Angelina Jolie has had preventive double mastectomy

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Look, I'll adit that I find it hard to care for something that couldn't affect me if it tried, but that's maybe because it's Jolie doing this and it must suck balls to have a friend or relative with breast cancer, but she generally did the right thing here, both for herself (and the drawbacks are pretty small: she has money both for plastic surgery and counselors) and the public (raising awareness).

As for the shitheads 'pitying' Pitt, instead of calling them names we should have fun at their expense: basement dwellers and 'cool brah' dudes, versus playboy millionaire married to a legendarily hot millionaire chick, now healthier and with even bigger tits than before. Man, any more onesided and it would be a Mobius strip.

[Broomstick]

Did she actually get bigger tits, or is that just an assumption?

And yeah, the angry virgin brigade element is pretty obviousl.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

Did she actually get bigger tits, or is that just an assumption?

And yeah, the angry virgin brigade element is pretty obviousl.

The only woman I can think of who was famous mainly because of her breasts/implants is Pamela Anderson, with Angelina it's her lips

Clearly these virgins missed the part where she still has her nipples, so it's not like she doesn't have any breasts any more, just that they're not entirely natural I wonder how many of them were jacking off to her sex scene in "Taking lives"?

[PainRack]

Now..... if only genetic screening is cheaper instead of its 3,000 dollars cost and the impact of that on your health insurance isn't so damaging.......

[Broomstick]

The screening costs that much in part because one company currently has a monopoly on it and part of the price is to recover "research costs", and the current "health care" "reform" is supposed to prevent discrimination based on genes.... but yeah, what you said.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

IMO, the screening for the gene is only half the battle, the next step logically is to remove the defective gene itself. Good luck doing that with every cell in the body though...

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Did she actually get bigger tits, or is that just an assumption?

It's an assumption. I made it to mock the permavirgins even harder.

I wonder how many of them were jacking off to her sex scene in "Taking lives"?

They might be jacking off to the sex scenes in Gia... uh, I mean... it's just an educated guess, you know... forget I said anything. I feel bad about this now.

IMO, the screening for the gene is only half the battle, the next step logically is to remove the defective gene itself. Good luck doing that with every cell in the body though...

Removing a trait from an already living organism is not biology as I understand it. Treating the organism to remove from future generations is how evolution works.

[Simon_Jester]

The near-certainty of breast cancer comes from mutations to the BRCA1 and 2 genes. The problem is that you can't just "knock out" the gene, you'd basically have to repair it. If you could do that, it would probably help because the DNA codes for production of certain proteins, and it's the protein that's the problem.

On the other hand, this would do nothing to benefit a woman's descendants unless you also fixed up any mutated BRCA genes in her ova.

[PainRack]

Broomstick, if I recall, cosmetic surgery to replace the boobs aren't covered under most health insurance in the States, right?

[Broomstick]

If the breasts are removed because of disease yes, it has to be covered. A number of years ago preventive mastectomy for women of high genetic risk of breast cancer was included under that rule. Technically, it's a considered a reconstructive and not cosmetic procedure.

[Broomstick]

CNN is running a gallery of self-portraits from a woman who underwent a mastectomy. I'm linking to it in case anyone is curious what a partial mastectomy looks like. The woman probably didn't have quite as good a reconstruction as Jolie did, the one pictured here seems to be of the sort that makes a woman look normal in clothing more than constructing a truly realistic breast. The again, this woman had actual cancer which allows for much less option - you can see how large a chunk was taken, a chunk dictated by the spread of disease and not other choices.

[EnterpriseSovereign]

The near-certainty of breast cancer comes from mutations to the BRCA1 and 2 genes. The problem is that you can't just "knock out" the gene, you'd basically have to repair it. If you could do that, it would probably help because the DNA codes for production of certain proteins, and it's the protein that's the problem.

On the other hand, this would do nothing to benefit a woman's descendants unless you also fixed up any mutated BRCA genes in her ova.

That's the thing with a lot of genetic diseases, because they don't manifest themselves until after their carrier has already reproduced natural selection cannot remove them.

[Grandmaster Jogurt]

Did she actually get bigger tits, or is that just an assumption?

And yeah, the angry virgin brigade element is pretty obviousl.

It's both disingenuous and somewhat insulting to try to boil this down to those people "being virgins". It ignores the actual issue of how women in the public eye aren't treated as people but public property (hence all the posts about the world having lost something here) and thus gets in the way of actually addressing it, and it turns virgin into an insult not just of experience but one of character.

[PKRudeBoy]

Did she actually get bigger tits, or is that just an assumption?

And yeah, the angry virgin brigade element is pretty obviousl.

It's both disingenuous and somewhat insulting to try to boil this down to those people "being virgins". It ignores the actual issue of how women in the public eye aren't treated as people but public property (hence all the posts about the world having lost something here) and thus gets in the way of actually addressing it, and it turns virgin into an insult not just of experience but one of character.

I don't think it's just women in the public eye that are treated as public property, but public figures in general. If athlete gets injured and can't play, or an artist can no longer create art, people will consider the public to have lost something. Granted, this will have nowhere near the effect on her ability to keep acting that the above issues would, but the public feels that it has the right to take issue with any decision that a public figure makes, which is total bullshit. People's private lives should be precisely that, private.