Am I annoyed by this or have I learned to be grouchy about it?

[SDRSpark]

I'm a breast Cancer survivor but I don't think you should let them squeeze you so hard you hurt for 2 days afterward. These days my mammograms hardly ever hurt as they have stopped doing what you describe. I think you should tell them about hurting and throwing up your lunch and tell them you'll not continue if they continue to squeeze you so hard. (And, btw, my breast cancer was discovered by a routine mammogram- I had no clue there was a lump there.).

I agree with this. I'm really, really concerned about the lasting damage from squeezing so hard. I just tried to compress my own breasts to 2"...no way in heck can I do it.

You'd think doing that kind of damage repetitively would be a serious contributing factor to issues down the road.

As an aside, I've never had a mammogram. I had a lump in my breast years ago (turned out to be nothing at all) and I requested ultrasound instead of mammogram- my request was granted.

 

[Mia]

You'd think doing that kind of damage repetitively would be a serious contributing factor to issues down the road.

I'm assuming there would be long-term tissue damage from this kind of procedure, yet the GP's tell me that it does not cause any damage. It feels like it does.

 

[Marmot]

Please don’t shoot me for admitting this (as women almost always do), but I’ve been in the medical device development field now for 15 years and a good portion of that has been developing mammography & medical imaging systems.


The bad news is that with traditional mammography systems, the tissue needs to be squished as flat as possible in order to get accurate image interpolation thru the breast tissue. The good news is that there is technology, currently in the testing / FDA approval process that uses ultrasound instead of radiation, and requires zero compression to get an equivalent image..... The day will soon come when you’re dropping your breast in a warm water bath and sitting very still to get your mammo instead of clamping them down and radiating them, but thank the complexities of the FDA approval process (+ product liability standards) for this not coming to market sooner.


I’ve never heard the debate of potential long term damage from the compression, but I have heard the debate of long term damage from radiation exposure for mere screenings, and this is why there’s many different opinions out there as to the age which you should start getting them, and the frequency in which you should repeat. -It’s a risk v/s gain calculation that the experts really haven’t agreed on yet.


I know this adds no comfort to the immediate situation, but sometimes you need a bigger picture of the good that current research (albeit painful) adds to the overall evolution of breast cancer knowledge. In the 15 years I’ve been developing mammo systems though, I’ve never heard of nor read anything about actual damage from the compression.

 

[SDRSpark]

Please don’t shoot me for admitting this (as women almost always do), but I’ve been in the medical device development field now for 15 years and a good portion of that has been developing mammography & medical imaging systems.


The bad news is that with traditional mammography systems, the tissue needs to be squished as flat as possible in order to get accurate image interpolation thru the breast tissue. The good news is that there is technology, currently in the testing / FDA approval process that uses ultrasound instead of radiation, and requires zero compression to get an equivalent image..... The day will soon come when you’re dropping your breast in a warm water bath and sitting very still to get your mammo instead of clamping them down and radiating them, but thank the complexities of the FDA approval process (+ product liability standards) for this not coming to market sooner.


I’ve never heard the debate of potential long term damage from the compression, but I have heard the debate of long term damage from radiation exposure for mere screenings, and this is why there’s many different opinions out there as to the age which you should start getting them, and the frequency in which you should repeat. -It’s a risk v/s gain calculation that the experts really haven’t agreed on yet.


I know this adds no comfort to the immediate situation, but sometimes you need a bigger picture of the good that current research (albeit painful) adds to the overall evolution of breast cancer knowledge. In the 15 years I’ve been developing mammo systems though, I’ve never heard of nor read anything about actual damage from the compression.

No argument from me, I also work in medical devices and the FDA is one of my least favorite government entities.

I've also heard concerns about the radiation, though to be honest, considering radiation and related issues is one of my special interests, I'm not paranoid about it. But anything that involves squishing my breasts flat (something they were never intended to be) would probably result in shrieking, struggling and throwing chairs. I hope by the time I'm old enough to ever see a mammogram, "flatten the breasts until they're 2" thick" is seen as barbaric and just not done. I can almost hear my mammary glands pop at that description.

 

[Bolletje]

I've also heard concerns about the radiation, though to be honest, considering radiation and related issues is one of my special interests, I'm not paranoid about it.

They do risk/cost/rewards analysis for any type of screening, especially if the screening involves radiation. These types of screening are only implemented if the carcinogenic risk of the cumulative radiation doesn’t exceed the chance of early detection of tumors and the added benefits of early treatment. As radiology techniques have improved, radiation dosage per scan has decreased. Yes, radiation does remain carcinogenic, but the risk of developing cancer as a result of screening only is very low.

 

[Debrah]

Of course l have to come from the opposite side: first there are non-intrusive mammagram machines out on the market. Second of all- you have done your "time". And they are coming out with ways to detect not even using those monstrosities.

If you don't want to go and be subjected to this then make the adult choice and forgo it. We here at the forum celebrate your past help.

Interesting comment. I have come to a similar conclusion and quit having mammograms altogether. Two things that I believe support my decision is that as a vegan, I'm significantly less likely to develop breast cancer because I don't use any dairy or eat cheap hamburger that is made of dairy cows. Those food items are loaded with pregnancy hormones and a 'cow-load' of estrogen is never good for a woman's breasts in my opinion. The other thing I do is include turmeric and black pepper in my diet, wherever I can. There've been hundreds of studies that show that that combination kills cancer stem cells. My husband just had a blood test to check his PSA levels (for his prostate) and the doctor was surprised at how low his PSA levels are. He mostly eats a well balanced vegan diet and gets his share of turmeric/pepper too.

So my chances are very low that I'll get it and I figure too, that I'm old(er) and if it's my time, it's my time. And to tell you the truth, I find life so torturous with all my self imposed guilt and angst, that I'll be relieved if it happens. (I'm definitely a 'glass is half empty kind of person')