…

I’ve been aware of some of these studies being done and it set off alarms in my mind. This is exactly how the government will be able to cut back on health care coverage. They will quote a study and deny coverage. It is an outrage, and I would hope that the Breast Cancer awareness groups will tackle it. The study is even suggesting self breast exam is unnecessary. Just not true. Many women have found the lump early and that is indeed what sends them to their MD.

You’ve also brought up another very important point, Jaded. Most medical studies involved men, even for conditions that affected both men and women. It has only been the recent past that began to see women studied. Who knew women had heart disease, high blood pressure, strokes? Oh we did, but women were not part of the medical models being focused on. Neither did they receive as aggressive treatment as men. We are still fighting that battle.

.. even for those not considered “at risk”. One of my best friends started having routine mammograms in her late 30′s and good thing, because she had been discovered to have an aggressive type of breast cancer, opted for a double mastectomy, had some years of chemotherapy, and now 20 years later, still cancer-free.

But were we not told that Obamacare was meant to actually encourage people to take advantage of the various screening tests, which would lead to earlier detection of disease – and therefore be in more treatable stages? Wasn’t that like sort of a selling point?

And could this administration be more schizo?

Of all the times they could have come out with this, they choose to do so now?

It sounds a bit fishy to me.

Of course this is the least of concerns for all the far-left groups that claim to care about “women’s health.” They are too busy worrying about abortion coverage. You can be rest assured that won’t be rationed.

between the ages of 40-50, we won’t be treated? The assholes are hedging just like a stockbroker. If they save 20M by NOT doing mammograms, hopefully only a couple will get cancer and need the treatment.

SAVE THE TA TAS!!

mammograms, but find it ironic that they should choose an issue which so well illustrates the problems of government mandates for their very first recommendation.

The issue of whether or not to get one is complicated. There are studies which show that getting them too early and too often can lead to cancer anyway. You also have the fact that because you get them repeatedly, the problems associated with false positives go up. According to one study I found with a quick Google search (http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/content/NWS_1_1x_Study_Looks_at_Reasons_for_False_Positive_Mammograms.asp) the chance of being told of an abnormal mammogram which is a false positive is about 30% if you’ve had 10 mammograms. If you have an abnormality, that’s more expensive tests. The committee making the recommendation does correctly note there are also issues with the stress related to being told about the abnormality.

On the other hand, it is deadly if undetected, and survival rates skyrocket with early detection. This even more true if there is a family history of breast cancer.

What all of this means to me is that each and every woman has to sit down with her doctor, and have what in Washington they call a “frank and open discussion” with her doctor to evaluate if/when she will start having mammograms, at what intervals she should have them, and for how long she should continue to get one. I don’t see any proper roll for the government in that discussion.

The same thing is going to happen for all medical issues. The risks vary, but they should all be handled at the doctor-patient level. I regard that as even more important than the legally well protected client-lawyer privilege.

if you don’t want to pay for it you come up with the standards that fit your aim. The further we get from last November 20, the angrier I get at the US voters. In the minds of these progressives, it is better to kill of everybody equally than save more lives. That’s healthcare reform to these barbarians. And they are doing it against the will of the people.

One would have to be an idiot not to see the implications of what amounts to a decision in eugenics.

Hopefully, this report does Obamacare NO good, and ultimately, the report itself will be reviewed and retracted.

recommends isn’t so much that women not have mammograms til after 50, but that self exams are unecessary. Those. Don’t. Cost. A. Dime! Sure, you might have to pay for a doctor’s visit initially to learn how to do it properly, but there are resources on the interwebs even for that such as this one from WebMD.com.

I know of at least 4 women who detected a lump this way, 2 were under 50. For a “task force to call this important self procedure unnecessary is just stupidity.

Of course, since no one is paying a doctor now for this and wouldn’t be paying a government approved doctor either if HCR passes….

Just sayin’.

You’re right, Jaded. This is just a preview of what kind of rationing we’ll see under DemCare. That, and that H1N1 vaccine thing…

When all the smoke clears it is about the MONEY

“With his boss reelected, and now serving in the majority party, Jones cashed out and went to work at the K Street firm Johnson, Madigan, Peck, Boland & Stewart.

In early 2009, Jones became a partner, and the firm changed its name to Peck, Madigan, Jones & Stewart.

Then, on September 25, insurer WellPoint hired Jones’ firm to lobby in the issue areas of health care, insurance, and Medicare/Medicaid, according to the lobbying registration filed last week, which lists the anticipated “specific lobbying issues” as “Healthcare reform legislation, specifically proposals affecting health insurance providers.”

It’s a longshot, but he’s hoping that reduced availability of screenings will remove competition for the WH in 2012.

Sometimes I’ve got a morbid sense of humor. Seriously though, whoever thought of taking away screenings for soccer moms is a demographic moron in addition to being a statist control freak.

You have your first vote Here. *plants his flag*

that if your read a bit further along in that article you posted, on page 2 it says,

“The recommendation was voted on almost a year-and-a-half ago,” she [someone who was on the government task force] said. “It is, in reality, entirely an accident that it is coming out on the heels of a lot of information about breast cancer screening, and certainly accidental in relationship to anything that’s being talked about in politics.”

Then they go on to explain that the point of the panel was to determine whether the cost of yearly mammograms after 40 (excess exposure to radiation) outweighed the benefits (catching the cancer early).

“”The task force doesn’t deal with insurance and coverage,” Petitti said. “Cost was not a part of what the task force looked at.”

Instead, the task force reviewed a number of studies to compile the benefits of mammograms, such as how many cancers were detected and how many lives were saved, and the harms of mammograms, such as how many false positives popped up, how many unnecessary tests were done and how much extra radiation women were exposed to during the false positive testing.”

So, I really don’t think this was some sinister attempt to deny women coverage of mammograms in the new health care system…since this was all done before obama was even elected. They were just trying to see whether blasting women with radiation every year was worth it. That is for the benefit of women everywhere, and we shouldn’t just dismiss it immediately.

However, I am really interested to know whether there is a good reason this task force recommends against self-exams.

recently about a medical study which seemed to conclude that really aggressive testing doesn’t automatically lead to better outcomes for the patient. i heard the study discussed only briefly, but it seemed to me that the basic point was not that screening need not be done, but rather that it does not need to be done quite as aggressively as it has been done. (Folks who heard the same segment should feel free to chime in if they remember the discussion differently.)

In other words, the study seemed to suggest that recommending a mammogram EVERY year for women over the age of 50 may not be necessary. It may be perfectly fine to recommend mammograms every other year, or every third year. The same was true of PSA tests to screen for prostate cancer in men: not that screening need not be done, just that it doesn’t have to be done every year.

I don’t recall any mention about self-screening/self-exams in the study.

today came out in opposition to these guidelines.

http://www.breastsurgeons.org/news/article.php?id=57

They also advocate the digital mammography machines which are much better at screening. I used to teach high school girls the importance of BSE and the guidelines for ensuring breast health, but now this is being all tossed in the toilet.
———————————————————————————————–
Save the ta tas!

…because for so many years, we’ve heard how important it is to love and protect our bodies–even if we have to save up for tests and things–and that women are beautiful and special and ~~~blah blah blah hugs and kisses and trust falls and Cosmos and tears~~~

Now, all of a sudden, we’ve got an agenda to pass and it’s not about people anymore (even though they claim it is!) It’s about their bottom line, and making people feel better about getting screwed.

I as a woman have known that for the bulk of scientific history that men and their diseases have been the most studied and of course from those studies spring forth medicine for those diseases.

Before we start here, please keep in mind I’m on your side with all of this.

I, as a conservative, once read a very convincing piece of government data posted by an online raconteur who went by the name of “Nick Danger.” It was quite some time ago, probably mid to late 90′s. The information indicated that more government funding was poured into breast cancer alone than all men’s and children’s cancers combined. When you think about it, we haven’t been able to swing a dead cat in a subway station or shopping mall for over ten years without hitting a pink ribbon. They’re even pining the things on young school boys fer gawd sakes. With three sisters, three brothers, and many many children in the family, I always have to stop and take a deep breath with all of the attention to a single disease for a single group. Breast cancer is tragic, but so is uterine cancer, and so is prostate cancer (did you know they remove your testicles for that?), and so is childhood leukemia.

You have to remember that the feminist lobby has been snaked around the democrat party since the early 70′s. They are so comfortable in their propaganda that they haven’t even bothered to tweak the numbers on stuff like the “women only earn 70% of what men earn in the same job” canards.

One wonders who planted this breast cancer stink b0mb in Harry Reid’s hat at this particular time. It’s a doozy.

A few years ago I had a mammo, and, my doctor called and asked that I go for further testing as they saw something. Yes, it was stressful but, when I went for another mammo and immediately an ultrasound, it was determined to be not a problem. Yes the stress was not fun, but, if it did turn out to be something I would have been thankful that it was detected early. The earlier you find these things the better your chances for a complete recovery. Very recently an 89 year old friend was diagnosed with brest cancer. Her doctor told her last year that she was beyond the age of getting brest cancer. She had surgery, and, is on breast cancer medication that is very expensive. There is no doubt that it is all a cost thing.

A few years ago I had a mammo, and, my doctor called and asked that I go for further testing as they saw something. Yes, it was stressful but, when I went for another mammo and immediately an ultrasound, it was determined to be not a problem. Yes the stress was not fun, but, if it did turn out to be something I would have been thankful that it was detected early. The earlier you find these things the better your chances for a complete recovery. Very recently an 89 year old friend was diagnosed with brest cancer. Her doctor told her last year that she was beyond the age of getting brest cancer. She had surgery, and, is on breast cancer medication that is very expensive. There is no doubt that it is all a cost thing.

The pap smear is being done too early so they say…again I will say where in the HELL are the men’s test that are too early or un-necessary…WHERE?

damn I cannot believe a second one this week