Emma
Evil Liberal Leftist
I skimmed the report I linked above; perhaps tomorrow when I'm not cross-eyed and half asleep, I'll dig in a bit deeper.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I skimmed the report I linked above; perhaps tomorrow when I'm not cross-eyed and half asleep, I'll dig in a bit deeper.
Thanks. That might be the prior recommendations, though, because it's recommending mammograms >age 40.Well, if conventional medicine is resistant to evidenced based practices, it shouldn't be surprising that board posters are too.
Though, they probably have no idea how it's contributed to their health and well being.
Well, resistance combined with partisanship. If I can't find a citation as to when this study began, I may just make a phone call
I found this:
Screening for Breast Cancer: Recommendations and Rationale
Looks like most of the data and rationale are there.
Which means it won't be read by any of the outrage pimps on this thread.
And, as the article states, unnecessary diagnostics and treatments (ironically some of which can increase one's chances of a cancer). I'll be honest here... I had no idea mammograms had such a high incidence of false-positives.There are risks in having a mammorgram or an MRI?
Yeah.
It's called radiation.
There are risks in having a mammorgram or an MRI?
Yeah.
It's called radiation.
Radiation Free Mammograms | EmpowHer - Women's Health OnlineNow doctors have come up with a revolutionary new mammogram that is radiation and pain free! They are using ultrasound technology to detect tumors in the breast. Radiologists from the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Detroit, USA, suspend a woman’s breasts in water and fire ultrasound rays through them to generate images of the breast tissue. Not only is the new method pain free, it is said to be more accurate at picking up cancer than a traditional mammogram and uses no radiation so it’s safer for the patient.
I skimmed the report I linked above; perhaps tomorrow when I'm not cross-eyed and half asleep, I'll dig in a bit deeper.
There are risks in having a mammorgram or an MRI?
Yeah.
It's called radiation.
OK, we can stipulate that x-ray radiation can cause cancer. But to not have Mammograms until 50? Why not have them every other year, or every third year from an early age, like the 30's. Not worth much, anecdotal as it is, but I know at least two women who died in their early 40's of breast cancer.
Occupational exposure for workers is limited to 5000 mrem per year. The dose of a resident of Denver Colorado is 500. For people living at sea level the ambient dose is about 250 mrem; mammogram 138 mrem per image
Office of Research Services (ORS) - Division of Radiation Safety (DRS)
But all that may be moot:
Radiation Free Mammograms | EmpowHer - Women's Health OnlineNow doctors have come up with a revolutionary new mammogram that is radiation and pain free! They are using ultrasound technology to detect tumors in the breast. Radiologists from the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Detroit, USA, suspend a womans breasts in water and fire ultrasound rays through them to generate images of the breast tissue. Not only is the new method pain free, it is said to be more accurate at picking up cancer than a traditional mammogram and uses no radiation so its safer for the patient.
There are risks in having a mammorgram or an MRI?
Yeah.
It's called radiation.
OK, we can stipulate that x-ray radiation can cause cancer. But to not have Mammograms until 50? Why not have them every other year, or every third year from an early age, like the 30's. Not worth much, anecdotal as it is, but I know at least two women who died in their early 40's of breast cancer.
Occupational exposure for workers is limited to 5000 mrem per year. The dose of a resident of Denver Colorado is 500. For people living at sea level the ambient dose is about 250 mrem; mammogram 138 mrem per image
Office of Research Services (ORS) - Division of Radiation Safety (DRS)
But all that may be moot:
Radiation Free Mammograms | EmpowHer - Women's Health OnlineNow doctors have come up with a revolutionary new mammogram that is radiation and pain free! They are using ultrasound technology to detect tumors in the breast. Radiologists from the Karmanos Cancer Institute in Detroit, USA, suspend a womans breasts in water and fire ultrasound rays through them to generate images of the breast tissue. Not only is the new method pain free, it is said to be more accurate at picking up cancer than a traditional mammogram and uses no radiation so its safer for the patient.
The USPSTF recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and take patient context into account, including the patient's values regarding specific benefits and harms.
Grade: C recommendation.
The USPSTF recommends against routinely providing the service. There may be considerations that support providing the service in an individual patient. There is at least moderate certainty that the net benefit is small.
We will be seeing all kinds of "recommendations" coming from the NIH "cost effectiveness" programs which will in turn ration care for all of us. Hello death panels.
My insurance carrier dropped routine mammograms 2 years ago. I guess they were just ahead of the curve...
We will be seeing all kinds of "recommendations" coming from the NIH "cost effectiveness" programs which will in turn ration care for all of us. Hello death panels.
My insurance carrier dropped routine mammograms 2 years ago. I guess they were just ahead of the curve...
So because you can't get decent coverage, the rest of us should by God have the same shitty coverage you do? Is that how it works? MY carrier has routine mammograms starting at 40, or even earlier if you have a family history of cancer.
Actually I didn't, as you acknowledged, mention "Obama-Care" in any of my posts in this thread. But It would be accurate to give it that title since he campaigned for it, he asked for it, he has driven it, he will sign it (if it reaches his desk), so.... he will get credit or the blame for it. To call it by its rightful name does him no disservice, and serves to notify him and his of that fair attachment; it will, if it passes, along with the processes that play into it, always be known by that name.First, let's just drop the "obamacare" bullshit (I know you haven't really been a culprit in that), it's a falsehood.
<SNIP>
As much as I'd love to go into a numbers crunching discussion about sensitivity and specificity, I have a feeling that most people on this thread don't really care. They just want to use this as an excuse to bash Obama care, even when it has nothing to do with it.
Actually I didn't, as you acknowledged, mention "Obama-Care" in any of my posts in this thread. But It would be accurate to give it that title since he campaigned for it, he asked for it, he has driven it, he will sign it (if it reaches his desk), so.... he will get credit or the blame for it. To call it by its rightful name does him no disservice, and serves to notify him and his of that fair attachment; it will, if it passes, along with the processes that play into it, always be known by that name.First, let's just drop the "obamacare" bullshit (I know you haven't really been a culprit in that), it's a falsehood.
<SNIP>
As much as I'd love to go into a numbers crunching discussion about sensitivity and specificity, I have a feeling that most people on this thread don't really care. They just want to use this as an excuse to bash Obama care, even when it has nothing to do with it.
They want to cut down on prostrate cancer screening as well.
They figure screening won't stop you from getting it.
That's the rationale to everything.
Your gonna die anyway.
Who was it who wanted the sick to "die fast"? Wasn't that supposed to be the Republicans? Don't tell me we finally have bipartisan support for something!!!
Republicans want the sick to die fast? My, my how soon we for get Terri Schiavo. I always thought republicans wanted the sick to suffer indefinitely...