100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

July 28, 2016 - Image 9

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

9

Thursday, July 28, 2016

The Michigan Daily — michigandaily.com NEWS

regiment — more extensive than
it’s necessary,” Katz said. “For
years, we’ve been talking about
overtreatment
of
cancer,
or

overtreatment of anything and
often blaming the doctors and
characterizing the doctor being
too aggressive. In one thing I
have researched and learned
was that patient’s partner often
would have the preference to
treat more extensive than it’s
clinically indicated.”

Katz believes patients who

think more extensive treatment
is better contributes to the rising
rates of double mastectomies. He
warned that extensive surgery,
not just mastectomies, can lead
to such side effects as life-long
swelling of the arms.

Katz believes there is a more

general problem: working with
patients to counter the immediate
reaction to a health threat.

There is an enormous need

for clinicians to help navigate
patients in their cancer treatment
since the decision is much more
complex than before, Katz stated.
Though the tests for breast
cancer usually can identify which
patient can benefit from which
treatment, in some situations, it
is uncertain what the best course
of action is. For such situations,
he said, patients want to go for
the more extensive treatment to
go back to their normal routine
or to assure themselves that they
did everything they could.

“It is the kind of psychological

factor that drive people to prefer
the most aggressive treatment
when in fact the most aggressive
treatment
will
not
improve

their health, life expectancy or

survival,” Katz said.

Katz
believes
doctors
are

trying
to
encourage
less-

intensive treatments to prevent
harm. Physicians recognize that
treatment can harm and even kill
patients, he said.

Sabel
wrote
that
double

mastectomies may, nevertheless,
be the right decision in uncertain
situations.

“The peace of mind (the

psychological
benefit)
of

bilateral mastectomies might be
a sound decision for them. It is
hard to say if it is ‘the best one’
and my job as a doctor isn’t to
make those decisions for the
patient, but to (educate) and
advise them,” he wrote. “Clearly
I try to steer patients away from
poor decisions, but when two
treatments have equal survivals,
even if one is more ‘drastic’ it is
hard to say it is a wrong decision.”

Sabel added that the key is to

learn why a patient wishes to
have a double mastectomy, while
informing what will or will not
work.

“So women who think they will

live longer because they have this
operation need more education,”
Sabel wrote. “But many women
are frightful of a (second) cancer,
even if the risk is low, and the
idea of yearly mammograms can
be stressful, particularly if they
get a call-back or need a biopsy.”

Ruth
Freedman,
chief

administrator of the University’s
Molecular
and
Behavioral

Neuroscience Institute, is an
advocate who leads the University
Breast Cancer Advocacy and
Advisory
Committee.
The

committee has monthly meetings
to provide the best information
for breast cancer patients and
survivors, helping them with
their decisions.

The committee aims to clarify

facts so that patients understand
their
best
course
of
action

and
become
knowledgeable

advocates. The committee also
communicates
regularly
with

researchers from organizations,
such as the American Cancer
Society, to give them feedback
on their work and clinical trials
on how it would affect their
patients.

While
acknowledging
that

the chance cancer can spread
from one breast to the other
breast is little and thus a double
mastectomy may be unnecessary,
Freedman
emphasized
the

decision is ultimately left to the
patient.

“For
them,
given
their

situation, (double mastectomy)
may be the best course of
treatment if they are young
women or single moms,” she
said. “Or if their own emotional
status is one that they can’t live
with the possibility of cancer in
the other breast, even if it could
go elsewhere as well, it’s not
necessarily a guard against any
other breast cancer.”

When it comes to decision

making,
Katz
recommended

patients
not
make
rushed

decisions. He stated that, being
diagnosed with breast cancer
is not a medical emergency, so
patients should take the time
to think, gather information
and
make
careful
decisions

with their physicians. Patients
should also find out rationales
for
recommendations,
he

emphasized, and be satisfied
with them.

Along
with
the
cognizant

patients,
doctors
should
be

mindful of the patients and keep
themselves updated on their
patients, he added.

understandable.
The
idea
that

“Clinton won fair and square”
is kind of out the window at this
point after it was revealed that the
party put its finger on the scale for
Clinton. It’s difficult for many to see
the nomination as legitimate.”

Kolenda added that he is unsure

of exact numbers, but the support
among members of his organization
is divided, with many going in both
directions.

With Michigan coming into

greater play this election season,
the turnout of students and whom
they support will play an important
role. Sanders, who endorsed Clinton
earlier this month, has called upon
his supporters to rally behind
Clinton, but to little avail. Monday
morning, he was booed when
addressing fans when he requested
that they stand behind the party’s
nominee.

Protesters, when asked about

Sanders’ endorsement of Clinton,
had a common response, stating
their movement is about more than
Sanders. Green said she believes
there needs to be change on a
grander scale and people should not
have to choose between only two
candidates.

“We need to be the change,” she

said. “That’s the bigger umbrella
reason of why I’m here. Bernie
Sanders is amazing, but he’s one
person, and we all need to be in this
together. … We believe that this is
not the end and we do not have to
choose between the lesser of two
evils.”

Kolenda
agreed
with
this

sentiment,
saying
that
the

movement has become larger than
just the presidential election and
students.

“Sanders was incredibly popular

with most people under 45,” he
wrote. “He came incredibly close
to the nomination, even with the
DNC actively trying to harm his
campaign ... There are also many
Sanders supporters (some I know
personally) who are now running
for office. The movement is more
than just young college students.”

Despite the large crowds of

protestors at the convention, and
the overarching movements, many
still believe students will rally
behind Clinton.

University Public Policy lecturer

Rusty Hill said he believes most
students will vote for Clinton, while
those who will vote third party or
for Trump will stem more from
young working people.

“I think there is a divide among

young people,” he said. “On college
campuses, the youth that vote will
overwhelmingly
for
Secretary

Clinton, but among non-college
youth,
those
people
that
are

working, trying to scratch some jobs
together, there may be some ground
for a Trump or third-party vote.”

Kelly agreed with this sentiment,

stating he believes students on
campus will rally behind Clinton,
with only a few stragglers voting
third party.

“Sen. Sanders knows himself that

it’s about the movement, not just
one person,” he said. “I think we
will see a lot of his supporters start
going the fold and getting excited
about electing Clinton.”

DNC
From Page 1

MASTECTOMY
From Page 3

The incumbent Warpehoski —

who is the director of the local
Interfaith Council for Peace &
Justice — held his City Council
seat since 2012 and disagrees
with Leeser’s assessment of city
affairs. While he acknowledges
Leeser holds positions aligned
with many locals, Warpehoski
argues he pragmatically accounts
for both his constituents’ needs
and the opinions of experts.

“The role of elected officials

is to listen to everybody, the
constituents as well as the subject
matter experts — the traffic
engineers, the attorney — taking
all of that in and making the
best decision for the good of the
community,” Warpehoski said.
“It’s not always governing by the

poll numbers. It’s not about doing
whatever the experts say; it’s
about bringing that all together
into a holistic approach to public
service.”

While
Leeser
has
been

outspoken in arguing the Ann
Arbor deer cull has been a waste
of city resources, Warpehoski
maintains the opinion of expert
ecologists in his support for a
continued lethal cull. Leeser
supports immediate action to
petition for EPA intervention
on the Gelman dioxane plume
— a widely debated city issue —
while Warpehoski insists city
and county authorities pursue
the federal option only if it can
be better handled by federal
authorities than by Michigan’s
environmental regulators.

WARD
From Page 2

Read more at MichiganDaily.com

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan