Posted on 11/18/2009 8:04:40 PM PST by Nachum
A top federal health official said Wednesday that the controversial new guidelines for breast cancer screening do not represent government policy, as the Obama administration sought to keep the debate over mammograms from undermining the prospects for health-care reform.
Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius, in a written statement, said the new guidelines had "caused a great deal of confusion and worry among women and their families across this country," and she stressed that they were issued by "an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who . . . do not set federal policy and . . . don't determine what services are covered by the federal government."
Sebelius's statement challenged the recommendations of that influential panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, made up of independent experts assembled by her department to address one of the most explosive issues in women's health.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtonpost.com ...
buckofama....
I note you mentioned that this panel was assembled by Sebelius’ own department. Which makes me think you know something about it, at least more than me right now.
I have, of course, heard all the flap over this recommendation that women NOT get annual mammograms before age 50 because of an alleged plethora of false positives, yada, yada.
What I’m not clear about is just who this panel is that came up with this idea, why it was formed...like that.
Care to enlighten me?
[[I just want to remind you that this was the “death panel” in action. They will reduce your care to control population. You women should be panicked. These people are Satanic.]]
Bingo! And after the bill passes, you will see that ‘recomendations for prostate exams’ will be reduced as well, because we’re now beginning to hear i nthe news that ‘young people who were diagnosed with prostrate problems, and were treated for the cancer, ‘probably never woudl have’ had serious problems had they opted not to have treatment’
Cripes- now they’re predicting who ‘might or might not’ die from cancer?
Yeah have you heard the latest talking points. They were all appointed during the BUSH admin.
It’s Bushs fault.
Just a question,are there services now determined by the federal government?
A little foreshadowing perhaps?
This is just too easy. Like shooting fish in a barrel.
Keep it up ... there’s a nation to save!!!
Then this announcement from Sebelius. LMAO, confirmation! Bingo!
Sebelius's statement challenged the recommendations of that influential panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, made up of independent experts assembled by her department to address one of the most explosive issues in women's health.
These people would sell out their own mothers, so why not the women of the U.S.? We just have to make sure women are aware of who drove this. When they vote in November of 2010, they damned well better remember who drove this.
When they start pushing kids around, it's only a question of time before one or several of them punch back.
And the Stalinists, just like the bully, will run away crying every single time.
This is exactly why the government (particularly the Executive Branch) has no business touching ANYTHING regarding Health Care.
Then this announcement from Sebelius. LMAO, confirmation! Bingo!
Sebelius's statement challenged the recommendations of that influential panel, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, made up of independent experts assembled by her department to address one of the most explosive issues in women's health.
These people would sell out their own mothers, so why not the women of the U.S.? We just have to make sure women are aware of who drove this. When they vote in November of 2010, they damned well better remember who drove this.
The real question is why they did this as the legislation is being voted on. It cannot be an accident.
WHAT??!!?? You mean that this was really just a BS trial balloon to see how much extra gravy they can get away with?
I think they backed down because even a lot of lefties would be angered about this because they’d be impacted just as much as any other woman would be.
I think it’s brash and exhibits an air of superiority that is breathtaking in it’s scope. I sure don’t see any positive aspects of it related to the health care push.
Did they really think women were going to take this lying down, what with everyone knowing women under 40 who have had breast cancer and barely beat it, if they didn’t outright die from it?
It’s as if they didn’t care. They were leftist driven and this fitting into Obama’s “test less” game plan, they didn’t need to consider anything else.
Buffoons one and all.
For her to bring it up, it means the folks she speaks with during the day ... and that's a lot ... are also talking about it. That worm keeps turning!
Or possibly to desensitize us to the notion of rationed care. Maybe to bring the argument up in the first place just to see if people are paying attention. Not sure what the reason is.
I think the lefties are well aware of the affects of rationing. They want it. That's why it is a curiousity to me as to why they are bringing it up so blatantly. It could merely be a case of "Acams razor" here too. The most obvious thing may be that the committee pushed this out before Sebellius could tell them to shut up about it till later....
First ya do, then ya don’t , then ya do, then ya don’t, then you pretend until it’s passed and READY AIM FIRE...it’s over!
Maybe. Or maybe they want to get in our face about it. That is the administration's style.
“A top federal health official said Wednesday that the controversial new guidelines for breast cancer screening do not represent government policy...”
The real policy will be: Mamograms only for women who can prove that they voted straight ticket Democrat in the last general election.
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.