Breast Cancer on Your Mind? Then Work to Overthrow the Profit Driven Healthcare Industry!

[xchrom]

http://www.alternet.org/personal-health/angelina-jolie-and-breast-cancer



Last month, I lost my too-young-to-die sister to a BRCA#1 breast cancer. When I was a toddler not yet in kindergarten, breast cancer robbed me of my mother. I am a BRCA#1 gene carrier, and recently wrote about it in my memoir, Raising Expectations and Raising Hell. Neither my sister nor my mother’s premature deaths, nor my own writing could possibly have turned BRCA#1 (and #2) into a household conversation the way a beautiful movie star could. Like millions of women, I have been reading the praise, the misogynist “jokes,” and the criticism being lobbed at Angelina Jolie.

The most urgent fact she left out of her op-ed, and that has received scant attention in the days since, is absolutely crucial: 70% of the BRCA#1 gene mutation breast cancers result in the most aggressive, least treatable form of breast cancer called the “triple negative,” a variation that more resembles ovarian than breast cancer genetically and which does not respond to any of the three main forms of treatment common among other breast cancers. The population next most likely to get triple negative breast cancer, after BRCA carriers, are African-American women.

According to Peggy Orenstein’s recent NYT Magazine cover story on the limits of the pink-fuzzy-teddy-bear breast cancer awareness movement, “Mammograms, it turns out, are not so great at detecting the most lethal forms of disease — like triple negative — at a treatable phase. Aggressive tumors progress too quickly, often cropping up between mammograms. Even catching them 'early,' while they are still small, can be too late: they have already metastasized.”

It’s safe to say that I am alive today, because after my sister was diagnosed with breast cancer, she had the gene test done. The fact that she’s now dead and I am alive leads to a very particular kind of grieving, one that mixes guilt into an already heavy stew of sadness and sorrow. Had she gotten the same directives I did, would she still be alive? I am sharing my story and celebrating Jolie’s brave if incomplete op-ed because my sister got different directives. As many have pointed out, Jolie, with more money than a small nation at her disposal, had access to the finest healthcare. I also had access to the finest healthcare, and mine came from my union.

[Dustlawyer]

1. You can count on our health care researchers sponsored by Big Pharma and the Health Care Industry

To be working furiously for "treatments!" What about cures you say, no money in that! Capitalism, it's what's for breakfast!
I have a have a chronic, extremely painful condition known as small fiber sensory neuropathy. The only ones working on cures are sponsored by the Federal government. They think they should cut that funding. Why you ask, because the Lobbyists told them to of course!
COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM (CCFR)!!! Lets get OUR Representative government back!

[sufrommich]

2. There is no advantage to being in a union

and getting the best healthcare if the genetic tests are not covered. I had union healthcare when I had breast cancer and the cost of the test would have been $4000.I don't think there is any insurance that covers the test,so your benefits package won't help you there. The fight needs to be to have these tests covered by insurance before it's ever going to matter which insurance you have.In my opinion,that is what is being ignored with the Jolie story,a woman who doesn't have $4000 at her disposal is out of luck.

[JayhawkSD]

3. "The fight needs to be to have these tests covered by insurance"

Actually, I think there needs to be a different fight. Or several different fights.

I think the fight needs to be to make these tests a whole lot less expensive, down to an order of magnitude where the average person can pay them out-of-pocket without having to rely on insurance.

Another fight would be to have these tests available as part of universal health care, getting rid of this whole health insurance scam altogether.

Another fight would be to have these tests be part of packaged care, eliminating (as the OP suggests) the entire structure of profit driven health care that makes our health care the costliest in the world.

[Lars39]

4. I've had the test and my insurance covered it.

Not all, but the usual percentage for procedures.

[proReality]

5. Here's a big fight...

The Fight to Take Back Our Genes
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) has granted thousands of patents on human genes; in fact, about 20 percent of our genes are patented. The PTO gives patent holders the exclusive rights to genetic sequences, their usage, and their chemical composition. Anyone who makes or uses a patented gene without permission of the patent holder – whether it be for commercial or noncommercial purposes – is committing patent infringement and can be sued by the patent holder for such infringement.

Because the PTO grants patents on the genes themselves, it essentially gives patent holders a monopoly over the patented genes and all of the information contained within them. Gene patent holders have the right to prevent anyone from studying, testing or even examining a gene. As a result, scientific research and genetic testing have been delayed, limited, or even shut down due to concerns about gene patents, and patients’ options regarding their medical care have been restricted.

http://www.aclu.org/free-speech/brca-faqs


ACLU Supreme Court challenge to patenting our genes

Did you know that private companies can patent genes in your body? A company called Myriad Genetics "owns" two genes known as BRCA 1 and BRCA2 –or Breast Cancer 1 and Breast Cancer 2. Women with certain mutations in these genes have a strong chance of getting breast or ovarian cancer.

http://www.aclu.org/fight-take-back-our-genes

[CanSocDem]

6. From a corporate POV....

...it would make sense to require a genetic test before hiring. Are you ready for all that that entails?

.