Refused a massage because I had cancer

[MinnieMountain]

I tried to book a massage at a new place yesterday but when I filled in their medical form and said I had cancer 8 years ago, they said they can't do it without a doctor's letter. Supposedly their insurance doesn't cover it as massage can cause any remaining cancer cells to grow again.

I'm astounded at their ignorance.

Has anyone else experienced this?

Active cancer is very different to someone who has been in remission for 8 years.

No, sorry, we’re not talking about active cancer here. Massage does not require special adaptation for cancer that was cured eight years ago in OPs case. And it’s been repeated several times - by myself included - that if cancer is active or treatment ongoing then a specialist practitioner experienced in how to treat recent surgery sites or other treatment protocols is a must. Not because there’s a danger of spread, but because these areas need lighter massage and more delicate protocols. The theory here is that massage spreads cancer cells - and that’s nonsense.

Or she can sue them for disability discrimination - which is what’s needed here to set a standard.

Yes. It is. Specialist massage is available for those who have lymphoedema because it requires a different approach. But the idea that massage spreads the cancer cells around the lymphatic system is utter nonsense.

Which is a completely different issue.

Exactly.

NO IT CAN’T.

This is quite scary. I had a minor breast cancer last year, lumpectomy followed by radio therapy. I’ve had a few massages since - and no-one suggested to me that it could be a problem. Both therapists had a medical form that we went through and this wasn’t raised as a possible issue.

It’s not an issue, don’t worry. The only scary thing is how misinformed so many people are.

Thank you .

Yes I know that which is why I have always said it.
So why am I being harassed about it?
The OP asked if anyone had been rejected for a massage after having cancer presumably for any reason…

I can become an issue because radiotherapy causes lymphodema which can appear even many years after treatment finishes.

Yes OP posted a myth, but it is not a myth that massage by someone not adequately qualified can be an issue if you have had cancer and then go on to develop lymphoedema.

It is important to be aware of this.

Unless, in rare case, the lymphoedema is caused by leukaemia which is also a side effect of radiotherapy for breast cancer as the radiation can cause the marrow of the ribs to develop leukaemia cells.

Yes, certain cancer treatments can cause cancer.

It won’t spread any residual breast cancer cells if the person is discharged from active treatment as no evidence of breast cancer, that part in the OP is a myth.

But if one has any symptoms of lymphoedema and has a history of cancer treatment especially radiotherapy, it’s best to contact your oncologist.

I don't think anyone is arguing that lymphoedema isn't something to be aware of, especially if someone was showing symptoms.

Most people with a history of cancer like OP or who have had a child with cancer like myself will be all too aware of the fact that cancer treatment can cause cancer.

There's nothing like signing a consent form to start cancer treatment for your child with the risks section full of wonderful words such as cancer, infections and death.

Ok? Then why do I keep getting replies that act like I’m repeating the OP? I have only mentioned it may be an issue if you have lymphoedema.

I was confused with your first response to me when I talked about massaging my son when he was in active treatment but I now know that what I thought you meant wasn't the case. Maybe others have had some confusion as well?

Perhaps. Although right before I replied to you I posted to OP about my aunt and lymphoedema requiring specialist massage.

And several times now I have explained that to you and others on this thread, it’s getting a bit tiresome.

Fair enough.

I agree that lymphoedema requires a specialist massage as well as someone who is in active treatment but OP is 8 years in remission with I'm assuming no symptoms of lymphoedema and I think that is what most people are commenting about as well as a few people insisting that the myth is correct.

When you responded to me the first time, I hadn't seen your previous comment about your aunt so I thought you were saying something very different.