As soon as I was diagnosed with breast cancer, I started reading, researching, and investigating. I hunted down every bit of information I could find about the disease that had somehow tunneled through my breast tissue. What I found kept me in the know. I felt informed and in control -- and a bit skittish too.

My doctor once told me to stop reading. It was causing me too much worry, too much unnecessary stress. And while I didn't stop reading altogether, I did cut down on my Internet research. Since anyone can post anything on the Internet, it can be an iffy source of information. So iffy that some doctors -- like mine -- have expressed concern.

Doctors may be able to breathe a sigh of relief, though. According to a study published in the April issue of the International Journal of Medical Informatics, using the internet generally convinces patients that their doctors are right on track with their medical opinions.

Source: MAMM magazine, May/June 2007

A new study shows that getting a second opinion when diagnosed with breast cancer can make a big difference for the patient. The researchers at the University of Michigan in Ann Arbor reported that more than half of breast cancer patients that sought a second opinion got a different recommendation for treatment. The second opinions were from a multidisciplinary tumor board. The board includes many specialists who treat breast cancer. The tumor board usually consists of surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists and pathologists working together to find the most optimal treatment for the patient.

Sometimes first treatment recommendations do not consider new techniques. The tumor board can help patients make those difficult treatment decisions they are faced with when diagnosed. Most of the time the patient will see the specialists individually. This can be fine and is what I encountered when diagnosed, however, more heads working together seem to be a better option especially if you are a breast cancer patient with a case that falls in one of those gray areas where the need for radiation or chemotherapy is questionable.

I think this approach is becoming a more popular way to find the best treatment option for breast cancer patients. If a tumor board is not something that you can utilize it is still in the patient's best interest to seek out a second opinion when they can to make sure they are hearing what all of their options are for better decision making.

Heavy head. Heavy body. Sore throat. Sore gums. Swollen lymph nodes. Fever blister. Hurts to chew. Hurts to swallow. Hurts to recall last time symptoms appeared. During chemotherapy.

Drugs attacking cells. Body weak. Blood counts plummeting. Body crashing. Headache. Fever. Sore throat. Sore gums. Trip to hospital. For five days. For antibiotics. For opinions. For constant monitoring. For daily shots to rebuild blood.

Phone call to dentist who knows my burden. Of worry. And fear. And anxiety. That never really goes away. Always reappears. A virus, he says. All of it. The throat. The gums. The lymph nodes. The fever blister. Nothing more. Should last five to seven days. Don't worry. Relax. Call if it gets worse.

Feeling better. Feeling emotional. Because people are so kind. Like my dentist. Who eased my mind. Soothed my soul.

Time to march forward. For myself. For today.

We are not the homeliest bloggers in the hills, as Al Capp's Li'l Abner strip described the original Sadie Hawkins, but today is our version of the American folk tradition of Sadie Hawkins Day here at The Cancer Blog.

We are not going to ask you to dance because that would be silly -- this is a blog after all -- but we are inviting you to tell us what you would like to read more about -- what you would like to read less about -- and what you might like to read about that we haven't been blogging about at all.

More research -- less research; more human interest -- less human interest -- more blogging from a personal perspective -- less personal; more tips -- less tips in facing the struggles with cancer; more nutrition and recipes -- less food talk; more prevention topics -- less prevention.

We try in earnest, each and every day, to blog about important issues in all-things-cancer-related, but as we get dressed up in our finest each day, we are inviting you to give us an idea how close we come and how far we need to go in publishing what you want to know.

Hair colorist Jason Backe hopes hair dye does not cause cancer -- because he is covered in it every day in the Manhattan hair salon where he works. But the topic of hair dye and cancer has been on his mind lately -- because he has been fielding questions from clients about the possible link between the two ever since an American Journal of Epidemiology study was released and caused nationwide panic about hair dye upping the odds that women might contract lymphoma -- a cancer of the lymphatic system. But on Thursday, a New York Times article summed up opinions from both experts and hair stylists, revealing that most everyone believes this panic is not necessary.

Recent studies found that those who had ever used hair dye were 1.19 times more likely to get lymphoma than those who had never used it. Those who colored their hair before 1980 -- before then-questionable chemicals were removed from hair dyes -- were 1.39 more times likely to get the disease. Ann Curry on the Today Show said, "These are scary numbers," but Dr. Barnett Kramer, associate director for disease prevention at the National Institute of Health said, "Compared to risk factors for other diseases, those numbers are very small." Smoking makes people 10 to 60 more times likely to get lung cancer. According to Dr. Joseph K. McLaughlin, president of the International Epidemiology institute, if these numbers are true -- and that's a big if -- it would mean that using hair dye may present a remote risk to your health. But it would still be less risky than crossing a street, driving a car, not wearing a seat belt, or drunk driving.

I am not exactly in a panic about this whole issue. But before I heard the news about hair dye and cancer, I did dye my hair -- once. And I don't think I will do it again -- even though the risk may be small -- because I have already had cancer. And any amount of risk associated with any type of cancer is just something I don't want to mess with.

Delaying treatments or surgeries to get second or third opinions or to make up your mind what is best for you, can really make a difference in surviving bladder cancer. However, sometimes postponing bladder cancer surgery might prove to be fatal. 

More than 61,000 people are expected to be diagnosed with bladder cancer in the United States in 2006. Although most cases are caught before the cancer has spread, about 20 percent of bladder cancers are diagnosed when they have already grown into or through the bladder wall. About half of patients with bladder cancer this advanced die within 5 years after surgery. Not delaying surgery is a simple thing doctors and patients can do to improve the chances a patient will survive.

Research found that delaying surgery more than 3 months led to a higher death rate. Three years after surgery, the death rate from bladder cancer was 51percent in patients who waited more than 3 months, compared to 38 percent in those who had surgery within 3 months.

In one study researchers found one reason for the delay was that the patients were getting second and third opinions to see if the surgery was really needed. Other studies found delays in surgery because patients had other medical problems. This might have caused the delay and perhaps made them less likely to have a good outcome. But in reviewing the charts, they found that other medical conditions were a problem in only 15 percent of patients who delayed surgery. Just 12 percent delayed treatment because they had trouble making a decision about it. Most of the delays -- 46 percent -- were caused by scheduling problems for tests as well as the surgery.