I already met the oncologist - the same week I met the surgeon, as they decided on a recommendation of what to do first. They decided on the surgery first which was fine with me. I'm now recovering from that, as noted elsewhere. I am now scheduled to return to the oncologist in 2-3 weeks. I like her a lot. She is a fellow, having practiced as a pathologist first and now getting additional training to work as an oncologist. Thus she has a sharper knowledge of the pathology behind it all than the average doctor. I am low on most risk factors with the glaring exception of being triple negative.

If the team should recommend against doing chemo, I will seek out a second opinion. (I think they will, BTW, but you never know.) I really don't cherish the idea of having chemo at all but I have read that 40% of triple negative patients have recurrence in the first few years. Even more importantly, IMO, is that the recurrence might not make its appearance in a relatively harmless location like the other breast. It could be in my liver, my brain, my bones. This is the stuff that can kill you in addition to making you suffer a lot in the process. I would rather go through shorter term suffering now, if there's a chance it will protect me later. I know there's no guarantee about anything, including my lifespan, but I would hate to forego the treatment now and possibly finding myself in stage 4 next year, wondering why I didn't do it.

Thanks for caring. I'll keep you posted. It helps to have others who speak the language.