Angelina Jolie has double mastectomy
- Thread starter dirtychinchilla
- Start date
She has a gene called BRCA1. The convention for genes is to name them after the phenotype which appears when they go wrong - in this case it stands for "breast cancer".
There's "runs in the family", and then there's "50-100% of getting cancer due to a faulty gene". She made a tough but good choice, and the publicity for genetic screening is brilliant IMO.
Nowhere did I say she didn't make a good choice for her. I just can't understand it. I personally wouldnt take the test or get a double masectomy even if it was certain thing. Its a personal decision.
I'm glad she is raising awareness for breast cancer but I do think its important to remember that she could die from an equally horrible cancer that they can't test for yet.
She still had a 13% chance not to get it, now she has a 95% of not getting it, reducing the risk does not eliminate it.
So you can't understand the need (or in fact want) for reducing the risk of cancer?
I'm not trying to pull apart your sentence here (soz), but I think 'necessary' is the wrong word to use here. She didn't have cancer, just a high chance of getting it, so it wasn't necessary. It was a choice she made prior to anything nasty happening.
BRCA1 is patented though, which brings a lot of problems and more importantly, a lot of profit.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/nancy-stordahl/brca1-and-brca2-gene-patents_b_3015595.html
Patenting a gene pattern, America turns my stomach sometimes.
I can understand if she had cancer but on just the fact she could get cancer, no.
If I get breast cancer I would likely opt for a mastectomy if it was advised. Just because I may get breast cancer in the future I'm not going to opt for one.
Yep, she doesn't have cancer, and thank god she doesn't. But the double mastectomy is traumatic enough and associated with cancer prevention.
My point was that even though movie stars who play superheros are only actors, the general public tend to think of those actors as perfect human beings, almost as though they really are superheros. With something like this, it would be difficult for people to view her in the same way and so Hollywood would probably want to find someone else as a Lara Croft who once again is perceived as a goddess of the screen. I know I know, it's all very superficial, but that's the way we are. I could be wrong of course and may still see her in another Tomb Raider movie, but I somehow doubt it. She will probably take on more serious roles now.
It wasn't a case of 'may' get breast cancer in the future. It was more 'almost certainly will' get breast cancer.
This was the most sensible course of action and one that she should be admire for IMO.
...What?
Read post #96
Well, at least they're eternally digitised in the form of Beowulf. Watch it if you haven't already.
To everyone criticising the decision, it's a bit like car/house insurance. You may never crash a car, but you sacrifice a fair old amount of cash in case you do. I'd rather be alive with no boobs than risk being a well bosom-ed corpse.
To everyone criticising the decision, it's a bit like car/house insurance. You may never crash a car, but you sacrifice a fair old amount of cash in case you do. I'd rather be alive with no boobs than risk being a well bosom-ed corpse.
I read it. I'm just surprised you think people would actually be bothered by it.
That being said, I can't see her being in another Tomb Raider film anyway, if they decide to follow the style of the new game they'll find someone younger and prettier.
All about education guys, us fellas cant even begin to imagine the emotional upset women have to go through when these things come along. Id dare say that she went public about it solely to raise awareness, not to get jokes and perhaps sympathy (which does absolutely no good in situations like this). Time to grow up for a few of you.