What does this have to do with Sellers genealogy? Linda Davis ----- Original Message ----- From: FDHaun@aol.com To: SELLERS-L@rootsweb.com Sent: Friday, September 19, 2003 1416 Subject: Re: [SELLERS] Fw: FYI on Ovarian Cancer and helpful screening test Hi, to all the women folk that I sent this out to this morning. I just had a friend let me know that this is a hoaxes. Please read below. Sorry about that. Dennis H. <A HREF="http://ads.burstnet.com/ads/ad1874c-map.cgi"> </A> Claim: The CA-125 blood test is a reliable way to detect ovarian cancer in its early stages, and women should insist upon having one done with each yearly examination. Status: False. Example: [Collected on the Internet, 1998] > > This is Kathy's Story > > As some of you know, I have Primary Peritoneal Cancer. This cancer has only > recently been identified as its OWN type of cancer; but it is, essentially, > Ovarian Cancer. Both types of cancer are diagnosed in the same way (with the > "tumor marker" CA-125 blood test), and they are treated in the same way > (surgery to remove the primary tumor and then chemotherapy with Taxol and > Carboplatin). > > Having gone through this ordeal, I want to save others from the same fate. > That is why I am sending this message to you and hope you will print it and > give it or send it via e-mail to everybody you know. > > One thing I have learned is that each of us must take TOTAL responsibility > for our own health care. I thought I had done that because I always had an > annual physical, had my annual mammogram and PAP smear, did monthly Self Breast > Exam, went to the dentist at least twice/year, etc. > > I even insisted on a sigmoidoscopy and a bone density test last year. When I > had a total hysterectomy in 1993, I thought that I did not have to worry > about getting any of the female reproductive organ cancers. LITTLE DID I KNOW! I > don't have ovaries (and they were HEALTHY when they were removed!), but I > have what is essentially ovarian cancer. Strange, isn't it? > > These are just SOME of the things our Doctors never tell us. ONE out of > every 55 women will get OVARIAN or PRIMARY PERITONEAL CANCER! The "CLASSIC" > symptoms are an ABDOMEN that rather SUDDENLY ENLARGES and CONSTIPATION and/or > DIARRHEA. > > I had these classic symptoms and went to the Doctor. Because these symptoms > seemed to be "abdominal," I went to a gastroenterologist. He ran tests that > were designed to determine whether there was a bacteria infection; these tests > were negative, and I was diagnosed with "Irritable Bowel Syndrome." > > I guess I would have accepted this diagnosis had it not been for my enlarged > abdomen. I swear to you, it looked like I was 4-5 months pregnant! I, > therefore, insisted on more tests. They took an X-Ray of my abdomen; it was > negative. I was again assured that I had Irritable Bowel Syndrome and was encouraged > to go on my scheduled month long trip to Europe. I couldn't wear any of my > slacks or shorts because I couldn't get them buttoned, and I KNEW something > was radically wrong. I INSISTED on more tests, and they (reluctantly) scheduled > me for a CT-Scan (just to shut me up, I think). This is what I mean by > taking Charge of our own health care. > > The CT-Scan showed a lot of fluid in my abdomen (NOT normal!). Needless to > say, I had to cancel my trip and have FIVE POUNDS of fluid drawn off at the > hospital (not a pleasant procedure, I assure you, but NOTHING compared to what > was ahead of me). Tests revealed cancer cells in the fluid. > > Finally, finally, finally, the Doctor ran a CA-125 blood test and I was > properly diagnosed. I HAD THE CLASSIC SYMPTOMS FOR OVARIAN CANCER AND YET THIS > SIMPLE CA-125 BLOOD TEST HAD NEVER BEEN RUN ON ME ... NOT AS PART OF MY ANNUAL > PHYSICAL EXAM AND NOT WHEN I WAS SYMPTOMATIC. THIS IS AN INEXPENSIVE AND > SIMPLE BLOOD TEST!!! > > PLEASE, PLEASE, P-L-E-A-S-E TELL ALL YOUR FEMALE FRIENDS AND RELATIVES TO > INSIST ON A CA-125 BLOOD TEST EVERY YEAR AS PART OF THEIR ANNUAL PHYSICAL > EXAMS. BE FOREWARNED THAT THEIR DOCTORS MIGHT TRY TO TALK THEM OUT OF IT, SAYING > "IT ISN'T NECESSARY." BELIEVE ME, HAD I KNOWN THEN WHAT I KNOW NOW, WE WOULD > HAVE CAUGHT MY CANCER MUCH EARLIER (BEFORE IT WAS A STAGE 3 CANCER)! INSIST ON > THE CA-125 BLOOD TEST; DON'T TAKE "NO" FOR AN ANSWER. > > THE NORMAL RANGE FOR A CA-125 BLOOD TEST IS BETWEEN ZERO AND 35. MINE WAS > 754...(THAT'S RIGHT, 754!) IF THE NUMBER IS SLIGHTLY ABOVE, YOU CAN HAVE > ANOTHER ONE DONE IN THREE OR SIX MONTHS AND KEEP A CLOSE EYE ON IT JUST LIKE WOMEN > DO WHEN THEY HAVE FIBROID TUMORS OR WHEN MEN HAVE A SLIGHTLY ELEVATED PSA > TEST (PROSTATE SPECIFIC ANTIGENS) THAT HELPS DIAGNOSE PROSTATE CANCER. HAVING > THE CA-125 TEST DONE ANNUALLY CAN ALERT YOU EARLY, AND THAT'S THE GOAL IN > DIAGNOSING ANY TYPE OF CANCER - CATCH IT EARLY. > > > Origins: This message has been circulating on the Internet since November 1998. There's no way to tell if the author's story is real or not, but the test she's pushing women to get is. However, the test that was her salvation is unlikely to be all that useful others, so please don't rush off to pressure your doctor into ordering one for you. Neither physicians nor the American Cancer Society recommend CA-125 as a screen for ovarian cancer because it yields too many false positive results. Fibroids, pelvic infections, liver disease and endometriosis can cause a rise of CA-125. Even worse, the test will often fail to detect the cancer. A doctor's reluctance, therefore, to order up this test no matter how hard she's pressured has nothing to do with not wanting to incur additional charges or waste staff time — it's purely a matter of not wanting to indulge in a test that is widely known to yield useless results. The American Cancer Society has come out against the use of the CA-125 blood test as a way to detect early instances of ovarian cancer. Although at first blush a 23 April 1999 article about <A HREF="http://www.cancer.org/eprise/main/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_3_1x_Assessing_Ovarian_Cancer">CA-125</A> on the American Cancer Society's web site looks like the ACS endorses the efficacy of this test in screening for ovarian cancer, a more careful reading reveals that the ACS endorses it only as a method for tracking how well treatment is progressing. (Once it's known a patient has ovarian cancer, CA-125 can be used to monitor the progress of the disease.) Says the American Cancer Society: > Although the study finds the CA-125 blood test useful for evaluating > treatment progress, the study results do not suggest the test can be used to screen > for ovarian cancer. A recent email making the rounds urged women to ask > their doctors for this test. For the CA-125 test to be a useful screening tool, > it would have to detect most ovarian cancers in their early stages and not > give positive results in women who do not have the cancer. The CA-125 test does > not meet these standards. > A related 4 June 1999 article on the ACS web site reports on a study undertaken to determine if <A HREF="http://www.cancer.org/eprise/main/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_3_1x_Ovarian_Cancer_Screening">CA-125</A> could be used as a reliable early detection tool in the fight against ovarian cancer. In a nutshell, no, it's not suitable. Although it might prove helpful in high-risk cases when used in conjunction with a pelvic exam, it's not the answer for women in the ordinary-risk category: > The study’s results point to the poor accuracy of the screening methods > used, Dr. Saslow added. "In other words, the screening tests missed too many > existing cancers and falsely detected too many cancers that did not in fact > exist," she said. > "In this particular study, for each of the six women who were diagnosed with > ovarian cancer as a result of screening, four additional women underwent > surgery unnecessarily," she said. "An additional 10 women who were screened > developed ovarian cancer within eight years although the test did not detect any > cancer. The poor accuracy of CA-125, even in combination with ultrasound, is > the primary reason why the American Cancer Society does not recommend > screening [with CA-125] for women at average risk." > And another article from the ACS' Ovarian Cancer Resource Center stresses that the CA-125 test is not a reliable detector of ovarian cancer in women who do not already demonstrate strong risk factors for the disease: > . . . some noncancerous diseases of the ovaries can also increase the blood > levels of CA-125 and some ovarian cancers may not produce enough CA-125 to > cause a positive test. When these tests are positive, it may be necessary to > do more x-ray studies or to take samples of fluid from the abdomen or tissue > from the ovaries to find out if a cancer is really present. For these reasons, > transvaginal sonography and the CA-125 blood test are not considered > accurate enough for ovarian cancer screening of women without known strong risk > factors. > The CA-125 is clearly not the way to go for those looking for a reliable early detection test. However, it's possible measuring the levels of lysophosphatidic acid in women might provide that information. (LPA stimulates the growth of ovarian cancer cells.) In one very small trial carried out at the Cleveland Clinic in Ohio involving 10 women with early-stage ovarian cancer, elevated LPA readings pinpointed 9 of them, while CA-125 readings detected only 2. Barbara "readings railroaded" Mikkelson Last updated: 6 September 2000 The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/toxins/ca125.htm Click <A HREF="http://www.snopes2.com/cgi-bin/comments/sendpage.asp">here</A> to e-mail this page to a friend Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2003 by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson This material may not be reproduced without permission