BREAST EXAM GUIDELINES CONFUSING

There's only so much a woman can do to protect herself against breast cancer. Science and medicine must figure out why some cancerous lesions kill women, and some don't. The panel never gave a list of other things women can do. It seems that HHS Secretary Sabelius,  is backing off from the new guidelines issued by her Task force on mammography.

As a medical physician for over 51 years, I strive to give you the best medical information on controversial medical subjects, and help your read betwwen the lines. You must come to your own conclusions. I have no ties to any organization, pharmaceutical, or lobby group. As an practicing medical acupuncturist since 1982, I find western medicine and medical acupuncture are very complimentary. This results in astounding healing in pain management, addictions to cigarettes and food, and a host of other maladies. Visit drneedles is blogging" at the end of each blog for a complete alphabetical list of all my blogs

Visit http://www.americanacupuncture.com/ for more detailed information on mind, body, and spirit healing.

 BREAST EXAM GUIDELINES CONFUSING


It seems that HHS Secretary Sabelius,  is backing off from the new guidelines issued by her Task force on mammography. Since these guidelines are complicating the healthcare debate the White House is also swiftly reacting.

Women were told: once you get to 40 your breasts will be more dangerous. Since the risk of mammograms is minimal, and the advantages far outweigh the advantages of early screening, you should get annual mammograms

Radiologists were looking at soft tissue images that might be cancers or suspicious lesions that could turn to cancer. Women with dense breasts, which include most young women, often needed a biopsy to see if the lesion is cancerous.  If the biopsy reveals cancer, this treatment would save a woman's life.

THE BOSS DOES NOT SUPPORT HER PANEL

One wonders why the government won't embrace the recommendations from the task force, which was appointed by the health secretary's department.  The administration fears the issue will be used to undermine support for the overall health care reform package in the same way that death panels deciding whether lifesaving care would be given was an issue against the summer.   They no longer want a return of the death panels.

HHS secretary admitted the guidelines caused a great deal of confusion and worry among women. Since mammograms have been a lifesaving tool against breast cancer, the secretary recommends you do what you've always been done, talk to your doctor ask questions, and make this decision that's right for you.

 Since this outside independent panel of doctors and scientists, which are under her direction, don't set federal policy and don't determine what services will be covered by the federal government.  She said her task force does not make policy decisions, or insurance coverage decisions.

Her statements challenged the recommendation of the very influential panel on preventative services task force. It is made of independent experts to address one of the most explosive issues in human health.

PANEL OPPOSITION

We can't over emphasize the actual lives saved when a young patient has cancer. Cancer in a young woman travels fast, and early detection is even more critical if they are under 50 years of age.  They also have younger children that are dependent on them.

These guidelines conflict with many recommendations from leading cancer organization.  It seems the mammogram debate has become a political football.

The recommendations reviewed older data and did not take into account new digital mammography, which picks up more cancers and dense breast tissue of younger women and probably saves more lives.

The panel may have had good intentions but they sure did a poor job of explaining their decision and did not present new data or alternative screening methods.

The panel looks at survival rates and harm and gives a lot away to pain and anxiety and survival as the only primary measure of any benefits. People, who had biopsies that turned out to be benign, are certainly glad they got screened and checked.

The basis for changing the recommended mammograms schedule has not been addressed. The question is: Are mammograms really necessary? Most women and many doctors are not simply ready to make such a drastic change.  It's hard to suggest that women should stop examining their breasts and for doctors to screen them. Why are we changing a practice that seems to work?

Women are saying the administration is now NO LONGER backing science decisions and just using politics.  This looks like a precursor to reduced insurance coverage.

SEEKING THE PERFECT FORMULA

Women find mammograms uncomfortable, and biopsies feared.   But most of them want it.
They are eager to act in what they believe the best interests of their health. The long accepted medical wisdom that women should get mammograms from the age of 40, are now told to put off the age of 50, and then every two years would be enough. There is no scientific information explaining this dramatic turnaround.

There seems to be a guessing game with women's health. I know most women can live with a little anxiety and distress, but can they live with a little cancer? We might be actually undoing a lot of good that's been done in the past few decades.

There is no one formula for every woman. Some have been over screened. This is an example of how difficult it will be to be to achieve successful health care reform in the United States.

Americans want every test and procedure possible, even if there is not much scientific evidence supporting it. Somewhere the thousands of procedures done every day uselessly must be stopped. 

COMMENTS

These guidelines will deprive patients of needed care and show the dangers of an increase government role in health care. This is how rationing is begun. You get a bureaucrat between you and your doctor.

Perhaps in the future new genetic markers might help understand which precancerous lumps are likely to turn into a fast-moving cancer. Today no tests like this exists.

Despite the White House reassuring women, these recommendations will have no immediate effect, the National Cancer Institute said it would include these guidelines and information to doctors and their patients.
 
How many lives will we save and are we making a decision whether it's worth saving the lives. The recommendations did not give anything to replace the advantage over mammograms.
We are all paying attention to how we can decrease the cost of health care.  And this decision seems to be economically motivated.

Our ability to detect precancerous cells has called paste our ability to understand how these cells work. Sometimes you treat with cancer preventing medications you're women then live with the knowledge there may be a time bomb living inside their bodies, even if the odds are slim.

There's only so much a woman can do to protect herself against breast cancer. Science and medicine must figure out why some cancerous lesions kill women, and some don't. The panel never gave a list of other things women can do.

With a public option, a near reality in health reform, one wonders what a politically dynamic panel might tell us about what is effective treatment. The politicians might modify their opinions on the basis of who hires the most expensive lobbyists.

Watch out folks, and get ready to pay for your necessary screening tests from your out-of-pocket costs, with what is left after you are taxed to death.

RELATED POSTS:

MAMMOGRAMS ARE USELESS

QUIT CHECKING YOUR BREASTS HONEY

VISIT www.drneedles.com for more discussion of more pertinent controversial medical issues.