This trial balloon is a big change from the court-tested policies of the past. Here, a well-accepted practice that catches a significant number of fatal cancers early is being attacked on a cost basis. But, in the courts, you have EPA approved policies on pollutant levels aimed at saving the 1 in a million case, and sometimes more than that. For example, I believe (someone with a more accurate memory can chime in here) the Alar spray used on apples had an estimated harm rate that was far below that, yet the hysteria over it was enough to get it pulled.
Statists must have constant turmoil and class hatred to succeed with the harm they intend to infict on the masses.
Will it work on the USA?
Would like to see cancer survivor Gloria Steinmen argue that women should skip mammograms until age 50 to save the govt money
or oooops, the”official” line: to “save themselves emotional distress over false positives and further testing that turns out benign”
As one 42 yr old cancer victim said last night- “Give women credit for being intelligent enough to choose possible distress over a false positive, over the chance of undetected breast cancer”
Just waiting for the AARP endorsement - after all, they fell in line with the Social Healthcare program, despite almost 70% of thier members rejecting it.
This story needs to be highlighted more. It is so outrageous and so clearly linked to govt. run healthcare and cost cutting schemes that will end up killing women.
I know until now a lot of emphasis has been placed on the “seniors” argument and rallying them against the cuts in Medicare.
An equally strong push needs to be made to America’s women (Obama’s last large constituency) A dangerous and irresponsible directive like could rally women and put the final nail into Obamacare.
I really am in shock. We have made such great strides in this country against breast cancer and to read such totally irresponsible political drivel (without any medical backup) is really sad and WILL end up needless killing a lot of women.
Unreal.
My sweetie is a young widower, who has 4 young children. His late wife (and mother of all 4) passed away by age 30 of breast cancer.
Also, my best friend, the bridesmaid at my wedding, watched her 19 year old niece (someone I knew since she’d been in second grade) die of breast cancer before she was even old enough to have a drink, legally.
I hope there is a special place in hell for these bastards.
Gov’t only knows how to impose a one-size-fits-all policy that reduces coverage based on costs.
The private sector would look for ways to reduce the costs of the tests so coverage would be expanded to more people and breast cancer deaths would drop to near zero.
Will obama’ bitter half wait until age 50 to be screened for BC? mmm mmmm mmmm
This is what our first (ma)lady said 3 weeks ago to a BC group:
Remarks by First Lady Michelle obama, Oct 23, 2009
“....people like you, all of you here, started speaking out, including two of my predecessors, First Ladies Betty Ford and Nancy Reagan. They began speaking out.
Survivors and those who love them started organizing and advocating and lobbying for more money, for more research, and better treatment for this disease.
And then folks like Venus and Jill started working to educate and empower people to promote early detection and make sure that people were getting the care that they needed.
And today, because of that work, the number of women getting regular mammograms has dramatically increased, and the five-year survival rate when breast cancer is diagnosed in time is 98 percent — and that’s compared to 74 percent in the early 80s...”
http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/remarks-first-lady-honor-breast-cancer-awareness
Where are the feminists groups over this outrage?
Where is the Susan B. Komen center commercials screaming about this? On their website they clearly argue for mammograms beginning at age 40 and leaving the decision on how often to have one between a woman and her doctor - not a 3rd party payer. Where is the outrage??
How many women will move from stage 1 breast cancer to stage 3 or 4 waiting to reach an age when the Gov approves we are allowed mammograms or in the two years between scans?
What a way to save money, assure people develop end stage cancers all in an effort to save money. Liberals should be proud.
another preview of government health control.
This kind of thinking is surely buried in the health control bill somewhere.
Soylent Green healthcare.
Today, that well-known organization that purports to care about women, known as NOW, issued this statement to the press about the need for mammograms. Uh, well, maybe they didn’t issue a statement. Still waiting... Oh, that’s right, their annointed one’s administration issued the new guidelines. It’s OK then. No need to get involved.
And the next logical progression is that since mammograms are no longer needed, according to this report, before 40 and only every other year after, the new government-run health care plan will not cover them. No coverage, no test, no problem.
How’s that CHANGE working for you liberals?
Maybe Katie, Oprah and the scores of liberal women around the country will begin to see what an anti-human administration we have. Where is N.O.W. on this?
I am not a Catholic, but I admire and am enlightened by the late Pope John Paul II. His thinking and analyses of real world problems were profound and informed.
His identification of modern western liberal secularism as a culture of death is essential to understanding where we are, and where the apparatchiki of government and consumption will take us if we do not reject all of them and all of their ways.
Everything about Obama and indeed most of our politicians and culture is ultimately about limitation, decline and death. Obama is simply another beast in the herd of this stampede of retrogression.
Alan Keyes warned us about BHO first. BHO’s earnest struggle against BAIPA tells all there is to know about Obama. The rest is garnish and packaging. His touch serves only to wither and kill.
May God reward these people as they deserve, and quickly too.
Exactly. And what is the insurance companies word on this?
Is it more cost effective for them to pay for each 40+ year old woman to have a mammogram every 2 years than it is to provide 1/4 of those 50+ year old women with cancer treatment that wasn't caught in time? I would think they'd rather pay for the mammograms earlier.
Not only are they not going to screen but there will come a time when they will say that the later diagnosed cancers are not cost effective.
Membership of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
Alfred O. Berg, M.D., M.P.H. Department of Family Medicine University of Washington Seattle, WA
David A. Grimes, M.D. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences University of California at San Francisco/San Francisco General Hospital San Francisco, CA
Robert B. Wallace, M.D., M.Sc. Department of Preventive Medicine University of Iowa Iowa City, IA
Donald M. Berwick, M.D., M.P.P. (Task Force Vice-Chairman) Department of Pediatrics Harvard Medical School Boston, MA
Robert S. Lawrence, M.D. School of Hygeine and Public Health The Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, MD
A. Eugene Washington, M.D., M.Sc. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences University of California at San Francisco/Mount Zion Medical Center San Francisco, CA
Paul S. Frame, M.D. Tri-County Family Medicine Cohocton, NY
Harold C. Sox, Jr., M.D. (Task Force Chairman) Department of Medicine Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center Hanover, NH
Modena E. H. Wilson, M.D., M.P.H. Department of Pediatrics Johns Hopkins Hospital Baltimore, MD
Dennis G. Fryback, Ph.D. Department of Preventive Medicine University of Wisconsin - Madison Madison, WI
Big surprise, a bunch of #%@*&#$ academics.
"Now to just to make sure, ...you are a registered Republican is that right? And you're a member a Free Republic.com? And you voted Sarah Palin, correct? Fine. Now our executioner will fire two 9mm bullets into your head and we'll be finished here. Goodbye!"