datarebecca.bsky.social
Data nerd, mother of boys, breast cancer survivor. Granddaughter of immigrants.
16 posts
13 followers
106 following
Conversation Starter
comment in response to
post
the budget?
comment in response to
post
YES this, I am coming up on 5 years and have spent the past four coming to terms with the fact that "stage 1 cancer survivor" is a low-level chronic illness, which I did not have before.
comment in response to
post
huh I hear about cold capping every few weeks in a survivor group and I've never heard anyone ask about this. (I was lucky enough to not get chemo)
comment in response to
post
I want a weight-watcher style point system, complete with a target, for my avoiding-recurrence choices.
comment in response to
post
1. Good.
2. Now do all the others!
comment in response to
post
The Washington Post had an article a few years ago on picking a "nudge word" instead of resolutions and that's been a helpful framing for me. Reflecting and picking the word is a powerful exercise onto itself.
comment in response to
post
Adding - non-bc-specialist doctor awareness and education!
My obgyn was dismissive of my concerns about family history in a convo about hormonal birth control and the right answer was EXACTLY OPPOSITE - to send me to a genetic counselor or something, I didn't know to ask for that but he should have.
comment in response to
post
Sort of. But you wouldn't have thought "carefully check the math" was something you needed to request before this. I feel like the trick is that it's a different gotcha each time. (Though: a big careful prompt of basic things you should just check would still be a win.)
comment in response to
post
WOW I feel like "high interactions with tamoxifen" whatever that means is something doctors should be more vocal about with patients (esp in areas where cannabis is easily accessible). I've discussed alcohol with my doctor but I think never cannabis.
comment in response to
post
Oh, and about the “routine screening” at age 41.5: that took tremendous helpings of both luck and privilege plus a pretty awful family history. Access to screening feels personal for me and I’m always here for a conversation about expanding access, especially if I can bring my data-nerd self to it.
comment in response to
post
Oh, and about the “routine screening” at age 41.5: that took tremendous helpings of both luck and privilege plus a pretty awful family history. Access to screening feels personal for me and I’m always here for a conversation about expanding access, especially if I can bring my data-nerd self to it.
comment in response to
post
As a non-med who looks at data all day I REALLY wish the buckets had been 0-6 and 6-12 years to align with the LNG-IUS window since the "adjustment for censoring" would be doing less work here. BUT still looks like a clear effect even in the 0-5 group.