Unnecessary Mutilation? Angelina Jolie and Pre-Cancer Breast Removal
2013-05-16 0:00

Red Ice Creations

Angelina Jolie has publicly revealed her decision to have her breasts removed in a double mastectomy (and then replaced with reconstructive implants) because she feared that her genetic makeup would eventually give her the fatal breast cancer that killed her mother. This move, and the public reaction and media circus surrounding it, is controversial.

Angelina Jolie’s editorial in the NYTimes on her medical procedure:

[...] 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 take action.

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 be beautiful. [...]
Source: NYTimes.com

Questions to consider:

Is removing body parts in a bid to stave off potential future issues unnecessary mutilation?
Is this not ’pre-crime’, but ’pre-cancer’?
What else would or could you remove from a healthy body ’just in case’?
Why are options such as natural alternatives not receiving the publicity that total removal does?
How might this influential woman’s surgery, and media attention, affect women and girls and their views on health and natural medical options?

The following video examines the issue:
"Mike Adams, the Health Ranger and Robert Scott Bell talk about how Angelina Jolie refuses to empower women with real choices about cancer prevention and instead wants to corral women into a "cancer industry meat grinder" that mutilates and poisons women with surgery, chemotherapy and radiation." (TheHealthRanger)




By Red Ice Creations




Related Articles


Latest News from our Front Page

USDA on board with shipping U.S. chickens to China for processing, then re-entry to States for human consumption
2015-03-03 21:32
“Chinese chicken” will soon have a whole new meaning, as the U.S. Department of Agriculture recently gave the green-light to four chicken processing plants in China, allowing chicken raised and slaughtered in the U.S. to be exported to China for processing, and then shipped back to the U.S. and sold on grocery shelves here. Furthermore, the imported processed ...
Feinstein: Netanyahu does not speak for all Jews
2015-03-03 21:52
US Senator Dianne Feinstein, chair of the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, has denounced Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu as an “arrogant” man who does not speak for all Jews. The Jewish lawmaker made the remarks in an interview with CNN on Sunday ahead of Netanyahu's controversial visit to the United States. The Israeli premier arrived in Washington, DC, on Sunday night ...
Netanyahu to US: Don’t negotiate ‘bad deal’ with Iran
2015-03-03 21:12
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called on the United States not to negotiate “a very bad deal” with Iran over its nuclear energy program. Speaking at a joint session of the US Congress in Washington, DC, on Tuesday, Netanyahu said, “We’ve been told for over a year that no deal is better than a bad deal. Well this is a ...
School Textbook: “There’s No Such Thing as Reverse Racism” Only White People can be Racist
2015-03-03 2:14
Only white people can be racist. A school textbook teaches students that “there is no such thing as reverse racism” and that women can never be as sexist as men. The passage, which appears to be taken from a “multicultural education series” book entitled Is Everyone Equal, states, “STOP: There is no such thing as reverse racism or reverse sexism (or the ...
Americans to Receive Full Biometric Treatment for all Forms of European Travel
2015-03-02 23:39
Travel becomes truly ominous... In a trend that isn't wholly surprising, EU Observer reports: US citizens and other non-EU nationals who enter Europe will be asked to have their faces image-captured and fingerprints scanned upon arrival at a half-dozen major airports. [emphasis added] This "biometric dragnet" is the pilot test for the EU's new "smart borders" packages. The test ...
More News »