Ladies are you watching the news? We no longer need annual breast exams until we are fifty. We don't even need to do a self examination. I don't know about the rest of you but this health care thing is getting pretty scary to me.

yup ignore all lumps until 50.................by then hope you have your burial plot picked out!
That woman is a whack job!!! Especially since 1 in 4 of us women will be stricken with this terrible cancer.

well, I just had a mammo in June and am only in my mid 40's, just a few weeks ago found a good sized lump in my breast. The lump doesnt move and hasn't changed size or shape. IMHO, suggesting that we dont need to do breast exams or regular mammos in absurd.

Who said you don`t need regular exams??
Was it Pelosi...Ommama?????



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/18/2009 10:46PM by DUN.

oh my gosh, isn't it?! i couldn't believe what i was hearing. as someone with a history of breast cancer in the family, i am told to start having mammograms at 35. By 50, women could already have it. I have known plenty of women diagnosed in their 40s. And to say to not have one annually, but every 2 years?

Saves the insurance company money.

~Trade~

i think the group that put out the report said that the cost/benefit didn't warrant the use of mamograms for every woman over 40. Obviously, individuals differ.

Apparently yesterday, the new guidelines were formally rejected by President Obama, as well as many major medical centers around the country.

Juanita on STX

Neither it was the American Cancer Society after research looking back at the studies of cost vs improved or saved lives for those women under age 50. It has nothing to do with the current administration or politics. However I think that insurance companies will take this information and RUN! It will give them an excuse to no cover mammograms until age 50. The statement of not doing self breast exams is based on that only less than 45 % of cancers of the breast are detected by SBE, and that there are alot of cost and false positives such as benign tumors identified, removed, drained and so on.

I do not agree on some of what the ACS recomendations state.
Rule one: Know your family history. Is there any first degree relaltives with early onset breast cancer? This is under the age of menopause. Then screen early with mamography!
Rule Two: Know your breasts. Many women have fibrocystic breast changes. (it is not a disease) and causes lumbs and bumps. Keep tabs on it and if anything feels different, go to your CNM, NP, MD and get it checked out.
Rule Three: Fight for your right to have testing done you need it. Your dr. or nurse practioner should be able to write an order for diagnostic testing if you have a risk factor that puts you in a higher catigory needing mamography.
Rule Four: See your Dr. or NP yearly for a breast exam and health exam.
Rule Five: All of these mamographys, CT scans, MRI's, Dental xrays and XRays all give off radiation and their is a cumunlative effect. Know what your risk vs benefit of the exam is. How much exposure have you had and is this increasing your risk for exposure cancers?
I hope this helps clean the air and empower your knowledge.

I hope to join your island soon as a Midwife at the hospital
Until then

Now we don't need paps anymore either. No need for one under the age of 21 and after that only every 2 or 3 years. Hmmm. Doesn't most of the female population have HPV now and can't that cause cervical cancer?

Propaganda????!!!
We must think for ourselves, or be sheep led to the slaughter.

But they only have our well being in mind.....call your congressmen (or former ones) tell them not to vote for this bill because these "recommendations" will be requirements soon if we don't!

[www.cbsnews.com]


I found the above to be informative. It doesn't seem to be biased either way, maybe leans a bit to the new guidelines, but it certainly covers the other side of the coin, as well.

Juanita on STX

My paternal grandmother died of cervical cancer in her early 40s. No family history. My aunt got breast cancer in her late 20s. She found the lump herself. No family history. To say that women do not need to check their own breasts because it does no good is a crazy statement. I have had false positives with a mammogram. It stressed me a little but didn't make me have such emotional trauma that it caused more harm than good. I predict a rise in deaths from breast and cervical cancer if these new guidelines are followed. It is a proven fact that preventive medicine reduces death and serious illness.

The Question should be who funded this study the panel did, and for who and what purpose?

Well, the good news is, one can certainly have as many mammograms and/or pap tests as she wants and can continue to self exam. Nothing stopping any woman from doing that. I don't know what the insurance companies will do, but according to the article I posted Medicare will continue to pay (at least for now?). I would think, and hope, that any doctor worth their salt will have the conversation with each patient and together decide what is best. We don't have to follow guidelines. They are just that. If your doctor recommends a treatment, your insurance should cover it. I know insurance companies don't always do what they should, though.

Worst scenario for women currently (or approaching) 40-50...if insurance refuses to pay for a yearly test, and a woman feels she needs yearly, she may have to pay for every other year herself. (Or if not 50 yet, pay until then.)

For the younger generation...if the new guidelines are indeed misguided, that should become apparent, and the guidelines can be revised back. Anyone "at higher risk" should certainly be discussing it with her doctor and doing what is best for her, no matter her age or who's paying.

I'm not crazy about the radiation exposure. I even hate having my teeth x-ray'd.

Juanita on STX

I used to work in a city government. Often, at public hearings, people would say that "if only ONE life is saved" a project was worth the cost. But, in fact, that's not the way it works. If my city had enough ambulances to station one on every block, obviously, some lives would be saved that wouldn't otherwise. But at what cost to other programs and projects?

So the bottom line is cost/benefit. Whenever there is a finite amount of money to go around, someone is deciding where the money should go.

LindaJ,
Finite amount of money? The CEO of the Blue Cross & Blue Shield of NJ Now Known as Horizon which is a not for profit Corp in the State of NJ earns an annual Salary of five million ($5,000,000.00) dollars. He is getting an eight percent (8%) raise this year. He is not a Doctor, but delegate's the type medical care you are going to receive. This same medical insurance company pays for ads on the Good Year Blimp, NY Times, local Papers, radio, TV etc. They also reduced the Doctors Compensation for services this year by 10%, and Hosp Fee's, Lab Fee's by 10%. They increased Premiums 13% what individuals and Companies pay. So I ask where is this finite money?

I am not arguing the merits of the use of these of these insurance funds or indeed, any other monies, I am just saying that they are not infinite and someone is making choices regarding expenditures.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 11/21/2009 01:33PM by Linda J.

Well, I told myself to not let myself get involved in the healthcare debate again....but. When there are claims made that are just not true, then I guess I need to put in my 2 cents worth.

The first thing you need to recognize is that the healthcare legislation is a WORK IN PROGRESS. It is obvious that the Obama haters and Republicans are screaming about every possible unfavorible thing they can find. If I was them I would be doing the same thing.

The facts are very different. I would hope that most posters here are not ignorant enough to accept the various lies and exaggerations that are being tossed around. Remember the recent comments about breast cancer and prostate cancer testing came from study groups and not Congress. Those comments have and should be discussed, but they have NOTHING to do with the current legislation.

Finally, I too doubt that congress will get it 'right' regarding our need for healthcare reform. That doesn't mean it should not happen. what they will come up with after many to many compromises will eventually be an improvement, but not a solution. It is time for all of the "scary stories", lies and 'what if's' to be put away so we can get as much truth as possible.

Well Ms Information, I am the most bipartisian person you will probably ever meet. I call it like I see it. I am not ignorant and I don't know what lies or exaggerations you are talking about unless you are calling all the major news networks all over the world liars. Most of the news I read comes from the BBC. I, for one am not a sheep and don't follow along with any agenda. I research and make decisions for myself. To me it is the Obama lovers who are brainwashed. I think all elected leaders should be held accountable and I certainly don't like what I am seeing. Please give us all the facts just in case we aren't getting the true story. If you think that congress will get it "right" then you aren't following the money train. It is all about money and if voters educated themselves more and "knew" who they were voting for then we wouldn
t be in such a mess. Just my 2 cents. You tell me where is the truth and how you know it is the truth? I can fix health care all by myself. Simply allow insurance companies to compete across state lines, quit covering illegals, tort reform, welfare reform, and regulate the current pre existing conditions that insurance companies are allowed. You don't cut coverage by saying that preventive medicine is not necessary.

I'll go along with any health plan that the Congress, Senate & all government workers will also be forced to use.

~Trade~