Task force opposes routine mammograms for women age 40-49 - Page 3 - New England Patriots Forums

Patsfanin Philly · 11-18-2009, 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

Not really, I have a partially torn achilles, had it forever.. one day went to the foot doctor and she noticed it was inflamed, within 1 hour I was in an MRI... the next day saw an orthopedic guy, who put me in a $900.00 boot and referred me to a foot guy.. when I explained I have had it forever, he recommended physical therapy... told him I have had it forever, said I could probably live with it.. I knew that. Probably cost 5K for something I already knew.

I could go on and on with anecdotal stories, that have to do more with my health insurance than my medical needs...

That actually supports my point. The reason for the care could have been ( most likely) the risks in NOT treating it. If you then fully ripped the Achilles and had to have surgery ( at a cost higher than 5K- prevention again), it would have been "Doc why didn't you treat it when it was partially torn?" There are places in this country where auto insurance accidents and med mal are cottage industries like Brooklyn, Philly, WV and it was Mississippi before tort reform. In Philly the difference in med mal rates from the city to the suburbs can be a factor of 3.....

***DarrylS*** · 11-18-2009, 02:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Patsfanin Philly

That actually supports my point. The reason for the care could have been ( most likely) the risks in NOT treating it. If you then fully ripped the Achilles and had to have surgery ( at a cost higher than 5K- prevention again), it would have been "Doc why didn't you treat it when it was partially torn?" There are places in this country where auto insurance accidents and med mal are cottage industries like Brooklyn, Philly, WV and it was Mississippi before tort reform. In Philly the difference in med mal rates from the city to the suburbs can be a factor of 3.....

I told the first doctor it was not necessary as it was an old injury... then a conundrum ensued...I should have been more assertive with the first one, but when you get immobilized with a boot you tend to take it more serious...

You do not know me very well, would have done none of that...

If I did not have my coverage none of this would happen....

***DarrylS*** · 11-18-2009, 02:54 PM

From Kathryn Sebelius...

Sebelius: U.S. mammogram policy unchanged - Cancer- msnbc.com

Quote:

The task force does "not set federal policy and they don't determine what services are covered by the federal government," Sebelius said.

Critics of the new guidelines said they would lead to more cancer deaths and expressed fear insurance companies would use them to justify denying coverage for mammograms to women in their 40s.

"Indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action," she said.

The proposed changes address healthy women with an average risk of breast cancer, not women who have a family history of breast cancer or some other special risk.

***Leave No Doubt*** · 11-18-2009, 03:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

The bigger issue to me is this is an example of how easy it is to take something as well known as "get mamograms early and often to prevent the #1 cancer killer" and to make it so the government no longer has to pay for it once the government gets involved.

Bingo. There's the health aspect (but seriously who lets the Surgeon General dictate your healthcare choices anyway). As long as your health stays between you and your doctor, let the govt recommend anything they want, as long as in the end we can do what we want.

But exactly, the bigger issue really is the almost complete 180 in a period of time that seemed like overnight, and on a MAJOR healthcare concern. You truly want these people ___ around with yours and your loved ones' health?

I wouldn't even want them involved with my dog's health. Just imagine if they took over animal's healthcare...Jurassic Park anyone

loljk..mostly

***Leave No Doubt*** · 11-18-2009, 04:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

From Kathryn Sebelius...

Sebelius: U.S. mammogram policy unchanged - Cancer- msnbc.com

We'll see. The task force may not dictate policy but once they're recommendations are out there, insurance companies will listen and discuss it eventually if not sooner.

***Leave No Doubt*** · 11-18-2009, 04:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Leave No Doubt

Pretty much my take too, though I'd go so far as to call it a form of soft genocide given the stats on breast cancer plus throw in the push for Gardisil. The breast cancer stats have become absolutely astonishing yet at this time, when it's become almost rampant, testing and early detection are suddenly deemed as unnecessary and self-exam is now useless.

I'm female and say what you want but I find the rise in breast cancer and the randomness of it kind of unnerving. There are walk-a-thons, there are pink pins, sweet jezus the NFL even wore pink to commemorate Breats Cancer Awareness and now the government thinks it's going to tell us that there's no point checking for it until you're 50?? I think not. None of this makes any sense no matter how you cut it and yep, at the very least I take this as a sign of healthcare things to come.

This woman wrote a book about her own personal experience, she calls it "Bright-sided:How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking has Undermined America". I hope any other women who might be reading this thread click this and read this interview. Fascinating, I never really gave it a thought but who are we to call her wrong, she lived it.

And they go on to interview her furthur, really interesting read.

LOL oduh
Author Barbara Ehrenreich on "Bright-Sided: How the Relentless Promotion of Positive Thinking Has Undermined America"

alvinnf · 11-18-2009, 04:39 PM

Cost savings, they are already going to start implementing these little cost savings policies. For what to ensure that we get health care for 20 million or so illegal aliens. Nice, I hope my colons in good shape, lord help me!

***BelichickFan*** · 11-18-2009, 05:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarrylS

From Kathryn Sebelius...

Sebelius: U.S. mammogram policy unchanged - Cancer- msnbc.com

Sure it does because nothing has changed . . . yet.

But when the new health care bill passes :

Quote:

Because the health care reform bill gives special consideration to the recommendations of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

Then these kinds of recommendations WILL change things.

alvinnf · 11-18-2009, 07:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

Sure it does because nothing has changed . . . yet.

But when the new health care bill passes :

Then these kinds of recommendations WILL change things.

Yup.... As of right now they are not in the insurance business, but once they are.......

***DarrylS*** · 11-19-2009, 03:18 AM

Interesting study on the negative effect of mammograms...

Anger, shock at new U.S. mammogram guidelines

Quote:

Q: Who should get yearly mammograms?

A: Probably no one, except maybe women who already have had breast cancer or who are at very high risk ... such those with a family history, a genetic mutation, those who have undergone chest radiation or previous breast biopsies. Even then exams every two years may be appropriate.

Q: How much of a concern is the risk of radiation from mammograms?

A: Radiation causes 1 death for every 2,000 women screened annually starting at age 40, according to a study published in 2005 in the British Journal of Cancer. Another study shows that each mammogram increases the risk of breast cancer by 2 percent. Mammography also saves women's lives, so that's why it's a trade-off.