Should you have a biopsy?

[Guest guest]

This site has lots of info.

I have read in several different places the same things about

biopsies. Can't say I am chomping at the bit to have one. Has anyone around had

any

experiences with biopsies? I have a tumour in my thyroid and the doctor wants

me to have a biopsy. Any suggestions?

blessings

Shan

Should you have a biopsy?

http://www.healingdaily.com/conditions/biopsy.htm

 

This article discusses biopsies. There are potential problems with biopsies

which you should be aware of. Am I saying " never get a biopsy " ? No. But you

want to be INFORMED, you want to be AWARE of what the possible consequences of

having a biopsy might be.

 

Say you found a lump somewhere. Your doctor will insist that he stick a

needle in it, that is the usual medical approach. The needle biopsy, the doctor

says, is safe and will not cause any spreading of the cancer, IF it is indeed

cancer, and we can't know for sure unless we do a biopsy.

 

If someone else knows about your lump, they will surely tell you, " You'd

better get that checked! You should have a biopsy! " Very few people would ever

worry about the dangers of having a biopsy. Most people would worry about the

cost, or the pain of a biopsy, but few people realize that a biopsy itself, can

be dangerous to your health.

 

 

Do biopsies pose a risk of spreading the cancer?

 

Some experts believe that if there IS cancer in that lump, the biopsy is

likely to cause it to start spreading.

 

In a biopsy, a piece of your flesh, or of some organ in your body, is cut out

so that it may be examined under a microscope. The medical staff then looks

at the cells in the sample and determines how many of those cells are in the

process of cell division. If the sample shows that 15% of those cells are in the

process of cell division, and that type of cell is not supposed to show more

than 1% of them going through cell division at any given time, then that cell

sample shows abnormal growth - cancer.

 

Although cancer is considered to be rapid and abnormal growth of cells, the

entire mass of a cancer normally grows rather slowly because it is encased. The

cancer grows inside a wall, or a shell. Therefore the body tries to protect

itself by building a wall around the cancer to keep any of the cancer cells

from leaking out, because cancer would otherwise spread throughout the body. In

truth, some cancers are very slow-growing, such as prostate and breast cancer,

while others are very fast, such as liver cancer.

 

When the cancer does leak out, doctors use a special word to describe this

situation: the cancer is said to " metastasize " , it is spreading to other parts

of the body.

 

Doctors will tell you that the biopsy is not expensive, that it is painless

and that it can be done during an office visit. They will tell you that the

biopsy is covered by insurance.

 

Doctors will tell you that if the lump is cancerous, it is critical that you

know about it in order for you to start treating the cancer as early as

possible.

 

They will explain that in the " fine needle biopsy " , where the needle is tiny

and is inserted through the flesh into the lump, only a minute amount of

material is withdrawn into the needle, and there will be no pain and no scaring.

 

If there is cancer there, of course, the doctor will then tell you that you

should move very quickly to start treatment. You may not realize this, but

there are only 3 legal treatments for cancer in most of the United States. The

laws of California, for example, make it a serious case of " unprofessional

conduct " for a doctor to diagnose cancer and then treat it with anything other

than

the approved methods - chemotherapy, radiation or surgery. He can lose his

license to practice medicine. He could even go to jail.

 

So, you discovered a lump on your body. You go to your doctor to have it

looked at. No doctor would ever recommend AGAINST a biopsy - the doctor must be

safe or he can lose his medical license and perhaps millions of dollars in a

malpractice lawsuit. So, he tells you, " You need a biopsy, immediately. They are

safe and painless. They are covered by your insurance. I can do this right

now " .

 

The biopsy itself can start the spread of the cancer from the inside of the

casing which the cancer was in. Remember, the body protects itself from having

the cancer spread - it builds a wall around the cancer.

 

Once you penetrate that wall, even with a very tiny needle, the cancer cells

can leak out through the hole and circulate in the body. These cancer cells

can then enter the bloodstream and be distributed throughout the entire body

within a few seconds.

 

It is possible that your immune system will be strong enough to handle these

stray cancer cells. It is possible that they just won't find a good place to

live. But, perhaps you have just allowed the doctor to metastasize your cancer.

 

What had been, possibly, a slow-growing cancer with no metastasis, has in one

split-second become a cancer which might now be spreading throughout your

body - requiring immediate, urgent treatment. Before the biopsy it was a

suspicious mass and you had time to learn about the many alternatives to

chemotherapy,

radiation and surgery. Now you no longer have time to learn.

 

I believe the minimum a doctor should do before he/she does a biopsy, is to

lay out the treatment options in great detail IF cancer is indeed found in that

biopsy. You should not expect a doctor to discuss alternative treatments

( http://www.healingdaily.com/conditions/detoxification-to-fight-cancer.htm )

because it would be illegal for him/her to use those, but at a minimum your

doctor should give you the details of the surgery, the chemotherapy and/or the

radiation (

http://www.healingdaily.com/conditions/detoxification-to-fight-cancer.htm )

he/she would use in the event the biopsy does show cancer.

 

What if you happen to believe in the power of some herb, or some diet, or

some cleansing program, or some other " alternative treatment " . If you are

foolish

enough to tell your mainstream doctor about these things, he will often get

angry with you and tell you that you will die, and that you MUST get the

biopsy, today, and sign consent forms or he will never have anything to do with

you

as a patient again.

 

According to the Merck Manual (1998 edition), for every case of breast cancer

diagnosed each year, between 5 and 10 women will needlessly undergo a breast

biopsy.

 

Why so many biopsies?

 

Why then, does mainstream medicine keep recommending biopies in such high

numbers? (and mammograms too? - but that's discussed in another article) Do the

math: a $1,000+ biopsy for 1-to 2-million women, and a $100 mammogram for all

62 million women in the United States over age 40, is an $8 billion a year

industry.

 

There are superior alternatives, such as advanced thermography, which does

not use mechanical pressure which can spread cells that are already malignant,

or ionizing radiation as mammograms do, and this advanced thermography can

detect signs of breast cancer years earlier than either mammography or a

physical

exam.

 

A prostate biopsy costs about $1,200.

 

Many men with suspected prostate cancer could avoid having a biopsy, a study

(1) shows, if doctors instead relied on the results of a prostate-specific

antigen (PSA) blood test. According to the study (1), more than 50% of men in

the

study group who had negative biopsies could have avoided biopsies in the

first place if doctors had relied on the results of a prostate-specific antigen

(PSA) blood test. Prostate biopsies are usually recommended for older men who

have abnormally high PSA levels, a possible indicator of prostate cancer.

Prostate biopsy requires surgery or the insertion of a needle into the prostate

gland, typically through the rectum.

 

 

 

 

[Guest guest]

I agree that we need to beware, Shan and thank you for your information. We

need to have all the

information and weigh up all the pros and cons. I wish you love and luck in

your decision making -

unfortunately for you but fortunately for me, I have no experience with thyroid

tumours; but I do

with breast cancer biopsy, so much so that I refused to even consider a needle

biopsy the second

time around.

 

There is a thriving iodine list in - I wonder if anyone there might

have any ideas to

help you.

http://216.27.161.35/iodine/the_iodine_group.htm

 

The title of the following up-to-date article is misleading.

Look at the first sentence:

" Several case reports and clinical

studies in the literature demonstrate needle track

seeding after core needle biopsy in patients with

breast cancer in up to 50% of cases. "

 

Nobody I know of was informed of this when they were (IMHO) " conned " into needle

biopsies (which

sound so innocuous when compared with surgery. I would have gone straight to

surgery had I known.

I was NOT told when they did my needle biopsy in 1998 that I needed to follow up

with radiation as

well as surgery if there was cancer, nor that radiation causes harm to other

organs, nor that it

doesn't always work. My cohort and I were told that, in the case of the Canadian

Gold Standard for

breast cancer care, even if the needle biopsy did not show cancer, there still

needed to be a

surgery because the needle might have missed the spot; the biopsy would make the

surgery easier for

me, though, as the surgeon would have prior information! Of course this is

" only " my interpretation

of what was said, not the actual words; however, what the client and her cohort

hear is of prime

importance in my opinion.

 

Best, Val (who succumbed to radiation to prevent breast cancer recurrence in the

same breast only to

have the same cancer recur in the same place, dxed 4 1/2 years later. I refused

nodal surgery both

times, as I knew I would not agree to chemotherapy, preferring alt. meds.)

 

Breast Cancer Research and Treatment

Issue: Volume 97, Number 1

May 2006

Pages: 9 - 15

 

Preoperative Core Needle Biopsy does not Increase

Local Recurrence Rate in Breast Cancer Patients

 

Florian Fitzal1 , Emanuel P. Sporn1, Wolfgang

Draxler2, Martina Mittlböck2, Susanne Taucher1,

Margaretha Rudas3, Otto Riedl1, Thomas H. Helbich4,

Raimund Jakesz1 and Michael Gnant1

 

(1) Department of Surgery, General Hospital,

University Vienna, Waehringer Guertd 18-20, 1090

Vienna, Austria

(2) Bioinformatics, General Hospital, University of

Vienna, Vienna, Austria

(3) Pathology, General Hospital, University of

Vienna, Vienna, Austria

(4) Radiology, General Hospital, University of

Vienna, Vienna, Austria

Published online: 24 February 2006

 

Summary Objective. Several case reports and clinical

studies in the literature demonstrate needle track

seeding after core needle biopsy in patients with

breast cancer in up to 50% of cases. The impact of

this observation on local recurrence and overall

survival rate is, however, not fully investigated.

Patients and design. We retrospectively analysed 719

patients after breast conserving surgery and

postoperative radiotherapy for stage I and II breast

cancer. We divided this group into patients with (189)

and without (530) preoperative core needle biopsy.

Demographic data, local recurrence and overall

survival rate were compared between these two groups.

Result. Preoperative core needle biopsy did not

significantly influence the local free recurrence rate

(median follow-up time of 78 and 71 months,

respectively). The prognostic factors and the

postoperative therapy did not differ significantly

between the two groups.

Conclusion. Preoperative core needle biopsy seems to

have no detrimental impact on local recurrence and

overall survival after breast conserving surgery and

postoperative radiotherapy.

 

 

 

surpriseshan2 wrote:

> This site has lots of info.

> I have read in several different places the same things about

> biopsies. Can't say I am chomping at the bit to have one. Has anyone around

had any

> experiences with biopsies? I have a tumour in my thyroid and the doctor wants

> me to have a biopsy. Any suggestions?

[Guest guest]

surpriseshan2 wrote:

 

" I have read in several different places the same things about biopsies.

Can't say I am chomping at the bit to have one. Has anyone around had

any experiences with biopsies? I have a tumour in my thyroid and the

doctor wants me to have a biopsy. Any suggestions? "

 

I can't answer your question about your thyroid biopsy, but I had a

breast biopsy last fall. I didn't even have a lump--just a suspicious

shadow on my mammogram that was getting slowly larger over time. I was

told that there was a 98% chance that it wasn't cancer, but I could only

be sure by having the biopsy. At no point was the option of NOT having

the biopsy ever brought up.

 

I had the type of biopsy that takes out all the questionable matter and

not just a small sample. It was done in a hospital operating room, but

under local anesthesia. I couldn't feel much until the very end when I

was being sewn up and then it hurt like hell. I was sent home shortly

thereafter.

 

I was told the recovery period would only last 2-3 days. What a crock.

The pain didn't even begin to dissipate until a week later when I had

the stitches out, and it was 6 weeks before I was able to raise my arm

over my head without pain. The pain killer I was prescribed (Vicodin)

was useless--didn't help the pain much and if I took it, I would have to

stay in bed because it made me dizzy and nauseous and gave me hot sweats

if I wasn't lying down.

 

The doctor who did the surgery was quite blasé about the pain involved

in recovery and even insinuated that I might not even need a

prescription painkiller. (The nurse who took care of me set me straight

on THAT issue.)

 

BTW, I happen to be someone who has a reputation for having a high

tolerance for pain, so I can only imagine what this experience would

have been like for someone who doesn't.

 

From the posted article:            

 

" According to the Merck Manual (1998 edition), for every case of breast

cancer diagnosed each year, between 5 and 10 women will needlessly

undergo a breast biopsy. "

 

Well, I was one of them. No cancer was found. Hell, I'd rather have

major abdominal surgery again than another breast biopsy--at least they

knocked me out for that and gave me decent painkillers after.

 

Cathy B.