Watch out, ladies.
The success of the “watch and wait” approach for low-risk breast cancers has cut into profits in a big way as more women realize they don’t need to treat harmless tumors.
So the mainstream has just dialed the fear factor up a notch with a study that claims to have compared surgery to “watch and wait.”
And just you “watch and wait” to see how they twist the facts to fit their agenda!
Over a decade, women who had surgery for DCIS (a.k.a. “stage 0 breast cancer”) had a lower rate of recurrence, which makes it sound like a big loss for “watch and wait.”
But don’t sign up to let some doc slice into your boob just yet, because this “study” is a hunk of hokum!
First off, despite their claims that this was a true comparison, there was no actual “watch and wait” group.
You read that right – those researchers pulled a fast one, because ALL 720 women in the study had surgery!
A small subgroup of 124 women who ignored the recommendation to get a SECOND surgery got listed as the “watch and wait” group…even though they actually HAD the full procedure already!
And, sure, they had a higher rate of recurrence, with some two-thirds of them ending up with another cancer diagnosis. But the other women didn’t exactly AVOID the disease, either, with a recurrence rate of nearly 50 percent.
The reason is simple: ALL of these women had an operation that cut around a tumor, potentially allowing cancer cells to spread into nearby tissue. Many, if not all, of these women no doubt had needle biopsies as well, which can also spread cancer cells.
These women are lucky to be alive…not because of the cancer… but because of the treatment!
That’s the real goal: survival. And this study proves “stage 0 cancer” is a big ZERO when it comes to risk… because despite the different levels of treatment… despite the high rate of recurrence… despite everything else, just ONE woman out of the 720 died of breast cancer.
So when it comes down to it, what we really have is a study that uses all kinds of tricks – a fake control group and a wrong end goal (recurrence vs. survival) – to reach a biased conclusion.
If these clowns were serious about settling this debate, they would have designed an honest study. It’s not hard: Take a group of women with DCIS, treat half, and watch the rest to see who eventually dies of the disease and who doesn’t.
Instead, they play these little games, and my guess is it’s because they already know what a real study would find: Non-invasive DCIS needs to be left alone, not treated.
So if you’re diagnosed with cancer, don’t assume you need the knife. Talk to another doc – a naturopathic doc – and make sure you know all your options first.