My breasts and I are conflicted over this mammogram thing...

[luvspeas]

I just had my yearly (OK, so 2 years went by), mammogram, and I must say that I am not sure what to think of all this.

First off about breast self-exams...I was with the first wave of women encouraged to do monthly breast self-exams. I had the little plastic card hanging in the shower because I thought it was cool. IMHO, the push to encourage self-exams had more to do with getting to know your body and how it felt, and noting what changes were normal, and what was something to be concerned about. It was an empowering thing, not as intimate as cervix viewing parties of the 70s, but along the same lines. If we now tell women it's OK to not do an exam, will we fall into the dark ages of not being comfortable touching ourselves in a non-sexual way? My younger sisters have already learned to hate hair, and aging, and flatchestedness, and who knows what else.

As others have pointed out on this subject, it is imperative that women get a baseline mammogram to refer to. My mom had had her first mammogram at 84! They found something suspicious and suggested a full mastectomy because she had very little breast tissue left and it would rule out any possibility of recurrence. This was what she wanted, so there was no question. That one went OK-ish. Two years later my mom took a pretty serious turn in her memory and was struggling with dementia. We were just getting to the point of getting the meds and the routine down to a functional level and she seemed to be getting a bit better when they found something in the other breast and again suggested a mastectomy. This time the operation brought on a huge setback in her dementia that she never recovered from. She had congestive heart failure and the operation weakened her, brought on pneumonia and she died within a few months. Was it really necessary for an 86 year old woman to go through that? Better to have had a couple more good years and a slow decline? If she had a baseline, it would have made the diagnosis easier. I also think that the current standards put an over emphasis on screening, and biopsy, partially because they don't fully know how to tell which growth patterns are going to be a fast moving cancer and which are not, which is why they want women to have yearly screenings. The grainy cell growth is a normal part of the aging process in breast tissue. It comes from mild injury and aging. Sometimes these calls become cancerous, sometimes they become slow growing cancers, and sometimes it's much worse.

I've just recently come into the time of my life that the yearly mammogram is suggested, but not too urgent. But I know this because I know my breasts, I have some idea of my family history and I know what the risk factors are, and I don't have many. I also drive my doctors crazy with questions and my questioning. My concern is for the women who don't know their breast as well as I know mine. There was a time in our recent past where women were beginning to be empowered by their sexuality, and their physiology. I don't have time to think about these things too deeply any more right now. Maybe other women and and their breasts, and men too, can elaborate on this.

[Nikki Stone1]

1. I think this recent "study" is crap. I think it's all about costs.

There is absolutely no question that knowing your own body and being able to get baseline mammograms at younger ages (like 35 or 40) helps greatly. Patterns emerge over a series of exams and knowing what is irregular is dependent upon what has been regular for a long time. If you don't get an exam until you're 50 or so, it gets harder to tell what normal is. My guess is that the "false positives" that they are so worried about will INCREASE as doctors don't have a baseline to work from.

[luvspeas]

3. The clinic where I got mine was packed to the gills...

with women. I think partially because it's paid for by insurance. Why not? I think it's excessive. At the same time, I think many people have gotten the message that it's important and they figure that even with free screening, and the threat of imminent death, most women won't do it every year.

[havocmom]

24. Perhaps the clinic was 'packed to the gills' is due to not enough places to get mammograms

Lots of other lab work gets done more often but with less crowded waiting rooms. Could it be there are just more regular labs so the crowd gets spread out?

Also, certain hours are probably busier due to the fact that people work and some hours are easier to get time off.

[dflprincess]

29. All clinics also get busier at the end of the year

when people have pretax dollars to burn and there may be a lot of of people trying to get tests out of the way before their out of pocket totals reset January 1.

Gee, we've got a great system. :sarcasm:

[havocmom]

30. Good point.

Re our 'great system' Dr Weil post on Huff post re depression treatments brings mentions how mental health care gets short shrift due to for-profit care.

[marshall]

16. In the end it's always about money

And it's a matter of numbers. They have access to the stats. I would imagine the number of cancers detected on younger women with yearly mammograms is a statistically small number. When it's you, then it seems important. But in the larger scheme of things the bills have to be paid.

[alfredo]

2. It's just a recommendation. There's no force of law behind it. How the

insurance companies react will be the downside. We can't really expect them to act civilly.

[Nikki Stone1]

4. You know the insurance companies will use this

No question.

[luvspeas]

5. I know and that sucks...n/t

[alfredo]

9. That really sucks. You know they will

[havocmom]

25. Yep, and it is not just the costs of mammograms they will look to save $ from

It's been abundantly documented that they put cost savings well above saving lives, so I feel my cynicism is valid. Consider: more mammograms will find more cancers which lead to more courses of chemo, radiation, even reconstructive surgeries and on-going monitoring/care.

If a few more cancers slip by and get worse before being caught, survival rates don't look so good and the cost from long term treatments is less. Fact: Dead is cheaper and Big Insurance is all about cheaper.

As one who nearly lost use of her dominate hand, 20 years ago, due to Big Insurance foot dragging as a cost saving technique, I am that cynical.

[lunatica]

6. I'm very sorry your grandmother suffered needlessly

Recently Thom Hartman was talking about a very recent study that says that cancerous cells are very common in people throughout their entire lives and that only a few will actually develop into full blown malignant cancer because the body has the tendency to heal itself. And that now that cancer cells are being discovered when they are quite small that people are being treated as if any cancer cell is bad.

He said that doctors are discovering more and more cancer cells at earlier stages but that statistics show that the same number of people die of cancer every year. So doctors decided to study this phenomenon and now believe that most early detections may be of the type of cancer cells that the body naturally destroys.

It made sense to me, but then it was Thom Hartman and he can make anything easy to understand. My mother had a tumor removed from her breast before I was born. It turned out to be benign, and if left alone maybe it would have gone away. Who knows.

[JuniperLea]

7. I think the RW knows a public option is in the works...

And they are starting to try to find ways of scrimping on it.

I have my mammogram every year... I do it around Valentine's Day, as a sweetheart gift to myself... the gift I love, and hate.

[GMA]

13. don't think so.

I've been around the net some and rw is blaming this on the government, putting out the idea of less, before rationing begins. Lots of upset about that. I'm wondering who's worse, the insurance companies or the government...

[JuniperLea]

15. There's a big difference between the RW...

And their sheeple. If you ask the sheeple if they want a public option, they will say no. If you ask them if they want the individual items within a public option, they will say yes.

[rhett o rick]

19. So you wonder who's worse? Interesting that you would phrase it like that.

The government under GWB was of course as bad as insurance companies. Insurance companies goal is to make money at all costs. The goal of a government of good people, not republicans, is to protect the people. Are you a recent convert to the Democratic Party?

[GMA]

22. Nope.

But I am cynical about the general goodness of the government.

[rhett o rick]

27. I am always cynical myself about those that want to paint the "government" as a static

entity that may be either good or bad. Government is what we make it. Our representatives are to reflect our desires re. what the "government" should do. A good many people were just fine when our government invaded Iraq. And as a people, if we dont like that kind of government, we vote it out. Most people that paint the government as bad with a big brush are usually brain washed republicants. They believe Ray-gun and successor republicants when they say government is bad.

Some governments are good, and some are bad. The key question my friend is do you believe in the government of the Democrats that gave us 50years of prosperity after the First Great Republican Depression? Do you approve of government programs like Social Security, VA, FDIC, FHA, Medicare, national highways, etc.? Or do you think that corporations, unregulated would bring us prosperity?

[GMA]

34. This is an either/or question?

I agree totally with your comments about government reflecting what we, as a people want, and that we must vote representatives to reflect those desires.

My dad grew up during the Great Depression, and it was so painful that he wouldn't talk about most of his early years until just before he died, but he still had mixed feelings about FDR and government programs. He was a construction foreman for an engineering company, and was a union man. But he saw and dealt with the corruption and problems of unions, as well as the corporation he worked for. So I guess he was pragmatic, and did his part, but didn't really see SS, etc., giving him back what he paid into them. That was because he saw that wherever there's power--whether it be government or corporate--there will be corruption, and we must always be on our toes.

So, to answer your question, I think it isn't a question between unregulated corporations OR government programs, with questionable oversight. I'm definitely learning, after being here at du awhile, that I'm not a true progressive or liberal. But I do really like to hear ideas and arguments for and against issues so that I can make up my mind. There certainly seem to be more insults than insights here, in my experience, so I truly appreciate you're comments.

[bdamomma]

23. oh, yea, there was a report about how the pharmaceutical companies

are hiking up the prices of medication too, damn bastards, just care about their freaking profits and not about the people. Women are getting the short stick on everything.

[JuniperLea]

32. Good call... you're right...

And I thought of another... the recent push by health insurance companies to lock in policies for a TWO YEAR period! Ads all over TV, buses, print media... disgusting leeches. It's blood money, nothing less.

[anigbrowl]

8. "will we fall into the dark ages of not being comfortable (...)" No.

(I'm a man , FYI). Men get very little info on self-assessment, apart from some general remarks that one could get testicular or prostate cancer (though these are considerably less common than breast cancer). I have no idea how to do a correct prostate exam, but have never had any hangups about checking myself for lumps or cysts or whatever as a matter of general health.

I'd be more worried about people (of either gender) who put off going to the doctor because they're worried about something turning out to be bad news, even if it's more likely to be a benign cyst. I think the media's endless focus on tragedy/horror of illness is part of the problem. Of course, there are not many stories in 'wo/man finds lump, but it turns out not to be important'. On the other hand, most people are more informed about their health these days than 20 years ago.

[elias7]

18. Self prostate exam? Oh my, please don't try that at home.

Perhaps the US Preventive Services Task Force will recommend the self-rectal exam in another effort to save money.

I like your point about avoiding health care because of fear of hearing bad news. As a health care worker, I believe that is more common than people think.

[anigbrowl]

28. Trust me, that's something I prefer to leave in the tender hands of a highly motivated professional!

[JohnnyLib2]

10. My wife, survivor, says she probably would be dead with that advice.

She wasn't a likely candidate and the ob/gyn did not expect the positive results of the mammogram....

[Walk away]

11. I had breast cancer ten years ago.

I could get a mammogram as my health insurance covers it because N.J. requires health insurers to do so. However, since my previous cancer is considered a pre-existing condition and I had a break in my coverage, they won't cover treatment. What is the point of being diagnosed? I would lose my house and my business. Where would I recover with no money even IF I could find a hospital to admit me. I would have to become indigent first and my chances of surviving would be less than half of someone with better insurance. I'd rather not know since there isn't much I can do about it.

[pokercat999]

12. My sister had mammograms every year after 45 or so. She

discovered a lump on her own and went to her DR. The diagnosis was missed for several years because the technician missed the tumor on the film the first year it appeared, so after that it was a "normal" thing from the year before. Long story short, she had a double mastectomy and multiple rounds of chemo but after six years the cancer had moved to various parts of her body and finally to her brain. She died just before Christmas three years ago at the age of 60. Her Doctor died around the same time so I don't know if he actually looked at the pics or just depended on the technician to do his job. Regardless, this may have been a preventable or controllable disease had she not trusted the medics to do their job and been more aggressive with her Dr.. Asking endless questions and demanding concrete answers should be part of every persons interaction with their medical professionals, it might just extend your life.

By the way, she died at home with an amazing dignity, surrounded by her husband, five children and too many grand children to count, me and my wife and our sister and her husband. She was a huge supporter of The American Cancer Society, volunteering for EVERYTHING. In all that time, throughout this ordeal, the one thing I NEVER her her ask was "WHY ME?"

[GMA]

14. I had my first mammogram when I was in my mid-forties.

It was especially difficult because I had breast implants, but we did get a good benchmark. It required a biopsy, but everything came back clear. I was terrified before the biopsy, but after that decided I'd just have to roll with whatever happens. I could have a mammogram and develop something in the year or two in between.

I'm adopted, and have no access to family medical history. I tell my daughters, with every new life-stage, "Okay, girls, now you know something new to look for." I don't mind living without the dread that I see so many women go through watching their female relatives.

[Shell Beau]

17. I am very conflicted about it too.

It is a cancer that kills far too many, and it can be very treatable if caught early. It was so ingrained in us to get that yearly mammogram. I am only 31, so I basically do just the self-checks, and my gyno feels around. No mammo's yet for me, but it will be hard for me to get one every 2 years when the time comes. I will want one every year, and there is no history in my family. Now, if the insurance companies quit paying for those yearlies, I am worried about what will happen. It is already such a huge problem.

[RoadRage]

20. Sorry.. you lost me at "Cervix Viewing Parties in the 70's"..

I was born in '77.. so technically I guess my mom participated in one of these on the day I was born with her OB, and a couple of nurses... but aside from that I think I (thankfully) may have been a bit to young to know about these kinds of "parties". What kinds of food & drink do you serve at these parties? Did it also involve a bunch of keys being thrown into a bowl at the end of the night? :)

Sorry for my ignoorance. :)

[luvspeas]

21. newly emergnig feminists would get together and look at their own cervixes...

cervi? cervixes? Oh whatever, I never did it, I'm not that enlightened.

[havocmom]

26. LOL go watch Fried Green Tomatoes for context

Funny scene!

[ItNerd4life]

31. The word 'Breasts' makes buys brains melt.

Sorry, it was off topic but couldn't resist.

Luckily, most women sound like they will stick with the previous recommendations until
it's proven that they are not worthwhile.

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our fourth quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!