Not All There

I'm not one to follow the lives of celebrities. But I've heard Angelina Jolie recently opted to have a double mastectomy based on having a defective gene that increases her risk of breast cancer by 87%. People seem to be applauding her for it. Now I get that it takes a lot of courage to lop off one's breast and it's a traumatic thing. In this case however, it seems to me to be... stupid. The gene increases her risk by 87%. Seems high, doesn't it? But that doesn't mean she has an 87% risk of developing it, only that it's an increase of 87% to whatever percentage the average woman risks. For those of you not getting it, this is a multiplication problem, not an addition question. Well, it's both, technically. The average risk is 12%. Which means Jolie's risk is about 20%. It's not a comforting number to stand against, I imagine. But one imagines she could reduce her risk with whey grass, high colonics and Scientology if she would but ask one of her Hollywood doctors. And correct me if I'm wrong but Jolie smokes. Or did smoke. Or has smoked in movies at least. Which greatly increases her risk of lung cancer. Is she going to have both her lungs removed too?