While this country is armpit-deep in the middle of a health care reform mess, a “Government Task Force” announced yesterday that women don’t need mammograms until their 50’s and that previously encouraged self breast exams are pointless and essentially a waste of time and resources. This announcement is the polar opposite of what we’ve been hearing from the American Cancer Society for the past two decades. Shouldn’t we be more believing of a Cancer Society rather than a bunch of Government Task Masters only interested in saving the insurance companies some cash?
Which brings up the question that is no doubt at the forefront of every one’s mind: Are mammograms and self breast exams truly ineffective? Or are the insurance companies covering their butts before they announce that they will no longer be covering these expenses? I’m betting it’s the latter.
I’m one of those “kids” in their 30’s who has already had a scare with breast cancer. I found a lump while checking things out myself…had it looked at…and was told it was most likely fibrous tissue, but was given a referral for a mammogram if I chose to have one. This process gave me confidence in my doctor and his willingness to put my health above the almighty dollar. If he had told me, “Yeah, it feels kinda lumpy in there, but I’m not referring you for a mammogram for another 15 years because the government told me not to.”…..then I’d spout off a few unsavory comments and go find another doctor…STAT. Wouldn’t we rather be safe than sorry? I have no doubt that while we’re all in heated discussion over this new announcement, people in dark offices are making sure the legal jargon covers and protects all medical and insurance providers from a barrage of malpractice suits when people start dropping like flies.
For this year (2009), the American Cancer Society lists 194,280 new cases of breast cancer. 1,910 males, 192,370 females. Along with these new cases, there have been 40,610 deaths as a direct result of breast cancer. 440 males, 40,170 females. (Source)
The probability of breast cancer according to age has been estimated as:
By age 20: 1 out of 1,985
By age 30: 1 out of 229
By age 40: 1 out of 68
By age 50: 1 out of 37
By age 60: 1 out of 26
By age 70: 1 out of 24
Lifetime: 1 out of 8 (American Cancer Society)
Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in women today. According to the American Cancer Society, in general, breast cancer rates have risen about 30% in the past 25 years in western countries, due in part to increased screening which detects the cancer in earlier stages. And now it makes sense to CUT BACK on these screenings, deeming them inneffective and unnecessary? Unnecessary for who, exactly? Insurance companies? They already know that if this pending health care bill passes, they’re screwed. Hm…so let’s see what’s costing us the most money….aha! These women with their ailing boobies! Let’s cut ‘em off. No, no….not the boobies! The hormonal women! They over-react to everything anyway.
Sure, there are going to be abnormal readings and false alarms. But wouldn’t we rather have those than a spike in deaths relating to untreated breast cancer? This braniac Government appointed cancer panel claims these recommendation are more in line with the international guidelines. The World Health Organization recommends to test every two years after the age of 50.
The American Cancer came back swinging with:
“The task force advice is based on its conclusion that screening 1,300 women in their 50s to save one life is worth it, but that screening 1,900 women in their 40s to save a life is not.”
That stance “is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives, just not enough of them.” (Yahoo News)
I wonder how far the insurance companies will go to save a buck? It doesn’t help that a butt-load of politicians are getting fat kick-backs, resulting in their staunch and vocal support of these “necessary cut-backs and recommendations”. So if a woman does everything right….waits until she’s 50 for a mammogram, doesn’t put much weight in self-breast exams….what’s going to happen if she finds she’s riddled with cancer? Will the insurace companies then say it’s a pre-existing condition? Will they charge you higher rates or deny coverage altogether? None of this is illegal. None of it. As a matter of fact….it’s darn good for business! For every medical bill the insurance companies are forced to pay, that’s precious cash snatched from their grubby little hands. And this snatching does not make them act kindly towards those with potentially hefty medical bills.
So…they stoop to the level of trash-picking paparazzi and start tapping into databases that reveal your history of prescriptions. They make it pretty with a name like “Predictive Modeling”….a greedy guess on whether or not your potential future ailments will cost more than your premiums. And it’s THIS type of calculating that results in your coverage being denied.
If you have HealthNet insurance, God help you if you get any kind of sick. If you haven’t taken a prescription medication in a year or visited the emergency room in two years, you get a preferred rate. But if you have, you will either be charged a higher premium or declined altogether. In regards to cancer, HealthNet will generally cover you, depending on what kind of cancer you have and if it’s been 10 years since you finished treatment.
UniCare (of Chicago) denied total coverage to a woman due to a “history of infertility”. They made this decision based on two drugs the woman had taken to help her ovulate in order to have her two children: Metformin and Actos. Naturally, UniCare refused to discuss their decision, stating, “These are decisions made on a case-by-case basis.”
And back to good ole HealthNet…..they were forced to pay $9 million to a breast cancer patient whose chemotherapy was interrupted because the company annulled her policy. These statistics are a mere tear-drop in the ocean of our available health care insurance companies. If only someone “higher up” would grow a set and stand up to these menaces and for once, put the human condition in front of a financial bottom line. Imagine what THAT would do for this country.
At this point, that’s all we CAN do…….imagine.
Authors bio is coming up shortly. 
