My temporary brick wall

Devonsangel

Shared on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 09:47
Yesterday I had my annual mammogram (or boob sammich) and ultrasound.  Two years ago the results showed a lump on the left.  Went in to have a sonogram and the radiologist declared it was a fibroadenoma.  Fine, but as far as I'm concerned, that is not a definitive diagnosis.  While fibroadenomas do show distinctive characteristics the only way to be sure is to have a biopsy performed.  Ok, the appointment was set and I was on the table ready for the procedure.  The conducted another sonogram to guide the needle etc.  They couldn't find it.  WTH?  Ok, I go home and really am relieved.  Mostly because my dad's sister has had breast cancer and my mom's mother died from ovarian cancer.  Both show a a relationship to breast cancer on the family level.

Anyway, last year I went in for my annual and the radiologist tried to talk me out of the sonogram after the mammogram.  I insisted and was very pissed that he would even go that far.   It was performed and all was reported as normal.  Fine. Great.

This year, I had to convince my doctor to give me the recommendation for the sonogram and he okayed it but only on the left side. (Where the lump was originally found).  Yesterday I have the sonogram and the radiologist says the lump is back.  Again, they have determined all along that it is benign and there is nothing to worry about.  Then during the discussion I hear that it was there on last years films.  They didn't tell me about it.  I'm pissed.  Granted it hasn't changed size and is in the general area it was the last time.  I tell him I want to be definitive about the lump being benign.  Just saying so doesn't make it so.  I don't care how many characteristics it has or how certain he is.  I want that slim chance of it being cancerous GONE.

He thinks for a moment and offers a MRI study of both sides.  He is reluctant to have a biopsy done because it will change the structure of the breast and make things harder to read for next year and cause scar tissue to form.  Fine, I agree to this.  So, next week I am having a MRI.

I'm not really worried about this because I'm 99% sure that it is a fibroadenoma and is benign.  I just don't like the not knowing for sure.  If there is still any doubt after the MRI, I will have a fine needle biopsy until I do know one way or another.

I guess the message for today is Don't let your doctor dictate your health.  If you aren't sure, find out and do something else until you are sure.  So, no worries, I'm not freaking out (in case Dastard reads this).  

Anyway, it's time to finish my homework for next week so I can play a bit this weekend.


Keep on Go!

Comments

Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 13:54
ROFL @ YEM
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 14:00
Cool websites.
J-Cat's picture
Submitted by J-Cat on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 09:50
woah... I pray everything is A-OK. health care does indeed suck sometimes. Doctors really don't lnow everything....
ATC_1982's picture
Submitted by ATC_1982 on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 09:51
Good Luck on your Homework. Since you say your good to go. I would chew that doctors ass for false documents last year. Have a good day and keep looking up.
doorgunnerjgs's picture
Submitted by doorgunnerjgs on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 09:52
The uncertainty sucks. And I definitely agree that YOU have to manage your healthcare. I have told doctors in the past, that if they are unwilling to work WITH me, forget it. I will find another doctor.
wilderz's picture
Submitted by wilderz on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 09:57
Hope everything turns out ok! I remember a few years back after a couple shoulder dislocations I was having pain in that shoulder again. I make an appt. to see the doc, and she assurres me that everything is ok. I said "I would like to get an X-Ray". She tells me that's not really necessary. So I ask her again politely, and she still says it's not necessary. I told her I didn't care if she felt it was necessary or not, I FELT it was necessary, and to get one ordered up PLEASE. She finally complied. WTF I don't get it....
OldManRiver48's picture
Submitted by OldManRiver48 on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:15
Glad to hear you were insistant and your sound relaxed and optomistic as well. Good luck, I'm sure it will be good news!
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:32
does god hate fags? Isnt that what that preacher guy says?
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:34
All of this would be prevented if both sides did not see fit to shove their beliefs down the other sides throats.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:41
People hate God and everything to do with Him, including His children. There doesn't have to be any shoving for someone to take offense, you just have to mention God or His works and people get offended.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:48
Not exactly, it's the blatant way His works can be used to oppress in His name that could be considered offensive to some. The love of Him has nothing to do with the dislike of the advertising. That is where I think some people get confused.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:56
While freedoms are protected for people to say awful things and in a way that I believe dishonors God's name, I do not think those freedoms should be taken away from people. We can see that the "God hates fags" guy does not know the Lord. But his freedom of speech ought to be protected, and as detestable as his ideas are, not be rendered crimes. There are many loving Christians who would share with a homosexual the good news of Jesus Christ and His judgement against their sin. This "idea" should not itself be a crime.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 10:58
Furthermore, I think the idea of atheism should be protected as much as theism. We ought to protect freedom of conscience and for people to exercise and practice their beliefs without fear of jail, fines, or worse. A secular state can be as oppressive and devasting to freedom as church-states have been.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:05
"---'God hates fags' guy does not know the Lord. --- How can you judge another like this. ---share with a homosexual the good news of Jesus Christ and His judgement against their sin.---" Just wow.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:05
This is one of those situations where people look to stir something up and then when it happens no one wants to be blamed. Christians making a stir at a gay rally, Neo-Nazis marching through a Jewish neighborhood, Pro-Choicers picketing at a Christian concert. And afterward everyone slaps their head and says they just wanted to make their point--at the other side's gathering. Not saying you can't do it, just saying don't be surprised when it doesn't work out for you.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:20
Holy shit, who are you and what have you done with MTK??!!
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:24
I think people who engage in controversial subjects should expect the opposing side to oppose. What I am contending for here is that no 1 set of morality should be legislated to the degree that it outlaws the other. If a so-called Christian attacks a pro-choicer or a homosexual, it already is a crime. To legislate against the ideas of people is wrong and oppresive. America faced this before from church-states that legislated their religion. Baptists for example, suffered under those legislations and worked for a separation of church and state. Now we see something of a reverse...a secularized government trying to legislate their morality. I see hate crime bills as doing this, albeit under good pretenses.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:25
wow.. i didnt think my view of certain people could go any lower...
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:26
XSSmoke, A Christian should, if he preaches, preach the full counsel of God. He should preach/teach God's righteous judgement against sins and God's mercy in Christ. To preach otherwise is to veil the truth.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:30
In other words, feel free to read about my opinions and beliefs, but please don't comment unless they fall in line with what I think. Awesome!
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:38
To assume you truly know God's will is presumptious. Similar to all the righteous crusaders who have killed countless thousands for a belief. I can not imagine a God exists that would condone the outright and blatant human to human judgement that is laid out by some people who claim to be doing His work. The holy wars fought over such an ideal is in and of itself one of mans insane quirks. If there is truly a God that views this type of behavior as something he sees fit, then He is not my God.
CapnHun's picture
Submitted by CapnHun on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:40
I believe there are some studies that show increased risk of breast cancer with multiple mammograms and sonograms. It may be why your doctor was hesitating. If you look this up, please let me know as I am curious too. I have been told that fibroadenoma are normal and can be the result of too much caffine. Good luck.
UnwashedMass's picture
Submitted by UnwashedMass on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:41
Good luck, dear Dangle. Glad you are getting your way. Better safe than sorry, and it sounds like the doctor is coming around to your point of view. boob sammich- *snicker*
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:42
presumptuous*
Devonsangel's picture
Submitted by Devonsangel on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:50
@Capn: I have heard of a link with the caffiene but not the amount of mammograms. I'll check into that.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:50
XSSmoke, The God of Holy Scripture, the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, the GOd and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ may indeed not be your God. Yet, He is the One True and Living God. God does want people to know His will. We know this because of His Word that He has given us, namely, the Holy Scriptures. We also know through Jesus Christ the Lord, whom the Father sent to be the Saviour of the world. If God in Holy Scripture says homosexuality is a sin, or lying is a sin, or murder is a sin, then it is a sin. If He declares judgement and punishment and wrath for sinners, and we are sinners, then we know God is a righteous and we are evil. We can get angry about it, but there is nothing that can be done. A criminal who gets caught and arrested for his crimes may be angry at the state, but his crimes will and must be punished for there to be justice in the land. Is God not a righteous and just judge? Will He let the guilty go free? God forbid. Is God merciful and kind toward sinners? Yes He is. And this is so clearly displayed in Jesus Christ who died for sinners, in their place, taking on Himself their sins and the punishment due to sin--death. God has willed that in Christ sinners can be reconciled to God and commands people everywhere to turn from their sins (repent) and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins. But to those who will not repent and believe, then wrath and indignation and judgement. That is the simple message of Holy Scripture.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:55
I don't know why but the US has seriously lagged behind the rest of the world in terms of tolerance and culture. For being the greatest country in the world, which it is, there are far too many ignorant and hateful people who have no clue of what being civilized is about. We love and cherish one another no matter what. That is simply what Jesus implied. No matter what race, color or social standing in life. Yet there are people who look past those words and taint them with misconceptions and misinterpretations that are far from what he intended in the first place. Laws like that have to be in place because sadly enough there are still ignorant people in this life which believe that they are superior than others in life and that grant them the right to treat others like shit. Once you really come to think of it, laws are merely guidelines for the stupid. Things that they need to be told not to do because they can't distinguish whats right and whats wrong, or whats civilized and whats acting like an animal.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 11:56
rabbermaster, I am not sure what gave you that impression of me, but its not the case. Everyone is certainly free to post and disagree with me. But if I represent the Word of God accurately, as I seek to do from Holy Scripture, then it is not me that one is disagreeing with, but God. If an ambassador from America brings a message to another country, and the leaders of that country reject the message of the ambassador, its not the ambassadors message they have rejected, but who he or she represents. If Christians be ambassadors fro Christ, and accurately represent His message as found in Holy Scripture, then its not our message that is being rejected--it is God's.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:01
ekattan, When the laws of men contradict the Law of God, what then? If the law of man says I cannot publically preach the Gospel (which in present times and times past countries have done) and the commandment of God is that we preach, who should we obey? Whether it is right in the sight of God to obey man or God, you be the judge. But as for us (true Christians) we must obey the Lord. If laws are passed that forbid me from thinking and speaking against the sin of homosexuality, will I stop thinking and speaking against it? God forbid. The Lord has said in His word that such behavior of men and women are sins. And we will teach it so as long as God enables us.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:10
Rather then continuing a diatribe over whose God is whose and is being gay evil or not, I'll just focus on the point of the blog. Should we pass laws that punish base on our thoughts? The clear answer to me seems to be no, yet for some reason this types of legislation is getting passed anyway. IMHO we can only, and should only, punish based on our actual actions. The example Five gave was just that, an example. Don't miss the forest for the trees.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:13
It's like talking to a brick wall. The way you can presume to judge others proclaiming you are just a tool of God is one of the dumbest concepts in existence. It is not your place to cast stones at others. Perhaps you should ask God yourself and see on a personal level if he really condones the way you speak about your fellow 202p'ers. Gay's, athiests and all. To judge another on the grounds you think you know God's message is indeed one of the worst sins there could possibly be. Quite unbelievable.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:14
BigOne, Hopefully no one detected any anger or frustration in what I wrote, even on matters of religion. I certainly do not feel angry, frustrated, or offended. Concerning the laws, I agree. And it is one incident that happened to those Christians and the charges were dropped. I just think it illustrates the dangers present with hate crime legislation and we should really consider whether or not to support such laws.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:17
XSSmoke, If I have misrepresented what is in the Scriptues, I'd be gald to be shown where I have errored. In other words, if the Scriptures teach the homosexuality or whatever is not sin to God, and I am saying it is, then i would like to see from the Scripture where I have errored. But if I have represented the Scriptures accurately, then why am I chargeable for anything execpt believing the Bible?
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:27
“He that is without sin among you, let him cast the first stone at her.” This is not unlike presuming you can judge another with harsh words and rhetoric. Consider the words (stones) you throw at people and even if God may think it is a sin (in your eyes) it is still not your place to judge another. Fact is, I could debate for days, but I have work to do and games to play and frankly even Satan himself could use scripture to defend his point of view. Good day to you, sir.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:31
XSSmoke, All I would say in return is what I have said before. The use of the Scripture you used is so wrested from its true meaning its baffeling how one is accused of being gulity of what those men wished to do to the woman caught in adultery, and to certain men of God who faithfully preach and teach the Scriptures. But as you said, you have better things to do.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:44
Why cant christians just let OTHER PEOPLE live THEIR lives and live their own the way they want to? That ladies and gentlemen is the $64,000 question!!
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:46
Solas, You really think Jesus would have not embraced in his love a homosexual? And by love and embrace I don't mean the physical kind. Jesus accepted and loved everyone. Whether it was a prostitute or a Roman Tax collector; people who sin and people who don't sin. He knew that even if we had chosen a path of sin we still should be accepted in the kingdom of heaven for we didn't know any better. Love a cherish all. Period! Like I said before; there are people who look past those words and taint them with misconceptions and misinterpretations that are far from what he intended in the first place.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:50
FB, That makes about as much sense to a Christian as saying to a fireman, "Why can't you just stay at the firehouse and mind the shop!" lol
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 12:57
ekattan, I think the love of God is clear from the life of Jesus. In other places in the NT it says that while we were still sinners Christ died for us. So that means while we were homosexuals, liars, cheats, thieves, adulterors, et. Christ died for us and loved us. Yet the Scripture does not teach that while God has unconditional love to sinners, that He in anyway condones, endorses, or supports their sins. The exect opposite is true. In the greatest display of God's love to sinners, the death and ressurection of Christ, is also a display of God's wrath and judgement on sin. Jesus died, not for His own sins, but for the sins of people. He bore in His body the sins of the world. And the judgement for such sins was death. But He overcame and atoned (paid for) the sins of His people, that whoever believes on Him may have the forgiveness of sins. Jesus is the Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world. The one sin in question, homosexuality, is a sin. Jesus did not come so that we may continue in sin. He came to forgive us our sins and cleanse us of all unrighteosness.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 13:00
"In other places in the NT" As quoted by Solas. "there are people who look past those words and taint them with misconceptions and misinterpretations" As quoted by ekattan. We do not judge Solas, for the lord is the only one entitled to. Very simple. We are not messiahs are we? Who are we to judge someone else?
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 13:08
I dont care what sense it makes to a christian. How does this sound, MIND YOUR OWN BUSINESS!
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 13:24
FB, With all due respect, you came to my blog. lol
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 13:29
ekattan, It is true that people can try to make the Bible say what they want it to say. I don't believe I have done that. If I have, I would like to know it. Jesus has commanded us to preach the Gospel. And that's what we do. I have not judged in the way some think I have, because that belongs to God alone. It is not judging a person to say homosexuality is a sin. The Bible teaches that it is. Nor is it the wrong judgement to say that those who reject the Gospel of Jesus will be damned. The Bible teaches it. And we are to represent what the Bible teaches to every man, warning every man, and admonishing every man. But this convo will get really detailed. If you would like to continue, go in-depth, then let's do it via email or private message. fivesolas.
Anonymous's picture
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Fri, 09/21/2007 - 13:40

Join our Universe

Connect with 2o2p