The above was a quote regarding the new guidlines regarding mammagrams and breast cancer. Guidelines are being put forth that women should not start mammograms until age 50 (instead of 40). The pundit/doctor was saying that the panel found that annual mammograms for women under the age of 40 are unnecessary/unhelpful/and potentially emotionally upsetting. The panel's main spin is that the downside annual mammograms for women under 40 leads to a 10% false positive reading which leads to (it seems) an emotional breakdown for these women. Because the panel is trying to "sell its findings" the false positive is the main point of the downside - it seemed that when a false positive reading was given to one of these women, a fainting couch needed to be at the ready.
I do need to say that 1) I have had a false positive (a shadow on the film) and no fainting couch necessary and 2) I have two friends who were under 50 and due to mammograms were diagnosed with breast cancer; caught it early and are now cancer free. These are friends so I feel like I know 2 that I chose to believe the mammogram did save.
OK that said, "Breast Cancer" as a business is a phenomenal model for other causes and businesses. "They" {breast cancer people} changed public perception (which is extremely, extremely difficult) by creating the idea (that many doctors claim as mythology) that if caught early you CAN beat cancer. They have created the idea of personal responsiblity, almost to the point of guilt (tell your doctor you didn't get screened and look at the face - guys it like telling the dental hygenist that you don't floss twice a day!!) that you MUST get screened every year because if you don't and then get cancer it is sort of your own fault. "They" have created the narrative of triumph and tragedy with symbols of pink ribbons and runs. And that you MUST care because it your mothers, daughters and wives. (Side note: Men get breast cancer also and boy is it difficult for them)
Many doctors, and patient advocates have claimed for years that the above narrative is a falsehood; not all cancers are treatable (no matter how early it is detected) and some cancers grow fast and some slow. That there is no rhyme or reason over who gets sick and who gets well. Of course we know some basic concepts of health but there are runners who die of heart attacks and 350 lb smokers who live until 100.
The fight breast cancer messages have become so internalized that to suggest any change (meaning doing less instead of doing more) leads to extreme discomfort.
Of course one of the questions is with this shift in the recommendation is will insurance companies no longer pay for mammagrams for women under 50; and how many of the poor (many with pre-exsisting comprimised health) will be negatively impacted? Also, mammagrams are currently a $5B dollar a year business with demand going down what will happen to costs? Economics says they should go down - I believe that any woman under 50 who wants a mammagram will have to pay more and/or cash out of pocket.
I do know my false positive cost me $250 out of pocket (insurance only covers the first one) and I was fortunate enought to have the money but most importantly not to be sick. It will be interesting to see how this plays out in both policy and public opinion.

Recent Comments