Older BRCA test results may need retesting

As a naturopathic physician, I am interested in primary prevention, preventing illness, not just catching it early. Because of that, I was encouraged in 2007, based on my family history and European Jewish ancestry, to have the BRCA genetic test. I breathed a small sigh of relief when my test came back negative. I kept up my diagnostic imagining and self-exams along with my pristine lifestyle.

When I was nonetheless diagnosed with breast cancer earlier this year, I was asked to have genetic testing done. When I reported that I already had and was negative, I was encouraged to get RE-TESTED, that much more was known now about these genes. Lo and behold on RE-TEST, I was positive. After a double mastectomy, chemotherapy and radiation, I slated myself for a visit with an oncologic gynecologist in order to plan for removing my ovaries and fallopian tubes. In the end, I had a complete hysterectomy and cancer was found on both ovaries, luckily caught very early; I am about to begin treatment again.

The point of this story and this post is this: If you tested negative for the BRCA gene since the late 1990s, meet with your genetics counselor and see if you should be RE-TESTED; it just might save your life.

Read the full, original story: BRCA test and re-test

{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.singularReviewCountLabel }}
{{ reviewsTotal }}{{ options.labels.pluralReviewCountLabel }}
{{ options.labels.newReviewButton }}
{{ userData.canReview.message }}
screenshot at  pm

Are pesticide residues on food something to worry about?

In 1962, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring drew attention to pesticides and their possible dangers to humans, birds, mammals and the ...
glp menu logo outlined

Newsletter Subscription

* indicates required
Email Lists
glp menu logo outlined

Get news on human & agricultural genetics and biotechnology delivered to your inbox.