Wait Till 50 for Mammograms? Patients ‘Just aren’t buying it.’

I will be 51 next week, don’t have any risk factors and have only had 1 mammogram 4 yrs ago. My dr just doesn’t think it’s necessary for me to have them all the time. This is nothing new, just catching on.

When you see women in their 20′s and 30′s getting breast cancer, and I do, then just exactly what is behind this recommendation?
It certainly isn’t about saving lives.

jhw539 | Nov 18, 2009 2:25:21 PM
Tell that to the women who have had the cancer. I’m sure they will appreciate the fact, that you don’t consider screening of any value to them.
By the way…in what way does screening matter to over 50 yr. old women…..if you are relying on younger women to screen themselves, you might as well rely on older women to screen themselves, as well.

I wonder why so much news attention has been given this. Basically the same issues arise (as I understand) it will both breast and prostate cancer. The latter seems to get much less news attention.
First, three types of cancer occur, in terms of vigilance. Some cancers (no one knows how many) represent no threat because they are growing so slowly, if at all. Some “cures” actually are of these. Second, some cancers are essentially incurable no matter when they are detected. Finally, medical intervention can cure some.
So, mammograms for average risk women in their 40s may occasionally save a life, but I wonder if this will occur more often than if a PSA is given to a 40s male at average risk for prostate cancer? I understand that most men are not advised to start PSAs until about age 50.

I wonder how many of those panel members have conflict of interests issues…. how many have history with insurance companies, drug companies, government and/or foundation grant monies to have decided such nonsense about early detection of breast cancer…. some one should investigate their backgrounds… like a vetting process to see the “real deal”

jhw539, thank you! it’s refreshing to see someone actually appealing to scientific evidence rather than anecdotes or emotions. What disturbs me even more are all the news outlets, including ABC News, who also believe that emotions trump any discussion of scientific evidence (this evidence, in fact, has been around for quite some time). Here’s a piece of scientific evidence that is routinely overlooked as well: Lung cancer, most of which is caused by smoking, is the leading cause of cancer deaths in women (not breast cancer). The leading women’s health issue is smoking, not breast cancer.

I’m sorry “Nancy” but the recommendations are ALREADY that men don’t have screenings for prostate cancer until after fifty, and the efficacy is in doubt even for that.

This panal is a government appointed panal. It has been around for years. Who knows who it is made up of but these people are appointed to this panal by the administration. Many on it now where placed there in the Bush admin so I am not blaiming this on Obama’s admin but on the GOVERNMENT. I am appaled by this. Just SIX months ago this same panal reported that women should get the mamo’s they are great it it is good and now just six months later we shouldn’t get them anymore? Now it’s not worth it??? Courious that the rec changes just as the government is trying to take over our health care? Just a coincidence??? I don’t think so. The fact that they also advise women to stop doing self breast exams because it causes us unessasary stress???? Give me break! What they are saying is a majority of the time when a lump is found in the breast of a women under fifty it is benign. A small percentage is cancer. They are saying the “costs” of the test and bi-opsies etc far outnumber the actual cancer that is found. The ones that are cancerous will now be collateral damage, acceptable casualties as far as the government is concerned. If this was the National Cancer society or the AMA that was rec this I would be more willing to accept it but they do not agree, it is a GOVERNMENT panal who is looking to cut medical cost when they take it over. Wake up people, if it looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, quacks like a duck it’s a DUCK! Our outrage is being blaimed on our “emotions”! People have emotions, numbers don’t. We are people not numbers! Of course we have emotions if we didn’t everyone could die of cancer it wouldn’t matter. I know personally my sister had her first mamo at 40, no risk factors and it was cancer, in situ, contained in the cell, biopsy removed it all, three days of radiation and done. Had she been 50 it would have been larger, required masectomy and chemo. She may have survived but would have had her breast cut off and gone through painful treatment. Is that emotional, darn right it is! Under these new GOVERNMENT guidelines, my sister would just have been an acceptable casualty because thousands of other women who at 40 had their first mamo and did not have cancer. They would say “too bad your sister died but look how much money we saved”! Breast cancer is the SECOND cause of cancer death in women, USA is the leader in breast cancer survival, there is a reason for that. If they just wouldn’t have advise women to stop self breast exames I may have been more likely to listen to these idiots but what is the only harm in self breast exams??? It is because women will then go to the Dr who will order test and will do bi-opsies etc. It all comes down to MONEY! This sickens me. This is what is going to happen to our health care in the US when the government takes over. Get prepared, it’s comming. American people need to wake up!

jhw539 – I agree completely! We live in a society where many people ignore scientific evidence. I am amazed at the level of ignorance in the U.S. People would rather spend money needlessly, and receive excessive and unnecessary radiation, just so they can feel “safer” about their situation. I’m not saying that there aren’t people who are considered to be at “higher risk” (i.e., family history). Those people should receive earlier and more frequent testing. But… that’s not the majority, and certainly not everyone! I wish people would get real and seriously look at the scientific research.