It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Govt panel says to get mammograms at 50 and think self exams are useless!

page: 1
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:33 AM
link   
WTH is some government "task force" without one oncologist doing telling women to get exams at 50 and that women in their 40s should only get them if it runs in their family and if they are at high risk.. This "govt task force" also states that self exams are useless?! They have no right to tell us women when we should get an exam or tell us self exams dont work. I know a few people where a self exam SAVED their life! Is this a glimpse of what govt run health care would look like?! They discourage self exams?!
Im only 31 but I do self exams because you never know!!!


These controversial guidelines tell women in their 40s that they should not have mammograms unless they are at high risk for breast cancer due to genetics or family history, and that women 50 and over should only get screened every other year for cancer. As if these suggestions are not enough, the government panel also derides monthly self-breast exams as useless, and discourages women against doing them.


sour ce


The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) today announced that it is changing its guidelines for mammography and no longer recommends routine screening for women between the ages of 40 and 49.


source


So whats next, you only get treatment if you are int he proper age bracket they feel is necessary?! This is ridiculous, because there will be people out there who think this is good advice when it isnt.

Breast Cancer Society






posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
First off your jumping the gun.

The reason they state this is that women from high risk families should get these exams.

But the problem is that may of these exams are doing more harm then good. They are causing a lot of false alarms, subjecting women to a lot more tests and biopsies, to only find it is nothing, that are saving only a handful of people.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
If the fed is going to pay the bills they've got to cut those expenses.

Cut them down to "oops, we caught it too late and having done so you're survival chance is only 20% so we wont bother with treatment. Have some morphine and go to sleep."



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by nixie_nox
First off your jumping the gun.

The reason they state this is that women from high risk families should get these exams.

But the problem is that may of these exams are doing more harm then good. They are causing a lot of false alarms, subjecting women to a lot more tests and biopsies, to only find it is nothing, that are saving only a handful of people.

'

Sorry but I disagree. Almost everyone I have ever come into contact with who has or has had breast cancer was in their 30s or 40s NOT 50s and only one of them had it run in their family. Many people are against these guidelines including the Breast Cancer Society. What is so wrong with checking yourself and keeping yourself up to date on exams? I personally think this will make for more cases. If women dont get checked or give self exams they might find out when its too late.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:49 AM
link   
I think I'll just ignore their advice.

Continue to self exam, and guys do the same down there. The point with cancer is to catch it early. Yes a lot of treatment has gone overboard and probably was wasteful and gratuitous. I did a thread here a while back about how some cancer corrects itself in the body. Read up on this, and don't go overboard on small anomalies.

Always self exam every part of your body you are able to. You know it better then anyone else.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:53 AM
link   
reply to post by Seiko
 


Agreed! The thing is many will listen to them. A good friend of mine found a lump from a self exam and she was only 28! She is fine now but then she had to go through a lot of procedures and torture as she put it, if she hadnt self checked herself she might not have found it in time.

It seems like its all about money and not saving lives like usual.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 12:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by mblahnikluver
reply to post by Seiko
 


It seems like its all about money and not saving lives like usual.


Its about economic motives and not humanitarian ones.
To them its just saving money.

Our world doesn't operate trying to help people it operates by trying to make the most money possible.

Its an economic thing and has nothing to do with humanity and saving lives.

If it wasn't then why do we distrust the government so much when they say something?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 12:18 PM
link   
I must disagree with these guidelines, especially as it pertains to self exams. From personal experience, my wife has a family history of breast cancer, having lost her mother to this disease several years ago. About 4 years ago, I found a lump on her right breast myself. Luckily she was able to get in to see her doctor the same week and had it checked. Thankfully it was benign. But what if it had been malignant? How else would that lump have been found excepting by regular exams? She was 46 at the time and the exams continue quite regularly and shall continue regardless of what they say.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 12:46 PM
link   
Someone has already tried to explain this but I will try again.

Breast self examination has been studied in many large scale trials. Unfortunately they are right and it has been proven ineffective. Yes, everyone knows someone who may or may not have benefited from this surveillance, however, there is not evidence that it is effective and is more likely harmful.

How can it be harmful? The problem is that if you test a low risk population(i.e. 20-40 year olds). The chance of them acutaly having breast cancer is very small. Therefore all abnormalities that are found are very likely benign. If you screen a low risk population, there will be a high number of false positives. Those false positives will lead to many healthy people getting unnecessary surgery. Surgery, no matter how minor has risk (even of death). Furthermore, breast cancer that occurs in young women is EXTREMELY aggressive. In 20-30 year olds, once a cancer can be detected it is already too late. Therefore it is not of use. Hope this helps.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


**warning, subtle humor ahead**

probably because self exams and mammograms drastically increase the risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 01:41 PM
link   
Take a look at what some of the critics are saying on the link below...

Source:



Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are blasting new guidelines from a government task force that recommends against routine mammograms for women under 50, questioning whether they are tantamount to health care "rationing" in the fight against the No. 2 cancer killer in U.S. women. "I absolutely believe this could be a form of rationing," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga, a practicing obstetrician and gynecologist for 26 years. "It scares me."



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:12 PM
link   
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


Most women are encouraged to have mammograms till their 40s. The only reaon someone in their 30s are having it done is because there were already suspicions.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 03:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Wayne60
 


Again, someone with a family history would get regular exams. They are not talking about the susceptible population, but the ones who have no family history of cancer whatsoever.

This is partly coinciding with genetic testing where they are finding the markers for breast cancer. Bascially you will get a test, if your susceptible genetically, you will get routine tests.


They are only talking about the age group of 40-49. Not altogether. The risk for that group is really low.

And that doesn't mean non existent, to stop you before citing examples.

Women die so much more from heart disease then they do breast cancer.

[edit on 17-11-2009 by nixie_nox]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:31 PM
link   
I was amazed when I heard this on the news this morning. I was going to post a thread myself, if there was not one, so thank you.

This is the most misleading garbage I've heard in I don't know when, and please spare me of the condescending "I will explain this again" crap.

Got it?

I'm not sure what's behind this, but of course like everything else it has to be money, and the insurance companies.

I've known many, many women who have had breast cancer, and if you ask what happened, the answer is inevitably "I found it myself". Not necessarily a formal self-exam, but often in the shower or bath.

So they want to limit the mammograms; obviously because they are costly, and they simply toss in the self-exam as a diversion.

Remember when people over 50 had a colonoscopy every year? Then a few years back "they" decided this population only needed them every five years. Did the doctor's get together and decide on this time frame? Give some thought to who you think might have made this brilliant self-serving decision. From every year to every five years is quite a jump, don't you think? Oh yeah, plenty of time to develop colon cancer. And colonoscopies are expensive.
Nah, doctors don't want that money. Most individuals can't afford these exams through private pay. And they would have us believe it's somehow making us worse?

Oh pleeze. Anybody who can't see through this.....


Even the news is reporting doctors don't know how to respond to this information.

This is more garbage being dumped on our health care.

S&F



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
A sad foreshadowing of things to come. Every single one of the six friends I've lost to breast cancer was between the ages of 35 and 49, and none of them had regular mammograms, which in all but one case the doctors said would have caught it early enough. What a crock. So much for the early detection bill of goods on the one hand. The good news is you can still have your mammograms...your insurance just isn't going to pay for it...you are.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:40 PM
link   
reply to post by drmgj
 


Ya know what drmgj? This really does not help. In fact, it is just more verbage on garbage.

Peace out.
liw



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by CoffinFeeder
reply to post by mblahnikluver
 


**warning, subtle humor ahead**

probably because self exams and mammograms drastically increase the risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer.



I love it! That just about sums it up! Thanks for my first big ATS laugh of the evening!



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   
I heard about this today, and I couldn't believe my ears when I did.
Are they freaking serious?
I mean if that is not a blatant slap in the face to how stupid they think people are, I don't know what is.
This has got to be the most obvious bit of media disinformation slip up I have ever seen.
Do you think that big RX has any motivation behind this?
Of goddamn course they do.
It's all about the treatment, and noting to do with the cure.
What a crock.
I guess they are going to say that men shouldn't check out their areas next.
If you have a family history of Prostate issues, there is no reason to be preemptive is there?

The next thing you know, bacon will cure heart disease.

[edit on 11/18/2009 by reticledc]



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:56 PM
link   
This is more of the misinformation payed for by the insurance industry.

Between this and the disinformation garbage they have been passing on national health-care its imposable to get the straight story on anything.

I was a EMT for overt 30 years and thought i had seen the insurance industry at its worst till this.

Just start checking the source of all the stories against national health care and you will almost never find who is spreading these stories,

This has been a carefully spread internet based campain against national health care run by the insurance industry.

Not that it maters to me what you all fall for as i get free health care as a veteran through the VA.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by drmgj... false positives will lead to many healthy people getting unnecessary surgery...


hardly. additional mammograms, ultrasounds, and needle biopsies maybe, but that is standard BEFORE ANY SURGERY. this is a flat out crock.




top topics



 
8
<<   2 >>

log in

join