2 of 2
2
Task force opposes routine mammograms for women age 40-49
Posted: 20 November 2009 11:13 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 16 ]
Moderator
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  5508
Joined  2006-10-22

If any of you watched Hardball with Chris Matthews last evening, you may have seen two interviews that strongly disagreed with this report.  You ladies may want to do more research before you accept this.

Occam

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 12:30 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 17 ]
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2457
Joined  2008-06-03

I’ve decided I’m going to go with what my doctor suggests, Occam, regardless of guidelines.  smile

 Signature 

Some people can read War and Peace and come away thinking it’s a simple adventure story. Others can read the ingredients on a chewing gum wrapper and unlock the secrets of the universe.    - Lex Luthor

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 01:01 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 18 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2160
Joined  2007-04-26
Occam - 20 November 2009 11:13 AM

If any of you watched Hardball with Chris Matthews last evening, you may have seen two interviews that strongly disagreed with this report.  You ladies may want to do more research before you accept this.

Occam

The problem Occam is that no one who disagrees with the report gives a logical argument why. All they say is ” I know women who’s lives were saved by a mammogram” when in fact they really don’t. All they know is that they have taken care of women who have had mammograms, found a tumor and are still alive. Thats a very different thing. Far too many physicians are arguing against these recommendations for the exact reasons I outlined in my post above. I’m still waiting for a logical argument from those who disagree with these recommendations. You’re not likely to hear one though because currently there isn’t one if you base your argument entirely on the available evidence.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 01:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 19 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2160
Joined  2007-04-26
Jules - 20 November 2009 12:30 PM

I’ve decided I’m going to go with what my doctor suggests, Occam, regardless of guidelines.  smile

Thats exactly what you should do Jules. The recommendations weren’t saying that women under 50 shouldn’t have a mammogram but that we shouldn’t do them on these women automatically. What they are suggesting is that women in this group have a discussion with their doctors about the risks and benefits before they proceed. If your doctor says to do it you should also ask him why, so you understand the reasoning and can decide for yourself if the advice makes sense.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 01:04 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 20 ]
Moderator
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4072
Joined  2006-11-28

Yes, it’s expected when CAM proponents argue gut feelings and “common sense” over sound scientific evidence, but it’s depressing when you see doctors doing it. :-(

 Signature 

The SkeptVet
The SkeptVet Blog
Militant Agnostic: I don’t know, and neither do you!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 01:25 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 21 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2160
Joined  2007-04-26
mckenzievmd - 20 November 2009 01:04 PM

Yes, it’s expected when CAM proponents argue gut feelings and “common sense” over sound scientific evidence, but it’s depressing when you see doctors doing it. :-(

Agreed. Many doctors are not the scientists they should be, and they do a great disservice to their patients and society when they fall short in that area.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 02:23 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 22 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4447
Joined  2008-08-14

I can’t believe this Government Panel used “Gut Senses” and Common Sense. I hope you guys are actively working to replace them.
What the heck was the HHS thinking? Irresponsible!
Maybe these are the beginnings of Death Panels ‘eh MacGeyver? LOL

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 03:02 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 23 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4447
Joined  2008-08-14

How is anyone supposed to make any sense of all this conflicting info? You wonder why CAM is a rapidly growing industry?

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 05:17 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 24 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2160
Joined  2007-04-26
VYAZMA - 20 November 2009 02:23 PM

I can’t believe this Government Panel used “Gut Senses” and Common Sense. I hope you guys are actively working to replace them.
What the heck was the HHS thinking? Irresponsible!
Maybe these are the beginnings of Death Panels ‘eh MacGeyver? LOL

They didn’t, they used concrete data from multiple large studies. The people opposing these recommendations are arguing based on gut reactions

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 20 November 2009 05:20 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 25 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2160
Joined  2007-04-26
VYAZMA - 20 November 2009 03:02 PM

How is anyone supposed to make any sense of all this conflicting info? You wonder why CAM is a rapidly growing industry?

I don’t think it’s as confusing as people are making it out to be. Medical recommendations are always evoloving as we learn more. We no longer recommend the use of leaches or blood letting and no one is confused by that. You need to look at the rationale behind the recommendations and understand the reason for the changes.

 Signature 

For every complex problem there is a solution that is simple, obvious,.... and just plain wrong

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 November 2009 08:10 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 26 ]
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  4447
Joined  2008-08-14
macgyver - 20 November 2009 05:20 PM
VYAZMA - 20 November 2009 03:02 PM

How is anyone supposed to make any sense of all this conflicting info? You wonder why CAM is a rapidly growing industry?

I don’t think it’s as confusing as people are making it out to be. Medical recommendations are always evoloving as we learn more. We no longer recommend the use of leaches or blood letting and no one is confused by that. You need to look at the rationale behind the recommendations and understand the reason for the changes.

I’m just going to come right out and say…I jumped the gun on you. I thought for a second that you and McKenzie were against these new guidelines. I had forgotten what you wrote earlier in the thread.
I got confused by what McKenz had written…
Yes, it’s expected when CAM proponents argue gut feelings and “common sense” over sound scientific evidence, but it’s depressing when you see doctors doing it. :-(
I didn’t understand this angle, and was thinking that suddenly you guys had changed direction on the guidelines.
Anyways I’m for the guidelines. I agree. I think this is a good benchmark, and I hope to see more modifications of existing guidelines.
Primarily to streamline and reduce waste and costs.
I’m sorry for any confusion. My bad.

 Signature 

Row row row your boat gently down the stream.  Merrily Merrily merrily merrily life is but a dream!

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 November 2009 05:35 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 27 ]
Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  107
Joined  2008-03-19

It amazing me how GOP latched on to this and the new cervical cancer screening guidelines by American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) as “proof” that rationed is on the way and that these two studies are linked.  Yet, as I pointed out to these folks that ACOG and the USPSTF have nothing to do with one another and ACOG disagrees with some of the new USPSTF guidelines. ACOG currently continues to recommend the following services:
• Screening mammography every 1-2 years for women aged 40-49 years
• Screening mammography every year for women age 50 or older
• BSE; BSE has the potential to detect palpable breast cancer and can be recommended.


What people don’t realize that medical providers disagree all the time about a number of issues. If you go to three doctors you will typically get three different opinions.

 Signature 

Barry Manilow didn’t write I Write The Songs. Bruce Johnston did.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 22 November 2009 07:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 28 ]
Jr. Member
Rank
Total Posts:  23
Joined  2009-04-16

Part of the problem is shoddy media reporting. Slate was one of the few that reported this well:

. . . . Researchers generally agree that mammograms save lives, but—this is critical—catching breast cancer early changes the outcome in only 15 percent of cases. So consider the actual numbers: For the average 40-year-old woman, annual mammography for a decade increases one’s overall chance of breast cancer survival from roughly 99.7 percent to 99.8 percent. [. . . .] According to the National Cancer Institute, there’s also a downside. During this time, half of all screened women will have at least one suspicious mammogram, and one-quarter of them will end up getting a biopsy. Mammograms in women from 40 to 50 years old cause a huge number of false positives, resulting in about 100 biopsies for every life saved. Even more worrisome: It’s possible the radiation from those mammograms may end up causing more cancers than they prevent. 
- http://www.slate.com/id/2236028/.


Jordan

Profile
 
 
   
2 of 2
2