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

cutting off perfectly good body parts is actually a recognized mental illness

Shes Wealthy, Famous, Attractive
and now she can add
Brave to her list.

reply to post by IgnoranceIsntBlisss


Personally, I think she simply is getting older, wanted a boob job, but then her publicist thought of a way for her to get one without getting negative press. Not really rocket science. I'm really surprised the MSM (and the public) are falling for it, but then again, I really shouldn't be.

I dunno why someone even created a thread about this millions of women are getting these everyday.

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

You are not mistaken.

Her Mother did die from breast cancer and she has the gene that causes her to be very high risk.

reply to post by Gazrok

Personally, I think she simply is getting older, wanted a boob job, but then her publicist thought of a way for her to get one without getting negative press. Not really rocket science. I'm really surprised the MSM (and the public) are falling for it, but then again, I really shouldn't be.

That post left a rather bad taste,

So she wanted a boob job and so to get it she lied about being at high risk of breast cancer (remember her mum had it) and having a double mastectomy just so she could get her boobs firmed up a bit?

That’s what your suggesting and I am sorry but is just ridiculous.

I cant believe on ATS we are bickering about a women’s plastic surgery like we are on a teenage girls web forum

But.

If she wanted to have her boobs done she would have done what all celebrities do, find a expensive and discrete plastic surgeon have the operation then lie about it to the press as soon as anyone asks about it.

Like I said in my first post on this thread, this should not be a thread bashing her for what she has done but admiring her for what she had done in rising awareness about a very serious issue.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

If she wanted to have her boobs done she would have done what all celebrities do, find a expensive and discrete plastic surgeon have the operation then lie about it to the press as soon as anyone asks about it.

Nobody gets away with lying about it anymore.

I'm not dissing her for it. I actually think it's a rather clever move. I'm simply not buying it. I think the reason for the drastic step is that she's using the cancer gene issue as justification for it (I don't think she is lying, just capitalizing on the fact). Her mother died in 2007 of ovarian cancer, so a good chance Angelina was well aware of whether or not she carried the BRCA1 gene back then. If for health reasons, why not do it 6 years ago?

Originally posted by Gazrok

I'm not dissing her for it. I actually think it's a rather clever move. I'm simply not buying it. I think the reason for the drastic step is that she's using the cancer gene issue as justification for it (I don't think she is lying, just capitalizing on the fact). Her mother died in 2007 of ovarian cancer, so a good chance Angelina was well aware of whether or not she carried the BRCA1 gene back then. If for health reasons, why not do it 6 years ago?

edit on 15-5-2013 by Gazrok because: (no reason given)

Ummm, because it's a very scary and difficult decision to make to have your breasts chopped off? I know if it were me, I would wait until the last possible moment to make this kind of decision. If you had to make the decision to have your testicles removed to avoid testicular cancer, wouldn't you put it off as long as you reasonably could?

Originally posted by MrWendal

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

You are not mistaken.

Her Mother did die from breast cancer and she has the gene that causes her to be very high risk.

Her mother died of ovarian cancer. Angelina had the genetic test and found she had the marker for a high risk of breast and ovarian cancer. I think she said she would have her ovaries removed, but wanted to wait a bit longer (presumably to have the option of popping out one more kid).

reply to post by Gazrok


Why not do it six years ago?

It’s a good question but unless I am living with Brad Pitt and been in a movie called wanted I really don’t think I am able to answer that question .

The idea that she would use breast cancer as a cover for a boob job I find unbelievable.

If you are of the opinion that she done just that then you are absolutely entitled to that opinion and to shout it from the roof tops

I just disagree entirely and think your views are cure and disrespectful to her.

reply to post by kaylaluv

If you had to make the decision to have your testicles removed to avoid testicular cancer, wouldn't you put it off as long as you reasonably could?

No. Not at all. Especially if it meant enhancing what is down there, if I wished it.
80 something percent chance of cancer? And I have millions of dollars? And I could make improvements? And I could get good press from it?

I'd have the best surgeons in the world on speed dial within the day.

reply to post by OtherSideOfTheCoin

I just disagree entirely and think your views are cure and disrespectful to her.

I certainly get that, but then again, she's done plenty in life to earn some disrespect. Of course, we've all made mistakes, but when given the genetic lotto at birth, we tend to feel such folks have a little less margin for error.

You are of course, equally entitled to your opinion.

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by kaylaluv

 

If you had to make the decision to have your testicles removed to avoid testicular cancer, wouldn't you put it off as long as you reasonably could?

No. Not at all. Especially if it meant enhancing what is down there, if I wished it.
80 something percent chance of cancer? And I have millions of dollars? And I could make improvements? And I could get good press from it?

I'd have the best surgeons in the world on speed dial within the day.

I don't believe you. Even the best surgeons can make mistakes.

reply to post by kaylaluv


So? If I'm Angelina, I've got millions to correct any such mistakes. What would I care? I seriously doubt the mortality rate of a mastectomy is much different than the rate for breast augmentation surgery, which, if accepting my hypothesis, would be something she was willing to risk anyhow.

Besides, it's obvious that she's at least had rhinoplasty in the past, and Botox injections, so she's obviously no stranger to such procedures...

Originally posted by IgnoranceIsntBlisss
reply to post by PhoenixOD

 

Like I said, maybe he "had to go". Maybe he's the poster child set up to maintain your neuronal constructs that there's nothing sinister about the cancer industry? Who is anyone to say?

Oh, lookie, one rich billionaire dies of Metastatic Insulinoma of the pancreas. There's the PROOF: no "cure" for "cancer".

edit on 14-5-2013 by IgnoranceIsntBlisss because: (no reason given)

I'm sorry, but that is one of the most deluded comments I've read on ATS, and I've read a lot. Do you ever step out of your constructed reality into the actual real world?

Here is the deal:

We can well assume that AJ and her husband made that decision after CAREFUL consideration with their doctor. She hardly had it done "for fun". The doctor told her there is a 87% of the same cancer developing her mom died only a few years ago from.

* What is more important? LIFE or B**BS?

The people who are so "shocked" about the decision seem to be those who only reduce a woman to their looks, worst..to "two b**bs" which any modern, plastic surgery can reconstruct anyway.

If your doctor tells you there is an overwhelming chance of getting breast cancer....the choice (IMHO) is obvious.

By the way, for me, AJ showed a lot of character and bravery doing this, because she also showed that for her there is MORE than simply superficial "looks". If you know AJ, you know she is not only good looking but in fact one of the best actresses today. (I am not talking about the Tomb Raider-flicks...she really IS an excellent actress!) Simply spoken: There are more important things than two b**bs in this world. As easy as that.

reply to post by flexy123

* What is more important? LIFE or B**BS?

She's choosing life and perkier boobs. She's not giving up anything.

Yet somehow, she's being made to be a martyr, instead of the adulteress, home-wrecker, and general wack-a-doo she is. Oh well. She's hot and popular, so guess that makes everything else ok.

By the way, for me, AJ showed a lot of character and bravery doing this, because she also showed that for her there is MORE than simply superficial "looks".

Yeah right. She ends up with flapjacks after the mastectomy, and I'll chime right in there with you on her bravery. But when she's sporting D's to the next premiere, I'll just have to agree to disagree.

What does her being a member of the CFR have to do with her decision to have her breasts removed in the hopes of avoiding cancer?

I see no evidence of a conspiracy in this story; this is nothing more than a woman that made a decision regarding her health.

I'm not AJ fan, in fact, I don't even have a TV or watch movies. But if this procedure grants her extra years of this life, more power to her.

Not everything is a conspiracy; there isn't always a grand master plan or planner behind the curtain pulling the strings.

Originally posted by Gazrok
reply to post by flexy123

 

Yet somehow, she's being made to be a martyr, instead of the adulteress, home-wrecker, and general wack-a-doo she is. Oh well. She's hot and popular, so guess that makes everything else ok.

Agree. She, a woman who is all of the cited, has made a medical choice about her body.

Frankly, if she was Jane Doe in farmland Kansas, this would not even be a story.

Next subject.

reply to post by Gazrok

Originally posted by Gazrok
I seriously doubt the mortality rate of a mastectomy is much different than the rate for breast augmentation surgery, which, if accepting my hypothesis, would be something she was willing to risk anyhow.

So, you think, without doing any research, that the mortality rate for removing ALL of a woman's breast tissue is the same as removing none, and adding augmentation? As someone who has had the former, let me tell you, it's very dangerous. A simple incision and addition of tissue (augmentation) is MUCH less dangerous that removing the entire breast tissue.

Besides, it's obvious that she's at least had rhinoplasty in the past, and Botox injections, so she's obviously no stranger to such procedures...

Right. So why would she hide it? In fact, her father said she once had implants and had them removed.

I rarely get offended here, and I know I shouldn't, but I take this personally. I can't help it.

Originally posted by Gazrok
She ends up with flapjacks after the mastectomy, and I'll chime right in there with you on her bravery.

Your insensitivity on this issue make me ill...