Thursday, December 29, 2011

That pesky mammogram controversy

Here is another article telling us about the benefits of mammograms. It says that after following women for 15 years, 86% of the ones whose breast cancer was discovered by mammography were still alive vs. 66% of the women whose cancer was found through other methods.

How many times do we need to say this? Mammography is beneficial and insurance companies and government insurance agencies who only want to cover mammograms after age 50 or only every few years instead of annually, are just being cheap and sacrificing women's lives.

Allow me to simplify:
- there is a test to screen for a deadly disease that occurs more and more frequently after age 40
- women who get the test are more likely to survive the disease as they are diagnosed earlier
- women who get the test are more likely to have lower medical care costs as they are diagnosed earlier
- the test saves lives and costs

And where is the problem?

1 comment:

WhiteStone said...

Add to that the statistic that one out of eight (or is it one out of seven) women will develop breast cancer. In any room of 75 women there will be ten bc victims. That is appalling and reason enough to have annual exams.

I've met some tragic cases...women who did NOT have exams because they did not have insurance. They were either 1) diagnosed too late or 2) diagnosed at a "free mammogram" clinic and therefore could not get insurance due to a now "pre-existing".

Thanks for reading Lennie's Diary. I wasn't certain at the beginning of the year that I would be here to finish it. (ovarian cancer). But here I am, still feeling fit. Still doing chemo. But still feeling decent. Thanks be to God.