No, doctors are part of the Big Pharma conspiracy to suppress the healing powers of acacia berries and black coffee so corporations can continue to make obscene profits by pumping people full of unnecessary drugs, remember?
Oh, that’s right. If only there was enough Acacia berries to go 'round. We’d have no more cancer.
To be fair, there is some room for debate around when preventative mastectomies are most useful. For example, there has been an enormous rise in women requesting double mastectomies after finding early stage cancer in one breast. In many cases, the chance of recoccurance in the healthy breast is quite low, and the risk from the surgery itself my outweigh the cancer risk.
Every woman is different and should seek out the advice of trusted doctors as she makes the best choice for herself, but I do think there is plenty of room for debate about the subject.
Maybe in some abstract intellectual sense. But if I’m ever faced with this decision, I won’t be inviting a debate or discussion about it, except with my doctor.
I don’t think Angelina Jolie much cared for a debate either.
Ah shit, I’m sorry to hear that. Hopefully it turns out your wrong.
You snark, but there are woo websites that have claimed exactly that. Or that Jolie was PAID by Big Pharma to have her breasts removed in order to support the company that was about to lose its patent on the genetic test she used. Or that she’s lying, and never had her breasts removed at all.
I’m not linking to those sites. They don’t deserve the traffic. I’m sure you can guess them.
For once I would be thrilled to find out I was.
Damn. And she had a pretty good song about breast cancer that I liked too.
What a fucking dumb belief. “Cancer comes from within you.” As everyone knows, cancer comes from the Cancer Fairy! If you drink lots of garlic-carrot juice, and meditate every day, it scares her away.
At this moment, let us shed a tear for some of the most influential boobs in Hollywood.
…Also, fuck that dumb bitch. I think it’s a damn shame that Jolie’s boobs will be different, but I would never judge her for making that choice - not my place to judge; it’s her health and body after all.
…Now, Gianna Michaels on the other hand…
Well, gotta say as a physiologist, she’s a very good singer-songwriter.
Jesus on Rollerskates, I mean, sure, entertainment celebs seem more succeptible to Woo, being as they make their living in an environment based on emotional connections, but still…
Yes, one can legitimately debate whether Jolie’s preemptive strategy is worthy of so much admiration and applause or it should have been responded to as “Hell, sure, if she can afford to *not *have to take such a high risk why should she; her own business, best of luck to her and the kids”. But Etheridge just casts it very, very badly along the lines of it not being so brave if you destroy the threat preemptively rather than fight it.
One wonders if for some people it’s more of an incarnation of opposition between the clinical, “cold-blooded” “Science: Because it WORKS, Bitches” approach vs. the “creative” make-your-own-reality mind-over-matter approach, and they feel the urge to make a stand for the latter.
I’m just not seeing how Etheridge essentially calling Jolie a coward in this instance constitutes useful “debate”.