Posted on 08/18/2014 6:42:51 PM PDT by Innovative
Screening older patients for cancer provided minimal benefit at considerable cost and increased use of invasive procedures, reported investigators in two separate studies.
"It is particularly important to question screening strategies for older persons," Gross continued. "Patients with a shorter life expectancy have less time to develop clinically significant cancers after a screening test and are more likely to die from noncancer health problems after a cancer diagnosis."
(Excerpt) Read more at medpagetoday.com ...
It's just an initial stage of "death panels".
Cancer Warriors Ping
Sure. Cancer therapy isn’t worth much in “seniors,” either.
They should just take the blue pill. Dr. Obola said so.
Death panels at work.
"A consensus exists within the medical and scientific communities that routine cancer screening is unlikely to benefit people who have limited life expectancy. The consensus is reflected in clinical guidelines and more recently in the American Board of Internal Medicine Foundation's Choosing Wisely program."
Sarah Palin was right about deathpanels
You are right. It is so obvious to me.
But there are no DEATH PANELS in Obamacare, you racist hillbillies!
I agree with this. Doctors wanted to schedule my 97 YO mother for a colonoscopy — no symptoms, no problems in that area. Chance of perforation would be high. I said HELL NO.
Go die, unless you have significant assets the I.R.S. and TOTALITARIANCARE can drain while you are still alive. Then, you can die.
yup. anything they can do to lower fedgov costs
Let one of these liberal writers come down with cancer and watch what they demand.
Who gives an Ess what studies show. It’s my money, I’ll spend it on tests & screening, if I want to. These interventionists need to F Off.
Exactly what age is “older” to these medical bureaucrats?
55?
“I agree with this. Doctors wanted to schedule my 97 YO mother for a colonoscopy — no symptoms, no problems in that area. Chance of perforation would be high. I said HELL NO.”
Common sense should prevail — but the bottom line it should be between the doctor and the patient, not some government guidelines.
“...unlikely to benefit people who have limited life expectancy...”
A BRILLIANT “scientific” assessment to rationalize restricting testing or care.
According to the article, they are talking about 65 years and older. That's a lot younger than your 97 year old mother.
I think anyone who might actually have an expensive condition, is “older” and unworthy.
“The age analysis did not include prostate cancer screening, as the United States Preventive Services Task Force has recommended against routine PSA screening at any age.”
That’s funny. I hear that’s true in England for men of all ages.
Yes! We don’t need PSA tests, mammograms, MRI’s, CAT scans, ovarian cancer checks, dermatology checkups looking for melanoma.
I mean, detecting a cancer when the patient is 63 may only lead to expensive treatment, extending that person’s life for another 30 unproductive years. Detecting a cancer when the disease is advanced means that the now 66 year old can get cheap palliative care in a hospice.
At least we don’t hear about “useless eaters”, yet.
“Let one of these liberal writers come down with cancer and watch what they demand.”
The poster boy for nationalized healthcare in the United States, Teddy Kennedy, went to Duke University hospital for his brain cancer treatment instead of locally in DC. His cancer had a low survival rate yet he pulled out all of the stops for expensive radiation treatment at Duke. In the New York Times article about Kennedy’s treatment (linked below) one sentence stood out, “These days, with a focus on controlling health care costs, it might seem that limiting patients’ options and restricting treatments that add maybe a few months of life might be a good place to start. But health economists say that would be a terrible idea.” Of course they are talking about one of the elites, not the little people.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.