Our Breasts Are At Risk - Red Alert

[SuperFemme]

It was all over the news this morning that a "panel" has decided that mammograms are kind of useless and are recommending that we don't have them now until AFTER 50. The frightening part of this is that now insurances are probably not going to pay for them at 40 (which is late IMO).

Here is a link to the story; http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/17/he...ef=todayspaper

Which got me to thinking, Who ARE these people? Here is a link to that: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfab.htm

There are several men and women but NOT ONE oncologist or gynaecologist.

I am wondering how this agency is funded and cannot find that info. Breast Cancer is a killer, and early detection is key to having a chance at recovery.
Now health insurance companies have a way to not pay for the screenings that save so many lives. I'm off to do more research.

[Diva]

Thanks SF...........this is frightening. Who determines the magic cut~off age?????? I had a friend die of breast cancer. She was 35.

Jeez.

[Arwen]

Originally Posted by SuperFemme

It was all over the news this morning that a "panel" has decided that mammograms are kind of useless and are recommending that we don't have them now until AFTER 50. The frightening part of this is that now insurances are probably not going to pay for them at 40 (which is late IMO).

This makes me very angry. I'm willing to bet that panel gets shot down for stupidity though.

[Bootboi]

Not a bunch of bright light bulbs on that panel. Just goes to show you we will have to be even more vigilant and proactive about our own health care. Also, any good Dr. will know its a suggested *cough* guideline and not the "rule".

[SuperFemme]

Watching two *experts* on GMA right now. One is for the new policy with the ridiculous claim that "there are no proven cases of mammograms detecting cancer in anyone under 50" while plugging her org. that concentrates on a cure. See her on the second video and pls share your thoughts.
WTH?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oEANaWBUt1Y"]YouTube- Breast Cancer Screening and Mammography Expert,Constance Lehman, MD,[/ame]

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gSZi1U6AxaU"]YouTube- New Mammogram Advice[/ame]

[Vlasta]

yes , this is absolutely crazy !!! I am so mad about it ... I was watching this on CNN and S.Gupta was giving his opinion on this .

I had pt not a long ago, just have a baby age 22 diagnosed with a breast CA with mets after delivery . She was getting Hickman for a chemo and have at home a week old baby . I want to cry for her , I spend time with her just to find out this young lady didn't even realized how serious were her conditions .

This is so scary for all the women out there . Where we are heading to with the healthcare ?

[robbrt]

What a load of

[MizzSabra]

I watched this story on the news last night and thought to myself....these people are freaking crazy! Two women on my mother's side (Aunt and Grandmother) both had breast cancer, both survived. This puts me in a "special" group of women who are to be tested at the age of 40 and every year there after. I love being special! NOT.

It's truly sickening that Viagra is available to men who can't get a hard on, but women now might have to WAIT to get a mammogram that will save their lives?

[Selenay]

It also says women age 50 to 74 should have mammograms less frequently — every two years, rather than every year. And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis.

Just seven years ago, the same group, the United States Preventive Services Task Force, with different members, recommended that women have mammograms every one to two years starting at age 40. . .


Congress requires Medicare to pay for annual mammograms. Medicare can change its rules to pay for less frequent tests if federal officials direct it to.

Private insurers are required by law in every state except Utah to pay for mammograms for women in their 40s.


Source

[Rufusboi]

I'm ignoring that "panel" because in 10 years they will reverse everything they just said here.

[MizzSabra]

Originally Posted by Rufusboi

I'm ignoring that "panel" because in 10 years they will reverse everything they just said here.

Right. But how many women will die in the meantime, esp low income women?

[SuperFemme]

Snipped from the panels website;

Role of Partners

Outside experts who provide extensive peer review of draft reports are drawn from the clinical professions, public health, epidemiology, health promotion, and education. Liaisons from the major primary care societies and from Public Health Service agencies contribute their expertise to the evaluation process, provide peer review of draft documents, and help disseminate the work of the USPSTF to their members.


Federal partners include the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Defense (DOD), Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), Department of Veterans Affairs (VA), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), National Institutes of Health (NIH), U.S. Army Center for Health Promotion and Preventive Medicine, and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).


Primary care partners include the American Academy of Family Physicians, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Physician Assistants, American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, American College of Physicians, American College of Preventive Medicine, America's Health Insurance Plans, the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care, the National Committee for Quality Assurance, and the Pan American Health Organization.

[Andrew, Jr.]

Please make sure everyone gets their yearly mammograms and does the monthly self breast exams.

Andrew

[WolfyOne]

Breast cancer runs on both sides of my family. I think these people ought to find something else to do with their time other than sitting around sipping coffee and trying to decide how they can upset and hurt all of us. Women are not the only ones that can get breast cancer. It's just more talked about and prevalent in women. I bet none of them would talk that way if they or someone close to them was diagnosed with breast cancer...............these know-it-alls disgust me.

[Andrew, Jr.]

My mammogram came back last week showing a huge tumor (5"). I am having a biopsy/outpatient. My mother and grandmother both had/have breast cancer.

[redrose]

i had my cyst in my left breast removed way back early 90's just before i met my butch,,,

[Bad_boi]

This to me seems like insurance companies + this terrible economy have something to do with this 'panel'.

This is why self breast exams are so important. You can't just count on everyone else, you gotta take care of yourself.

[Toughy]

What I got to say ain't gonna get me any brownie points........

Mammograms are, in women under 50, pretty useless for the general population. Breast tissue is too dense and the risk/benefit ratio does not justify doing mammograms in women under 50 who are at low risk for breast cancer. And if you are talking yearly mammograms on low risk women under 50 it is just plain stupid.

Frankly I completely without reservation support not doing mammograms on women between 40- 50 who have little to no risk for breast cancer.

Susan Love, MD is my go to person for breast cancer. Here is a link from her website and is 10 FAQ. Read all of them and learn a bit about breast cancer.

http://www.dslrf.org/breastcancer/co...d=672&d=nn#exp

I would also highly suggest looking around on her website and read all her books on women's health.

By the way..........one of my best friends died of breast cancer that was undetectable on mammogram....it was stage 4 when her girlfriend felt it and could not be found on mammogram because her breast tissue was too dense. They did find it on ultra-sound. She went through mastectomy, chemo, radiation and bone marrow transplant and died........all before age 50.

Detection of breast cancer sucks. Mammogram does not and never will detect all breast cancers.

edited to add...........in the FAQ link I posted is info on breast self exam. I don't do them ever.......I'm not going on a search and destroy mission on my breast especially when you rarely find them that way.

[bonne-maman]

yeah...yeah...I read all that last fall about mammograms being statistically not a good diagnostic tool before 50. And, usually, I like to think statistically, I like the logic and reason of it. What came out last fall was pretty sound in revealing that perhaps only 1 life out of (1000? or 2000?, now I can't remember), is saved from mammography before age 50.

But, damn, I am that one life.

A routine mammogram at age 48 revealed that I had a small, aggressive tumor. No family history. I am now nearly at my 5 year mark, and have been great after my lumpectomy, 4 rounds of chemo, and 35 doses of radiation were accomplished in the fall of 2005.

Hard for me to reason against the statistics, but, I am damn glad these statistics hadn't come out 5 years ago to dissuade me from gettin mammos every year or two after age 45....

[Andrew, Jr.]

Toughy,

I agree and disagree. Mammograms still work as do the self-breast exams. I also think it is very important that people are not afraid to seek out help because of their fear of having breast cancer.