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.

[shootingstar]

Last time I was at the dentist I was told to have my teeth X-rayed.

What for? I got the x-rays 2.5 yrs. ago. At that time, they explained what needed to be done, type of dental self-care I had to do in-between dental visits.

At some point, an old filling needs to be replaced. But I can't afford it right now since I'm not working right now. And it's not hurting me yet. Canada's public medical insurance does not cover dental care.

So I quietly refused the x-rays with my reason and had my teeth cleaned as I originally requested.

Prior to this dentist, I only had my teeth x-rayed every time I switched to a new dentist. In Toronto, I had a dentist for over 15 yrs. with visits twice per year. I was only teeth x-rayed twice..when I started as a new patient and several years later when I had dental surgery to remove 4 wisdom teeth. That's all I wanted in terms of x-rays from any dentist. Minimal.

Unlike some people, I have good teeth. Just have to watch out for the gums.

Sorry..for digression. More about x-rays than mammos.

[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.

[Tuckervill]

The guidelines are just falling in line with the rest of the industrialized world.

Karen

[ny biker]

It's statements like this that bother me:

"For women age 50 and older, cutting back to screening every two years would maintain 81 percent of the benefits of testing annually while reducing by half the number of false-positives, the computer modeling study estimated. "

Yeah I understand the problem of false positives, but I'd really hate to be one of the 19% that could have been helped. That's a big number.

Anyway I have pretty much every risk factor there is -- family history, no children, etc. I would be happy to avoid the pain of being squished, but I will continue to get them every year because it's worth it for me.

[smilingcat]

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.

++1 and with KnottedYet.

Oh absolutely to make more profit for the insurance company. They are not denying payment. they will continue to collect the same amount as before but less payout because of the new guideline. WHAT A DEAL!! they are not the bad guy cause now the gov panel is going to deny you the test. Not the insurance company.

As far as Atlas Shrugged, I suggest you read Animal Spirits by George Akerlof and Robert Shiller. (BTW Dr. Akerlof is a prof. of Economics of UC Berkley. Maybe too left wing. How about his other crendential 2001 Nobel winner in Economics. and Dr. Shiller is a professor at Yale.) BTW, the book was used for a Yale grad students in economics and law. And you do need to know the basics of Keynesian theory/principles of economics. Its my book at the moment...I'm not going into diatribe about Ayn Rand.

We can flame each other via PM if you wish.

[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.