Posted on 03/15/2012 8:53:33 PM PDT by Pining_4_TX
Recently, however, there have been rumblings within the medical profession that suggest that the enthusiasm for early diagnosis may be waning. Most prominent are recommendations against prostate cancer screening for healthy men and for reducing the frequency of breast and cervical cancer screening. Some experts even cautioned against the recent colonoscopy results, pointing out that the study participants were probably much healthier than the general population, which would make them less likely to die of colon cancer. In addition there is a concern about too much detection and treatment of early diabetes, a growing appreciation that autism has been too broadly defined and skepticism toward new guidelines for universal cholesterol screening of children.
The basic strategy behind early diagnosis is to encourage the well to get examined — to determine if they are not, in fact, sick. But is looking hard for things to be wrong a good way to promote health? The truth is, the fastest way to get heart disease, autism, glaucoma, diabetes, vascular problems, osteoporosis or cancer ... is to be screened for it. In other words, the problem is overdiagnosis and overtreatment.
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Why did you think you needed to be screened for melanoma?
I heard someone on the radio talking one night about the subject and just thought “I need to get my moles checked”. There was a sort of intuition.
The doctor checked me all over and said I was fine and almost without thinking about it I said “what about this one?” and pointed to one I have never before paid any attention to. Turned out it was the earliest stage - any earlier and it wouldn’t have tested as melanoma according to the doctor. It was “in situ”, they dug out around it and I was good to go. I was VERY lucky!
Thank God that you heard that radio program!
My mother has moles, and has them checked every six months. She’s had a couple of them that were melanoma...the rest that were suspicious were basal cell.
Thankfully, I have my daddy’s skin, but I’m not inattentive...just in case.
You weren’t “lucky”...you were informed. Proud of you! ;o)
I go once a year. I got another one a few years later and it too was easily removed.
Actually, I think I have a guardian angel. :-))
Yes. After DECADES of news outlets scaring the bejebus out of people about the SILENT KILLERS and such, they now are poo pooing the idea of finding out of something is wrong when it’s early enough to do something about it.
“Coming up at 11... could your blood pressure be a ticking time bomb??????????”
Now it’s “Anh, if you don’t know about it, it’s probably fine.”
This world is loony tunes I think.
Right. Cause I’d rather wait until I am losing toes to find out I have diabetes.
Is it just me, or is this article absolutely batpoop crazy?
Yes, they just recently lowered the level that determines if you have high blood pressure.
Ahhhh, now it makes sense. It’s the EVIL health care industry.
Or maybe it’s the LAWYERS who sued anybody and everybody to bully doctors into OVER TESTING and now they are recommending UNDER testing.
“How did we get here? Or perhaps, more to the point: Who is to blame? One answer is the health care industry: By turning people into patients, screening makes a lot of money for pharmaceutical companies, hospitals and doctors. The chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society once pointed out that his hospital could make around $5,000 from each free prostate cancer screening, thanks to the ensuing biopsies, treatments and follow-up care. “
That and the lowering and lowering of levels of what “is sick” ....In December of 2007, I was told no diabetes, just barely borderline. In February of 2008, I broke a rib and had a blood test and they said I was diabetic, did I want medicine? I asked how I got this way in less than 60 days? They said the government lowered the figures in January so I AM diabetic and will always BE diabetic. Asked me what I wanted to do, medicine or strict diet. I said “give me percoset for the ribs and I want to go home and have a beer.”
Its as simple as this:
When private insurance paid the bills, testing was inadequate and never enough.
When the government picks up the tab, they aren’t really necessary.
At least the NYT tells us what the government thinks.
Just beware of health professionals who may call adult protective services if you don’t allow certain tests to be done on your “poor helpless relative”. (not criticizing you, but I know how some of my “comrades in arms’ tend to think!).
Yup.. I have seen the same happen with high blood pressure with a friend of mine. One week healthy, few months later 100 dollars worth of pills every week, problem was his blood pressure was the exact same.
Interesting article on this in the Seattle times called “Suddenly sick” it shows not only the lower levels, but who pushes for them and how Disease Marketing works.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/news/health/suddenlysick/
“we know what is wrong with her and what she needs.”
—
That just about says it all.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.