All hell broke loose over the talk radio airwaves today in the wake of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's recommendation that routine mammograms be put off until age 50 and that women should be discouraged from learning breast self-examination. The reversal of previous recommendations has raised suspicions that this represents the leading edge of health care rationing.
Updated November 17, 2009
Critics See Health Care Rationing Behind New Mammography Recommendations
FOXNews.com
Some lawmakers on Capitol Hill are blasting new guidelines from a government task force that recommends against routine mammograms for women under 50, questioning whether they are tantamount to health care "rationing" in the fight against the No. 2 cancer killer in U.S. women.
"I absolutely believe this could be a form of rationing," said Rep. Phil Gingrey, R-Ga, a practicing obstetrician and gynecologist for 26 years. "It scares me."
Gingrey told FoxNews.com on Tuesday that he and other lawmakers are gravely concerned that insurance companies will seize upon the new guidelines to deny mammogram coverage for women under 50.
"Early detection is hugely important," Gingrey said, noting that breast self-exams are critical in looking for cancerous tissue masses.
The new government recommendations, released Monday by the Preventive Services Task Force of the Department of Health and Human Services, recommend against regular mammography tests in women aged 40 to 49. The guidelines also downplay the effectiveness of self-examinations and advise that women aged 50 to 74 years receive mammograms every other year.
The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force, a government panel of doctors and scientists, concluded that such early and frequent screenings often lead to false alarms and unneeded biopsies without substantially improving women's odds of survival.
[...]
But critics of the new rules say ignoring the health risk is not worth it. Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths among women and the seventh leading cause of death overall for women.
"For every seven to 10 women that are being overdiagnosed or overtreated, we're saving one woman's life and I think for me that's worth it," said Dr. Cynara Commer, a professor of surgery at Mt. Sinai's Surgical Oncology Department in New York.
"That's worth finding that one cancer at early stage as opposed to late stage, and the argument that this is saving cost is sort of irrelevant because if we end up finding cancers at later stages, those women have to go much more aggressive treatment," Commer added.
[...]
Rep. Bill Cassidy, R-La., said the new guidelines may discourage a number of women from seeking necessary preventive screening.
"The concern is that many people are not complying now with what is currently recommended," he said. "There is a potential that this is going to confuse women and make them less likely to be treated.
"I prefer to think that this is just not a conspiracy to save costs," Cassidy added.
"We've spent years educating women and the public to do this early detection and now we've just taken a 180 and turned the other way," added Rep. Phillip Roe, R-Tenn, a retired obstetrician and gynecologist who stressed that some of the most aggressive cancers are found in younger patients.
For most of the past two decades, the American Cancer Society has recommended annual mammograms beginning at 40, and it reiterated that position on Monday.
"This is one screening test I recommend unequivocally, and would recommend to any woman 40 and over," the society's chief medical officer, Dr. Otis Brawley, said in a statement.
Commer said she is very concerned that the new guidelines are the top of a slippery slope toward rationing, and questioned the timing as the Senate is about to vote on health care reforms that could end up containing a so-called public option.
"The government-run insurance companies are definitely going to be using these federal guidelines as opposed to using the American Cancer Society guidelines, and the American Cancer Society is not going along with these guidelines, and we can only hope that the private insurance companies don't follow suit," she said.
"I think it's coming down to saving costs. I don't think we should be doing that at the expense of women," she added.
FoxNews.com's Cristina Corbin and The Associated Press contributed to this report.
FOX has full coverage starting here.
It was gratifying to hear the level of concern for the well-being of American women coming from pundits, physicians, spouses, friends, sons and daughters of breast cancer survivors and those who did not survive. It was the sound of people all over this country looking at an important woman in their lives and thinking... "she might DIE because of this".
Obama really stepped in it this time -- and it hit the fan at the "high" setting.
1 comment:
they can go screw themselves.
whether by design or intent or obtuse tin ear-itis to whats presently being debated in america they have shown what has to happen if they socialize medicine.
and it is just the tiniest tip of the iceberg
as the widower of someone who fought long and hard against breast cancer which was first found when my wife was 28, I give a big FUCK YOU to the assholes who are setting these policies.
Post a Comment