New Recommendations: Let Health Care Rationing Begin!

I think the GOP sucks, but our only hope seems to be them, to help restore some balance in 2010. Thanks Pat for the observations.

Yes, this commission sure makes one wonder. Glad my friend recently diagnosed, over 74, didn’t follow the recommendations on mammograms. Or another friend, a breast cancer researcher, who was diagnosed at age 42, fortunately with a baseline mammogram at age 40, a particularly difficult breast cancer. They’re all fine. What if?

And what about all that other women’s h.c. in that bill?

Welcome to socialized single payer government run healthcare system

This is what Obama and Democrats pushing for this will not tell you.

I read this and was disgusted.

All it takes is one – just one – woman under the age of 50 who would not ba allowed a mammogram and as a result dies of breast cancer.

I dont’t care what the statistics and probability say – even if it is one in 150 million – that one person has a Constitutional right to stay alive.

Every single elected official who votes for this Obamacare should not be re-elected in their next election cycle.

come on man,

why in the world would you rather have INSURANCE COMPANY executives whom are concerned with MAKING MONEY rationing your healthcare like they do now. The ‘for profit’ healthcare industry just does not work, dude. There is NO incentive to bring down any costs associated with healthcare and that is why health related bandruptcies are so prevalent here. You don’t need to do much research to figure out the even though RICH PEOPLE get the best healthcare in the world here, the rest of us are screwed. There is absolutely no reason not to get the gov’t involoved in some way to get people healthcare who cant afford it or cant get it through work, and try to bring costs down so they are competitive with the rest of the world. Most of these idiots against ‘Obamacare’ vote against there best interests every day with the republicans.

Every single elected official who votes for this Obamacare should not be re-elected in their next election cycle.

If you could only figure out the secret to getting a school of fish to swim in one direction contemporaneously…

once again, no one here has done any research, knows any facts about this issue, and confuses exactly what is being proposed for something made up in their head. Health costs in the US are twice what they are everywhere else. Medical bandruptcies are only evident in the U.S. The ‘for profit’ health sytem, where health company executives concerned with making money are rationing your healthcare now. Why are you against trying to provide health care for those who cant afford it or get it through work, and try to bring costs down to be more in line with the rest of the free world.

U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) has discovered that cancer is very cheap to treat if you will just go away and die quietly. Its patriotic.

The largest rationing will come from those on Medicare. The seniors voted for Obama because he promised them something for nothing. Then again he promised everybody the same things. We saw all we needed to see during the elections… an old and wrinkly McCain = bad. A young and vibrant ethnic person = good. The message couldn’t have been clearer. So the illegal immigrants will have the seniors health care services. Oh well, It isn’t like they don’t at least in some part deserve it. They did vote for and enable the guy. Obama’s policies are coming down on everybody who helped enable him. Nothing personal, it’s just “policy”.

People would welcome REAL reform. But they don’t trust a regime that seized power criminally to do it.

Starve a troll today!

I know these grade B retards are ripe pickings, but lets stop feeding them.

UGH–I think most people here want real health care reforms and have done a great deal of research. That’s what makes us concerned. What is going on so far is not making a lot of sense.

We know all about what private insurance companies do. We know all about systems in other countries. We know the bankruptcy stats. We have been discussing these issues here for a very long time. BUT, Are you suggeting that mature women need to become poorly served as a way to help others without insurance? That it is an either/or with you.

Have you read these bills? I have read the first 2 health care bills as well as the first senate bill. Both House bills are incomprehnsible and the senate bill, thought readable, had a lot of problems.

Remember that sometimes what is touted as a cure can be worse than the problem. Let’s see some meanigful reforms!

Pat, your symbolic illustration is profound. Can barely wait for oowawa’s analysis of it.

Breast cancer is more aggressive in African American women. Therefore, these USPSTF guidelines not only will put women at risk, they’re also Racist!

Also, there were NO oncologists on this panel. Curious …

Excellent point

I know what I am talking about and as a Nurse, this will kill women if followed. And it is only the begining.

Dentist will tell you in advance the cost of what you will be getting into. Simple and works. Physicians/Hospitals treat you and then send you a bill that either you pay or you get served.

We have the technology to have physicians and hospital post a menu of services and allow users to decide which hospital/physician you are going to use. Like E-Bay and Amazon, prices are posted, shipping charges too. I go with free shipping because it has a lot of hidden benefits.

Hospital A charges 15 thousand for a whatever but Hospital B charges 10 and gives you ice cream before you are let go. I’ll go for the ice cream.

Our system is a rip-off of consumers, simple and the poor are at risk only because they cannot choose. If you knew before hand what a procedure will cost you you could beg outside the hospital for a while until you get enough money to pay for it. That would work for me.

“Life is not lost by dying; life is lost minute by minute, day by dragging day, in all the thousand small uncaring ways” – Stephen Vincent Benet

Well, but there are more old “white” people. The larger portions of the ethnic populations are younger in age. If there is a racial slant in this, it will fall the other way. Still, I can’t help but to recall the Obama ad that made fun of McCain because his war injuries kept him from being able to type. It was a sign, but almost nobody was listening.

Perfectly said.

It is very telling that there is not one oncologist on the panel that came up with these new guidelines. Following this prescription will be a disaster. And thank you for your insight, Owllwoman.

I too spoke with a nurse recently — this man has been in the profession for 30 years and told me Obamacare as it currently stands would be a disaster — the rationing word came out of his mouth more than once. I am sure if I called to talk with him about the news anti-screening guidelines, he would be likewise appalled.

Is this how the Obama administration plan to pay for healthcare — just cut down on all the tests. So are the women in Congress in that age range going to stop screening too – or are they too smart for that.

Great article, Pat. Thanks for putting this front and center.

No one can explain it better.

It is so hard to believe that cancer research and treatments have come so far only to be sent back to the dark ages because our government would rather spend money on themselves instead of the people. What makes it even more unbelieveable is that our president has a beautiful wife and two amazing daughters. What is in their future?

t.y. Lark.

when the insurance companies are paying for mammograms the gov’t mandates that they pay for them yearly. When the gov’t is about to pay for them they tell people they don’t need them. Had the insurance companies commissioned this study with this result there would have been non ending outrage by the msm and non stop (ugh) rancor about greedy insurance companies.

There is NO rationing of health care anywhere in this bill. It is made up in the head of Limbaugh and Beck et al to stir up the republizombies. There are no death panels.
Only decent ideas that may or may not work to provided healthcare for those who cant afford it or get it through work. It does NOTHING to anyone who does not want to participate.
It also attempts to bring costs down exaclty, and very very successfully I might add, they way medicare does by giving the gov’t a hand in negotiating prices.

How can you be against health care for those who cant get it or is too expensive? It’s disgusting.

OK, let’s all share. I’m on Medicare. You probably have a good company plan. We add up the benefits from both of our plans and, because mine are less, you have to give me enough of your benefits to make us even. Of course, that means you lose some of your benefits.
Now, if we both get cancer, both of us will live or die based on some bureaucrat’s opinion of “best practices” and cost/benefit analysis.
BTW- Here’s a piece of trivia for those who think gov’t run HC is so great. In England, “main street” HAS to use gov’t HC system-there aren’t any private plans for them. However, ALL gov’t workers have private plans through their employer, the GOVERNMENT.
Another piece of trivia- England’s Health Services administration
is the 3rd LARGEST EMPLOYER IN THE WORLD, surpassed only by the Chinese Red Army and the Indian Railway.

I think it was an NIH study about 15 years ago, which came up with the same guidelines. There was such a backlash from ACS ACR and ACOG that the current recommendations were born. Hopefully the same will happen this time.

We’ve heard for years that self breast exam is pointless because by the time a tumor is palpable, it has most likely spread already. I have several patients who have had normal mammograms and breast exams within a year and find their own breast cancer.

More and more medicine is pushed by the recommedations of these panels. WHI is a perfect example. Women are now afraid to use hormones based on questionable science and poor statistics.

Does anyone see a common thread? Old ladies live too long and cost too much. Who cares what is best for the women of America?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1NdjtiqR-sw
eat more carrots

Ugh–It IS disgusting if you don’t care about women and old people. I happen to care about them…

Perhaps if you address this specifically sans the usual talking points you will get folks to engage you?

Pat Racimora

I don’t think I am being paranoid when I suggest that the new tactic for rationing health care will be to do it slowly, quietly, in little bits and pieces off to the side, and maybe no one will notice.

Well, a new set of mammogram recommendations has just been issued, and it would appear to be a good example of such a sly attempt.

Emphasis mine. Here’s my talking point:

People would welcome REAL reform. But they don’t trust a regime that seized power criminally to do it.

You married these crooks. You expected a walk in the park as they ram-rod their agenda?

you freaking moron, this bill has nothing to do with health care it’s about handouts to the insurance industry and criminalizing being poor

How can you be against health care for those who cant get it or is too expensive?

Are you talking about illegals or seniors on fixed incomes? Because it looks to me that seniors on fixed incomes are taking the hit for all the good and illegal people who just “want” a “better life”. We all have “wants”. Why do their “wants” trump a lifelong taxpaying senior citizens legitimate “needs”?

The Republican charges of “Death Panels” in the first House health care bill (a jumbled mess for the most part) was over-the-top dramatic.

Now, I really do see death panels.

I don’t think the talking points cover that “little” problem.

once again… much ado over nothing. the new rules do not apply to women who have a family history of breast cancer. I’m 45 and when I turned 40, I asked my doctor if I needed to have a mammogram. He told me 5 years ago that with no history of breast cancer, it wasn’t necessary for me to have a mammogram until I was in my 50′s.

That and hospitals will accept a much lower rate negotiated from an insurer when they join the “plan” than they will accept from any cash paying patient. Patients with cash are unprotected and always are charged the most of anybody. It is a health care “mafia”. But, putting the Chicage Don in charge is the worst mistake ever.

OK–How about every 2 years instead of every year given that cancers grow so fast? What about nothing after 74 (74 seems to be some major number–duty to die age?).

Plus, I really do not know my history. Family issues a generation ago split everyone up–I have no idea what my risks actually are for anything. Adopted children do not know. Many situations keep risks unknowable.

My friend who had cancer at 32 had no known risks. (She passed at 40.)

I guess nobody here has any intellectual curiosity, as always, all cries for revenge and bluster with NO FACTS whatsoever. Nobody here has in any way tried to understand this bill.

“….handouts to the healtcare industry and criminalizing being poor…”

Facts pal, what the hell are you mumbling about?

There had to be concessions to the Health Industry to make this work….change doesn’t happen overnight. These changes should have been attempted long ago, just like alternative energy sources.

I’ll say in one more time…this bill attempts to bring down health care costs just like medicare does, and tries to get health insurance for those who cant get it now for whatever reason. It does ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to your existing policies or health care if you don’t want to participate. The government has the ability to do things at a much lower cost than private sector in certain situations. Medicare folks. Read the friggin bill or find someone who can read to tell you about it. People with no health insurance are a burden to our society and drive costs sky high. Far higher than ANY OTHER COUNTRY IN THE WORLD. It is not sustainable. Do some research.

Your doctor clearly doesn’t much like you.

Talking points are hilarious. It is hilarious to watch the White House staff, Pelosi, Reid and all the bots regurgitate the exact same syntax day after day. It is hysterical how they can’t even see that they don’t even have free thought anymore. They don’t know what to think until they get the points. The irony is the points are only disseminated after the focus groups made of the public are consulted so the White House knows how to word the points. The blind are leading the blind. This from the smartest President ever. It is hilarious.

Can we not feed this grade C troll?

He already brought up green power and regurgitated some Obama lies, oops, ‘talking points’.

I predict that next he will bring up Hillary Clinton.

My wife had breast cancer. The annual mammogram she had detected the cancer early on. Today she is cancer free–thanks to those annual exams. What the Obama administration is displaying, by trying to change those annual life saving exams to two years, is a lack of respect or care for life.

By the way–Globe Magazine seems to think Obama has lung cancer. Which would account for his weight loss. He appears to be anorexic and he has a team of four doctors at his disposal 24/7. Yet, his cronies recommend women cut their mammogram exams in half? Would this include Muchelle Obama? I doubt it.

The party of “Death and Taxes”. That should be all over bumper stickers and t-shirts.

According to the American Cancer Society, only 5-10% of breast cancer cases are hereditary. What about the other 90 – 95% of us that have no genetic risk factors?

You are right. What you are talking about is “reform.”

Obama/Reid/Pelosi are talking about a complete overhaul – not reform of the current system to make it better. What they are talking about is not fixing the problems but shifting where the problems will occur – the government – which will only make them much, much worse.

And, by the way, Pelosi care will still leave over 30,000 people uninsured.

my doctor is a professional and i trust him. he’s been my family doctor for over 20 years. so yes, he does “like me”. what a juvenile response.

Well, Solara 9, I am humbled, but wait no longer for I am here with my smarty-pants critique. I agree: the illustration is profound. I assume that on one level, it suggests a mammogram (never having had one myself). The weird pink modules that do not belong seem to suggest a metastasizing mass. But what makes the ‘toon so effective is its ominous overtones: perhaps, an eyeball punctured and oozing pink stuff; or a meteor crashing into a planet; or the robotic round lamp that stares down at you unblinking in the dentist’s office, bearing witness to your anguish. It hurts and seems very wrong.

I think “ugh” is the only sound that can be made by someone who is filled to the bursting point with unicorn flavored Koolaid?

course not she has the cadilac plan

I think you are on the wrong website.

You should be on Daily Kos where a quack doctor DemCT is a front pager who supports Obama and the idea that women should not have to a mammography until 50. The mean education level there is 3rd grade which is about yours.

Any doctor that does not suggest baseline mammography at 40 (some do at 35) is incompetent. Or you are lying.

Just because you choose to play the odds does not require others to do so.

This change is not much ado about nothing. It is the first of many changes that will reduce the quality of care and disease outcomes of people receiving medical care in the United States.

Did I use enough “big girl” words for you now?

Obama and his administration’s definition of a breast exam is a trip to Hooter’s, so this is par for them.
And no, Pat, you are not being paranoid, since this “task force” is funded and appointed by the U.S. Gov’t. This is clearly the first shot fired from their first firing squad/death panel.
Great post. Thank you!

The people here are much more thoughtful and highly educated when it comes to issues.

They are not the brainless fish who follow Obama and blindly support his socialism. Polls don’t lie. Obama will be THE most failed one term President in American history.

He even admitted that his policies will result in a double dip recession – something he can’t blame on Bush – which is an excuse no one is buying anymore.

It is curious, isn’t it, that these recommendations just happened to come out now; and that not one oncologist was on the panel? Curious, that.

I do have some experience on the other side of the rationing argument however. I have a mom-in-law [now deceased] who was diagnosed with terminal lung cancer. She also had a serious–fatal, eventually–blood disease which prohibited her from receiving any chemo or any other cancer treatment. And, at age 88, in end-stage lung cancer, and blood cancer, she was prescribed a mammogram by her doctor. She’d never had cancer, never had breast cancer, and she couldn’t be treated for it if they found it. We had to fight her doctor on issues like these for years; tests ordered that had no valid rationale.

“People with no health insurance are a burden to our society and drive cost sky high”. You are absolutely right. Especially those who continue to propogate and inflate the population with illegit children and over-tax the welfare system because they do not give a good god damn about life. The fix is to shut off the welfare to these generational misfits who have never worked a day in their lives and do not intend to ever work and live on the dole of the government. Illegal aliens and generational welfare recipients are robbing the social programs, the educational system, and health care programs. Get your head out of your ass. Obama is not going to give you $1,000,000, a new car, free housing, free education (maybe he should so you could sign your welfare check), free insurance, and a life of ease for the rest of your sorry life. You put him in office and you are of no further use to him. Deal with it.

Lucky you. My BFF died in August, she was 62. She never did self-exams. She found her lump while showering, and died 10 months later.

She had no family history of breast cancer. She was African-American. I doubt ObamaCare cares.

I miss her.

I don’t see any big words, or even cogent debate from you hc123. All I see is personal attacks, sarcasm, sneering and whining about others being “trolls.” You haven’t contributed much to this thread from what I’ve read.

Yes, you’re right. I accidentally fed a troll. My apologies.

wow. such hate… of course you used enough “big girl” words. and if it weren’t for all the smarta$$ comments such as yours, this blog “might” be taken more seriously.

And just think about all of the underlying Freudian implications. I think were just seeing the tit of the iceberg.

Trolls exist to stop discussion, cloud the waters and annoy other posters. Cogent debate with them is impossible and a waste of e-ink.

However you do remind me not to forget to thank our “hostess”.

Thanks Pat, for another great post. As always your artwork is superb.

I am sorry that ugh, kc and apparently mountain have decided it is all very silly.

mountainaires. That is a sad story of waste, and no one agrees with that. I think we have to make it OK for doctors to use their heads when making test decisions rather than fears of being sued if they don’t cover every conceivable base. Where is tort reform?

It was recently discovered in an X-ray when my mom fell that she has something “worrisome” (doctor’s term) on her kidney. But they will not do anything about it even though she does not have any other negative condition. save for being frail. Why? Because she is 98. To my sister and I, that makes sense because she cannot tolerate the usual pain medications. Whatever it is is apparently growing slower than her expected life span otherwise.

LOL–Ah, Onofre’s arm, I didn’t notice you lurking about, pun in hand. I also see the drain or the black-hole down which we are swirling with this so-called health-care bill. Yikes.

the only woman on the panel pediatrician ????????

I don’t suppose there should be any concern about exposing a healthy young woman without risk factors to regular and cummulative doses of ionizing radiation throughout her life?

The effective doses of radiation for each mammogram is very small, of course.

Still, routine mammography screening has been a lot more controvercial than most people realize. Consider this:

“The majority of health experts agree that the risk of breast cancer for asymptomatic women under 35 is not high enough to warrant the risk of radiation exposure. For this reason, and because the radiation sensitivity of the breast in women under 35 is possibly greater than in older women, most radiologists will not perform screening mammography in women under 40.”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mammography#Critique_of_screening_mammography

There are a number of independent studies suggesting that routine mammography screening may statistically increase the incidence of breast cancer.

BTW, you guys don’t know the difference between socialism, marxism, communism and botulism.
Every gov’t progam is ‘socialism’

‘The fix is to shut off the welfare to these generational misfits who have never worked a day in their lives and do not intend to ever work and live on the dole of the government. Illegal aliens and generational welfare recipients are robbing the social programs, the educational system, and health care programs.’

Facts pal. Just because you make something up does not make is so, pal.

Were all immigrants. When is the white man gonna get a fair shake, huh?

ugh

You are way wrong on all counts ugh, which isn’t surprising since your post is simply regurgitated propaganda talking points.

You claim that the bill is filled with good ideas to provide health care to those who can’t afford it. Even Nazi Pelosi claims that it will only cover 96% of our citizens. That leaves more than 12 million uncovered. Currently, only 8 million legal citizens cannot get or afford insurance, medicare, or medicaid. This bill will actually ADD to the numbers of people falling through the cracks.

You claim that it does NOTHING to anyone who doesn’t want to participate. Do you call fines and/or imprisonment nothing? ALL evaluations of the bill predict that it could double the price of insurance for EVERYONE who choses to keep their private plans. Is that nothing?

It is almost universally agreed that this bill WILL NOT bring down costs, just the opposite. The per capita costs for medical care will explode, but the costs will be hidden in countless new taxes. And it will drastically slash medicare, forcing our seniors to buy supplimental insurance (no wonder AARP endorses this) from entities like AARP, out of their own pockets, in order to get adequate coverage.

And nobody I know of wants the poor to go without health care, but nobody is denied really, ER’s are required by law to treat everyone now, period.

Wonder if her doctor had to prescribe the mammo because his malpractice insurance company told him to.

Yes, we may have crossed the event horizon.

There is also a downside to mammograms: they expose you to radiation. The new guidelines specifically exclude those women with a family history of cancer, or women who know they are at risk, and are an attempt to balance the benefits of mammograms and the risks of radiation from X-Rays. Newer technologies, including a possible blood test for cancer, may make these guidelines irrelevant in the near future.

But this is a minor incident in the whole healthcare saga, and once again we have the gang on the sidelines screaming that government ‘takeover’ of healthcare will mean rationing with bureaucrats deciding who gets care.

I have a question to those of you who now have private health insurance: Q: Who the H… do you think decides what care you now receive? A: An insurance company bureaucrat with no medical training and who’s first answer is ‘deny approval’-that’s who!

Americans WITH insurance have all sorts of restrictions, including which doctors they can see and what hospital they can go to, and co-pays and lifetime caps in their policies. In fact, the only thing that saves many Americans is if they live to be 65, they can finally get government-run Medicare. Americans WITHOUT insurance have lots of restrictions on what care they can receive.

Healthcare in other OECD countries is quite different. First of all, people get to choose their doctor. The system pays for the treatment the doctor and the patient agree on – no one else has to approve. Patients can go to whatever hospital they wish. Everyone is covered from birth, no matter if they are sick or well, employed or unemployed, rich or poor. NOBODY goes bankrupt in order to pay medical bills. NOBODY. And this is accomplished for, on average, half of what Americans spend on healthcare. That’s right. For half the money, they cover everyone. Why aren’t Americans DEMANDING better?

Are there some waiting lists in other OECD countries? Yes, but there are waiting lists in America, too. Especially if you add the time that elapses from when you see your doctor until the time the insurance company approves treatment.

In the Michael Moore film, ‘Sicko’, some Americans living in France were discussing why the French got so many excellent services from their government, while Americans got so little. One American said, ‘In France, the government is afraid of the people, but in America, the people are afraid of the government.’

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer

“WIKIPEDIA MAKES NO GUARANTEE OF VALIDITY”

“No formal peer review”

“Not professional advice”

It would probably be too much to ask anyone to give a even moment of consideration to the sound medical reasons and concerns behind the new mammogram screening guidelines.

After all, this couldn’t about health. It’s always got to be about politics and Obama.

Has a single person even read that thing? Seriously, I highly doubt it. It was written by lobbyists for the drug and hospital industries. Democrats right now don’t have to read bills, they just vote they way they are told to by Nancy. Nancy wears their pants. They should all be named “stanley” because they are all tools.

American Cancer Society recommendations for early breast cancer detection

Women age 40 and older should have a screening mammogram every year, and should continue to do so for as long as they are in good health.

Women in their 20s and 30s should have a clinical breast exam (CBE) as part of a periodic (regular) health exam by a health professional, preferably every 3 years. After age 40, women should have a breast exam by a health professional every year.

Breast self-exam (BSE) is an option for women starting in their 20s. Women should be told about the benefits and limitations of BSE. Women should report any breast changes to a health professional right away.

Please click the link to read the entire article.

American Cancer Society recommendations for early breast cancer detection

Women age 40 and older should have a screening mammogram every year, and should continue to do so for as long as they are in good health.

Women in their 20s and 30s should have a clinical breast exam (CBE) as part of a periodic (regular) health exam by a health professional, preferably every 3 years. After age 40, women should have a breast exam by a health professional every year.

Breast self-exam (BSE) is an option for women starting in their 20s. Women should be told about the benefits and limitations of BSE. Women should report any breast changes to a health professional right away.

Women at high risk (about 20% or greater lifetime risk based on family history or history of prior treatment with radiation) should get an MRI (magnetic resonance imaging) and a mammogram every year beginning at age 30 (see below). There is not enough evidence to recommend for or against the use of MRI for women at moderately increased risk (15% to 20% lifetime risk) based on family history or other risk factors. Yearly MRI screening is not recommended for women whose lifetime risk of breast cancer is less than 15%.

Good information. Yes, but Nancy wears the pants now. Ask Nancy Pants.

Please disregard this, its incomplete. Read the comment below. Thanks.

I have to agree, Galt. The Dems sure aren’t showing women any love. This totally flies in the face of everything we know about preventive care. And wasn’t focusing on preventive care a large part of how this health care bill was supposed to SAVE money??

Yeah, I keep forgetting Wikipedia is widely perceived as a left wing plot. They’ve collected together so many annoying facts.

They list their references at the bottom of each page. Or you can search the same information out on Google for yourself. I did a bit of that, but the Wikipedia article nicely summarized things.

Here’s a random study suggesting that routine mammography screening itself might be inducing a certain percentage of breast cancers:

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/6/3/201.abstract

Is this how the Obama administration plan to pay for healthcare — just cut down on all the tests.

Yup, that’s exactly how. Next to go will be pap smears. After all, it’s only women.

Thank you for an excellent article.

Yeah, I keep forgetting Wikipedia is widely perceived as a left wing plot. They’ve collected together so many annoying facts.

Ticked you off, didn’t I. Post the direct sources, if you don’t want to be criticized. And I don’t consider it a “left wing plot.” Their own disclaimer should be heeded, IMO.

Check. Fresh out of troll feed.

References, please.

I think that name is a misprint.
It should read Preventing Services Task Force.

Good question.

I only have anecedotal info. to share concerning this but I’m inclined to agree that some mammogram recommendations may have only helped those who already had a strong family history and even then both parties almost died from the treatment – although in both cases their choices were no treatment and die for sure or have treatment and possibly survive. One many years later is doing great.
The other is doing well as far as the cancer is concerned but is having problems with her bones due to the chemo apparently destroying bone tissue. However in both instances although mammograms only caught advanced cancers, they both would probably be dead had they not had the mammograms.

These same recommendations came out while Bush was in office. Bush refused to sign on to them. So, yes, it is about politics. It’s about who respects women and who would rather err on the side of caution and perhaps save a life or two vs. those who are all about “cost effectiveness.”

…to give even a moment of consideration…

Sorry. I become typo-prone when I’m ticked off. That a well-intentioned and well-reasoned health policy change should be reflexively turned into another occasion for an anti-Obama skreed–with total disregard for the actual reasons behind it–ticks me off. Ironically, it’s those of us who actually think on occasion that are continuously accused of being the mindless partisans.

A Maternal-Fetal Medicine specialist is on the panel but no Oncologist is? Curious, to be sure. More curious is the timing, which could not be coincidental.

It’s a sort of Rorschach test, isn’t it?

On the first glance I saw a beautiful porcelain plate with a small ration of food. Further study did seem to indicate the shadow of a breast with a mass in one quadrant.

Pat — that’s the beauty and cleverness of your art. It can be symbolic on so many levels and yet crystallize exactly what your message is. Kudos to you as always!

After all, this couldn’t about health. It’s always got to be about politics and Obama.

My, my that’s the view of a simpleton. We can walk and chew gum at the same time – the issue can be about both health and the politics of said health issue(s).

And cost effectiveness is a laughable term coming from the people who are basing the cost of this “health care reform” on 10 years of income to offset 6 years of coverage.

I had my baseline mammogram at 35 and then had them at 37, 39, 40 and every year thereafter. I just had my 50th birthday and get tremendous comfort when I get the letter in the mail saying everything is normal. My maternal aunt is a 25 year survivor. My doctor also had me get a baseline bone density test several years ago because you can’t tell if you are losing bone density if you don’t know where you started from.

Ignorance and prejudice and fear go hand in hand.(and hand)

Enjoy Obama for another 7 years.

Another Wiki joins the ranks of Pbot.

The HHS sec had to walk this one back this afternoon,I understand.
Wouldn’t want to get the wrong impression that health care is to be rationed.
The laws of supply and demand would inform anyone with half a brain that this will be the case, but that half was rationed. Oh well.

No! we are not all immigrants. We American citizens who are natural born citizens, the descendants of two American parents, unlike Obama who was born of one American parent and a kenyan from the continent of Africa. We are not the run of the mill Obama dredge, we are Americans. Socialism, Marxism, communism, and botulism are all poisonous and have no place in America. The white man/woman gets a fair shake when and because they create the fair shake and do not depend on the government for anything. The American citizens have been fighting the Marxists, Lenninists, Communists, and the likes of Obama and his socialist programs for longer than the average American citizen can remember. Whatever your socialist program or agenda–stick it where the sun does not shine.

Fact pal, you need to get a job and get away from the Obama slop chute, AKA the pig trough. Or is that another ugh? LOL!

Yep. Good ol’ W. There’s big money in routinely irradiating the breasts of healthy young American women–any medical opinions and evidence concerning an increase in radiation-induced tumors notwithstanding.

I’d just as soon leave what George did out of the discussion. He’s living in Texas, and no longer president.

Thanks Oowawa (and Solara 9). I was waiting myself. As usual Oowawa gets most of what I hoped to convey (and then adds a few interesting takes that I hadn’t considered).

The illustration is quite creepy–a mammogram of a breast, yes, but also of dying (that “dead” blue of death) from the thriving, pink, happy cancer that is speading.

Well I am ticked off that once again women are thrown under the bus by the party that is supposed to care about them. First the Stupak amendment took away our rights, and now we are supposed to shut up and nod when the recommendations we’ve followed all our lives are thrown out the window in the name of cost effectiveness. We are supposed to say OK when they suddenly want to take away mammograms from women over 75 because they will probably die of something else sooner. So take your ticked off little self off this blog and go find someone who actually cares that you are ticked off at “anti-Obama skreed.”

Question: should not the decision on how and when to detect breast cancer be up to women and their physicians, and not some bloody panel appointed by the government?

What happened to the talking point of “keeping the health care we have” ?

You print ‘em, I’ll wear ‘em!

Thank you kindly, Portia Elizabeth.

I am sorry for your loss Murray.

Great. Now we are making health care recommendations based on wiki. My middle school aged son isn’t allowed to use wiki for his school reports, but it’s the reference of choice for bots.

Brilliant! Unfortunately, Dr. Zeke Emanuel wrote in JAMA that doctors who put their patients’ interests first are a bug, not a feature.

That anything and everything Obama does or says or approves of is automatically wrong and to be automatically resisted strikes as a far more simplistic view. It’s pure negativity.

I think I saw a wind up key in Nazi’s back. She needs to be upgraded to her very own teleprompter, maybe pocket size.

Women on Medicare are already rationed for pap smears to one every two years. This is dangerous for the generation that didn’t have access to information about the HPV virus in the 1960′s – 80′s when casual sex was pretty rampant. Thankfully, AIDS changed a lot of that with women. However, all sexually active women, of those decades in particular, need regular screening to make sure they don’t have the potential consequences of undiagnosed HPV, cervical cancer.

So I guess the message is, if cervical CA doesn’t get ya, let’s hope breast CA will. Bastards. Each and every one of them.

However, my daughter and I will get our mammogram yearly anyway whether or not it has to come out of pocket. I’m not rich but it’s that important. And, I hope if the insurance companies start using this as an excuse not to pay, women will start a class action suit to teach them a lesson.

that is why we need the insurance companies out of health care. They have bullied their way between patients and their doctors and suck obscene amounts
out of a system which worked very nicely before their
arrival.

Bush is relevant in this case, as Lana pointed out “These same recommendations came out while Bush was in office.”

I’d just as soon listen to Lana than you and your talking points and diversions.

Do we seriously think Michelle is going to give up her mammograms? Or those 2 precious girls when they are old enough?

Prejudice is ignorance and the ignoramous Obama played the prejudicial race card throughout the presidential campaign. Now you are trying to rejuvinate the same tactic with you ignorant socialized health care arguement. stick it.

Obama and his administration’s definition of a breast exam is a trip to Hooter’s

Oh my god, that is funny! Dolcelder, there’s your bumper sticker line!

In this society there is only one thing of less worth than an old man and that is an old woman.

I have a friend who, a couple of months ago, in her 60′s found a breast lump (soapy hands self exam in the shower) and acted immediately. She was able to have a lumpectomy because it was caught early; she took aggressive follow-up with chemo and radiation. I expect her to be declared free of cancer when her 5 year check-up comes around…if she had waited, I have no doubt she’d be dead in 5 years.

Well now I’m in a quandary about who to listen to–The American Cancer Society or the wiki entry posted by the bot…

UGH:

People aren’t AGAINST “health insurance” reform (imo one should be careful not to confuse it with health care! which is excellent). It seems to me you are obfuscating the issue on purpose..(?)

But the CURRENT legislation pending would be disastrous. You do not believe me? How about the Dr. Flier, Dean of the Harvard Medical School one of the leading medical school in the country? After all IT IS ABOUT a patient and his/her doctor, right? So why not LISTENING to teh doctors, epecially one who’s in academia and in charge of a school that trains/educates them? Dr. Jeffrey Flier surely is not on the pocket of the insurance companies–
Politicians? Well…whose bed are not they in…
I surely trust Dr. Flier by far more than the government.

Health ‘Reform’ Gets a Failing Grade
The changes proposed by Congress will require more draconian measures down the road. Just look at Massachusetts.

Pat Racimora: GREAT cartoon and post. Thank you !!

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704431804574539581994054014.html

Harvard Med School Dean: Health Care Reform Gets a Failing Grade.

…n discussions with dozens of health-care leaders and economists, I find near unanimity of opinion that, whatever its shape, the final legislation that will emerge from Congress will markedly accelerate national health-care spending rather than restrain it. Likewise, nearly all agree that the legislation would do little or nothing to improve quality or change health-care’s dysfunctional delivery system. The system we have now promotes fragmented care and makes it more difficult than it should be to assess outcomes and patient satisfaction. The true costs of health care are disguised, competition based on price and quality are almost impossible, and patients lose their ability to be the ultimate judges of value.

Worse, currently proposed federal legislation would undermine any potential for real innovation in insurance and the provision of care. It would do so by overregulating the health-care system in the service of special interests such as insurance companies, hospitals, professional organizations and pharmaceutical companies, rather than the patients who should be our primary concern.

Game. Set. Match. Tournament.

Doubtless you looked over the Wiki entry on Mammography and checked their listed references before drawing any conclusion about it…

Your son’s school is actually telling students what they aren’t allowed to read before preparing school reports?

You must really enjoy the view from Obama`s rectum.

Sorry. I become typo-prone when I’m ticked off.

Yeah you are also acting irrationally and illogically.

That a well-intentioned and well-reasoned health policy

The road to hell is always paved with the best of intentions. Well-reasoned? Have you tried to decipher the bill(s)?

change should be reflexively turned into another occasion for an anti-Obama skreed–with total disregard for the actual reasons behind it–ticks me off.

Being ticked off is a bad place to be if trying to sway folks to your point of view.

Ironically, it’s those of us who actually think on occasion that are continuously accused of being the mindless partisans.

If we don’t think here and are not up to your standards of magnificence, don’t let the blog door hit you in the ass on the way out.

Amen, Galt. And amen to Doc 99 below.

That anything and everything Obama does or says or approves of is automatically wrong

That’s your assumption, not mine.

Indiana Dem — will you take the word of a radiologist who trained at The Cleveland Clinic? He’s furious that this issue is being considered. He said a significant percentage of the patients who come up positive on mammographies are in their 20′s and 30′s. Due to hormone influence, these cancers can develop much faster than in an older woman. Radiologists are asking for further research into the statistics before making these sweeping and possibly life-shortening changes.

Hold on, as IndianaDem searches Wiki for a talking point comeback!

Game. Set. Match. Tournament.

Thing is, it if passes, we lose. So enjoy the symbolic victory for now.

You are right. It says it all.

I think you will find that confirmed by over 80% of American physicians.

What does Obama, Reid and Pelosi know about healthcare that qualifies them or their staff to throw our healthcare system under the bus and force Americans to accept a system that has already failed in other countries?

UGH: Unhorse, you look ridiculous up there.

That’s just it, Hokma. Their statistics showed it DOES help to have mammograms between 40-50. That makes their decision even more egregious.

A totally relevant facts aren’t a diversion.

Evidence indicates that routine mammography screening of healthy young asymptomatic women having no risk factors for breast cancer, finds few tumors, produces a lot of false positives, and appears to actually induce new tumors. What does logic suggest about the screening guidelines? Would you want the doctor to routinely irradiate your daughter in accordance with a government approved schedule?

To me, it’s that simple.

Your “logic” and argument is flawed. I thought you were superior in intellect to us?

Tricia:

mountainaires. That is a sad story of waste, and no one agrees with that. I think we have to make it OK for doctors to use their heads when making test decisions rather than fears of being sued if they don’t cover every conceivable base. Where is tort reform?

Excellent points!!

What does Obama, Reid and Pelosi know about healthcare that qualifies them or their staff to throw our healthcare system under the bus and force Americans to accept a system that has already failed in other countries?

I take that as a rhetorical utterance and second it.

Hooray, the Dean of the Harvard Med School is a Capitalist who understands how efficiently market forces, and consumer choices are at bringing down costs and increasing quality. That’s of course, if the government would get the Hell out of the way.

Thanks for this Doc99!

just me — you need to get a second opinion. Your doctor seems woefully uninformed. The incidence of breast cancer in women with no family history is roughly 50% of all cases. In plain words, half of the women diagnosed with breast cancer don’t have anyone else in their family who’s been diagnosed.

I don’t know any intelligent woman who would think those odds are good enough to bet her life.

West Coast Galt, this statement crystallizes the problem. We do not trust this administration to act in our best interests given that they lied and cheated and stole their way into power, silencing the will of the majority along the path. Why would any rational person do otherwise?

Love it!

A Totally relevant facts aren’t a diversion.

OK. My typos are increasing and my blood pressure is up. That’s a sure sign it’s time to leave a discussion. I’m out of here.

A totally relevant facts aren’t a diversion.

You do generally practice the art of diversion and misdirection and your “facts” are not necessarily all facts.

Thank you, Portia Elizabeth. I hope this is posted on wiki so the bots can find it.

Hat’s off to you Lana, brilliant comment!

Welcome to socialized single payer government run healthcare system

Ummm … we don’t have that. We have a bunch of Insurance Companies that will happily stop paying for mammograms for women in their 40s.

Don’t demonize something that isn’t there.

Praise the lord for small miracles! Face the fact there are millions of folks will never join in your group-think partisan universe.

Ahem. As always, I enjoy your comments, hc123. Your insight is much appreciated and spot on.

Ya got me, partner… I’m staggering out the door… Maybe I’ll go watch Glenn Beck and get my head straightened out before I return, full-up with clarity, logic, and righteous, properly-directed anger.

Genocide is the deliberate and systematic destruction of (or attempt to destroy) an ethnic, racial, religious or national group. Genocide – to kill off an entire race or ethnic group. The actual crime is mass murder committed in an attempt to do so.

So, basically, LADIES FIRST!!

OK let’s all share FlaGirl. You and I are on Medicare. It is nothing like England’s system but it is still a government-run system. Do you want to leave?
I’d just like a safety net for everyone so no one has NOTHING.

Thank you for the excellent info in this post.

These suggestions are as insane as claiming Women are not human.

My Mother in Law’s cancer would not have been detected then either.

Nor would mine, that I found 5 years ago yesterday. On my own at 43. My mammogram the year prior did not pick it up. And the mammogram after finding my lump did not pick it up.

The ultra sound DID find it when I pointed to the exact area. Scheduled a needle core biopsy. That came back, as I was told on the phone “not cancer, but they recommend you still have a surgeon remove it”. I found a surgeon, and received the call the week of Christmas that it was cancer. I had a 2nd surgery and then 6 weeks of radiation.

I’m expecting Obama to come out with another guideline that women are not allowed to touch themselves.

Let’s see, kill women, young, middle and old, but they sure will be buying alot of drugs to try to extend their life when it’s discovered too late. No doubt has his Big Pharma donors walking around with a box of kleenex from sheer ectasy.

Here here! Ding! You win a cluefulness prize!

Justice delayed is Justice denied, so therefore, Medical Prevention delayed is Medical Prevention Denied!

I could go all day, but I think you all get my point!

Trolls exist to stop discussion, cloud the waters and annoy other posters. Cogent debate with them is impossible and a waste of e-ink.

it’s not really a debate/discussion if you aren’t “allowed” to post a different opinion. what i posted was in no way intended to stop, cloud or annoy, nor was it a personal attack against someone i don’t even know.

and just because I don’t see a problem with not getting a breast exam until 50, based on information provided to me by my doctor of 20 years, does not mean that i am insulting pat’s post. it just means i don’t really agree that it’s a big issue. hence the “discussion”.

and in case you can’t comprehend that, I’ll just reply to this comment from you

Your doctor clearly doesn’t much like you.

with “yeah, well your mother dresses you funny”, or “your mother wears army boot”, or some other equally juvenile retort.

No, I think he is on the right website. We are not all the same here and respect each other’s point of view – hopefully without insults and name-calling.

Sorry, slight correction. Based on the only documentary ‘evidence’ in the public record, in combination with BO’s history of telling lies; I find no reasonable basis to assume, the man BO identifies as his father is, in truth, his father.

Doc99– stop with the logic fest! Stop with the experts’ opinions fest!

(Where’s Donna to comment on this?)

I hate it when people use Massachusetts as a bad example. It was created by a Republican to make everyone buy insurance from the Insurance companies. How is that anything other than a gift to the insurance companies?

Your bias and prejudice are showing. No surprise there, you voted for and blindly support a racist/sexist/radical. And that isn’t even remotely clever. I thought you were leaving?

I don’t recall ever having suggested that. I suggested that some evidence be considered before automatically drawing politically motivated conclusions. That generally seems to me like a reasonable suggestion.

Once again, an Obot pops up and tries to change the conversation and again shows the high level of ignorance.

LMAO.

Who are “the seniors” you are referring to? Not me. I like old an wrinkly and didn’t vote for Obama.

Exactly, jbjd. And they have shown us NO sign that they can come anywhere near knowing what something will cost–Cash for Clunkers cost triple what they said it would. The government site is lying about the number of jobs the stimulus created. And we’re supposed to believe they’ve got THIS ONE right?

A few weeks ago I read that this Congress had tried to deal with the problem of lead in toys with a 30 page bill that outlined the restrictions. They so completely messed it up that production of some toys has had to totally halt while they toy companies and Congress try to figure out what they said. but I’m sure they’ve got this 2,000 page bill right…

I don’t recall ever having suggested that.

Ironically, it’s those of us who actually think on occasion that are continuously accused of being the mindless partisans.

Nice try, but you lose.

Thank you, Galt, for rescuing us from the imbeciles. I personally get so disgusted with their twisted logic and changes of subjects that I just can’t reply or I’d fry the keyboard.

Keystone Cops controlling our destiny. Great.

Yes; actually, the contempt was aimed at old JMc’s supposed inability to decipher the computer, which wrong conclusion evidently resulted from the fact, his manual dexterity is hampered by war injuries.

I’m expecting Obama to come out with another guideline that women are not allowed to touch themselves.

I can’t decide whether to laugh or cry over this one.

Im a Linda too –congratulations on being a survivor! Thanks for sharing your personal battle with us. It’s one many women have to fight and it’s insane that our own govt. wants to take away our weapons.

Too True Ugh. The commenters here would rather have a morally reprehensible healthcare system where companies are allowed to actively profiteer on medical misfortune than anything at all proposed by Obama. The sad thing is, the same commenters would be giggling like excited schoolgirls if Hillary had the same proposals.

This country needs single payer. But in a society where the $ is the real religion, any initiative aimed at medical need rather than company bottom lines is described as socialistic government interference. Of course single payer would prioritse nasty disease in the young – that is right. Here, though, you get a wallet test before anything else. At least a public option tries to address this.

The GOP genuinely doesn’t give a damn about those who don’t have health insurance and people like you lot and teabaggers don’t like it a priori because Obama is addressing the issue. Sarah Palin doesn’t know about the issue at all.

That is why the US will continue to have an awful healthcare system – part overpriced, part 3rd world. No broke country would aspire to this.

Save your breaths – I’m a healthcare pro and I’ve worked in the system here and in the UK.

Onofre – I saw that 96% before. Does anyone know WHO this bill DOESN’T cover? I’d like to know.

Hey Ferd are you lurking? I’m sure most people miss your bot swatting abilities. Same goes for Katmoon.

Too True Ugh. The commenters here would rather have a morally reprehensible healthcare system where companies are allowed to actively profiteer on medical misfortune than anything at all proposed by Obama. The sad thing is, the same commenters would be giggling like excited schoolgirls if Hillary had the same proposals.

Sock puppet, you really had to twist logic to come up with that rubbish.

Excuse me, but health care rationing began the day health care was turned over to for-profit insurance companies. I disagree with these findings and recommendations, but I’m hardly an expert in these affairs. What I’ve read, though, is that mammograms often give readings that lead to false assumptions which often lead to unnecessary worry and cutting.

I guess I’m basically in favor of “if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.”

REMEMBER WHAT LARRY SUMMERS SAID MONTHS AGO!! WE SHOULD HAVE BEEN WARNED THEN ABOUT THE PLANS TO RATION HEALTHCARE:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30291720/page/2/

DR. SUMMERS: The president’s laid out a number of measures on the tax side and in–and much more importantly, a number of measures that involve taking costs out of the Medicare, the Medicare budget. But the really important issue for the long run, David, is changing the way in which we deliver health care in this country. You know, there have been a whole set of studies done, they look at health care, the frequency of different procedures, whether it’s tonsillectomies or hysterectomies in different parts of the country, and what you see is that in some parts of the country procedures are done three times as frequently and there’s no benefit in terms of the health of the population. And by doing the right kind of cost-effectiveness, by making the right kinds of investments and protection, some experts that we–estimate that we could take as much as $700 billion a year out of our health care system. Now, we wouldn’t have to do anything like that, we wouldn’t have to do a third of that in order to pay for a very aggressive program of increased coverage. And so really the president and OMB director Orszag have identified a number of items that they call the game changers: prevention, cost-effectiveness, research, doing a better job on, on reimbursements. And as we put those into effect we can get this growth of health care costs under control. And it’ll be a good thing for the federal budget and, frankly, a good thing for the national economy.

“The sad thing is, the same commenters would be giggling like excited schoolgirls if Hillary had the same proposals.”

Hillary Clinton was subjected to the same blistering attacks when she was pushing for healthcare reform back in the Clinton days, remember? I remember the same corporate-funded media blitz intended to make the public fearful of healthcare change. It worked.

And Bill! Bill was the devil himself back then. As with Obama, they tried to take him down by attacking his public image. Whitewater. When that failed, Monica. Not much talk about the deficit or the economy, of course, since–dammit–they were doing so well. Nobody wanted to talk about Bill’s worries about terrorism, which were nothing but an attempt at diversion from the really important matter of a tabloid-level national debate about a middle-aged man’s sexual indiscretions.

Not much seems to have changed.

Thank you.

…Lana, yes, really.

FLAgirl. I worked for the UK gov in the healthcare sectorand the healthcare I got was the free National Health Service. Health benefits aren’t part of job offers, except maybe private dental. You can buy privately and some firms offer this to do ingrown toenails etc. But if there’s something seriosly wrong with you you default to NHS care anyway, maybe with a private room.

Please don’t make stuff up: it helps no-one in this debate.

Seems as though all my thoughts on the ruling by this panel have been expressed here. Thanks for the great ‘toon and your commentary, Pat.

This is only the beginning of what we can expect down the road. It’s not meant to relieve any anxiety over a false positive, it’s designed to contain costs. Period. Anyone who believes that BS is full of it themselves. Shame on them for expecting us to swallow their drivel.

To make it even more confusing for American women, now we have the HHS Princess herself coming out to say that the government panel that came up with these guidelines is full of baloney and the government isn’t going to follow or recommend their ideas. WTF?? I have an idea to save money. Drop these crazy, effing panels and put them out in the street.

I’m a nurse and I approve this message and endorse Pat’s toon.

There was a statement issue re: prostate cancer a few weeks ago. Men don’t have to be screened as often.

Not really. As an occasional visitor here I’m quite familiar with how the thinking goes.

No on this task force is listed as an oncologist.

This is not Hillary’s legislation. Its impossible to compare her ideas with the present bills. The comparison is illogical. And you are conveniently forgetting the crux of the problem: millions of people, including many former Dems do not trust the government, since the present administration seized power in their minds illegally. Hillary lost because she played clean. She would have problems of course trying to make into law her version of health care reform, but she would not have countless folks questioning her legitimacy as president. Yep, this issue will never go away no matter how many times you click your ruby slippers.

And you are wrong in your conclusions.

“It would do so by overregulating the health-care system in the service of special interests such as insurance companies, hospitals, professional organizations and pharmaceutical companies, rather than the patients who should be our primary concern.”

As as been asked before: If that is truly so, why are those special interests so strongly resisting it?

Profit-oriented special interests are spending millions to agressively lobby and advertise against something that will make them more profits?

When did grass turn blue and the sky turn green? I apparently failed to notice.

Really. After watching behaviors against good powerful women in media, liber blogsites and Democratic Elected representatives, I’m beginning believe Dems and Liberals are absolutely Sexist.

David Letterman has clearly showed Sarah was right about him.

If your mammogram revealed something that led your doctor to think it was prudent to run further tests, that doesn’t mean the worry and/or cutting were unnecessary. You wound up with valuable information that might allow you not to worry as much. We run medical tests of all kinds all the time to rule out things. Ruling something out is of value.

You have it solved now, don’t you. I concur with your view except that today more and more young women are exposed to more and more radiation from cell phones and wi-fi equipment in their homes and offices and everywhere else. So yes before we had the bombardment of the computer monitors which today have been replaced by plasma screens. That is a positive. But now we don’t know what so much radiation will produce in women as well as men. The whole environment has changed again.

Pap Smears are every year, whether you are on Medicare or not. Likewise mammograms. Bone density is every other year.
If all women don’t fight this, they will pay.

Profit-oriented special interests

They are not a monolith, think AARP and the AMA.

Thanks IndianaDem. Nice to see there are people who know what they are talking about here. Everything here is filtered through a “Obama is Evil” mindset. I agree with the new guidelines.

Just to be clear here: these guidelines are for routine scans. If there are family histories etc. the scanning will be done earlier. Scanning without due cause is dangerous.

Thanks IndianaDem. Nice to see there are people who know what they are talking about here.

Supporting Obama grants him this distinction? That should be snark.

And Obama is evil incarnate.

Sweet heavens galt: can’t you give a reasonable reply to a reasonable post? None of your comments since your rather lame pizza parlour have added anything worth reading, and most are rather obvious monosyllabic ad hominem attacks. I await your thrilling reply. If you need convincing, look back through your post history.

Pretty much the same folks who currently can’t get it for various reasons. The bill is a fraudulent government power grab. Pelosi et all thought they could whip up support by playing off of everyone’s sympathies. But the facts have gotten out, and now that a great majority are against the bill, they will simply ignore the wishes of the country and try to ram it through anyway using back door, deceitful tactics. This has absolutely NOTHING to do with the welfare of the American public. This is about power consolidation and a complete restructuring of our Republic into a Fascist dictatorship.

Whatever Zit!

Oh, the irony, the irony – I was coming here to mention that the Medical University of South Carolina disagrees with the assessment of the Task Force, but since Ugh so artfully said we make everything up in our head, I won’t bother. Ahem. Same with the American Cancer Society. What the hell do THEY know, anyway?!?

As an aside, don’t you LOVE when people who DON’T do their research accuse those of us who DO? Perhaps since they make up these “facts and figures” in their heads, they assume we do, too. Charming. Just charming.

I’M NOT MUMBLING YOU STUPID TWAT.
What part of going to jail if you fail to purchase mandated insurance is unclear? The predicted cost of coverage for those uninsured forced to purchase coverage is $5,300 per year: that’s $440/month, bozo. Poor people can’t afford that.

I think FOX news is working on that.

Maybe the task force can just issue recommendations for the age when women should be issued fainting couches since they obviously shouldn’t be worrying their pretty little heads about something as anxiety provoking as breast cancer. I’m guessing that not being able to have a mammogram might cause a little anxiety too, thus we’ll be needing those couches.

I think along the same lines as you, jbjd. Much more likely that his father was Frank Davis, not the Kenyan man named Obama.

I believe the AARP and the AMA are both non-profit organizations.

I see you’re still licking it, Jamsie!

Stop the on your knees fest!

I thought I sent a post but don’t see it here. Did I say something wrong?

You don’t think it’s odd that a discussion of health guidelines is seen as being “about Obama” right from the start, instead of being about the pros and cons of the health guidelines?

Anybody curious who and what the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force actually is?

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/health/2010291347_mammodocs18.html

They evaluate research and issue opinions. They don’t make rules. They have no regulatory power. I don’t know how they’re seen as an instrument of Obama. As someone already pointed out, they came to an identical conclusion when Bush was in office.

it’s probably the evil Spaminator; it’ll turn up eventually…

A fascist corporatist organization with a puppet dictator as a figurehead. Somebody who can give good speeches and make legs tingle. Somebody who makes people feel good about themselves for having him propped up.

Eisenhower didn’t call it the military-industrial-congressional complex for nothing

My my. I havent read such an irrational hysterical outburst in years. You should really turn Rush off. Fascist Dictatorship? Did you even do elementary school history?

The members on the task force. Anyone care to run these to names to ground? I am.

No inference made, but to ziggy’s point, it needs to be understood where these opinions grew from.

I would love to do a DNA test. Where is freaky frank laid to rest?

LOL.

he died in Honolulu where he’d lived for a long time: he is probably buried there.

“Non-profit” is an IRS tax designation. Technically they don’t make “profit,” but they do have a financial stake in the game.

Cool, I take criticism from a troll as a compliment.

ziggy,

Who has influence on the boards of these “non-profits”? If you think for a second, ( and I do not infer you do), that the amount of money involved with these “orginizations” is not an eye opener you may wish to revise your remarks.

AARP Financial Inc. is an investment adviser and a subsidiary of AARP.

Who under writes the health care policy for AARP?

A 2007 study;

Published in January 2007, this Special Report by John Carlisle examined taxpayer support for AARP. The study found that federal funding accounted for $83 million, or about 10 percent, of AARP’s annual revenue of $878 million. AARP’s total assets are worth $1.6 billion.

.

Please don’t tell me a entity with 1.6 in assets in not a poor little 503 something.
Aetna is health insurance company that underwrites AARP policies.

Good grief.

You get more irradiation walking through JFK airport than you do with a screening mammogram.

“If there are family histories etc. the scanning will be done earlier. Scanning without due cause is dangerous.”

How do you reconcile this with the evidence that most breast cancers are caused by diet, next by the environment, and only third by heredity???? I guess because they “ate” and “lived somewhere”, they’re dispensable.

“So take your ticked off little self off this blog and go find someone who actually cares that you are ticked off at “anti-Obama skreed.””

But…. poor things… there are fewer and fewer places for them to go to avoid that “anti-Obama screed”….

thank you for pointing that out. i typed up a reply but of course it never showed up. oh well, not worth the trouble of typing again.

a majority (certainly not all) people who post regularly on this blog don’t want discussion. otherwise you wouldn’t get called names and attacked personally for voicing a different opinion.

Galt makes a lot of thought-out, well-informed replies. IMHO, I think maybe he’s running circles around you, so you’re lashing out…

He did do a good thing – he made a commercial to ask men to be fathers to their children. I never get negative about him about that.

Hey thanks.

There is an all-women’s credit union here in town. Maybe we need a national women’s healthcare plan – only female doctors making the decisions, too! (well, at least for female health issues)

Anyone know a rich female feminist who knows about business? Hmmmm… Maybe Lady Lynn!

If it was only just that, there would not be a problem. There are purposeful disruptions disguised as “voicing a different opinion” and commenters here tend to be rather sophisticated and see right through it. Yes, innocent bystanders get caught up in this. Not much one can do about it.

Europe begins their screenings at 35 years old.

If its is such a joke to you, why are you here? Surely it holds more meaning than that since you are gracing the blog with your magnanimous self.

Galt, it’s just giving them the “health reform” preparation – there are some posters with dissenting opinions, supposedly a few of them are well-meaning, would-be discussants. There are supposedly a larger number of trouble makers.

So now we have a “troll-care bill”. We’re throwing them all out of the lifeboat, because it’s more cost- and time-effective than finding and attending to the fewer well-meaning trolls.

How is that any different than taking away a lot of women’s healthcare, as providing it would only save a few women?

So, they’re just being provided, free of charge, an experience that will help them prepare for health care reform….

They’re going to be moving towards using MRIs for breast exams instead of the traditional machine.

Well, that’s what the medical profession says. Don’t know what will happen once the govt. gets hold of it….

Diet and environment. Don’t know if they account for the whole 90-95%, though.

I believe (at least in part) the diet factor is considered to be due to all the hormones we put in animals (to make them grow really big really fast), which then goes into omnivores’ bodies.

Fascinating.

What the heck is this? Warfare on women? Choice goes under the bus and now mammograms?

I had breast tumors when I was under 40. I detected them during an exam. When I had my check up a male doctor said they were no big deal. 6 months later a female doctor that examined me was very alarmed and scheduled me for a biopsy and removal. Thankfully they turned out to be non-cancerous.

Was I terrified? Hell yes. This is not acceptable. NOW, Emily’s List, etc. better get with it. If they’d listened to us in the first place…..

There is another theory that he has Parkinson’s. Early, copious drug use, apparently he has lots of books in his library about Parkinson’s, and they say it could make him thin, too. Who knows….

Look to your left. That talking point is sitting right next to you under the bus!

This panel of “experts” (but no oncologist) was begun by the Bush Administration! I don’t know if Obama was aware of it or not, but he hadn’t been elected when this “study” was commenced. I find this ironic: started by Bush idiots and now when Dems are working for a healthcare bill for all legal Americans, that the Republicans are collectively voting down the bill and all ammendments!! I believe there are enough women to protest this sort of crapola……

And, I, too, haven’t heard what is supposed to happen to the women over 75…I had quite a few biopsies in my lifetime, including last year. The anxiety for any health/medical/surgical problems are all great….that’s life…..not the worst anxiety one can have…. It’s not as difficult and less anxiety provoking than serving out a cancer death sentence. Some of my biopsies were before I was 40 and one last year….over 75! It certainly eases the mind when the results indicate “benign”….

Thanks, Pat….

“I’m expecting Obama to come out with another guideline that women are not allowed to touch themselves.”

They already did. It was part of that group’s recommendations that women stop performing home breast exams. Seriously.

It’s not that simple. If it’s “broken”, it may not be known for years that it is “broken”, if screenings aren’t done.

It’s not like you have no mass one day, and the next day you have a huge, obvious mass that needs attention. It’s actually been growing the whole time, and could be spreading to other parts of your body. You need the tests to find out as soon as possible that there is “breaking” going on…. before it’s “officially broken” and other complications arise.

Otherwise, when it’s found to be broken, it’s REALLY broken, and your chances of survival are really poor.

I wonder where Scout, MD, is. I’d like to hear her thoughts on all this.

The number of posts on this thread is testimony to how this news has riled the public. No wonder Sec. Sebelius was on TV backpeddling like crazy. No wonder the bots have been dispatched and are out in force.

As it stands, there will be very few political proponents of these new guidelines, since the Secretary of Health and Human Services herself seemed to be dismissing them! I heard her and it was simply pathetic.

If those promoting and crafting current healthcare legislation had anything to do with this and thought it would help their cause, they were wrong. Women are alarmed and affronted. What a political blunder.

It was signed by (not created by) a Republican Governor but it was created by a heavily Democratic legislature which was negotiated enough for Romney to sign.

These reccomendations have NOTHING to do with preventing or treating cancer early. Their sole purpose is to reduce the COSTS of having to investigate what turns out to be “false alarms” in younger women. The USPSTF should be ashamed of themselves.
And what this bull-oney about self-exams being valueless? Please! It’s is completely FREE and encourages women to know their bodies, recognize changes and actively take a leading role in their own health. That in and of itself is priceless. Do they think women are so stupid we can’t tell the difference between a nipple or a pimple or a lump that was there before? Please! Stop pissing on my leg and telling me it is raining out. This has nothing to do with women’s health and everything to do with cost containment.

OK Zut, where is the money going to come from for research into rare disease, and new drugs? Do you actually want to take the money out of healthcare, and go without new research and new and better drugs and vaccines? Or maybe cures? I suppose you think that the Gov is going to put all that money back into the system for research,NOT! I have a rare disease. It matters to me and my family.

(that “dead” blue of death) from the thriving, pink, happy cancer that is speading

Wow, Pat. This line sends chills down my spine.

What a political blunder.

Instead of trying to control services performed they should have been regulating prices charged. That way the services will take care of themselves. How? Look at rates currently contracted by hospitals and pharma currently that they curremtly willingly accept for HMO patients for the top 10 HMO plans by head count nationwide, average them and set that prevailing rate fixed for a period of time for everybody. Insured or not the rate is fixed. This will stop unnecessary services. We don’t need studies, the rates are already set by hospital administrators and insurers. We already know both are comfortable with this. Then, make a the government plan which is just an amalgamated average of these ten plans and enroll everybody who wants it at actual cost. Not free, at cost. No need to review services so much because outrageous profits are already removed. Thereby saving the administrative costs of reviews. Then setup ways for indigent persons to have that cost subsidized as need may be. Subsidizing this is not a part of actual health care, poverty is a separate issue altogether.

I thought the illustration was some kind of endoscopic image. I did get the tumor part. I should note I’ve never seen a mammogram image up-close, so that’s why I was confused.

Comment by Doc99 | 2009-11-18 15:01:31

Breast cancer is more aggressive in African American women. Therefore, these USPSTF guidelines not only will put women at risk, they’re also Racist!

No surprise there to me since rac-ists and a lot of other ‘ists criminally seized power of America via nefarious means. Oh yeah, they know better than the electorate and we’ll thank them and create shrines for dear leader. I’m still waiting for the pink unicorn to be delivered to my garage and the celestial choirs. I hope they can do a medley of Elvis tunes. That would be very nice indeed.

Also, there were NO oncologists on this panel. Curious …

I’d say that’s just plain stupidity. I keep getting the feeling this bunch just reacts to situations sans proper deliberation.

I’ve been doing a lot of thinking about this latest government recommendation. I listened to two women doctors on Fox News this morning. The one doctor said this panel was convened under Geo. W.’s administration and that they based their conclusions on many studies. The same doctor also pointed out that although it is true that more women are being diagnosed with cancer of the breast, the mortality rates have not dropped from this dreaded disease for women.
As stated before and as has been expressed by many commenters here on this blog, there are pros and cons both ways. Because of my own very limited experience on the issue, I tend to weigh in, in this case, on the side of the government. I also think of my own scare a few years ago when a small calcification showed up on a routine mammogram. It was benign. However in the process of having it removed, (aspiration did not work, although they were able to biopsy it and I later had surgery to remove it) my breast was exposed to a lot of radiation. That concerns me.

It was also pointed out by one of the doctors on this same program that more women at younger ages are being diagnosed in their 20s and 30s with cancer of the breast. I’m 61 years old and when I was in my 20s and 30s I knew of no one having cancer of the breast or dying from it. Is this all due to more mammograms or is our lifestyle, pesticides, and even so-called low doses of radiation playing into this? I don’t know but I think this issue is much more complex than we realize.

Hey, Indiana Dem!

Aren’t you the Commie who posts in that Shithole known as Democratic Underground?

Aren’t you the Socialist Shit-sniffer who had the Karl Marx avatar?

My Little Red, Be Sure and tell your DUmpster friends, Will Pitt, Frenchie The Cat and Stephanie to be careful not to ingest too much feces as you rim away on Barky. ( I don’t care how much you think you’re tasting that White House pie)

I want everyone on DU to be healthy and in fine form without any amebic dysentary.
The day, the Birth Certificate breaks out, I am stopping by.

TTFN, Sugar!

We pay more for health care than any of the other industrialized societies. 50% more than 2nd place Switzerland. 100% more than EU countries. An MRI of the lumbar spine costs $1,700 in the U.S. The same procedure costs $176 in Japan.

There is something seriously wrong with the current system.

I am of two minds concerning this government study. On one hand, I have known two women who were diagnosed with cancer of the breast and mammograms were instrumental in their diagnoses and are probably alive today because of those mammograms. However they had mothers who died from cancer of the breast. In the one woman’s case, her mother, as an elderly lady had passed away from the disease only about a year before she herself was diagnosed with the dreaded disease.

On the other hand, I am 61 years old and like many of my women peers, have already been subjected to many mammograms. In my case, a few years ago a small calcification was found on a routine mammogram which turned out to be benign but before all was said and done, my breast was subject to many doses of low-dosage radiation for just this one small lump. I am particularly concerned about the cumulative effect of these low doses of radiation to my breasts over a number of years. God willing, I hope to live to a ripe old age and remain active both physically and mentally. But I am concerned about the toxins in our environment that were not there when my grand-parents were raising their families and when they were living out their senior years. I am concerned about our sedentary lifestyles although in the case of my two friends, both were extremely physically active and appeared very “fit” before being diagnosed with their cancers. I think this issue is much more complex than we realize.

“I think this issue is much more complex than we realize.”

That was an excellent comment and your last sentence is the point. Health issues should not be decided by a government bureaucrat, or for that matter a corporate cog.

In this country a person’s healthcare should be discussed and decided upon by the person, their family, and the physician.

In the Obama/Reid healthcare overhaul bill there is a provision that states that doctors must abide by government mandates and government workers will be making calls on doctors to enforce those mandates.

When I found that out this mammogram issue was the first thing I thought of. Obama will pass it off as fear and ask that we trust him – the same way he promised that unemployment would not go past 8.5%.

There is something seriously wrong with the current system.

Yes, it is worse than being unregulated, the regulations actually contribute to the problems. Take the cost of one prescription item:

Xanax 1 mg Consumer price (100 tablets) : $136.79 Cost of general active ingredients:
$0.024 Percent markup: 569,958%

O.K. but we have the FDA to regulate who can make and sell because it keeps us safe… right? Or, is it working in reality to keep down competition? Look at aspirin… OTC medicine cheap and generic in every pharmacy and even dollar stores. Look at xanax. Expensive everywhere, probably costs less to make than aspirin does. The regulation as to who can make and sell it causes it to be expensive.

Same with diagnostic centers… who can make and sell the equipment? Who can own the centers? and the list goes on. What we need isn’t maybe more regulation, but more free market. Right now, face it there is no free market when a medicine that costs just pennies to make sells for over $100. People may say there is a free market, but in reality there couldn’t possibly be. Do the drug makers need to recoup development costs? Yes, but if regulations were less the costs to develop would also be less. Also, give money to colleges and let them develop new drugs. Let doing so be a part of graduate school education. There are better ways. This bill addresses none of that. It is a power grab.

Thanks “hokma” and thank-you for the info. concerning government mandates for doctors in the Obama/Reid health care overhaul bill. It truly is frightening to think our health care or lack of it could be based on “Big Brother” dictates to the medical profession.

You are so right about this mammogram issue. In my mind this government study is “another opinion” surrounding the issue of breast cancer. However because we are looking at the fact that government controlled health care is at our doorstep, it does put the timing and release of this study in a much more sinister light.

I’m sorry you’ve got a rare disease. But private pharma is as unenthusiastic about rare disease as about 3rd world disease – no money in it. That’s why they focus on ED and convincing everyone they have asthma.

In fact, most research into rare disease is government funded with a small charity element. This research often turns into small biotech. Govt needs to relax drug approval for rare disease as it costs a royal fortune. But the private sector couldn’t care less about such small markets.

By the way, I really do know what I’m talking about here.

One more thing I learned and this is written into the bill.

What better way to reduce cost of primary care physicians than to redefine who they are.

In the bill, they redefine primary care physicians to include Physician Assistants and Nurses who all do a great job but are not medical doctors.

Imagine the government mandated healthcare telling you that since you are generally healthy we will not pay for anything more than a nurse to do your annual physical.

imho this healthcare boondoggle is just a cover for what is really going on behind closed doors. obama has reid and pelosi running around like chickens without heads to come up with something..anything (he doesnt really care what since he had so little input) that he can put his name to. meanwhile he keeps them too busy to notice what he and his chicago thugs are really doing. they helped him steal the election thinking they would have a puppet they could control (something they couldnt do with hillary). well the joke is on them (and us). he is the one using them to get whatever it is he really wants or thinks he is going to get. i dont know what promises were made to him.. king of the universe perhaps? it is obvious to anyone with half a brainthat he doesnt give a rats ass about this country. only what power he and his friends (acorn, seiu, bill ayers,rev wright, mayor daley etc etc) can get. he shows us his backside when visiting foriegn countries and gives us the finger when he is here. we MUST do everything possible to see that he is only a one term president. i shudder at the thought of what damage he can do in 8 years.

Look at the Reid bill.

The government is mandating that physicians follow certain practices and the government will be actively monitoring doctors to make sure they do.

Now if you want a mammogram it is between you and your physician. Health insurance companies cover that. And even if you found one that did not, you would successfully argue for it.

Under a government run plan, that study would become part of a mandate of practices that would punish a doctor for allowing an unauthorized mammogram. And as far as the patient, I would much rather take my chances arguing with a health insurance company (and have many times) than a Federal government bureaucracy. Ever try to argue with the IRS?

If whoever you’re imagining I am is actually a “commie”, we’re probably about as similar as Karl Marx is to Groucho Marx. Obsession with the birth certificate suggests difficulty making distinctions between imagination and reality. Consider turning your attention to UFO abductions, bigfoot sightings, and crop circles. They cause less personal stress and have more entertainment value.

The usual comparison is that a woman gets about as much radiation from each mammogram as she gets from normal background sources during a typical three month period. Of course, background radiation isn’t repeatedly focused on a single specific area of the body which is apparently especially prone to a particular sort of tumor. Each dose is an addition to a cummulative total, which already includes lifetime background exposure, which itself may be a factor in carcinogenesis. To me that suggests it’s something to consider in any risk/benefit analysis.

Well, I should check this out I guess because I simply took my GYN’s word for it that Medicare no longer pays for my yearly pap smear; only every other year. I have an appointment in a couple of weeks for my test so I’ll ask again.

As an older female that the new democratic party now thinks is expendable, I want every democrat who has voted for this death warrant and everyone who will vote for it run out of office.
Rahm Emanuel warned the dems in congress ” don’t antagonize the deep pocket drug industry. That fool better start worrying about antagonizing the majority of American citizens.
If anyone one had told me two or three years ago that the democratic party would be the biggest threat to my well being in my lifetime, I would have called them a liar. Today I would have to say they are right.

WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

PS
Who is the bigger threat to the citizens of this country, congress giving in to backtrack everyday in every way or Bin Ladens bunch. Right now I am not sure.

WOMEN WITH INTELLIGENCE AND EXPERIENCE,MEN WHO SUPPORT THEM AND COUNTRY BEFORE PARTY ALWAYS

PUMAS,BUBBAS,EQUALISTS AND THOSE PEOPLE RULE

[...] New Recommendations: Let Health Care Rationing Begin! : NO QUARTER [...]

I’m with you.

I do not understand why the Democratic Party has moved so far to the left and is actively engaging in socialism. I feel like I am in some alternatie universe when I see certain level-headed Democrats (at least I thought they were)supporting every one of Obama’s policies.

One of the unpublished points in Reid’s bill is redefining what a primary care physician is. In his bill it now includes Physician Assistants and Nurses. Which means that a government run plan can force you to see a nurse for your annual physical. If you are looking to lower the cost of primary care that is certainly one way to do it.

Yes, sorry if I didn’t make it clear. I know, that’s most of my outrage, as I found mine on a self exam.

I mean … at all, like in their private region. And I don’t mean only for self exam purposes down there. You know, Sexist men just don’t deal with reality of women too well.

Jessie Jackson:

“YOU CAN’T VOTE AGAINST HEALTHCARE & CALL YOURSELF
A BLACK MAN”

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2009/11/19/jesse-jackson-says-blacks-cant-vote-against-obamacare-media-mum

More and more African Americans are realizing that their own leaders have been marginalizing them for their own personal benefit.

Perhaps if they stop calling themselves hyphenated Americans that would be a good start.

I feel that women are being attacked. First mammagrams, now I hear pap smears. But equally as alarming are the cuts in Medicare because women live longer than men. Where is NOW? The New Agenda? Anyone? Women are under attack.