[palmer]

There are people who adapt well and even gain psychological benefits from what they believe is greatly reducing their cancer risk whether or not it is. Prophylactic medicine is usually based on bad statistics or lawyer medicine, not science. The genetic predisposition is probably overrated as well but I can understand doing amputation for that reason. It is a very individual decision based on the objective factors you mentioned but subjective factors for better or for worse.

So, there shouldn’t be cancer on the healthy side at all.

There's always abnormal cell growth somewhere. They will count DCIS and cysts and other abnormalities that isn't really cancer and does not "turn into" cancer.

[Tired of Taxes]

It’s not about psychological benefits. It’s not an irrational fear. The statistics show the risk is much higher than the general population for patients who have certain genetic mutations.

And, again, doctors are telling women without cancer who test positive for genetic mutations to undergo this surgery. They’re pushing it. That doesn’t mean we have to follow their advice. But it does mean that women aren’t coming up with the idea on their own. Oncologists have been recommending preventive surgery for a long time to these patients - long before a famous actress underwent the same surgery.

As for DCIS, I agree that sometimes it doesn’t become invasive cancer. But, at other times, it does. My pathology report showed a mixture of IDC and DCIS. So, very likely it started as DCIS and then turned invasive.