The mammogram controversy…
I’ve been following this, but had not yet posted. An earlier US News & Reports story caught my attention, Task Force Member Defends Mammography Guidelines. I recommend it for those looking for more information on both sides of this issue. After seeing this from WTOL Former NIH chief: Ignore new mammogram guideline that says in part:
WASHINGTON (AP) – The former director of the National Institutes of Health is advising women to ignore new guidelines that delay the start of routine mammogram testing for breast cancer.
Dr. Bernadine Healy says the directive would save money but not lives. The recommendation, released last week by an independent panel, recommends that women not routinely undergo mammograms until age 50. Longtime guidelines have said women should have regular mammogram screening after age 40.
I decided this is an important issue that some of you may want to share your thoughts on…I’ve had scares when it has come to lumps, I don’t regret receiving medical treatment, I’d rather learn that something was benign early than to take the risk. Though I still believe that whoever created the mammogram machine would have had a good future as a torture device manufacturer…
With the news on mammograms, the H1N1 vaccine questions recommendations, and tonights coverage on CBS 60 minutes on “The Cost of Dying”, every American Citizen needs to question every recommendation given by the Medical Profession and Government!
The Medical Profession and Government are only making medical decisions and recommendations on financial issues and NOT THE RIGHTS EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN!
November 22nd, 2009 at 11:56 pmYeah, this screeching 180 degree turn has NOTHING to do with cost. At the COST of life. The hypocrisy here turns my stomach and will cost many lives if it allowed to pass.
Please don’t allow this to pass.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:05 amAll of the healthcare issues need to be turned down at this time!!
TURN THE PLUG OFF ON HEALTHCARE ISSUES NOW until more is looked at, discussed, and more input from the American Citizens themselves!
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:14 amGovernment control of our entire lives will be the end result if we don’t get off our lazy butts and stop them.
November 23rd, 2009 at 6:20 amI don’t know if this new recommendation is medically valid. However, I do worry about imposing a rule that applies nationwide to every women.
Everyday, I deal with insurance companies and government. You are in for a very big surprise if you think the govt will be easier to deal with than your health insurance company.
November 23rd, 2009 at 8:04 amWithout getting into the healthcare debate, there is a new mammogram test out there that is PAINLESS. It’s called C.U.R.E. and uses ultrasound waves and water. No more squishy and radiation. It’s actually supposed to be quite comfortable.
Here’s an article: http://www.sciencedaily.com/videos/2008/0810-sound_detects_breast_cancer.htm
Talk to your doctor about it. If anyone hears of somewhere in Toledo offering the treatment, please do all of us women a favor and let us know.
November 23rd, 2009 at 8:46 amThank you very much for the link re: Healy! I’ve been wanting to know her opinion since the task force news came out. Thank you!
November 23rd, 2009 at 10:13 amAn interesting read -
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:08 amhttp://pandagon.net/index.php/site/comments/less_boob_squishing_seems_like_a_value_add_to_me/
Sensor, considering many women don’t get the first baseline one done, less squishing may seem nice but I’d personally rather make sure that I didn’t lose my breast completely, or my life…Early detection saves lives.
It was very unpleasant, so Mesmerix’s item is of great interest since I kept telling myself the last time, there has to be a better way…
Jill, I wondered the same thing, which is why I thought it was post worthy.
November 23rd, 2009 at 11:14 amLet’s see here, mammograms, pap smears, both are tests women have to screen for cancer. How come we arn’t seeing this kind of rationing relating to men’s issues?????? Raising the age for a woman to start having a pap smear? Face it, we all know kids today are sexually active at a younger age. The virus that causes cervical cancer is spread through sexual contact. These government boards are death panels. They are conditioning us to accept rationed care. The government should stay out of our healthcare. The government needs to stay out of our lives. The whole healthcare bill is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
From the movie, The Patriot –
Would you tell me please, Mr. Howard, why should I trade one tyrant three thousand miles away for three thousand tyrants one mile away? An elected legislature can trample a man’s rights as easily as a king can.
November 23rd, 2009 at 12:16 pmThe Federal Government wants to take complete control of your health, every aspect of it. It’s as simple as that. It’s a power grab by by Obama, Reid, Pelosi, Sherrod Brown, Marcy Kaptur, et. al. When they are up for reelection, vote them out!
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:39 pmThat doesn’t make much sense once you realize who actually created the panel that released these recommendations. It was done by President Bush…not President Obama…
So, using your theory since this panel was created under Bush, you should vote for Obama, etc., and vote out all Republicans.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:49 pmLink to documentation:
But Ned Calonge, who chairs the 16-member panel, defended the recommendations and denied that cost or the debate over health-care reform played any role in the decision. “Cost just isn’t a consideration when the task force deliberates,” said Calonge, who is also the chief medical officer for the Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment. Twelve of the task force members were seated during the Bush administration, and the remaining four were chosen before President George W. Bush left office, he said.
November 23rd, 2009 at 1:51 pmGood Afternoon, All,
DD Boots stated :”The Medical Profession and Government are only making medical decisions and recommendations on financial issues and NOT THE RIGHTS EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN”
May I throw this out there?? It is my contention that the medical profession is practicing defensive medicine to some degree…tests are ordered, x-rays are obtained, labs are drawn and surgeries are performed…by golly…we will find out what ales ya! Why? We don’t want to get sued! Consumers/patients want it both ways…they want everything done, and don’t want to pay for it…and if, God-forbid, something goes wrong…they will sue your socks off…!
So while it may be based on ‘financial’ decisions…it also has been allowed to become a huge free for all where any hint of unfortunate happening equals a big payday.
Can you tell the kind of day it’s been!
Be well and cover your coughs…
mindy
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:20 pmI was unaware that this panel was created by President Bush. Now I’ll have to laugh at the next person who screams about how Obama wants to ration health care. Not like it isn’t already rationed. Really…I’ve been on waiting lists that are months long for a simple doctor visit.
November 23rd, 2009 at 2:58 pmDo you live in Canada?
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:09 pmI live in Toledo, Ohio. I should be fair and mention that one of the waiting lists was for my son to see a developmental pediatrician. That was a six month wait for the initial vist in my quest to get a diagnosis and insurance didn’t cover it because they don’t cover anything regarding Autism. That doctor left Toledo and if we wanted to start seeing her replacement, we would have to start over again on the waiting list and I think the replacement’s waiting list was nine months long. So, I just said forget it.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:18 pmI can only imagine how long it will take for that if government run health care passes. Good luck.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:34 pmLisaRenee Says:
That doesn’t make much sense once you realize who actually created the panel that released these recommendations. It was done by President Bush…not President Obama…
So, using your theory since this panel was created under Bush, you should vote for Obama, etc., and vote out all Republicans.
The point is this is a “GOVERNMENT” panel. This is the government rationing healthcare. The republicans are as bad as the democrats. I am sick of the politics as usual and the politics of usual. We need people in office that stick to the Constitution. The two party system is nothing but corrupt. Look at the 300 million dollar bribe Landrieu from Louisianna took for her vote on the debate. That’s our tax dollars. If the bill is so great, why did she need a bribe??????
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:47 pmPam, my comment was more specific to Jim’s comment, I don’t disagree it is a government panel, but not one created by the current President. Therefore, the blame directed at Democrats for this particular panel is misplaced.
The Bush administration also made edicts such as demanding that all women who want to become legal citizens of the US must have a vaccination requiring Gardasil. That is not required for the rest of us…
Which means if death panels exist, which some do believe insurance companies are basically already death panels, they are not the creation of just Democrats, Republicans as well should be the focus. That’s now however what is happening right now with the focus being that Obama wants to control our health care decisions, if we are going to blame government over all? Then that extends beyond the present administration.
November 23rd, 2009 at 3:55 pmLisa,
That is why I said republicans are as bad as the democrats. It’s all politics as usual. Only lives are at stake.
I do not want government involved in my healthcare decisions. We need reform where we can buy insurance across state lines creating competition which helps bring costs down. There is no competition when government is involved. With government, they are the final answer.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:08 pmAlso, this government panel that made this bone-head decision now answers to the current administration.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:09 pmI referred to the health care bill, Lisa Renee, not the recommendations on mammograms.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:26 pmJim, you stated the Federal government wants to take control of our health, this post is about the mammogram recommendation panel that was created by our previous president. Which would mean your recommendation to vote out only Democrats would not be a solution since this also involved Republicans.
November 23rd, 2009 at 4:31 pmPam – re: women’s cancers vs. men’s cancers…
Actually, there were some changes made to prostate cancer screening recommendations a few years ago. Didn’t get anywhere near as much as publicity as these mammogram/pap recommendation changes.
The breast cancer lobby is the most powerful out of all types of cancers – that’s why breast cancer gets so much funding/attention compared to most other cancers. If anything, there’s a strong female bias in cancer research/funding.
(Meanwhile, pediatric cancers are woefully underfunded, but that’s a debate/issue for a different day…sigh.)
November 23rd, 2009 at 8:57 pmSA,
I won’t disagree with you on that. Cancer has become a big business for some groups.
I was being a bit sarcastic about the man -vs- woman cancer tests. This is the government conditioning society to accept rationed medical care. This is not a republican/democrat issue. Look at some of the information the government has put out there. Remember whitehouse.gov and reporting fishy e-mails. That went down in flames. Now we see recovery.gov with fraudulent stimulus numbers including numbers for congressional districts that don’t even exist. How can we put our trust in this goverment for our healthcare needs? The whole thing is unconstitutional to begin with. I don’t trust this government with my tax dollars, why would I trust them with my healthcare and my life?
November 24th, 2009 at 9:11 amLisa,
November 24th, 2009 at 2:14 pmDoesn’t matter which administration has a panel that comes up with some stupid idea, I’m sure all of them through history probably had some kind of stupid advisor/panel with crazy recomendations. With this particular one though, it is Obama’s administration that is going to try and enforce it.
Doug, it seemed to matter to a few when they believed this was from the Obama administration, which is what some Republicans would like people to believe and the Obama administration is not going to try to enforce this…Just one example of the many media reports on this:
November 24th, 2009 at 2:22 pmAnd this is my point taken from the article too:
“But critics note that under legislation pending in Congress, the panel’s guidelines could be used to set standards for what insurance companies would be required to cover. And although the latest research was started long before the most recent health-care debate began, the timing of Monday’s announcement led many opponents to speculate that the two are related.”
November 24th, 2009 at 2:30 pmDoug’s point makes the most sense. The only sense.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:33 pmJust like whitehouse.gov and the fishy e-mails. They float the trial balloon and when caught, they have to backtrack. I believe this administration believed the public would just accept these new guidelines. I don’t think they believed there would be such an angry and rightfully so backlash. This panel reports to Ms. Sebelius. Why didn’t Ms. Sebelius clarify the recommendations with this statement at the time they were made public? Sounds like conditioning society to accept rationed healthcare to me.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:33 pmCritics speculating is not the same as your statement “Obama’s administration that is going to try and enforce it” – there is nothing that indicates that is a possibility and the Obama administration has stated the opposite, that they are not going to enforce it.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:34 pmSebelius has been making those comments since the report came out, it’s been interesting to watch how that’s been ignored with this being used as a way to attack the health care bill when it was not even created by this administration.
People want to believe what they want to believe, this story has proven it.
November 24th, 2009 at 2:37 pmWhen we see this administration post fraudulent stimulus jobs for congressional districts that don’t even exist, it’s hard not to see this administration for what it truly is.
If this panel reports to Ms. Sebelius who is part of this administration, I can’t see how they are not responsible for this report.
Why would anyone trust government with their healthcare?????????
November 24th, 2009 at 2:58 pmYour right, this will always come back to what people beleive and here is what I believe.
-Federal Government runs NOTHING efficiently
-Federal Government size is LIMITED by the Consititution and any new bill or amendment is created to increase government control
-Federal Government does not care for individual liberty
-Federal Government is always trying to increase it’s control
-Elected officials lie
I also believe the majority of Americans believe this to be true and if you weight the healthcare bill against these beliefs you will always come out against this bill; no matter how benign it may seem, how socially just, or how honest our elected officials seem. I believe it to be true and history has shown it to be true.
So this administration didn’t create these recommendations, I agree, but this administration is trying to take the power to enforce any kind of recommendations it wants. What recommendations would a governmental body use? Hmmm? Maybe one that comes from a government appointed panel? I guess I would rather use common sense when thinking about the future than listen to Obama’s promise to not enforce it.
I criticize this bill just as vehemently as I criticized the Patriot act, (by the way has Obama relinquished ANY of those powers he himself criticized?) so just because I am against this bill does not mean I am for Bush. I am for individual liberty. ALWAYS
November 24th, 2009 at 3:06 pmDoug, the federal government is what is because of us, we are the ones who have allowed party politics to take over with both parties really being no different in how they behave when they have the majority and are the minority.
Then voters are conditioned to believe one side is “evil” and one side is “good” while both sides work together on a variety of issues with just a few that they divide on all for the sake of keeping partisan appearances up. It wouldn’t do for the average voter to figure out that if they actually wanted to work towards solutions, they could.
Some blamed Bush for the economy and the war, forgetting that Democrats played a role. Now, the Democrats are in power and they are being blamed for things that Republicans had a hand in. I watch the selective outrage happen time and time again, most times manufactured by one side or the other not only nationally but locally. The only way for the government to be fixed is for people to stop seeing only one party or one person as being the problem…
November 24th, 2009 at 3:36 pmJust wanted to throw this out there about “enforcing” recommendations…
According to the bill, on page 17 or “SEC. 2713. Coverage of Preventative Health Services”:
“(a) IN GENERAL.—A group health plan and a health insurance issuer offering group or individual health insurance coverage shall provide coverage for and shall not impose any cost sharing requirements for—
(1) evidence-based items or services that have in effect a rating of ‘A’ or ‘B’ in the current recommendations of the United States Preventive Services Task Force;
(2) immunizations that have in effect a recommendation from the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention with respect to the individual involved; and
(3) with respect to infants, children, and adolescents, evidence-informed preventive care and screenings provided for in the comprehensive guidelines supported by the Health Resources and Services Administration.”
which, if I am reading it correctly means that the U.S. Preventative Services Task Force (USPSTF) is basically the one that decides what is mandatorily covered as far as preventative care goes. The same Task Force that works under Sebelius and the same one that changed mamography screening guidelines.
Now granted there are 2,073 other pages in just the senate version of the bill, dealing with such things as nutritional information on vending machines, or in the house version that may override this section.
Also, this section does not say that health insurance companies can’t cover it, however I would be surprised if they would, and as above there are 2,073 potential other pages to check and see.
After seeing the parts relating to vending machines this seems like it would be quite an interesting read to see what else it contains… I especially like the opening on page 1:
“To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to modify the first-time homebuyers credit in the case of members of the Armed Forces and certain other Federal employees, and for other purposes.”
As I am curious to see if that even appears in it.
November 24th, 2009 at 4:31 pmThe Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) is not the same panel that made the recommendations for mammograms…
November 24th, 2009 at 4:57 pmThat would be correct, the ACIP did not make the recommendations for mammograms, the USPSTF made the recommendation for mammograms.
If I am reading correctly,
(1) Says USPSTF makes decisions on evidence based items or services (i.e. mammograms)
(2) Says ACIP of the CDC makes decisions on immunizations (i.e. swine flu vaccine)
(3) Says Health Resources and Services Administration makes decisions in regards to infants, children, and adolescents as far as preventative care goes.
Maybe your comment is not relation to mine, or I mistyped and then misread what I typed, but I don’t see where I said the ACIP came up with mammogram recommendations.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:14 pmThe point was that the ACIP is different than this panel, so while they may have different powers, it’s not related to the mammogram issue as far as the particular panel that made those recommendations having the same authority.
I did not want those reading to get the impression that the mammogram panel had the same authority or power.
November 24th, 2009 at 5:57 pmI think you ignore the obvious Lisa. I know you want to play devils advocate, and we are talking about evil here. But the truth is, these government panels which ever the he11 one we are talking about, will be used to establish health care guidelines to minimize cost, at least, if these people get what they want. Command and control as Doug has outlined.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:08 pmPam – I guess I missed your sarcasm about the men vs woman cancers.
I do agree with the point someone else brought up – you can bet your sweet bippy that adopting new screening recommendations will eventually affect insurance coverage. (I’ve worked with and/or for health insurance companies for over a dozen years now.)
Right now its fortunate that so many groups are against the new recommendations, perhaps the controversy will hold off any implementation by insurance companies. At least many states do have mandates regarding coverage of screening mammograms – those laws would have to be altered before insurance companies in those states could reduce coverage.
November 24th, 2009 at 7:11 pmLisa, I think you might not have read my post carefully enough, it says that the United States Preventive Services Task Force is 1 of the 3 groups that, should the legislation pass, have quite a lot more power to determine what is and isn’t covered by insurance companies. This United States Preventative Services Task Force that made the mammogram recommendation (follow the link in previous post).
ACIP and Health Resources and Services Administration are the other 2 groups that will gain more power should the health care legislation passes (and are not the groups that made the mammogram recommendation)
November 24th, 2009 at 11:15 pmI read your post carefully, which is why I pointed out that didn’t apply to the mammogram issue, as I wrote, I don’t want people to get the impression that this panel is similar to the powers the ACIP has. Sometimes when things go off topic, while still in a similar area, it clouds the original issue. My attempt was to clarify not to take issue with what you stated on that particular aspect.
November 24th, 2009 at 11:21 pmI think either we’re arguing about two completely different things or you’re setting up a straw man.
So I guess to try and tie everything back together, according to the website about the ACIP: The committee is made up of 15 members selected by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. The committee writes recommendations for the routine administration of vaccines to children and adults in the civilian population. They deal with vaccines.
According to the website about the USPSTF: The members are nominated to the AHRQ and “are selected based on recognized expertise in prevention, evidence-based medicine, and primary care.” “The USPSTF conducts rigorous, impartial assessments of the scientific evidence for the effectiveness of a broad range of clinical preventive services, including screening, counseling, and preventive medications. Its recommendations are considered the “gold standard” for clinical preventive services.” They deal with best practices in preventative care.
Coincidentally, both have government websites (.gov) and both seem to fall under the umbrella of the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services… either that or the USPSTF is being really misleading and shady. So while not selected directly by the secretary it does appear that they report to her.
To the best of my research abilities, both the ACIP and the USPSTF seem to have no power other than making recommendations which may or may not be followed.
As far as the ACIP goes in the argument I’m making, they are but section (2) and could have been easily left out of this conversation because they have absolutely nothing to do with making recommendations related to anything but vaccines. Mammograms fall under the recommendation jurisdiction of the USPSTF, section (1) from my original post.
The argument I am making is that right now we can easily ignore them and not have to worry about them a whole lot, but should the legislation that is before the senate (the section that I took out from that legislation in particular) be passed then the triad of those 3 would become the defacto standard in healthcare in relation to preventative medicine.
A hypothetical example dealing with mammograms would be: If everyone else was saying that 50-74 was the age range and the USPSTF said 40-74 was the age range, insurance could easily justify covering only 50-74 because most places said it was good. However, should the legislation pass, they would have to cover 40-74 as the minimum even though everyone else said 50-74 was good enough.
I guess I fail to see what bringing up the fact that the ACIP is not the USPSTF as I never said they were the same group, and had they not been listed in the legislation, they would not have even been in my post.
You do point out that the you “don’t want people to get the impression that this panel is similar to the powers the ACIP has”, however it does appear that they do have similar powers now, one for recommendations of vaccines and the other for recommendations of preventive services, and in the future becoming the defacto standard for those above. If you could please enlighten me to the differences you are referring to, I would be much appreciative.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:17 amI didn’t think we were arguing at all, this thread is about the mammogram issue, I was merely clarifying to those who read your comments that the ACIP had nothing to do with the mammograms and that the ACIP has a different level of authority than the mammogram panel.
November 25th, 2009 at 12:23 amFor those interested in the original topic, I recommend Chrys Peterson’s blog post on this topic.
November 25th, 2009 at 1:02 amLisa,
I am confused what point you are trying to make with John’s posts? The first link in the original post talked about the new recommendations, the current powers of this panel, and everyone else’s views on it. The second link tells women to ignore the recommendations.
So I think John’s posting the senate health care bill excerpt is VERY much in topic to the original article as it clearly points out that the recommendations made by UPSTF will become the standard insurance companies will have to follow. So women won’t be able to ignore these recommendations if thier insurance doesn’t cover it because of this panels new found powers through the health bill.
I really don’t know where ACIP has anything to do with anything in this post other than it was latched on to for no apparent reason other than maybe diversion? If John was guilty of anything it would be copying and pasting too much?
November 25th, 2009 at 9:22 amDoug, I can’t tell you why it’s become an issue, for you or John all I was doing was making sure readers knew that the ACIP had nothing to do with this particular issue, which is the mammogram panel, that’s what this thread is about and did not have the same powers as the ACIP. I thought it was rather simple.
November 25th, 2009 at 3:58 pmLisa,
I guess it was confusing to me that you pointed out ACIP at all. John just copied the text from the health bill and included the entire subsection. He made no mention of it in his post.
From the health bill
1) is UPSTF (mammograms)
2) is ACIP (immunization)
3) is Health Resources and Services Administration (children).
You just pointed out section two as having nothing to do with mammograms but not section 3? It all seems fishy and like diversion. His posting of the health bill contradicts what you posted in #32. I hope you weren’t trying to create a side argument to deviate from that. Obama is pushing this health care bill, the bill gives power to the committee that comes out with these recommendations, therefore it can be inferred that what I said in post #27 is true: his administration will be the one that enforces the recommendations of the UPSTF committee.
November 25th, 2009 at 5:37 pmWell, I’m sorry it seems “fishy” to you, but I always try to keep things on topic and to avoid/diminish confusion.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:09 pmThanks for clarifying that Doug, it makes perfect sense.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:30 pmWhat makes perfect sense to me is staying on topic and not interjecting material that could create the wrong impression and trying to make things about me rather than the simple basic material? Does not create discussion on the actual topic and actually kills the discussion for others since most just decide it’s not worth it.
It’s unfortunate, Chrys Peterson’s blog post was something I’d hoped would spark discussion rather than attempting to create some type of disagreement that doesn’t even exist.
November 25th, 2009 at 6:41 pmI read Chrys Peterson blog post on this topic. And it makes it even more clear that Doug’s and john’s comments were totally on topic.
Lisa Chrys Peterson’s blog is exactly what they have been talking about. And that is what will happen if obama care happens. Women will not be allowed to have the mammograms that could save lives. which is the way they want it.
November 25th, 2009 at 7:23 pmI don’t see how you could get that from what Peterson wrote, or get that from the actual facts as presented. The only way you could believe that is if you believe that the Obama administration a) had something to do with this panel which it didn’t. b) believed this panel had the same authority as the ACIP – which it doesn’t or c) ignored the fact that the Obama administration does not agree with the recommendations made by the panel.
Doug and John’s comments about me were totally incorrect and the material they were trying to discuss that was at issue was not related to the topic of the mammogram panel.
Which is all a moot point now because when a thread goes like this one? The discussion ends up being dead which is why I take issue with those who try to make it about me or take the topic into other areas. If anything the additional material John posted demonstrated that there is no risk of the mammogram panel’s recommendations becoming something that either the government or insurance companies followed because it does not have the powers necessary.
November 25th, 2009 at 8:26 pmI apologize if you are offended by what I wrote. I will let this one go and just say that I hope the decision will always stay between the doctors and patients.
November 26th, 2009 at 1:23 am