L alleges that the oncologist tomorrow will answer all. We'll see. It makes me angry that the report is deliberately written to obscure. Would it kill them to have a glossary attached? Or to double-space the report so that you'd have room to write notes? I have Stage 2a, which I always thought I had. Why did the physician assistant have to go out of the room and check this? Wouldn't she have it right there at hand? I have lobular carcinoma in situ, which has a 20 percent chance of showing up in the other breast. I also have invasive breast cancer, which is 15 percent likely to show up in the other breast. Are these calculated together or separately, meaning do I have a 35 percent chance of getting some kind of cancer in the other breast? The largest tumor is 4 cm. My tumors dine on estrogen and progesterone. That sort of tumor-diet is more common among the post-menopausal. I am a meno woman, never pausing, bearer of the never-ending period, it flows from a normal cycle into a pseudo-period egged on by the fibroids. Without chemo, I have about a 70 percent chance of not getting cancer again. The thing, Dr. Susan Love points out, is you have to find out what your chances are *with* the chemo and "without* and figure out if chemo's worth the difference. Between each appointment with The Expert, you think: This One will explain all... I think I will get a second chemo opinion.
I still have to wear the damn tubes, which hurt when I walk.
This cancer is starting to wear me down.
No comments:
Post a Comment