DUmpmonkiez on old Boobiez:

[dutch508]

Because 'O' says so, that's way.

Chemisse  (1000+ posts)        Mon Nov-16-09 07:59 PM
Original message http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=222x76958
Wait until 50 for mammograms?
 NEW YORK - Most women should wait until age 50 to get mammograms and then have one every two years, a government task force said Monday in a major reversal that conflicts with the American Cancer Society's long-standing recommendation of annual screening starting at 40.

Also, the task force said breast self-exams do no good and women shouldn't be taught to do them.

For nearly two decades, the cancer society has been recommending regular mammograms beginning at 40.

But the government panel of doctors and scientists concluded that getting screened for breast cancer so early and so often is harmful, causing too many false alarms and unneeded biopsies without substantially improving women's odds of surviving the disease.

"The benefits are less and the harms are greater when screening starts in the 40s," said Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chair of the panel.

The new guidelines were issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, whose stance influences coverage of screening tests by Medicare and many insurance companies. But Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America's Health Insurance Plans, an industry group, said insurance coverage isn't likely to change because of the new guidelines.



http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33973665/ns/health-womens_h... /


Ok, I am always eager to find an excuse not to get the mammogram, but somehow I think we are getting scammed here.

You are being scammed. Welcome to teh New America.

mzmolly  (1000+ posts)        Tue Nov-17-09 12:54 AM
Response to Original message
3. My Dr. advised to have a baseline done in your late 30's/early 40's for comparison
 if there is ever an issue. Something about repeated exposure to radiation makes me question the logic of early, annual mammos. But, I think the advice should differ if you have a family history of course. Also I can't help but think women with larger breasts may not detect lumps as easily? Some studies appear to suggest the same.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2474642 /

This is more about saving the government costs once they force through the National Health Care crap...it's the Dems who want you to die quickly...

blindersoff (221 posts)      Tue Nov-17-09 10:24 AM
Response to Original message
5. 9 year breast cancer survivor
 I started my mammograms at age 40 and all went well until age 49, when first I found a small lump and then a followup mammogram was done. Turned out to be stage 2 breast cancer. If I hadn't had the mammograms and done breast self exams regularly (which is also up for discussion about whether they are important or not), I would probably be dead by now! I am willing to have a necessary followup procedure done even if I am "traumatized" by the wait for a negative result. This is just ridiculous, in my opinion.

There are many people in a similar position who are going to say, "WTF?"

[jukin]

Welcome to fascist America under Obama and Pelosi.

I can see it already, "If you want a mammogram before 50 you are not patriotic."

"But Speaker you have had  mammograms since you were in your thirties."

"Well I only have tow and you have to take care of them."

OR

"There are doctors that ummm..errr... would rather aaaaah...perform mastectomies than ahhh...errr provide mammograms ahhhh because they get ahhhh...eerrrr more money from amputating boobies."

[miskie]

Ive been taking an unofficial pulse on Massachusetts liberal and independent women I know on this issue, And they are ANGRY.

I fully expect a retraction from the O-Ministry on this issue, as 'erroneous reporting'. The Dump will follow through as if this was an action by a freeper to further discredit Obama, and to fill people with fear of Heathcare reform.