did angelina jolie make a mistake by acting on the 'breast cancer

7/28/2019 Did Angelina Jolie Make a Mistake by Acting on the 'Breast Cancer

1/11

193 23 24.5K

Search this site:

Search

User login

Username or e-mail: *

Password: *

Create new account

Request new password

Log in

GreenMedInfo.com

Like

59,614 people like GreenMedInfo.com .

Social Networking

Support Free Media

Become A Sponsor

View Our Sponsors

Advertise/Collaborate

Become a MemberBecome an Affiliate

Link To Us

About Us

Did Angelina Jolie Make A Mistake By Acting On The 'BreastCancer Gene' Theory?

Posted on: Tuesday, May 14th 2013 at 12:45 pm

Written By: Sayer Ji, Founder

T h e ' p r o p h y l a c t i c ' r e m o v a l o f w o m e n ' s b r e a s t s d u e t o B R CA 1 / B R CA 2

s t a t u s h a s b e c o m e a d i st u r b i n g l y p o p u l a r t r e n d , an d i n c r e a s i n g l y i t i s

b e i n g c e l eb r a t e d i n t h e m a i n s t r e a m m e d i a an d m e d i ca l e st a b l i s h m e n t s

a s a r e a s o n a b l e c h o i c e . B u t d o e s t h e s c i e n t i f i c e v i d e n c e i t s e l f r e f u t e

t h i s a p p r o a c h ?

Angelina Jolie's recent announcement in a New York Times op-ed that she had a 'prophylactic'

double mastectomy due to her BRCA1/BRCA2 status has disturbing implications, some of which

we covered late last year in connection with Allyn Rose, the 24-year old Miss America contestant

who announced she would be undergoing a double mastectomy to "prevent" breast cancer .

Beyond the fact that as high-profile celebrities their decisions will affect millions of women's

perception of the procedure, likely making them more accepting of the concept, their decisions also

reflect profound misconceptions about gene-mediated disease risk embedded deeply with in popular

consciousness, from which prevailing medical opinion is hardly immune.

First, there is a common misconception about the role that the so-called breast cancer susceptibility

3K

Tweet

24337 28 11k

LikeEmail StumbleUpon ShareThis

Home Explore Tools Articles Store My Account FAQ Contact

Angelina Jolie Make A Mistake By Acting On The 'Breast Cancer http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/did-angelina-jolie-make-mistake-a...

11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


2/11

genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, play in breast cancer disease risk and prognosis. BRCA mutations vary

widely by ethnicity and are exceedingly rare in the general population, which is why, as

NBCNews.com recently reported , "The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommends that only

women with a strong family history even think about get ting a BRCA genetic test which is only 2

percent of U.S. women." But even in those in which a BRCA mutation is identified, the genes, in

and of themselves, do not alone make the disease.

Despite the commonplace refusal of so-called 'evidence-based medicine' to acknowledge the actual

evidence of genetics, we moved into a Post-Genomic era over a decade ago following the

completion of first draft of the enti re human genome in 2000. At that moment, the central dogma

of molecular biology that our DNA controls protein expression, and therefore disease risk was

disproved. Our genome was found to contain roughly 20,000 genetic instructions not even

enough to account for the 100,000 proteins in the human body!

As a result, we must now accept that factors beyond the control of the gene, known as epigenetic

factors, and largely determined by a combination of nutrition, psychospiritual states that feed back

into our physiology, lifestyle factors, and environmental exposures, constitute as high as 95% of

what determines any disease risk. In fact, even the psychological trauma associated with being

diagnosed with cancer can drive malignancy via adrenaline-mediated multi-drug resistance, [i] and

according to a recent NEJM study, lead up to a 26-fold increased risk of heart-related deaths in the

seven days following diagnosis. [ii]

Given this fact, Jolie's decision to have a bilateral mastectomy in order to excise from her body the

breast tissue that contains BRCA1/BRCA2 genes which are known to interfere with the repair of

radiation-induced DNA damage, rather than focusing on reducing or eliminating all future radiation

exposure from her breasts, or incorporating hundreds of nutritional components

experimentally confirmed to protect against radiation and associated genotoxic insults to the

breast, reflects a iron clad faith in the inevitability of gene-driven cancer vis--vis a fundamentally

powerless subject, versus trust in the body's ability to prevent and heal all disease , assuming it has

the right conditions.

Another common misconception is that you either have, or don't have the "BRACA genes," as if

they were monolithic entities, ascertained with the black and white certainty of a pregnancy test. Itis a little known fact that thousands of "mutations" in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes have already

been identified and characterized on a molecular level, adding much more complexity to the picture

than the present level of medical knowledge can claim to convert into compelling statistical risk

calculations and actionable treatment recommendations.

These mutations are technically known as gene polymorphisms which are naturally occurring

variations of a gene present in more than 1% of the populations. It will come to many as a

surprise to learn that some of these so-called "mutations" actually REDUCE the risk o f

breast cancer . BRCA1 variation K1 183R is related inversely to cancer risk, leading the authors of

a review on the topic titled, "The case against BRCA1 and 2 testing," to conclude: "It seems that

some polymorphisms may actually have a protective effect." [iii] Moreover, research exists showing

that BRCA2 mutation carriers and non-carriers have similar breast cancer-specific rates of breast-

cancer specific death, [iv] and that although BRCA positive patients have more frequently negative

prognostic factors, their prognosis appears to be equal to or better than in patients with normal,

also known as wild-type, BRCA. [v]

Another concerning blind spot in the framing of Jolie's decision is that approximately 70,000 breast

cancers (31% of annual breast cancers diagnoses) are misdiagnosed by the vast breast cancer

'awareness' and treatment complex each year. [vi] These are not just so-called "zero stage"

breast cancers such as Ductal Carcinoma In Situ (DCIS), which arguably should be reclassified

as non-cancerous normal variations in breast morphology, but 50% are known as early-stage

"invasive" breast cancers [view NEJM study video analysis here ].

How many of these women, having received a mammography-detected diagnosis of breast cancer

and then a follow up BRCA test, believed that the gene must have therefore "caused" t he "cancer"?

The popularization of this crude way of understanding natural, sometimes self-limiting variations in


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


3/11

breast morphology as cases of "breast cancer" is itself a malignancy that should be prevented and

treated with healthy doses of the very 'evidence' that the so-called 'evidence-based' medical

system claims to possess as a differentiating factor from other, more ancient, plant- and

nutrition-based medical traditions.

Last November, an article published in NEJM found that 1.3 million US women were

overdiagnosed and overtreated for so-called "breast cancer" in the past 30 years. These were

screen-detected abnormal breast findings that would never have progressed to cause harm in the

women in which they were diagnosed. These women, while essentially iatrogenic victims of

medicine, being given standard treatment options, including mastectomy, lumpectomy, radiation,

chemotherapy, were considered statistically as "survivors" whose lives were saved by the medical

establishment, and these cases further inflated the statistics to make it appear that conventional

treatment interventions are far more effective than they actually are.

Given these facts, Jolie's decision conceals a dark side that she, like millions of other American

women, are completely unaware of. For example, look at the soaring stock response of Myriad

Genetics, the patent-holders of the human genes BRCA1/BRCA2, soon after Jolie's announcement

in this Yahoo Finance article published today: Myriad Genetics Shares Climb After Angelina Jolie Has

Mastectomy .

The Utah-based company, contrary to popular opinion, owns patents on your BRCA genes (men

have them too). And not only that, as a recent Slate article explains:

[Myriad Genetics] claims to own the rights to any test for the presence of the two

critical genes associated with breast cancer, and it has ruthlessly enforced that right,

though their test is inferior to one that Yale University was willing to provide at much

lower cost. The consequences have been tragic: Thorough, affordable testing that

identifies high-risk patients saves lives. Blocking such testing costs lives. Myriad is a

true example of an American corporation for which profit trumps all other values,

including the value of human life itself.

Given the fact that powerful, profit-driven corporations stand to reap profound financial benefitfrom the propagation of an oversimplified gene-driven theory of breast cancer susceptibility, we

must be cautious in jumping on the mainstream media and medical bandwagon by viewing Jolie's

increasingly popular decision uncritically. Consider also that women who undergo these

mastectomies often opt for breast implants which themselves have been linked to cancer, as we

discussed in our article from last year, " Implanted: The Myth of the Cancer-Free Breast

Implant ," and which only recently were linked to more aggressive breast cancer , and lower breast

cancer survival rates.

What we want is the truth when it comes to understanding breast cancer risk, its natu ral history,

and what preventive and therapeutic steps should be employed to reduce i ts progression and

associated suffering. Unfortunately, however, the breast cancer industry's influence stretches from

academia to government, from KFC buckets of fried chicken to Smith & Wesson's pink ribbon-

branded fire arms. All the more important to read between the lines, and remember that we alone

are responsible for educating ourselves, so that a truly informed choice is made possible.

Please use our breast cancer health guide for direct access to the peer-reviewed and published

research on natural and integrative breast health interventions: Health Guide: Breast Cancer

Resources

[i] GreenMedinfo.com, Stress Hormones Found To Make Cancer Resistant To Treatment

[ii] GreenMedInfo.com, Research: Some Diagnoses Can Kill You Quicker Than The

Cancer

[iii] Cheryl Lin, Tina Sasaki, Aaron Strumwasser, Alden Harken. The case against BRCA 1 and

2 testing . Surgery. 2011 Jun ;149(6):731-4. PMID: 21621683


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


4/11

[iv]Mario Budroni, Rosaria Cesaraccio, Vincenzo Coviello, Ornelia Sechi, Daniela Pirino, Antonio

Cossu, Francesco Tanda, Marina Pisano, Grazia Palomba, Giuseppe Palmieri. Role of BRCA2

mutation status on overall survival among breast cancer patients from Sardinia . BMC

Cancer. 2009 ;9:62. Epub 2009 Feb 20. PMID: 19232099

[v] Andrea Veronesi, Clelia de Giacomi, Maria D Magri, Davide Lombardi, Martina Zanetti,

Cristina Scuderi, Riccardo Dolcetti, Alessandra Viel, Diana Crivellari, Ettore Bidoli , Mauro

Boiocchi. Familial breast cancer: characteristics and outcome of BRCA 1-2 positive and

negative cases . BMC Cancer. 2005 ;5:70. Epub 2005 Jul 4. PMID: 15996267

[vi] New England Journal of Medicine, Effect of Three Decades of Screening

Mammography on Breast-Cancer Incidence

Sayer Ji is an author, researcher, lecturer, and advisory board member of theNational Health Federation .

He founded Greenmedinfo.com in 2008 in order to provide the world an open

access, evidence-based resource supporting natural and integrative modalities. It is

internationally recognized as the largest and most widely referenced health resource of its kind.

Disclaimer : This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views

expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of GreenMedInfo or its staff.

Commenting is limited to users that have the Member or Professional role.

To comment:

Login if you have a membership

Sign up for the Member role

Sign up for the Professional role

Recommended Related Articles

How X-Ray Mammography Is Accelerating TheEpidemic of Cancer

13,136 views


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


5/11

Submitted by VDR928 on Sat, 2013-05-25 22:47.

Health Guide: Breast Cancer

Print Options

Some features are currently member only features. If you are already a member, please login .

Otherwise, click here to become a member.

Printer-friendly version Send to friend PDF version

Facebook Comments

GMI Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the co mments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Su pport Angelina's right to Choose!

I eat according to Weston Price/paleo principals (no processed foods, no dairy, sugar, white stuff,

I am grain free, only eat pastured grass finished beef, etc) I make my own deodorant, lotion...

you get the picture... but I disagree with most of what is being said. I think Angelina did whatshe researched and thought was right FOR HER and her family. Her aunt tried the holistic

approach and now has stage 4 BC. My husband's WHOLE family has had prostate and breast

cancer. I don't need the tests to know they have the gene. Some of them eat VERY healthy and

grow their own organic vegetables, etc. Didn't change things.... ALL (but the youngest

son...YET) had prostate or breast cancer (and there are 13 children in the family.

The thought that Angelina would do this for stocks, patents, etc is ludicrous!! She does not need

money for anything. I agree with whoever said "you have gone to far to the other side". Let it

hit your spouse or yourself and see what you think then? Things change! My husband had

surgery followed by radiation and he is cancer free 7 years out even though the cancer had

penetrated the prostate capsule. Sometimes it works, folks!! Praise God for these treatments

when needed. These days breasts can be reconstructed better than ever using our own tissue.

Why risk it with the kind of money Angelina has?! I do not blame her one bit for doing what she

thought was right and I don't think anyone else should judge her, either. Someday it may be

Facebook social plu in

Posting as Gary Moller (Change)

Add a comment...

Post to Facebook

Kenny Ray Top Commenter

Another day, another psyops.

Council on Foreign Relations Jolie, good little girl. Selling what the medical mafia is pushing.

Hollywood propaganda and mind control merges with corporate interests....again. Someone thinks there is much profit to bemade.

Sometime soon there may be a paparazzi photo of Angela's reconstructed assets and everyone will say "My, what a good jobthey did."

Edward Bernays would be proud.Reply Like Follow Post May 17 at 1:09pm2

Mark Goodman ND North Las Vegas, Nevada

Is Angelina a Myriad Genetics stockholder?

Reply Like Follow Post May 21 at 11:31am

Follow

Save settings


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


6/11

Submitted by prettycool on Sun, 2013-05-26 02:09.

Submitted by Gay N Gooen on Thu, 2013-05-16 07:36.

Submitted by rogerbird2@hotm... on Wed, 2013-05-15 16:03.

you... Whatever happened to kindness and understanding? Trying to see the other's point of

view?

She did because doctors told her too

She did it based on that if she didn't she would surely develop cancer. That is the wrong

mentality. We can base our life on statistics. Her mother died from ovarian cancer not breast

cancer. With breast cancer you have a 90% of survival rate with ovarian a 46% chance. I

don't let stats rule my life. I don't focus on that. We are not our genes and even dr. bruce

lipton a geneticist has stated that quite clearly. If you ever read "The Biology of Belief" he

clearly states that if we assume we are going to get cancer we do especially if we have a

predispositon for it. I have a predisposition for thyroid cancer however I don't even think or

worry about. We can get sick at anytime, cutting off your boobs cause you think it can or will

prevent cancer is not a guarantee. 90% of women who do develop ovarian or breast cancer

do not have a disposition for it . Your husband developed most likely out of now where. Her

case is different. She wasn't sick, and she has carried this gene all her life. Sometimes I think

was if she did or hadn't gotten check would she be ok or would she have been sick? I say that

self fulfilling prophecies are quite powerful. If we have enough fear of cancer we will develop

it in the future. These are things that should be thought about quite thoroughly and carefully.

The Most Sad Part of This...

is that people (not just women) have given the responsibility for their health away to a group of

"professionals" who were probably never trained in nutrition, stress reduction, or the process of

food as medicine.

Gay

Response to signalfire

According to www.gapminder.com/world, in 2002, South Korea has a breast cancer rate o f 20 /

100,000. Japan has a breast cancer rate of 33 / 100,000. The USA had a breast cancer rate of

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


7/11

Submitted by prettycool on Wed, 2013-05-15 11:39.

Submitted by forbiddenhealing on Wed, 2013-05-15 09:41.

101. This shows a tremendous difference. My wife is from Philippines and her family is from the

sticks, or as they say, the boondocks. Yes, "boondocks" is a Filipino word. Before coming here,

she had never heard of breast cancer before. Their rate at www.gapminder.com/world is 47 /

100,000. Clearly, we are causing a lot of breast cancers.

It may be a bunch of things that are causing the problem that also include diet. It is hard to get

away from the fact that franken-foods are at the bottom of a lot of our problems. Remember, my

dear, what conventional wisdom says is a healthy diet is not a health diet when seen in the light

of the Theory of Evolution and thousands of years of tradition.

If the chances of getting breast cancer were reduced to 1/3 of what it is they currently are, then

Angelina Jolie would not have mutilated herself and then tried to pass it off as a wonderful thing

to do. Sayer Ji may not talk much about evolutionary eating; he may call it traditional eating or

green eating. But he is a closet paleo person, sort of. In any case, what he focuses our

attention on is eating that is at least Weston A. Price style or traditional or paleo.

But you suggest that other things are involved. You could very well be right. I have seen

numbers that indicate that bras are highly suspect. Chinese Medicine says that all diseases are

disease of stagnation. Wearing a bra is certainly going to cause stagnation, and the more and

the tighter the bra, the more the stagnation.

I also have room in my mind for the thought that women are bombarded in our culture withthought forms and vibes of extreme lust which are focuses on their chests. I, of course, don't do

this because I am so freaking spiritual. The previous sentence is a lie. (:->)

Good luck.

Just Wrong

I was absolutely appalled that she did this, I was upset that someone convinces someone to get

rid of their boobs because of a gene that they have carried all their life. This woman is a healthy

37 year old mother of 6! I just don't get this. We are not our genes! That is why I feel so upset.

It says that women who carry her gene a likely to develop it young but that didn't happen for

her. I know she has chances but we all have chances of developing diseases. We can't alter our

bodies because we think we can prevent something from happening, this is insane! It's 90% of

women who do develop breast cancer are not even carriers. I am hoping women will change their

mentality will stop such a stupid trend like this.

Fear Sells

Once fear grabs your ego and the darkside of imagination runs wild, you can be made to doanything..at gun-point so to speak...

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


8/11

Submitted by signalfire on Wed, 2013-05-15 08:17.


Those wielding fear and doubt know all too well that they are in the drivers seat...and that the

consciousness of their victims has been paralyzed....This is mind theft pure and simple...And

lowers the resonant frequency of your molecular being...power!

Look at the very profitable solutions to artificial fears...9/11 (War), disease

(Pharma/Obamacare), cancer/research (pink ribbons), oil shortages (war/risky mining), famine

(GMOs), death (religion), laws (corporate monopoly)....the list goes on...

The problem is...

The problem is that DCIS can go from 'pre-cancerous' to invasive to the lymph nodes with

alarming speed. Who wants to go for repetitive radiological checkups (because almost no docs

do 'manual exams' anymore and they're not 100% useful) over and over again waiting for what

seems the inevitable, when you can remove the tissue that you're not using (Jolie doesn't nurse

her adopted children, right?) and remove most of the worry, especially if you seem to have a

family history, a genetic propensity for the disease, and watched your mother die from it?

You've gone too far over to the other side; until the alternative treatments are shown to be

100% effective, they are just as worrisome a treatment as radiation and chemo. I don't think

radiation and chemo work, and I know they're toxic; I don't know if the others work either

(there's no way to tell except use them and wait); I was just diagnosed with early BC and I'm

using a lumpectomy and nutritive approach but it's nervewracking as hell; my insurance won't

pay for the bilateral prophylactic approach, only on one side that has already had cancer in it;I'm waiting until the other side gets cancer and then I'll insist on the bilateral. I'd rather get rid

of the threat than worry about it. It's not like I'm using the organs anymore at 60 years of age,

but my age has nothing to do with it considering the alternative...

Why do people keep bowing down to the all-holy breast? Because of men's reaction to it? If

some other body part you weren't really making use of (except as an all-important sex object)

was threatening to kill you prematurely, wouldn't you remove it? Why are we not having this

conversation about gall bladders? Or appendixes? It's time to take the sexual issues out of this

and look at it as calmly as possible; we're all living in a toxic world and sometimes these toxins

are going to try to kill us. She did what she thought was best for her and I applaud both the

decision, and the decision to discuss it publicly. She's not a sex object, she's a person with one

opinion that I'm glad she voiced, and I'm glad she opened up a dialogue about this.

What? Me worry?

signalfire, there isn't any worry if she had pursued a Weston A. Price, paleo, or otherwise

healthy diet. there is only a worry if she insisted upon going to parties until late at night

eating any kind of garbage her cravings dictated, etc. etc. etc. Cancer is not a problem for

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


9/11

Submitted by Sayer Ji on Wed, 2013-05-15 10:02.

Submitted by signalfire on Wed, 2013-05-15 14:23.

Submitted by lakhana on Wed, 2013-05-15 07:50.

99% of all people who are stridently health oriented.

Roger

DCIS

How often does DCIS rapidly grow to life-threatening status? We will never know, because

when this mostly asymptomatic, screen-detectable "lesion" is detected it is almost

immediately "treated." The few natural history studies that exist indicate that it would likely

never progress to cause harm in women, much less even symptoms of disease. Please

research this more in-depth, and I t rust you will come to a more balanced understanding of

the topic, which may mean that you accept DCIS is not even cancer.

Reply to both above...

Sayer, I appreciate your site, it seems the most informative of all of them I've seen , and I

am researching the issue but it takes a while to get up to speed when so much of the

information is pharmaceutical company and 'conventional medicine' propaganda. I was

diagnosed with more than DCIS, I had a 1.2 cm invasive ductal, clean margins and clean

sentinel LN bx but with now just as worrisome LCIS and DCIS in the removed specimen.

My choice was to have lumpectomy and I requested a BPM of the insurance company,

which was denied. Since I'm a 44DD, I opted not to do just one side; that would make

me pretty lopsided; if it recurs, and now I'm on high alert, I'll request the bilateral again.

To answer the other poster, many, many people who eat 'right', exercise regularly, etc.

have been diagnosed with cancer. There's far more issues involved in both the acquisition

of any given disease and its treatment. We have all been exposed to mega-amounts of radiation from nuclear tests, pesticides, tens of thousands of ecological poisons, et c.

Telling someone they 'just didn't eat right' is insulting. Wait a few decades and see how

you do being exposed by our corrupt corporate Wall Street and Madison Avenue form of

government...

Just the beginning

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive


11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


10/11


Submitted by tracychess on Wed, 2013-05-15 06:40.

One must not forget Angelina Jolie has made mill ions from her movies and other revenues. She

is a spokesperson for the World Health Organization that wishes to vaccinate everyone. She is

part of the thinking associated with a New World Order, if not directly part of it. She may have

even "sacrificed" herself (which is not uncommon at all for those like-minded) so this "remedy"

can be pushed on women. She is either just as ignorant as the rest of the populous (highly doubt

it) or she has motive.

Since most people look up to the Angelina Jolie types (movie stars and athletes) and cannot

think for themselves or are so brainwashed even the evidence cannot reach them, there will bethousands, maybe a few million world-wide who will follow her decision. Unfortunately for the

rest of us who are sane, clear thinking people and know the truth, the powers that be will use

this to force us to join the ranks or be labeled mentally ill - it's happening right now in a few

states under so-called gun control laws. Vets and others who do not fit the bill have been

diagnosed mentally unstable and had their guns confiscated without any other reason. Medicine

is next. Anyone eating organically, sustainable food and avoiding pesticides, who actively protests

against Monsanto's GMO crops will be diagnosed paranoid - wait and see.

I am astonished at some people's lack of intuition.

My intuition is screaming. Even if I knew nothing about alternative healing, this breast-ectomy

would deeply offend me. It's sick. But I do know about alternative healing, and so it makes my

outrage even greater. This is a sin; it is crime again God. I notice that the oncologists are not

suggesting that men should have their testicles removed in order to avoid testicular cancer; this

is mainly because most oncologists are men.

Treating Sickness with Sickness

Frankly, I am saddened and dismayed by the fact that a group of medical professionals could

convince an innocent woman to have her breasts cut away and replaced with a prostheti c (that

looks even better?) to avoid a disease they don't understand, based on a genetic factor they

clearly don't understand either. I guess in some ways it is to be expected, given the fact that

medicine, possibly che-mother-apy failed her mother; even though the cancer statistics probably

say her mother's doctors succeeded, because she lived more than 5 years after diagnosis.

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive

Flag as offensive


f 11 5/06/2013 12:01 p.m.


11/11

Submitted by goldphysh on Tue, 2013-05-14 19:43.

Hey Doc, I'm worried about getting brain cancer .....

It's sad pathetic and ludicrous to think anyone can prevent disease by chopping off one's bodyparts.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the co mments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Login or Register to write a comment

Flag as offensive

Save settings

Privacy Policy Return Policy About Us Contact Us Sitemap


did angelina jolie make a mistake by acting on the 'breast cancer

Documents