Thanks for posting such great info here. I was just searching for some info on this topic.
MmiDaveof AL1:22PM March 05, 2011
I am a Mammographer and honestly believe if they go this way, there will be lives lost by cancers that will have been missed. I have seen breast cancer in women as young as 29 yrs of age and have seen a change in women's breast even after one year that came back positive by proven mammography imaging. I have seen it with my own eyes! Dont these women count? They are excluding all the women who have been tested positive even though the numbers are statistically low. THese are women that matter !
I think more people need to be educated in whats involved with mammography . Cancers are not always felt under examination. They are seen under xray and sometimes not seen under xray. Another form of pathology known as Calcifications can only be seen under xray. These are tricky and not palpable by anyone , not even your physician. They appear to look like little powdery specks so tiny, and if not caught early and treated, it can be too late. We still dont know all the answers on breast cancer and the thought of stopping it until age 50 would honestly be the wrong way to go. I think this is a way to lowering our population. Really scarey!
Technology is still moving strong, and now with digital mammography , we are able to see more pathology in womens breast but we still have a way to go.
People need to be more educated and not by just statistics, but by pathology and having their yearly mammograms. Please , I hope this doesnt happen. People get your mammogram dont be stupid!
becaof CA10:19AM January 25, 2010
Aloha! rln
Aboutlcmscof GA5:59PM December 03, 2009
Aloha!blui! http://lmaocqss.com ewsfx houno
Abouthbjfkof IN5:59PM December 03, 2009
The task force which produced the study on mammagram recommendations gives patients a window into what what " lies beneath." Americans are unaware that the Health Care Delivery system is going to be radically changed.Imagine if the food or electricity delivery system was changed to this degree.
Because I have a science background I researched numerous medical journal aticles like those in JAMA and THE LANCET and governmental health " White Papers."
First, the blueprint of this delivery system is the Dartmouth Atlas, which if you enter their home page and scroll down to their " white paper " on how the administration can cut costs- you will recognize several of these pseudo cost savers in various House Health Care Bills.This is the study that Obama refers constantly to, when he talks about geographic differences in cost of health care.
The main premise of this medical study is that it is the mere availability of medical resources such as hospital admissions, or hospice or nursing home admissions that cause greedy doctors to want to fill them.
The doctors who are specifically targeted are specialists. It came as no surprise to me that the head of the American Medical Association said he endorsed the House bill, but said that he was concerned that there were grants to hospitals to train primary doctors but not specialists, like surgeons and adolescent psychiatrists.The Dartmouth Atlas states that Congress should not fund them grants in their white paper.
They are also against screening for prostate and breast problems, against stents and pace-makers, MRI's and CAT- SCANS. They complain about teaching hospitals using too many resources, and also that certain cardiac operations, and also knee and hip replacements,and expensive drugs are unnecessary.
And about those greedy doctors, when they divide the country into good hospitals that use less resources, and bad ones who use more and thus have higher Medicare costs, I find it astounding that according to their own data that 75% of rural hospitals have average costs. Does this mean that all the non-greedy altruistic doctors flee to the country ?
Part 2 of the delivery system is these Task Force recommendations that come from The National Institute of Health, Comparative Effectiveness Research, The Department of Health- which group the population into groups by age, race,etc. and determine what is the the proper treatment plan for certain conditions,i.e.- the Mammagram Task Force.They will start off with bonuses for doctors who promote their decisions and later use fines and expulsion from treating Medicare patients.These pronouncements will be law.
Part 3- of the delivery system concerns money-reinbursements to Medicare/ Medicaid. There are pending bills that will move MEDIPAC which is an advisory board to Congress that makes non-binding suggestions to Congess to the ececutive branch.Obama will appoint and control the new board, and make their decisions mandatory-READ LAW.
peggy- www.abloggerwithoutablog.comof PA10:06PM November 21, 2009
First of all, to yeahmammo, I wish you the very best of luck!!
Second, this "recommendation" is ridiculous! Many women have been diagnosed with breast cancer in their 30's and 40's, many only found out through a routine screening, I know many women who have fought or who are now fighting breast cancer, they are all in their 30's and 40's and one is over 50. Many people are diagnosed with cancer who have no family history, I really don't think we can rely on that guideline anymore.
My brother is fighting the worst kind of cancer, there is no screening for it, it's almost always deadly, there is NO family history of any type of cancer in our family.
Johnathan, why is a mammogram a waste of time? I know someone who was 42 when a routine mammo diagnosed her cancer early enough for her to get rid of it...like I said, there are many people who will say the same thing and many who have NO family history.
I don't think you have the right to call others ignorant, there are woman here who commented on how the mammo detected their cancer, you are rude and your dr. friends might be the one who are ignorant.
You're naive enough to believe that the gov. has your best interest at heart? Wake up, the Gov has their dirty hands in every aspect of our lives, Obamacare will ruin this country and this new recommendation is just what his plan is all about...they will ration health care to whom ever they think is deserving and everyone else will suffer and die. The Gov. has no right to decide what we need and don't need, notice this doesn't go to public vote? Because it would fail! Socialism is right around the corner, we'll all be screwed! Will you be one of the ones bending over to take it?
My brother was diagnosed stage 4 incurable cancer, do you know what would happen if this new healthcare bill was in place now? He'd be ignored, considered one of the "not worth treating" Our lovely gov. would rather let him die than allow treatment, treatment that has kept his cancer from spreading and who knows, a cure could be right around the corner and this treatment would allow him to be alive for that.
disgusted in our governmentof TX4:57AM November 21, 2009
Whether any side of the political party likes it or not, this new "opinion" on limited mammograms is only a taste of what Obama and Pelosi are trying to do to our healthcare. They are lieing to us and very cunning ways. So I wait until I am 50 and then find out I have stage 4 breast cancer. Then the government will tell me there is no need for treatment because my cancer is too advanced. What a horrific thing to do to Americans because trillions of dollars are wasted and used up by illegal people living in this country. Stop the waste where it doesn't belong before this goes any further.
Liof MA10:26AM November 20, 2009
at least, probably. I had my first mammogram at age 43 a couple of weeks ago. I still don't have final staging information, but I do have breast cancer. There is absolutely no history of breast cancer or any related cancers in my family. Under the new recommendations, I would not have survived.
No pun intended, but that's a really hard pill to swallow.
yeahmammoof CA11:12PM November 19, 2009
I was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 39 after my first mammogram. I had no identifiable risk factors and no family history of the disease. I elected to have a mammogram based on the fact that the guidelines recommended it and because I lived in Marin County, California - a place with the dubious honor of having one of the highest breast cancer rates in the country. I was diagnosed on December 22, 2006 and had a mastectomy on January 17, 2007 and am currently being treated with tamoxifen. The new guidelines feel like a step backwards in women's health. I am most appalled by one of the reasons for the recommendation - that 3 out of 4 women have a false positive and this will eliminate their anxiety. I know 3 women who had false positives - this reasoning means I would have died to eliminate the anxiety they went through. I know they would elect to experience that anxiety to save my life. Had the guidelines been in place when I was 39, I would not have survived. I am thankful that I will be spending another Thanksgiving with my 12 year old son and 7 year old daughter this year.
Nicole Jantzeof GA7:17PM November 19, 2009
On NPR's Diane Rheam show yesterday, Wednesday, Nov.18-09, The vice chair of the task force stated upon repeated questioning from Rheam that the medical director for a HMO based out of Minnesota sat on the board that made this decision. I believe that we should take a cynical look at this so called analysis in which Dr. Kaplan (also on Rheam's show)stated to the effect that it looked like a glorified cost analysis decision. In addition, this is not fair to female veterans who will prob. be denied by the V.A. their yearly mammogram now to save the VA money.
Reader Comments
Back to article
MmiDave of AL 1:22PM March 05, 2011
beca of CA 10:19AM January 25, 2010
Aboutlcmsc of GA 5:59PM December 03, 2009
Abouthbjfk of IN 5:59PM December 03, 2009
peggy- www.abloggerwithoutablog.com of PA 10:06PM November 21, 2009
disgusted in our government of TX 4:57AM November 21, 2009
Li of MA 10:26AM November 20, 2009
yeahmammo of CA 11:12PM November 19, 2009
Nicole Jantze of GA 7:17PM November 19, 2009
Leonard Clark of AZ 6:02PM November 19, 2009