Less Mammography in my future

[Tuckervill]

ScienceDaily (Nov. 16, 2009) — A comprehensive analysis of various mammography screening schedules suggests that biennial (every two years) screening of average risk women between the ages of 50 and 74 achieves most of the benefits of annual screening, but with less harm. The results represent a unanimous consensus of six independent research groups from various academic institutions.

Link

Just in time for me...had one for year 47, and if I wait until I'm 50, I only get to skip 2 years.

What occurred to me first when I heard this news was that the reason there will be (and there has been) so much push back from the doctors, etc., is because, in theory, their business would be cut clean in half by this recommendation.

Karen

[roadie gal]

My first thought was that, with this recommendation, that insurance companies are going to use it as an excuse to deny payment to younger women who have a good reason (family history, etc.) to get mammograms. Breast cancer is being diagnosed in younger and younger women, a lot of them without any risk factors besides being a woman.

I'm getting really sick of people assuming that doctors are just in it for the money. MOST are not. MOST want what's best for their patients. Of course, the bad apples who are ripping people off get all of the news, so it seems like there's a lot of them. But they are the vast minority.

[KnottedYet]

My first thought was that, with this recommendation, that insurance companies are going to use it as an excuse to deny payment to younger women who have a good reason (family history, etc.) to get mammograms.

Yup.

People tend to forget that insurance companies exist to make a profit for their shareholders. The less they pay out, the bigger their profit.

[hoffsquared]

Here's an article from the Washington Post. Hard to know what to think with all these conflicting views.

[MommyBird]

Drug prices being raised, mammography schedules changing...more changes will come as society prepares for socialized medicine.
The media is doing a great job of creating the "correct" enemy list in the public's minds. Propaganda at its finest hour in the USA.
Are drugs too expensive or is it expensive to develop new drugs?

Read Atlas Shrugged...It is prophetic.

[tulip]

I'm 42 and just had my third one last Thursday. I have no history of breast cancer in my family and no reason to need a mammo except that the Powers That Be said I did. So I did, not having any reason to do otherwise. Now, I will wait for 8 years for my next one. At least I have some good baselines.

[shootingstar]

I'm 42 and just had my third one last Thursday. I have no history of breast cancer in my family and no reason to need a mammo except that the Powers That Be said I did. So I did, not having any reason to do otherwise. Now, I will wait for 8 years for my next one. At least I have some good baselines.

I had my 2nd mammogram a few months ago. I'm 50. I'm clear. My lst mammogram was over 10 yrs. ago. No problems.

It was a decision that I made. I could have had one 2 yrs. ago but I kept forgetting to book the appt. It has nothing to do with socialized medicine. Here in British Columbia they advise women over 50 get a mammogram every 2years. I'm not even sure I want it in 2 years..abit later.

[Pedal Wench]

The thought that I could have a cancer growing undetected in my body for two years is petrifying. Under 10% of breast cancer patients had a family history, which means most people have no reason to go, except perhaps to save their lives.

[Zen]

Drug prices being raised, mammography schedules changing...more changes will come as society prepares for socialized medicine.

Socialized medicine?
Don't even start that one.

[uforgot]

Every year for me too. Until my mom was diagnosed with breast cancer, we had no history either. It was diagnosed early, wasn't in the lymph nodes, but reappeared in the other breast within a few years and she lost the battle. Two years is too long. I've seen what it does.

[Tuckervill]

If annually is good, why not every six months? Or every quarter?

This is an honest question.

Karen

[lunacycles]

I'm 44, and I've had two. Such fun! But I do feel a little mixed, and I am really not pro-screening for the reasons they just upped the recommended age to 50. Having said that, I have a friend who had one in her late 40's (with little or no family history), and it literally saved her life (or we hope, double mastectomy and 3 rounds of chemo later...)

I also find it interesting that, even with all the new drugs and ways of testing for cancer, that survival rates haven't changed much in the last few decades.

[Pedal Wench]

I also find it interesting that, even with all the new drugs and ways of testing for cancer, that survival rates haven't changed much in the last few decades.

Margo, at the 3-Days, they've been saying that survival rates, with early detection, have gone from about 75% up to something like 98%

These stats stress the extreme importance of early detection:

Stage I:100%

Stage IIA: 92%

Stage IIB:81%

Stage IIIA:67%

Stage IIIB:54%

Stage IV:20%

[indysteel]

My first thought was that, with this recommendation, that insurance companies are going to use it as an excuse to deny payment to younger women who have a good reason (family history, etc.) to get mammograms. Breast cancer is being diagnosed in younger and younger women, a lot of them without any risk factors besides being a woman.

My understanding is that the 50+ recommendation specifically does not apply to those at higher risk for BC, e.g., women with a family history and Africans/of African-descent. FWIW, I got my baseline mammogram done at age 30 because my mom had breast cancer at age 34. Despite the fact that I received my baseline 10 years before I would have otherwise gotten my first mammogram under the previous guidelines, my insurance carriers have never denied my claims. I'd like to think that I won't have problems under the current guidelines either.

[shootingstar]

I suspect my mother had mammos less than 3-4 times in her whole lifetime.

She's clear..at 75. She has other long-term problems....high blood pressure and abit of gout.

(Oh yea, she still has excellent teeth. Maybe the best in the family so far.)
I did have an aunt who started to have abit of breast cancer. But she died from totally different reasons at 82.

I come from an extended family of many women. No. of females across 3 generations dominate by 70% over no. of males. So far the breast cancer is very low. Just that aunt I mentioned. Maybe there's another woman I don't know. But this is out of 30+ women.

We'll see. Dietary changes, environmental factors, etc.