Breast cancer info for you women

I really don't like this Natural News website. .

I think they have lot of good information, but they way write things is very biased.

For example:

When pushing that high-profit double mastectomy procedure to Christina Applegate, what cancer doctors did not tell her is that breast cancer has many natural cures, and none of them require surgery. In fact, breast cancer is one of the most easily cured forms of cancer, and had Applegate been informed about her options, she might have chosen to avoid being surgically maimed, and she could have lived out her life with her natural-born breasts.
Click to expand...

Now come on. . . her mom had breast cancer. . . and she is rich. . I'm sure she was very well informed about her options.

Who's to say that she didn't decide against natural cures?

I hate the bs they write. . they did the same thing with Bernie Mac. .
 
you must be out of your fuckin mind if what they said doesn't make sense. you think just because someone is rich that they are well informed? being rich doesn't automatically make you aware of things you werent aware of when you weren't rich. people in this country are taught to believe natural cures and healing are a hoax. there is nothing biased about the article.

and why the hell would she decide AGAINST something that would help here keep her breasts?
 
destrehan said:
you must be out of your fuckin mind if what they said doesn't make sense. you think just because someone is rich that they are well informed? being rich doesn't automatically make you aware of things you werent aware of when you weren't rich. people in this country are taught to believe natural cures and healing are a hoax. there is nothing biased about the article.

and why the hell would she decide AGAINST something that would help here keep her breasts?
Click to expand...

:lol: calm your ass down first of all


Second of all. .. That wasn't my only reason. Just because she is rich. Her mother had breast cancer too. . so I could ASSUME just like Natural News ASSUMED that she was probably aware of the options that existed.

They have no evidence that she was aware or not aware that's my point.

Reread what I wrote before you respond damn :smh:
 
Chicutie said:
:lol: calm your ass down first of all


Second of all. .. That wasn't my only reason. Just because she is rich. Her mother had breast cancer too. . so I could ASSUME just like Natural News ASSUMED that she was probably aware of the options that existed.

They have no evidence that she was aware or not aware that's my point.

Reread what I wrote before you respond damn :smh:
Click to expand...
nn assumed that she WASN'T informed of her options. and most people AREN'T.
 
destrehan said:
nn assumed that she WASN'T informed of her options. and most people AREN'T.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean they are right because most ppl are uninformed. It's bad journalism. That's my whole point. Nothing to do with medicine. I'm not just talking about this one story. . . They make a lot of assumptions on that site. It takes away from their credibility and the information they could be giving the public.

Most people don't know about the options. . ok. But people must take responsibility for that. I'm not defending physicians, but a lot of things people don't know is because they don't care or don't want to. The information is out there, it's there job to do the work.
 
Last edited:
Chicutie said:
That doesn't mean they are right because most ppl are. It's bad journalism. That's my whole point. Nothing to do with medicine. I'm not just talking about this one story. . . They make a lot of assumptions on that site. It takes away from their credibility and the information they could be giving the public.

Most people don't know about the options. . ok. But people must take responsibility for that. I'm not defending physicians, but a lot of things people don't know is because they don't care or don't want to. The information is out there, it's there job to do the work.
Click to expand...
you are disgusting me right now. i posted the article so women in here can get info about breast cancer treatment alternatives. goodbye.
 
destrehan said:
you are disgusting me right now. i posted the article so women in here can get info about breast cancer treatment alternatives. goodbye.
Click to expand...

Don't mind the hate. You post something informative...they hate it. You post something funny...they hate it. Fickle.
 
I'm sorry.. but she never said that the info wasn't useful, but just that they have a biased point of view.. sort of like Fox News, how they always take a republican stance on all the issues... she even used a quote from their article to back up her point... The site does have interesting info on breast cancer, but why did the have to personally attack Christina Applegate??
 
her argument was absolutely wrong! look at my second response to her. she said they assumed she knew about the alternatives. they did no such thing. why would anybody choose to get their breasts cut off instead of trying an alternative? my point is, why even worry about someting so trivial as what the article said about chrissy applegate? who gives a fuck? the information provided is valid and that's what matters. yall women can really fuck up a fuck up party sometimes.
 
Cleopatra_J said:
I'm sorry.. but she never said that the info wasn't useful, but just that they have a biased point of view.. sort of like Fox News, how they always take a republican stance on all the issues... she even used a quote from their article to back up her point... The site does have interesting info on breast cancer, but why did the have to personally attack Christina Applegate??
Click to expand...


Some only see what they want to see dear.



destrehan there is no hate in this thread what Chi said I think was taken out of context. I personally am all for natural remedies. And thank you for providing the info.




Peace
 
destrehan said:
her argument was absolutely wrong! look at my second response to her. she said they assumed she knew about the alternatives. they did no such thing. why would anybody choose to get their breasts cut off instead of trying an alternative? my point is, why even worry about someting so trivial as what the article said about chrissy applegate? who gives a fuck? the information provided is valid and that's what matters. yall women can really fuck up a fuck up party sometimes.
Click to expand...

:yes:
 
destrehan said:
her argument was absolutely wrong! look at my second response to her. she said they assumed she knew about the alternatives. they did no such thing. why would anybody choose to get their breasts cut off instead of trying an alternative? my point is, why even worry about someting so trivial as what the article said about chrissy applegate? who gives a fuck? the information provided is valid and that's what matters. yall women can really fuck up a fuck up party sometimes.
Click to expand...

I think you need to reread the article.

I'm not knocking the information but the journalism is bad. Quit taking it so personal.
 
the article is informative, but it mentions nowhere that she chose to have the operation b/c she tested positive for the breast cancer gene and the mastectomy lessens the chance of the cancer returning....
 
king-i_210877c.jpg


"Can't we all just...get along?!?"
 
DDDiva said:
the article is informative, but it mentions nowhere that she chose to have the operation b/c she tested positive for the breast cancer gene and the mastectomy lessens the chance of the cancer returning....
Click to expand...
WELL IF THERE ARE NO BREASTS PRESENT, IT WOULD BE HARD FOR CANCER TO GROW THERE. THE ARTICLE IS SAYING THAT A MASECTOMY IS THE DUMBEST WAY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top