New guidelines for mammograms; tip of the iceberg

hollow bottle

So here we are. The Us Preventive Services Task Force has a new recommendation: No routine screenings for women 40 -49; instead talk to your doctor. This is a sliver of what we can expect under the current administration. More bureaucacy that will marginalize our health care. Now the "Expert" Tast Force (that includes not one Oncologist!) is trying to soften the blow. They did not expect us goons to grasp the severity of this new lie. "With its new recommendations, the [task force] is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them," Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. The White House responded "There’s only one problem: the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost" How much is Low Cost and how much is your life worth women? Don't be fooled by the lies you will hear by this administration, who will try to divert you from the facts. Mammograms save lives of women in their 40's and is one of the leading causes of death for women. Unemployment was not to reach (I believe Obama said) beyond 8% with the stimulus package. It is now over 10%. January was the promised deadline to close Guatanamo Bay. Not going to happen. The deficit for 2009; Contact the Guiness Book of World Records because it is now (drum roll please) 1.4 Trillion Dollars or $1,400,000,000,000. The one thing I no for certain is that Obama has not delivered. Blame who you want but the truth is out.

gimmesometruth27

hollow bottle wrote:

So here we are. The Us Preventive Services Task Force has a new recommendation: No routine screenings for women 40 -49; instead talk to your doctor. This is a sliver of what we can expect under the current administration. More bureaucacy that will marginalize our health care. Now the "Expert" Tast Force (that includes not one Oncologist!) is trying to soften the blow. They did not expect us goons to grasp the severity of this new lie. "With its new recommendations, the [task force] is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them," Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. The White House responded "There’s only one problem: the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost" How much is Low Cost and how much is your life worth women? Don't be fooled by the lies you will hear by this administration, who will try to divert you from the facts. Mammograms save lives of women in their 40's and is one of the leading causes of death for women. Unemployment was not to reach (I believe Obama said) beyond 8% with the stimulus package. It is now over 10%. January was the promised deadline to close Guatanamo Bay. Not going to happen. The deficit for 2009; Contact the Guiness Book of World Records because it is now (drum roll please) 1.4 Trillion Dollars or $1,400,000,000,000. The one thing I no for certain is that Obama has not delivered. Blame who you want but the truth is out.

i thought you wanted to address the mammogram issue?

instead of talking about an important topic that is worthy of serious discussion, you use this opportunity to turn this into another anti obama thread, which diverts it from the real issue.... good work.....

i believe that if you have a family history of breast cancer the guidelines do not change? i believe that is what i read yesterday and today. if you have a family history of breast cancer you should take the same precautions as before. that is all they are saying here. i also read that breast self exam is the best way to determine if an early mammogram would be indicated. the way i understand it, if you feel a lump, tell your doctor and the workup will begin at that point.

it would not surprise me if the insurance industry had something to do with this. if the requirements were pushed back from age 40 to age 50, how many less mammograms would insurance have to pay for over the lifetime of every woman in america?? they might also use these new guidelines as leverage against paying for mammograms before age 50.

aerial

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

hollow bottle wrote:

So here we are. The Us Preventive Services Task Force has a new recommendation: No routine screenings for women 40 -49; instead talk to your doctor. This is a sliver of what we can expect under the current administration. More bureaucacy that will marginalize our health care. Now the "Expert" Tast Force (that includes not one Oncologist!) is trying to soften the blow. They did not expect us goons to grasp the severity of this new lie. "With its new recommendations, the [task force] is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them," Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. The White House responded "There’s only one problem: the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost" How much is Low Cost and how much is your life worth women? Don't be fooled by the lies you will hear by this administration, who will try to divert you from the facts. Mammograms save lives of women in their 40's and is one of the leading causes of death for women. Unemployment was not to reach (I believe Obama said) beyond 8% with the stimulus package. It is now over 10%. January was the promised deadline to close Guatanamo Bay. Not going to happen. The deficit for 2009; Contact the Guiness Book of World Records because it is now (drum roll please) 1.4 Trillion Dollars or $1,400,000,000,000. The one thing I no for certain is that Obama has not delivered. Blame who you want but the truth is out.

i thought you wanted to address the mammogram issue?

instead of talking about an important topic that is worthy of serious discussion, you use this opportunity to turn this into another anti obama thread, which diverts it from the real issue.... good work.....

i believe that if you have a family history of breast cancer the guidelines do not change? i believe that is what i read yesterday and today. if you have a family history of breast cancer you should take the same precautions as before. that is all they are saying here. i also read that breast self exam is the best way to determine if an early mammogram would be indicated. the way i understand it, if you feel a lump, tell your doctor and the workup will begin at that point.

it would not surprise me if the insurance industry had something to do with this. if the requirements were pushed back from age 40 to age 50, how many less mammograms would insurance have to pay for over the lifetime of every woman in america?? they might also use these new guidelines as leverage against paying for mammograms before age 50.

This could be used to cut care with the Health Care Bill our government is trying to shove down our throats.

_

hollow bottle wrote:

So here we are. The Us Preventive Services Task Force has a new recommendation: No routine screenings for women 40 -49; instead talk to your doctor. This is a sliver of what we can expect under the current administration. More bureaucacy that will marginalize our health care. Now the "Expert" Tast Force (that includes not one Oncologist!) is trying to soften the blow. They did not expect us goons to grasp the severity of this new lie. "With its new recommendations, the [task force] is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them," Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. The White House responded "There’s only one problem: the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost" How much is Low Cost and how much is your life worth women? Don't be fooled by the lies you will hear by this administration, who will try to divert you from the facts. Mammograms save lives of women in their 40's and is one of the leading causes of death for women. Unemployment was not to reach (I believe Obama said) beyond 8% with the stimulus package. It is now over 10%. January was the promised deadline to close Guatanamo Bay. Not going to happen. The deficit for 2009; Contact the Guiness Book of World Records because it is now (drum roll please) 1.4 Trillion Dollars or $1,400,000,000,000. The one thing I no for certain is that Obama has not delivered. Blame who you want but the truth is out.

You have got to be fucking kidding. Now I've heard everything! :roll:

1. The new recommendations are about public health, not politics.

2. Routine mammograms for women aged 40-49 has been a source of contention ever since the recommendation was lowered to age 40.

3. They're not saying women at high risk for breast cancer shouldn't or can't get mammograms.

4. They're only saying that - on a population level - the risks outweigh the benefits for routine mammagrams for that age group.

hollow bottle

This could be used to cut care with the Health Care Bill our government is trying to shove down our throats.[/quote]

Exactly. And countless women have had the opportunity to live because they were diagnosed via mammogram testing before the age of 50. Cancer develops at an exponentially alarming rate. Are women really expected to give self exams in replace of a mammogram? High risk or not, women will die as a result of a government that cannot afford to deliver what it has promised. That is a fact. This is political as the White House is involved and has supported it. Now they are on the sidelines because they were exposed. Watch them try to quickly confuse us with bullshit and attempt divert us away from what has been said.

Is this administration responsible for anything?
Are we going to blame the previous administration for Obama's entire term?

Cosmo

hollow bottle wrote:

Exactly. And countless women have had the opportunity to live because they were diagnosed via mammogram testing before the age of 50. Cancer develops at an exponentially alarming rate. Are women really expected to give self exams in replace of a mammogram? High risk or not, women will die as a result of a government that cannot afford to deliver what it has promised. That is a fact. This is political as the White House is involved and has supported it. Now they are on the sidelines because they were exposed. Watch them try to quickly confuse us with bullshit and attempt divert us away from what has been said.

Is this administration responsible for anything?
Are we going to blame the previous administration for Obama's entire term?

...
You DO understand the difference between a 'Recommendation' and a 'Mandate', right?
Women can STILL receive Mammograms at any age. They can STILL seek advice from their doctors. The government 'reccommends' that I get a daily dose of x amount of Vitamin C and Niacin per day... but, they are not hauling me off to Levenworth because I don't. No one is saying "NO MAMMOGRAMS UNTIL AGE 50"... that is your paranoia that you are hearing.

justam

hollow bottle wrote:

So here we are. The Us Preventive Services Task Force has a new recommendation: No routine screenings for women 40 -49; instead talk to your doctor. This is a sliver of what we can expect under the current administration. More bureaucacy that will marginalize our health care. Now the "Expert" Tast Force (that includes not one Oncologist!) is trying to soften the blow. They did not expect us goons to grasp the severity of this new lie. "With its new recommendations, the [task force] is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them," Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. The White House responded "There’s only one problem: the recommendations of this task force would actually be used to provide access to effective preventive services for free or at low-cost" How much is Low Cost and how much is your life worth women? Don't be fooled by the lies you will hear by this administration, who will try to divert you from the facts. Mammograms save lives of women in their 40's and is one of the leading causes of death for women. Unemployment was not to reach (I believe Obama said) beyond 8% with the stimulus package. It is now over 10%. January was the promised deadline to close Guatanamo Bay. Not going to happen. The deficit for 2009; Contact the Guiness Book of World Records because it is now (drum roll please) 1.4 Trillion Dollars or $1,400,000,000,000. The one thing I no for certain is that Obama has not delivered. Blame who you want but the truth is out.

The red words don't really have much to do with your original subject!

In fact, it becomes clear that you don't really care about your original subject by the time you start ranting like this. You are USING the idea to get people to read your red rant.

To me, this paragraph shows me that you are most concerned about discrediting this administration somehow and not at all concerned about women's health care.

_

It's great to think of the benefits of mammography, but no one ever considers the potential harms. Potential harms include false positive diagnosis (when the woman doesn't really have breast cancer) and overdiagnosis (when she has breast cancer but it wasn't going to shorten her life anyway), both of which could lead to unnecessary stress and anxiety for a woman and her family, excessive medical bills for the woman, unnecessary invasive tests such as biopses, and even unnecessary treatments like radiation, chemo, and mastectomy.

This task force has merely judged that the benefits of screening ALL women aged 40-49 don't NECESSARILY outweigh the risks/potential harms for routine mammography in that age group. They are saying that this discussion of risks and benefits should occur between women and their doctors and it's best for the decision to screen in that age group to be made on an INDIVIDUAL basis. And this is based on EVIDENCE of the risks and benefits of screening. And the task force acknowledges where there is more or less evidence and which recommendations are stronger or weaker than others.

Sounds perfectly reasonable to me. And, for the record, I had heard this said among the docs at the teaching hospital where I work long before I ever heard of Obama.

If anyone would like to read the actual statement, you can find it here: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstf09/breastcancer/brcanrs.htm

Also, an interesting discussion about it on PBS can be found here:
http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/health/july-dec09/mammograms_11-17.html

Cosmo

Let me add the following;
I have been a voluenteer crew member for both the Avon Walk for Breast Cancer Research and the Susan G. Komen 3-Day Walk for Breast Cancer Research since 2002. I have met many, many women who have survived breast cancer and have known some who lost the fight against it.
This is from the Avon Health Resource Guide, 2008:
Breast Cancer Facts:
240,510 total cases of Breast Cancer were diagnosed.
40,460 women and 450 men died from breast cancer.
There were over 2.4 million breast cancer survivors in the U.S. in 2008.
People over the age of 50 accounted for 76% of breast cancer cases.
The majority of breast cancers found today are 'Hormone receptor positive', and excellent treatments exist. Nearly 1 in 5 breast cancers diagnosed will be HER2-positive brest cancer, a form that tends to grow and spread more aggressively than other breast cancers.
Risk factors:
Gender - Women 99%, men 1%
Age - Only about 5% of breast cancer diagnosies are in people under age 40 and approximately 18% are in their 40s, while more than three quarters of new cases are diagnosed after age 50.
Menstruation and reproductive history....
Family history of breast cancer...
Diet and weight...
Routine exercise reduces risk...
...
And early detection saves lives. I believe that a knowledgable self exam helps as well as routine mammograms and advice from your gynocologist. The government recommendations may say routine after age 50, but if you are included in the risk factors and ar not over 50, it is your responsibility to act.

hollow bottle

I just love that when you dissagree with the current administration, you are called paranoid. I am actually a pretty content person. I am not paranoid . I do not rely on the government to take care of my needs. It has proven that it can't. Statistics can be very misleading. All you need to do is take a basic statistics course to figure that one out. The potential harms of a mammogram "False Positives, overdiagnosis, stress, anxiety..." do not compare to the potential harms of not getting a mammogram (rapidly developed cancer, stress, anxiety, death). Recommendations can also be misleading, especially coming from a government task force. Why did they come out with this? They have no experts in the field. Yes, I am guilty of bringing up my disgust for the government. Please allow me to appologize. I forgot that this site hates when the Obama administration isn't celebrated.

P.S. Just because someone is paranoid does not mean that their wrong.

Paranoia is reality seen on a finer scale. ~ Philo Gant

justam

I don't care if you don't like this administration, but keep your topics separate if you want to be taken seriously.

Otherwise, it just feels like you're USING the healthcare topic as bait to get people to read your rant.

hollow bottle

justam wrote:

I don't care if you don't like this administration, but keep your topics separate if you want to be taken seriously.

Otherwise, it just feels like you're USING the healthcare topic as bait to get people to read your rant.

I have the freedom to say whatever I want and how ever I want to say it. Acting like a tough guy doesn't impress anybody. I despise this administration. It makes me want to hurl. Our enemies love when we have a wimp in the oval office. Yuck!

CJMST3K

Just for some levity, am I the only one who pictured a boob coming out of the water, from the below term?

hollow bottle wrote:

tip of the iceberg

SPEEDY MCCREADY

hollow bottle wrote:

I just love that when you dissagree with the current administration, you are called paranoid. I am actually a pretty content person. I am not paranoid . I do not rely on the government to take care of my needs. It has proven that it can't. Statistics can be very misleading. All you need to do is take a basic statistics course to figure that one out. The potential harms of a mammogram "False Positives, overdiagnosis, stress, anxiety..." do not compare to the potential harms of not getting a mammogram (rapidly developed cancer, stress, anxiety, death). Recommendations can also be misleading, especially coming from a government task force. Why did they come out with this? They have no experts in the field. Yes, I am guilty of bringing up my disgust for the government. Please allow me to appologize. I forgot that this site hates when the Obama administration isn't celebrated.

P.S. Just because someone is paranoid does not mean that their wrong.

Paranoia is reality seen on a finer scale. ~ Philo Gant

I have no comment on the mammogram issue...

But i agree 100% with you on one thing....

"I dont rely on the government to take care of my needs"

Damn Right....

I'm 44 years old and one thing I have realized....It doesnt make a damn bit of difference whether it is a Democrat or Republican in office......My life just moves forward....

Nixon
Ford
Carter
Reagan
Bush
Clinton
Bush
Obama

It doesnt make a damn bit of difference to me....
My life moves on....

JR8805

Mammograms will be covered, but not pushed for anyone under 50. It makes sense to me for anyone not particularly at risk of cancer. On the related pap smears, for years my doctor has said that, as a woman, you don't need yearly paps. I happen to get them because I do go in for yearly follow-ups on this, that and the other thing, and while I'm there, they just figure they'll do a pap...I don't mind. But, I wouldn't have a conniption fit if they only did them every other year saving me some time and a pinch. I think people are getting too excited about this mammogram thing when it's just a guideline, not a way to keep women from getting mammograms.

TriumphantAngel

SPEEDY MCCREADY wrote:

hollow bottle wrote:

I just love that when you dissagree with the current administration, you are called paranoid. I am actually a pretty content person. I am not paranoid . I do not rely on the government to take care of my needs. It has proven that it can't. Statistics can be very misleading. All you need to do is take a basic statistics course to figure that one out. The potential harms of a mammogram "False Positives, overdiagnosis, stress, anxiety..." do not compare to the potential harms of not getting a mammogram (rapidly developed cancer, stress, anxiety, death). Recommendations can also be misleading, especially coming from a government task force. Why did they come out with this? They have no experts in the field. Yes, I am guilty of bringing up my disgust for the government. Please allow me to appologize. I forgot that this site hates when the Obama administration isn't celebrated.

P.S. Just because someone is paranoid does not mean that their wrong.

Paranoia is reality seen on a finer scale. ~ Philo Gant

I have no comment on the mammogram issue...

But i agree 100% with you on one thing....

"I dont rely on the government to take care of my needs"

Damn Right....

so often i see comments like this from people on here. so, so adament that you won't/don't rely on the government to take care of your needs.

if you don't trust the government to look after your health/or don't need the government to take care of your needs, then i trust you won't be a hypocrite and call government paid/run emergency service personnel, and their equipment, anytime soon.

_

JR8805 wrote:

Mammograms will be covered, but not pushed for anyone under 50. It makes sense to me for anyone not particularly at risk of cancer. On the related pap smears, for years my doctor has said that, as a woman, you don't need yearly paps. I happen to get them because I do go in for yearly follow-ups on this, that and the other thing, and while I'm there, they just figure they'll do a pap...I don't mind. But, I wouldn't have a conniption fit if they only did them every other year saving me some time and a pinch. I think people are getting too excited about this mammogram thing when it's just a guideline, not a way to keep women from getting mammograms.

+1

decides2dream

scb wrote:

JR8805 wrote:

Mammograms will be covered, but not pushed for anyone under 50. It makes sense to me for anyone not particularly at risk of cancer. On the related pap smears, for years my doctor has said that, as a woman, you don't need yearly paps. I happen to get them because I do go in for yearly follow-ups on this, that and the other thing, and while I'm there, they just figure they'll do a pap...I don't mind. But, I wouldn't have a conniption fit if they only did them every other year saving me some time and a pinch. I think people are getting too excited about this mammogram thing when it's just a guideline, not a way to keep women from getting mammograms.

+1

agreed.
i belive? the guidelines for paps was after 3 consecutive clear years, you could then skip every other year in any case. at least i think so. i got them annually simply b/c i visited the gyno annually, and it was always one of those...while you're here kinda things. and as to the mammograms, if the need is there, the mammogram will still happen. simple as. i am considered 'high risk' as i have a sister who is a breast cancer survivor. my annual mammograms will still be happening, and i've been getting them annually since i was 36 since she was diagnosed when i was 35. and so it goes. people just seem to like to get outraged at times.

Cosmo

hollow bottle wrote:

I just love that when you dissagree with the current administration, you are called paranoid. I am actually a pretty content person. I am not paranoid . I do not rely on the government to take care of my needs. It has proven that it can't. Statistics can be very misleading. All you need to do is take a basic statistics course to figure that one out. The potential harms of a mammogram "False Positives, overdiagnosis, stress, anxiety..." do not compare to the potential harms of not getting a mammogram (rapidly developed cancer, stress, anxiety, death). Recommendations can also be misleading, especially coming from a government task force. Why did they come out with this? They have no experts in the field. Yes, I am guilty of bringing up my disgust for the government. Please allow me to appologize. I forgot that this site hates when the Obama administration isn't celebrated.

P.S. Just because someone is paranoid does not mean that their wrong.

Paranoia is reality seen on a finer scale. ~ Philo Gant

...
Well... when you say things such as,
'No routine screenings for women 40 -49; instead talk to your doctor. This is a sliver of what we can expect under the current administration. More bureaucacy that will marginalize our health care. Now the "Expert" Tast Force (that includes not one Oncologist!) is trying to soften the blow. They did not expect us goons to grasp the severity of this new lie.'
That's paranoia.
No one is saying that women at risk (Family History, Diet and Weight, etc...) will not be allowed access to their doctors, mammograms or cancer specialists...
That's paranoia.
And that whole, 'Tip of the iceberg, look out because here it comes' thing...
If that isn't paranoia, i don't know what is.
...
The TRUTH is... women without risk factors are more likely to become at risk after age 50. It doesn't mean women under age 50 are not at risk. But, there is NOTHING that says anyone under age 50 will be denied access because of a recommendation by the government.
...
And no one is attacking you... or out to get you. We are saying that the things regarding Breast Cancer you are bringing up are false and an attempt to further convince yourself (and others) that 'The Government' is out to take over our lives.
"Unemployment was not to reach (I believe Obama said) beyond 8% with the stimulus package. It is now over 10%. January was the promised deadline to close Guatanamo Bay. Not going to happen. The deficit for 2009; Contact the Guiness Book of World Records because it is now (drum roll please) 1.4 Trillion Dollars or $1,400,000,000,000. The one thing I no for certain is that Obama has not delivered. Blame who you want but the truth is out."
Have NOTHING to do with Breast Cancer. You try to link them, but you can't. At least, in a rational and reasonable manner.
....
Finally... I love this:
"Paranoia is reality seen on a finer scale. ~ Philo Gant"
You are quoting a fictional character in a movie... who was a paranoid record producer to support your view that you are not paranoid. Golden.
Paranoia is also, Black Helicopters, Contrails of Doom, Mark of The Beast Tattoos and George W. Bush blowing up the World Trade Center. Reality on a finer scale... is based according to whose reality you are viewing.

Cosmo

CJMST3K wrote:

Just for some levity, am I the only one who pictured a boob coming out of the water, from the below term?

hollow bottle wrote:

tip of the iceberg

...
You mean... like the nipple?
...
Hey... I can go for that.

_

Cosmo wrote:

CJMST3K wrote:

Just for some levity, am I the only one who pictured a boob coming out of the water, from the below term?

hollow bottle wrote:

tip of the iceberg

...
You mean... like the nipple?
...
Hey... I can go for that.

Wouldn't that be the nip of the iceberg?

CJMST3K

scb wrote:

Wouldn't that be the nip of the iceberg?

...well, it IS cold!