Skip to comments.
No Breast Cancer Screening For Women Aged 40-49, New Canadian Guidelines
Medical News Today ^
| 11/21/2011
| Editor's Choice
Posted on 11/21/2011 7:46:38 PM PST by writer33
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 next last
Canadian guidelines. Is this the future for women under Obamacare? Waiting for a beauracrat to decide when they should have a breast screening.
1
posted on
11/21/2011 7:46:42 PM PST
by
writer33
To: writer33
Awesome! I’d be dead now.
Ain’t socialized medicine great?
2
posted on
11/21/2011 7:48:20 PM PST
by
acapesket
To: acapesket
Aint socialized medicine great?Where's your compassion for the poor and indigent? So you're inconvenienced by death. This is bigger than you. LOL! /sarcasm
3
posted on
11/21/2011 7:52:08 PM PST
by
writer33
(Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
To: writer33
4
posted on
11/21/2011 7:59:30 PM PST
by
Rocky
(REPEAL IT!)
To: Rocky
5
posted on
11/21/2011 8:00:20 PM PST
by
writer33
(Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
To: writer33
Yes. The new Gov’t guidelines only allow for mammograms starting at age 50. We have a friend in New Zealand. NZ just lowered their age level for covered mammograms to 45. She went for one as she had just turned 45 and is now being treated for metastatic breast cancer. The older you get, with Obamacare, the less care is offered. After age 65, good luck. It is not in the interest of the Fed Gov’t to bother to keep you alive when you are no longer paying into the system. PS-when you are being taxed an extra 10-20% to pay for healthcare for all, you don't think you should have to pay extra for any preventative medicine. SURPRISE!
To: originalbuckeye
7
posted on
11/21/2011 8:03:44 PM PST
by
writer33
(Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
To: writer33
Well....when you get right down to it, everything is bigger than me!!!
I must say that I do get rather impatient when inconvenienced.
As I suspect, most of my fellow Americans do, as well.
And that my Friend, will be the beginning of the end of Obotcare (fret not, I am one sarcastic wench myself!)
8
posted on
11/21/2011 8:07:48 PM PST
by
acapesket
To: writer33
Not even for women with a family history? I started them when I was 35!
To: OrangeDaisy
most women with breast ca dont have a fam hx per the data
10
posted on
11/21/2011 8:23:06 PM PST
by
mriguy67
To: OrangeDaisy
If you’ve got a family history, you definitely have to start early than most.
11
posted on
11/21/2011 8:37:38 PM PST
by
writer33
(Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
To: writer33
Here's the deal. You have to wait longer to get your screenings, but if they find cancer after you turn 60, they won't pay for chemo. Problem solved.
To: acapesket
And that my Friend, will be the beginning of the end of ObotcareLet's hope it is the end.
13
posted on
11/21/2011 8:38:34 PM PST
by
writer33
(Mark Levin Is The Constitutional Engine Of Conservatism)
To: toothfairy86
Yes, I was being sarcastic.
To: originalbuckeye
My sister-in-law, 47, died this afternoon from breast cancer. My other sister-in-law who is 48 also has breast cancer. Please insist that the women you love have mammograms.
15
posted on
11/21/2011 8:47:08 PM PST
by
FoundinTexas
(Hot in Texas! Waiting for the 2012 election!)
To: FoundinTexas
Two months back my mother was diagnosed with Breast Cancer - stage-2. It was due to yearly mammogram, it was detected early .
According to CMA, fter 45, women utility is over and they can die, This is Socialism.
To: writer33
the dirty little secret is that if you have hormones (i.e. before menopause) breast cancer grows faster and spreads earlier.
So “screening” doesn’t catch them much earlier than you would by feel alone...and even then often it has spread. doing a mammogram every 3 to 6 months might catch a lot of these cancers earlier, but every two years, as present guidelines suggest, only confuse matters. A woman has a negative mammogram, and then ignores the lump that pops up three months later.
And when you have hormones, you get a lot more “false positives” (benign lumps that have to be biopsied) and the smaller cancers are harder to find in the dense breast tissue.
So how do I personally feel about mammograms?
I didn’t bother to get yearly mammograms when I was under age 50...but I did send my patients for them.
17
posted on
11/21/2011 10:31:13 PM PST
by
LadyDoc
To: FoundinTexas
I am so very sorry to hear that. That is so sad to lose her at such a young age. You and your family have my deepest sympathy.
Yes, women need to be screened for cancer, case closed. I saw the headline for this story and at first thought it was from The Onion.
18
posted on
11/21/2011 10:52:46 PM PST
by
Hetty_Fauxvert
(Fuel up the Cain Train! Donate today! - - - https://www.hermancain.com/donate)
To: toothfairy86
Yep. Avastin has helped many women with metastatic breast cancer, but it's too expensive. FDA has just ‘unapproved’ it.
To: acapesket
“Awesome! Id be dead now.”
Me too! Diagnosed in 1994 at the age of 46.
20
posted on
11/22/2011 5:07:53 AM PST
by
heylady
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-22 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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson