Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

In Reversal, U.S. Urges Mammograms at 50, Not 40 (Here comes Obamacare)
New York Times ^ | 11/16/09 | by Gina Kolta

Posted on 11/16/2009 2:50:45 PM PST by earlJam

11/16/09

Most women should start regular breast cancer screening at age 50, not 40, according to new guidelines released Monday by an influential group that provides guidance to doctors, insurance companies and policy makers.

The new recommendations reverse longstanding guidelines and are aimed at reducing harm from overtreatment, the group says. 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.

The new report conflicts with advice from groups like the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiology. They are staying with their guidelines advising annual mammograms starting at age 40....

The cancer society, in a statement by Dr. Otis W. Brawley, its chief medical officer, agreed that mammography had risks as well as benefits but, he said, the society’s experts had looked at “virtually all” the task force and additional data and concluded that the benefits of annual mammograms starting at age 40 outweighed the risks.

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.

But the new guidelines are expected to alter the grading system for health plans, which are used as a marketing tool. Grades are issued by the National Committee for Quality Assurance, a private nonprofit organization, and one measure is the percentage of patients getting mammograms every one to two years starting at age 40...

Researchers worry the new report will be interpreted as a political effort by the Obama administration to save money on health care costs.

(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...


TOPICS: Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: breast; breastcancer; cancer; screening
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

1 posted on 11/16/2009 2:50:45 PM PST by earlJam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: earlJam
And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis.

Huh?
2 posted on 11/16/2009 2:53:11 PM PST by mlizzy ("Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person" --Mother Teresa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

When Obamacare goes into full effect, mammograms will only be administered to women at age 60, but, unfortunately, treatment for breast cancer will be restricted to 55 and under.

That’s just the way it is in Great Britain now.


3 posted on 11/16/2009 2:53:59 PM PST by BertWheeler (Dance and the World Dances With You!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis.

Whiskey Tango Foxtrot??!?

How does this hurt to do a self-examination? It's almost like they want women to neglect exams and die of a cancer that is highly treatable. But, what do I know; I'm just a racist.

4 posted on 11/16/2009 2:54:02 PM PST by Hodar (Who needs laws .... when this "feels" so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy

Bill Clinton has selflessly volunteered to help out the 40 y.o. women who will be displaced as a result of Zer0bamaCare


5 posted on 11/16/2009 2:55:03 PM PST by HighWheeler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Meanwhile, here in NJ, the dems’ whole campaign ended up being that Christie wanted to “deny” women mammograms because he said younger women should be allowed to purchase cheaper policies that don’t cover things like mammograms, if that’s their choice.


6 posted on 11/16/2009 2:55:12 PM PST by Williams (It's the policies, stupid)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: BertWheeler

Yep, saves a LOT of money not to diagnose the youngsters with cancer!! Sarc


7 posted on 11/16/2009 2:56:09 PM PST by browniexyz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
Researchers worry the new report will be interpreted as a political effort by the Obama administration to save money on health care costs.

How can it be anything else?
8 posted on 11/16/2009 2:56:20 PM PST by Question Liberal Authority (Why buy health insurance at all if you can't be turned down for any pre-existing conditions?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
Most women should start regular breast cancer screening at age 50, not 40

I know a woman who would be dead if she followed that advice.

9 posted on 11/16/2009 2:56:39 PM PST by red-dawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Reminds me of an old Dragnet episode . . .

Suspected killer of elderly: “Hey they were old . . they didn’t have that much longer to live anyway”

Sgt. Friday was NOT impressed


10 posted on 11/16/2009 2:57:19 PM PST by A_Former_Democrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

I can understand the cold, actuarial analysis which compares some extra tumors found in later stages requiring more aggressive treatment and some extra deaths versus cutting the number of mammograms by more than half (1/2 years vs 1/year + higher starting age). I can’t figure out how “And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis” will save any money, unless they are counting cost of the number of noncancerous lumps found and biopsied which wouldn’t be found until a biannual mammogram and seen as noncancerous on the x-ray.


11 posted on 11/16/2009 2:57:55 PM PST by KarlInOhio (Obamalaise - the new mood for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red-dawg
I know a woman who would be dead if she followed that advice.

I have a cousin and and aunt who both had breast cancer in their 40s, but are live and well today. F___ the government. We are heading into such a terrible disaster.

12 posted on 11/16/2009 2:59:16 PM PST by ilgipper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: red-dawg

That’s the whole point...they are looking for the booty from estate taxes at the same time...it’s a twofer.....


13 posted on 11/16/2009 2:59:57 PM PST by Crim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
I had a co-worker at PacBell that succumbed to breast cancer at age 28. She fought it for almost 2 years. My mother-in-law was diagnosed in Feb 1996 and died in May 1996. She had some clues that something was amiss in Nov 1995, but failed to act as she was concerned a "bad" diagnosis might impact her eligibility for a home improvement loan. She got the loan, did the improvements and lived to enjoy them for about 4 months.
14 posted on 11/16/2009 3:00:02 PM PST by Myrddin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red-dawg
I know a woman who would be dead if she followed that advice.

In the world of Obmaacare, dead is cheap and therefore good... doubly so if she is a Republican.

15 posted on 11/16/2009 3:00:21 PM PST by KarlInOhio (Obamalaise - the new mood for America.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Hodar
While many women do not think a screening test can be harmful, medical experts say the risks are real. They include unnecessary tests, like biopsies that can create extreme anxiety. And mammograms can find cancers that are better off not found. Some cancers grow so slowly that they never would be noticed in a woman’s lifetime. When they are found, women end up being treated unnecessarily.

Researchers worry the new report will be interpreted as a political effort by the Obama administration to save money on health care costs.

Ya think?

16 posted on 11/16/2009 3:02:29 PM PST by rocksblues (Sarah and Joe, Real Americans!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Williams
because he said younger women should be allowed to purchase cheaper policies that don’t cover things like mammograms, if that’s their choice.

And that's exactly why insurance premiums are so high; people are forced to buy policies which are forced by law to be chock-full of tests which may not necessarily be desirable for various groups of people.

17 posted on 11/16/2009 3:03:32 PM PST by what's up
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

FWIW, My wife’s acorn-sized breast tumor was discovered when she was 47


18 posted on 11/16/2009 3:03:58 PM PST by muir_redwoods (Obama: The Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Stupid.

My aunt and my godmother had breast cancer. One is a survivor, the other lost her battle. Both were diagnosed by mamograms in their 40’s and both would have been gone by 50 had they not had treatment.

Instead, one has beaten it and the other got to see both her daughters get married and the birth of her first grandchild before she lost her battle.

Thi is idiotic.


19 posted on 11/16/2009 3:04:19 PM PST by Hoodlum91 (There's a strange odor coming from the White House. Smells like BO.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red-dawg

And I know a woman who is battling for her life now because she skipped one annual mammogram.


20 posted on 11/16/2009 3:05:05 PM PST by NautiNurse (Obama: A day without TOTUS is like a day without sunshine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

yeah right - tell that to three of my friends, all who discovered lumps in their thirties. Sadly, two of them lost their battle. The third one is doing okay...


21 posted on 11/16/2009 3:06:21 PM PST by SueRae
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy

“And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis.

Huh?”

I can’t believe the article didn’t bother to explain this. My guess is that the self-exams can give women a false sense of security (”I didn’t feel anything, so why bother having them checked by a doctor”), when quite often women don’t really know what they’re doing when they do a self-exam. Might also be because it causes unnecessary worry (and unnecessary doctor’s visits), when a woman thinks she’s feels something but it’s nothing. Just a guess—but still lousy reporting to not explain (would have taken all of a sentence).


22 posted on 11/16/2009 3:06:33 PM PST by The4thHorseman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy
And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis. Huh?

Doctors should teach men to examine women's breast on a regular basis.

23 posted on 11/16/2009 3:07:45 PM PST by Go Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Obama wants to kill your mama?


24 posted on 11/16/2009 3:10:19 PM PST by chuck_the_tv_out ( <<< click my name: now featuring Freeper classifieds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: muir_redwoods
FWIW, My wife’s acorn-sized breast tumor was discovered when she was 47

I think you mean acorned-sized tumor in the breast?

25 posted on 11/16/2009 3:10:47 PM PST by Go Gordon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper

My cousin was 35 when she had breast cancer and a good friend was 39.


26 posted on 11/16/2009 3:10:50 PM PST by luckystarmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: BertWheeler

No one should be surprised by this. This is part of 0zer0 and the dumbcrats master plan. Study after study shows that over 25% of all annual Medicare costs are spent on patients in their last year of life. The “savings” the dumbcrats will get from Medicare will come by restricting coverage for elderly sick patients. Delay health screening and you get more sick patients. Then you can rule that they are terminal and not worth saving.

This is the “death panels” and is why the libs go bonkers whenever it is brought up. This type of media article needs to be forwarded to every senior, soon to be senior, and congressman and explained how ghoulish it is.


27 posted on 11/16/2009 3:11:15 PM PST by SDShack (0zer0care = Socialized Soylent Green Healthcare)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
And it said doctors should stop teaching women to examine their breasts on a regular basis.

OK, that one's so weird I have a hard time believing it. "Be ignorant" is seldom sound medical advice.

28 posted on 11/16/2009 3:11:16 PM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Hodar

“..... examine their breasts on a regular basis.”

I’ve been doing to examinations for decades and I’m not going to stop..... even though my wife says she doesn’t need them anymore.

Sorry, I can’t help myself. ;>)


29 posted on 11/16/2009 3:11:26 PM PST by Gator113 (Obamba, Reid, Pelosi, the socialist triad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: The4thHorseman

A friend from church did a self-exam and found cancer just a few months after her annual mammogram.


30 posted on 11/16/2009 3:11:43 PM PST by luckystarmom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

This is ridiculous, my friend died of breast cancer at the age of 33. 50 is too late for some women. This is conditioning us for 0bamacare which will sanction white women for mammograms at the age of 65, while black women should begin by age 40.


31 posted on 11/16/2009 3:12:31 PM PST by FrdmLvr ("The people will believe what the media tells them they believe." Orwell)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Go Gordon

I recall a study years ago that indicated the majority of breast lumps were initially located by male partners.


32 posted on 11/16/2009 3:13:17 PM PST by NautiNurse (Obama: A day without TOTUS is like a day without sunshine)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: mlizzy
This is such B.S. Trust virtually NO ONE who has M.D. after their name but who spends >90% of their time as a policy wonk. Further, this organization is based on outcomes assessments and “quality assurance” measures. This is at best a very faulty system of assessments that measures cost/benefit rations in terms of dollars spent per patient year of life saved etc. Patients aren't statistics. They are individuals, and each needs to be assessed and treated independently.

Part of working hard in life, getting an education, trying to live healthy, saving money, looking for a job with good benefits etc. is so that you can assure your family and yourself that you'll have a choice when it comes to treatment options.

Buttheads like Obama don't want anyone to have anything more than anyone else (unless you are a politician/lawyer/or work in Hollywood). So they think the best way to make sure that happens is to come up with standards that are applied universally. Inevitably those standards have to restrict care to some extent in order to keep the governments part of this cost from looking unsustainable right out of the box. The result is that they lower the standard of care for everyone, and the costs will be higher anyway. The reality is that everyone can get a great standard of care. There are plenty of ways to do this, but none of them are the ways that are being proposed now.

33 posted on 11/16/2009 3:16:27 PM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
It seems that o-bow-man is obsessed with death, babies, older people, and for now, at least, women under 50 years old. My late was discovered to have breast cancer while in her early forties after having a mammogram. If we waited until she was in her fifties she would have died eighteen years earlier.
34 posted on 11/16/2009 3:17:05 PM PST by chiefqc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Wow, my sister would be dead - she was 45 and Stage 3. Luckily she’s a 10 year survivor now.


35 posted on 11/16/2009 3:19:36 PM PST by Clintons Are White Trash (Lynn Stewart, Helen Thomas, Rosie ODonnell, Maureen Dowd, Medea Benjamin - The Axis of Ugly)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: rocksblues
Researchers worry the new report will be interpreted as a political effort by the Obama administration to save money on health care costs.

Ya think?

You took the response right off my keyboard!

36 posted on 11/16/2009 3:22:20 PM PST by Right_in_Virginia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: FrdmLvr
Premenopausal women are at the greatest risk of virulent cancer. It needs to be identified early if any survivability is to be expected. Postmenopausal women typically have quite treatable/managable breast cancer. This seems to be indicative of making the value judgement that young women with breast cancer have low survial rates and cost the most money to treat. Therefore, the healthcare gurus have decided to just pass on agressive care. Not unbelievable at all. Welcome to our brave new world.
37 posted on 11/16/2009 3:23:42 PM PST by downtownconservative (As Obama lies, liberty dies!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Seeing as the Dems have absolutely no intention of paying doctors to treat anything...there’s certainly no incentive to diagnose anything...


38 posted on 11/16/2009 3:24:03 PM PST by mo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: pieceofthepuzzle
Here's a real life example in which outcomes measures would likely change management based on cost/benefit ratio.

Th traditional thinking about suspected appendicitis is that it is better to have a 10% false operation rate (i.e. normal appendix) than to miss anyone with appendicitis. It would likely be very hard to justify this based purely on outcomes measures and cost/benefit ratios. So to save on costs one might institute a higher bar to jump over before going to surgery. This would likely reduce the number of unnecessary operations, but would also increase the number of those that get missed that really needed surgery. If you're one of those who didn't get operated on and your appendix ruptures, you as an individual will pay the price for being on the wrong side of a statisticians equation.

39 posted on 11/16/2009 3:26:13 PM PST by pieceofthepuzzle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Death Panel.


40 posted on 11/16/2009 3:26:29 PM PST by NotSoModerate
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: earlJam
I haven't had one in 35 years...am 70. Getting one's breast smashed between 2 bricks is not something I volunteer for...I think more women find lumps via self exam than mammograms..

If there is a family history of breast cancer thats another story. Then I'd probably get one. That would be common sense...

41 posted on 11/16/2009 3:30:24 PM PST by goat granny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red-dawg

I had a friend that died of breast cancer at the age of 32. Are they saying younger women don’t get breast cancer?


42 posted on 11/16/2009 3:31:30 PM PST by mia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Already starting to try to teach us to love rationing.


43 posted on 11/16/2009 3:31:30 PM PST by FromLori (FromLori)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: KarlInOhio

You cannot fathom how angry I am right now...

The government SOB’s DON’T want women doing self exams and finding those lumps that needs COSTLY investigation. Rather have women die FROM A TREATABLE CANCER!!!

That line about the self exam HAS TO BE A MISPRINT. No rational human would say that.


44 posted on 11/16/2009 3:31:34 PM PST by PennsylvaniaMom (She's not quitting...she's reloading.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

My 36 year old daughter went in for a mammogram about a month ago. A lump turned out to be a fat deposit. During the exam, her doctor noticed a small growth on her back so she ordered further tests.

After a weeks worth of of various tests and scans, they inadvertently discovered a spot on her liver.

To make a long story shot, in two days, she going in for surgery to have a golfball size growth removed from her liver.

I strongly suspect that had all of this taken place after Obamacare, the growth on her liver may not have been discovered and it may very well had killed this mother of 3, dedicated wife of a vet, business owner and my only daughter and best friend.

I am not a forgiving man when it comes to placing my family in jeopardy. God help anyone responsible for the loss of one of my loved ones over this Obama scam.

From guys like me, there is no place to run, there is no place to hide, if you have hurt my family, period.

I can’t help but think that there are millions of dads just like me.... these nitwit dems are playing with fire.


45 posted on 11/16/2009 3:32:48 PM PST by Gator113 (Obamba, Reid, Pelosi, the socialist triad.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: red-dawg

New rules said that women can only get them on the third Monday of the month.
Welcome to the federal health care morass. health care applied with all the sympathy of the IRS.


46 posted on 11/16/2009 3:42:39 PM PST by Yorlik803 (better to die on your feet than live on your knees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: ilgipper
I have a cousin and and aunt who both had breast cancer in their 40s, but are live and well today. F___ the government. We are heading into such a terrible disaster.

I'm on Medicare and I can only have exams every other year as per their payment agreement. I have to go on "a certain day," and my doctor's assistant ALWAYS asks, "Do you have other insurance as well?" You get treated pretty trashy. What are doctors going to do when everyone is essentially on Medicare, however not as nice as Medicare is now? What a mess this will be. I'm not a big mammogram person, but 50 does seem a little old for starting them if you so desire to have one and ESPECIALLY if breast cancer runs in the family. Then it's just suicide it seems. Pray this does not pass ... there's still hope for that. Here's a link to an online Rosary ... I say it all the time. It brings me peace in this crazy world.
47 posted on 11/16/2009 3:45:16 PM PST by mlizzy ("Do not wait for leaders; do it alone, person to person" --Mother Teresa.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Next 60 not 50.


48 posted on 11/16/2009 3:46:42 PM PST by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Clintons Are White Trash

My sister had breast Ca at 46.

Her son in laws first wife died at 24 of breaast ca.

They want to “avoid overtreatment”,,and let women die.

Why are the women not in arms over this.


49 posted on 11/16/2009 3:46:48 PM PST by cajungirl (no)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: earlJam

Unless I’m mistaken, their decision was based on a study of patients in the British NHS. I think that is self explanatory.


50 posted on 11/16/2009 3:47:14 PM PST by A Strict Constructionist (How long before we are forced to refresh the Tree of Liberty? Sic semper tryannis)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-61 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson