me that someone is prepared to have a part of their body removed to reduce the "possiblity' of contracting something.

There are no guarentees in life, apart from death and taxes.

Why is there so much focus on womens' breasts and ovaries? These are what make us different from men. Are we going to see an androgynous future? Maybe there is a link to transhumanism.

Originally posted by Carreau
reply to post by ShadellacZumbrum

 

Her Dr. told her she had a 87% chance of getting cancer.

What an odd and prcise number..would really like to know how this number is calculated. It almost seems as if there is no chance involved but that Jolie has a certain 13% chance to survive.

reply to post by zatara


That number comes from years of research on the small portion of women that have this particular genetic marker. Of those women, 87% have gotten ovarian or breast cancer, or both.

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Or, and this is just me being crazy, there is no massive conspiracy, and she just made a logical decision based on the mathematical probability of her developing breast cancer and the chances of her surviving it...

I know, it's crazy talk, basing things on facts and mathematical probability!

Get over it, she's the master of her own body. This makes more sense than circumcision, and yet no one in the USA seems to think the genital mutilation of boys without their consent is anything unusual

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
TPTB are simply trying to scare people into giving them their DNA.

Do you even understand DNA, and how stupidly simple it is to get it? They could have 90% of all American's DNA on record after a year or two just by employing doctors to gather it, why would they NEED to go to all this trouble?

This place makes less and less sense every day.

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
TPTB are simply trying to scare people into giving them their DNA.

Do you even understand DNA, and how stupidly simple it is to get it? They could have 90% of all American's DNA on record after a year or two just by employing doctors to gather it, why would they NEED to go to all this trouble?

This place makes less and less sense every day.

Yes, but would people willingly give their DNA to the national health system? Or would they need to be scared into it? Or would it need to be for their own good or for their future and their offsprings future?

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
TPTB are simply trying to scare people into giving them their DNA.

Do you even understand DNA, and how stupidly simple it is to get it? They could have 90% of all American's DNA on record after a year or two just by employing doctors to gather it, why would they NEED to go to all this trouble?

This place makes less and less sense every day.

I tried to explain this already. Go to the doctor, the bank, school, a welfare office, a government job...any of a BUNCH of places and "they" have every chance in the world to get your dna.

This would seem to be a very inefficient way to go about this, especially when it is voluntary. if "they" really wanted all of our dna, they wouldnt ask. Theyd simply collect.

Originally posted by deessell

Originally posted by Rocker2013

Originally posted by NuclearPaul
TPTB are simply trying to scare people into giving them their DNA.

Do you even understand DNA, and how stupidly simple it is to get it? They could have 90% of all American's DNA on record after a year or two just by employing doctors to gather it, why would they NEED to go to all this trouble?

This place makes less and less sense every day.

Yes, but would people willingly give their DNA to the national health system? Or would they need to be scared into it? Or would it need to be for their own good or for their future and their offsprings future?

Even if we assume that it would need to be done against your will, every time you go to the doctor or the dentist you are potentially leaving a sample of your DNA. It wouldn't need to be voluntary, a swab in the mouth, the tongue depressor, a suction by the dental nurse (ooh err! lol) and your DNA is on file.

Why would they need to tell you about it? You people think there is some evil and despicable giant secret club and yet you think they would ask politely if you would "just step this way..."?

My, these imaginary evil villains sure are polite!

Originally posted by caladonea

Originally posted by Carreau
If I'm not mistaken, her mother died of breast cancer and she is doing this as a preventive measure.

She took the cancer gene test and it came back that she has an 87% chance of getting breast cancer during her lifetime. She elected to have her breasts removed has a preventive measure; and also she had breast reconstruction. From what I understand she did this to prolong her life and be here for her children.

And quite naturally, if she was just any old person, such a decision would potentially save her insurance company a fortune in expensive cancer treatments.

I wonder of what benefit it could be (and who it would benefit most) to advertise to the masses that they should proactively chop their body parts off if it is determined they have a higher than usual risk of cancer?

Well, of course it does benefit you if you take the test and you don't want cancer and you're willing to do it. But think about where this could go (because you always have to do that when you're dealing with these people). The key here is influence. Celebrities are influential. They can sway many millions of people with a 15 minute speech. Everything they do is useful for propaganda.

Could it just be that they are easing into suggesting that everyone should get a bunch of DNA tests and that if they have ANY potential problems that can be detected, whatever "solutions" are recommended, should be mandatory? If that sounds silly, think about mandatory health insurance and the recent attempt at a soda ban in NY.

I have learned not to take these things at face value. I think something stinks here. Watch and see if they don't continue to use celebrities for medical propaganda. Maybe the medical issues these people have are real (I have no idea) but it isn't very hard to take a large pool of people and find someone with a medical problem if you know what you're looking for. If that person is famous and known to many millions of people, you could then use them, their lives, their circumstances for whatever purposes you choose. You only need to have a creative writing staff and a way to publish it.

Originally posted by BrianFlanders
And quite naturally, if she was just any old person, such a decision would potentially save her insurance company a fortune in expensive cancer treatments.

The "fortune in expensive cancer treatments" eventually ends up in someone's wallet.

Same medical mob that own the health insurance companies?