tagged w/ Health Care Reform
-
WASHINGTON – Moderate Senate Democrats threatened Sunday to scuttle health-care legislation if their demands aren't met, while more liberal members warned their party leaders not to bend.
The dispute among Democrats foretells of a rowdy floor debate next month on legislation that would extend health care coverage to roughly 31 million Americans. Republicans have already made clear they aren't supporting the bill.
Final passage is in jeopardy, even after the chamber's historic 60-39 vote Saturday night to begin debate.
Nelson and three other moderates — Democratic Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas and Connecticut independent Joe Lieberman — agreed to open debate despite expressing reservations on the measure. Each of them has warned that they might not support the final bill.
One major sticking point is a provision that would allow Americans to buy a federal-run insurance plan if their state allows it. Moderates say they worry the so-called public option will become a huge and costly entitlement program and that other requirements in the bill could cripple businesses. "I don't want to fix the problems in our health care system in a way that creates more of an economic crisis," said Lieberman.
The sway held by such a small group of senators has annoyed their more liberal colleagues, who could vote against a final bill if it becomes too watered down.
Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, said he didn't think rank-and-file Democrats would feel compelled to go that far. At the same time, Brown warned Democratic leaders not to make too many concessions.
"I don't want four Democratic senators dictating to the other 56 of us and to the rest of the country — when the public option has this much support — that (a public option is) not going to be in it," said Brown.
The Senate bill would require most Americans to carry insurance and provide subsidies to those who couldn't afford it. Large companies could incur costs if they did not provide coverage to their work force. The insurance industry would come under significant new regulation under the bill, which would first ease and then ban the practice of denying coverage on the basis of pre-existing medical conditions.
More on the story from Associated Press
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20091122/ap_on_bi_ge/us_health_care_overhaulWASHINGTON – Moderate Senate Democrats threatened Sunday to scuttle health-care... more
-
-
Friends,
What an amazing few days on the road this has been. Your spirits have been high, your faith strong and your spine unbendable. I ended my multiday book tour at The Villages with what had been billed as a rally but could be better described as a candid citizen-to-citizen chat.
Today, I have stopped looking for a leader to show us the way out because I have come to realize that the only one who can truly save our country...is us. To change America's course we need to change ourselves, our expectations and our willingness to accept the unacceptable. When we refuse to allow our children to receive a trophy for participation, we are on the road to restoring the meaning of merit in our Republic. When we insist that no one is too big to fail, we will be able to learn from our mistakes, and when we demand that we are self-reliant, we will ensure that others can rely on us, not the government.
There is much to do, much to learn and time is of the essence. While I will be explaining the entire Plan over the coming weeks and months, I did want to give you a preview of some of the highlights:
- Education is key, and not just for our children. To that end, we will be conducting a series of conventions. These will be full-day experiences where you will be immersed in learning about topics ranging from self-reliance, community organizing, the economy and how to be a political force in your own neighborhood and country. The first one will be in Orlando at UCF Arena on March 27th. You will also be able to vote to have a convention in your region by clicking here.
- I have begun meeting with some of the best minds in the country that believe in limited government, maximum freedom and the values of our Founders. I am developing a 100 year plan. I know that the bipartisan corruption in Washington that has brought us to this brink and it will not be defeated easily. It will require unconventional thinking and a radical plan to restore our nation to the maximum freedoms we were supposed to have been protecting, using only the battlefield of ideas.
- All of the above will culminate in The Plan, a book that will provide specific policies, principles and, most importantly, action steps that each of us can take to play a role in this Refounding.
- On August 28, 2010, I ask you, your family and neighbors to join me at the feet of Abraham Lincoln on the National Mall for the unveiling of The Plan and the birthday of a new national movement to restore our great country.
Am I the only one who finds this a little disturbing?Friends,
What an amazing few days on the road this has been. Your spirits have been... more
-
-
By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent – 1 hr 8 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Invoking the memory of Edward M. Kennedy, Democrats united Saturday night to push historic health care legislation past a key Senate hurdle over the opposition of Republicans eager to inflict a punishing defeat on President Barack Obama. There was not a vote to spare.
The 60-39 vote cleared the way for a bruising, full-scale debate beginning after Thanksgiving on the legislation, which is designed to extend coverage to roughly 31 million who lack it, crack down on insurance company practices that deny or dilute benefits and curtail the growth of spending on medical care nationally.
The spectator galleries were full for the unusual Saturday night showdown, and applause broke out briefly when the vote was announced. In a measure of the significance of the moment, senators sat quietly in their seats, standing only when they were called upon to vote.
In the final minutes of a daylong session, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., accused Republicans of trying to stifle a historic debate the nation needed.
"Imagine if, instead of debating whether to abolish slavery, instead of debating whether giving women and minorities the right to vote, those who disagreed had muted discussion and killed any vote," he said.
The Republican leader, Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, said the vote was anything but procedural — casting it as a referendum on the bill itself, which he said would raise taxes, cut Medicare and create a "massive and unsustainable debt."
For all the drama, the result of the Saturday night showdown had been sealed a few hours earlier, when two final Democratic holdouts, Sens. Mary Landrieu of Louisiana and Blanche Lincoln of Arkansas, announced they would join in clearing the way for a full debate.
"It is clear to me that doing nothing is not an option," said Landrieu, who won $100 million in the legislation to help her state pay the costs of health care for the poor.
Lincoln, who faces a tough re-election next year, said the evening vote will "mark the beginning of consideration of this bill by the U.S. Senate, not the end."
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/us_health_care_overhaul
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All 58 Senate Democrats and two independents voted to advance the bill. All 39 votes in opposition were cast by Republicans. GOP Sen. George Voinovich of Ohio was the only senator not to vote. Montana Sen. Max Baucus, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee who has labored on health care for more than a year, flew in from his home state on a government plane for the vote and was returning afterward to be with his ailing mother.By DAVID ESPO, AP Special Correspondent – 1 hr 8 mins ago
WASHINGTON – Invoking... more
-
-
Sweeping health carelegislation has cleared its first hurdle in the U.S. Senate on a party-line vote.
The 60-39 vote clears the way for a historic debate after Thursday's Thanksgiving holiday on the legislation. The measure is designed to extend coverage to an estimated 31 million Americans who lack it and crack down on insurance industry practices that deny benefits.
The vote came in a rare Saturday session in the Senate. Democrats posted 60 votes in a Senate showdown, precisely the number needed to overcome Republican delaying tactics.Sweeping health carelegislation has cleared its first hurdle in the U.S. Senate on a... more
-
-
If you're considering Botox to erase frown lines or liposuction to get rid of love handles, you might want to move fast. The "botax" may be on the way.
The $848 billion health care bill that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., unveiled Wednesday includes a 5 percent tax on cosmetic procedures and surgeries. The tax, which would take effect in January, would raise an estimated $5 billion over the next decade to help pay for extending health care coverage to millions of Americans.
Plastic surgeons decried the proposal, saying the recession has battered their practices and they're just beginning to recover.
About 12 million cosmetic procedures and surgeries — which insurance typically doesn't cover — were performed last year, at a total cost of $10.3 billion, according to the American Society of Plastic Surgeons. The vast majority, 10.4 million, were minimally invasive services such as Botox injections and chemical peels. The most common surgeries were breast augmentation, liposuction and tummy tucks, but all those procedures declined at double-digit rates last year.
New Jersey, where a 6 percent levy on cosmetic procedures and surgeries took effect in 2005, is the only state with such a tax. Doctors there say many patients go to neighboring New York or Pennsylvania for the most expensive procedures to avoid the tax, which has brought in about $11 million a year, only about half as much as expected.
More @ linkIf you're considering Botox to erase frown lines or liposuction to get rid of love... more
-
-
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s hopes of starting debate on health reform got a boost Saturday when Democrats announced that Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) will vote to start the debate.
The news first broke on the Senate Democratic Twitter feed around 12:30 p.m. “Sen Landrieu will vote yes to allow debate. . .” Landrieu was expected to make comments shortly after.
That left Sen. Blanche Lincoln (D-Ark.) as the lone holdout and the would-be 60th vote needed to allow President Barack Obama’s vision of health reform to make its way to the Senate floor after Thanksgiving.
Democrats expect Lincoln to vote yes on the debate – and at this late stage, a no vote would be a devastating blow to Obama’s plans.
Landrieu had telegraphed her yes vote today as the week wore on, even telling POLITICO Friday night that she was “leaning towards” voting to open the debate.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1109/29792.htmlSenate Majority Leader Harry Reid’s hopes of starting debate on health reform got a... more
-
-
I have decided to take on the task of reading the health care bill. It is going to take me awhile however I thought that I would pass along notable items that I find as I go through it. Here are a few points of interest that I have come across so far:
-It will be mandatory for insurance companies to cover most types of preventative care, which could include smoking cessation, heart disease and diabetes prevention along with others.
-Insurance companies will have to submit specific information in regards to their yearly costs to the Secretary of State.
-Hospitals will have to establish and make public a list of all the standard charges for all of their services.
***The most important section that I have come across is the Immediate Action to Preserve and Expand Coverage. This states that within 90 days of enactment there will be a temporary fund set up to cover all people who are uninsured due to a PRE-EXISTING CONDITION. To me this would be reason enough to pass the bill however I am only 40 pages into it so I won't make any kind of final judgment at this point.***
Keep in mind that I am not a lawyer and this is a very long document (2074 pages) so I'm not exactly studying it. I am only passing along items of interest, if you want to analyze the document you should probably read it yourself.
I encourage everyone to make your voices heard in regards to this health care bill, regardless of your opinion this issue is too important to let others decide this for you.I have decided to take on the task of reading the health care bill. It is going to... more
-
-
Senators Reid, Baucus, and Wyden announced today a healthcare amendment to the Senate bill that would allow people to choose a public option even if they have employer based insurance. This is a switch from the original public option that only is available to people who don't have an employer that offers insurance.
“As I have long said, empowering Americans to choose the health insurance that works best for them and their family is the single best way to hold health insurance companies accountable,” Wyden said. “While this is just one step in the direction of guaranteeing choices for all Americans, it is a major step because, for the first time, it introduces the concept of individual choice to a marketplace where it has long been foreign. This is a significant step toward real reform.”
This opens up the proposed insurance exchange to considerably more people. The CBO estimated this type of option opens up health care to an addition one million. Yet the U.S. has over 50 million without health care coverage. It seems we are chipping away at the number ever so slowly. Why not implement medicare for all Americans. That would solve everything.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/68897-sen-wyden-wins-big-healthcare-concessionSenators Reid, Baucus, and Wyden announced today a healthcare amendment to the Senate... more
-
-
During his November 19 Fox News program, Glenn Beck falsely claimed that under the Senate health care bill, "All of the benefits of this bill don't kick in until when? You don't get a single benefit until 2014." He later added: "Guess what, you're not going to get jack for five whole years" after the bill is passed.
Fact: Numerous benefits from the health care reform bill would "be available in the first year after enactment" of the bill.
According to a document put forth by Senate Democrats summarizing the "Immediate Benefits" of The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act , the bill includes numerous benefits that would "be available in the first year after enactment" of the bill. Indeed, Washington Post dot com blogger Ezra Klein published the following list of benefits that the Senate bill would provide "before 2014":
1) Eliminating lifetime limits, and cap annual limits, on health-care benefits. In other words, if you get an aggressive cancer and your treatment costs an extraordinary amount, your insurer can't suddenly remind you that subparagraph 15 limited your yearly expenses to $30,000, and they're not responsible for anything above that.
2) No more rescissions.
3) Some interim help for people who have preexisting conditions, though the bill does not instantly ban discrimination on preexisting conditions.
4) Requiring insurers to cover preventive care and immunizations.
5) Allowing young adults to stay on their parent's insurance plan until age 26.
6) Developing uniform coverage documents so people can compare different insurance policies in an apples-to-apples fashion.
7) Forcing insurers to spend 80 percent of all premium dollars on medical care (75 percent in the individual market), thus capping the money that can go toward administration, profits, etc.
8) Creating an appeals process and consumer advocate for insurance customers.
9) Developing a temporary re-insurance program to help early retirees (folks over 55) afford coverage.
10) Creating an internet portal to help people shop for and compare coverage.
11) Miscellaneous administrative simplification stuff.
12) Banning discrimination based on salary (i.e., where a company that's not self-insured makes only some full-time workers eligible for coverage. [Ezra Klein's Washington Post dot com blog 11/19/09]
http://mediamatters.org/research/200911190051During his November 19 Fox News program, Glenn Beck falsely claimed that under the... more
-
-
-
On his November 19 radio show, Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed that undocumented immigrants "are covered" under the recently passed House health care bill. In fact, the Affordable Health Care for America Act (H.R. 3962) stipulates that those "not lawfully present" may not receive subsidies to purchase insurance.
Follow link for more information:
http://mediamatters.org/research/200911190040On his November 19 radio show, Rush Limbaugh falsely claimed that undocumented... more
-
-
Senators Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) and Joseph Lieberman (I-Connecticut) say they do not support the health care legislation in its current form. Both have issues with the government run insurance option, or public option. Nelson stated that he would support an opt-in system as opposed to an opt-out one. Lieberman on the other hand wouldn't go into specifics.
At the same time Senate Democrats are courting Maine GOP Senators Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe, both of whom have said they are open to supporting a bill with some sort of "trigger" or a weaker public option.
While centrists were threatening to filibuster the current bill, Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio), an ardent supporter of the public option said "In the end, I don't want four Democratic senators dictating to the other 56 of us,"
To top all of these statements off, Michael Bennett (D-Colorado), a fill in for Secretary of the interior Ken Salazar said that he'd sacrifice his seat for Health Care Reform.
Despite all of the posturing Mr. Schumer (D-New York) predicted that “at the end of the day” Democrats would unite behind an amended version of the bill and “everyone is going to be together." He added "I think now the wind is at our back. There’s a real momentum. And the good news here is we still have a very diverse caucus but every Democrat, from the most liberal to the most conservative, very much wants to get a bill.”
-------------------------
Its important to note that Mr. Schumer is the third most powerful Democratic Senator, he heads up the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, which means he's the one who decides how to allocate funds come election time.
My perspective: Its seems the debate has shifted from whether the public option will be in the bill to what type of public option will be in the bill. At the very least, a "super trigger" will be included. It seems increasingly likely that the final bill (Produced by the House-Senate Conference Committee) will have a government run insurance option.
Prediction: Final legislation will be signed into law by President Obama's State of the Union address.
Centrist Senator article-
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/health/policy/23talkshows.html?_r=1&hp
Dems focus on Maine Senators -
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/23/health/policy/23health.html?hpSenators Ben Nelson (D-Nebraska) and Joseph Lieberman (I-Connecticut) say they do not... more
-
-
NOW (National Organization for Women) warns that the Senate will vote on an amendment similar to Stupak-Pitts that would prevent millions of women from obtaining insurance coverage for abortion under their version of health care reform, S1796. Is that the bill number or the year they intend to regress to?
It appears advocates will use this amendment to hold health care reform hostage unless this affront against women is included. http://www.capwiz.com/now/issues/alert/?alertid=14342106
This comes on the heals of the passed house Stupak-Pitts, anti-abortion amendment and the more recent mammogram media blitz tactic that blamed the White House for an independent private sector task force recommendation. It appears the health care insurance industry and their friends in Congress are out to target women in an all out effort to discredit health care reform. http://lafilmonline.com/oitsf/?p=74
NOW posted the following to it members on their website:
______________________________________________________
Reportedly, Sens. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.) and Bob Casey (R-Penn.) may offer a version of the Stupak-Pitts Amendment to be attached to the Senate bill. That means, in all likelihood, if the Senate adopts this harmful amendment, it will remain in the final Senate-House conference bill and become law. Alternatively, a modified variation of Stupak-Pitts could be incorporated into the bill. Either way, millions of women lose -- big time.
Please Take Action NOW!
The Stupak-Pitts amendment explained:
* The ban on abortion coverage in insurance would apply to both the proposed public option and to private health insurance plans sold in the new regional health insurance exchanges. It is estimated that some 36 million uninsured persons would be purchasing insurance policies through new exchanges and would be eligible for federal affordability subsidies.
* Health insurers may not sell plans that cover abortion to customers who are paying without a subsidy, if even just one person who is receiving the federal affordability credits (the subsidy) were to purchase a plan. In other words, even if you are paying 100 percent of your insurance costs, abortion coverage would not be available in your plan if anyone with affordability credits joins the same plan.
* Women may purchase a separate abortion "rider" for coverage, though many doubt that these riders would be offered by the insurance companies.
* Small companies (fewer than 100 employees) would also likely purchase health insurance through the exchange, but if any of their employees received affordability credits no abortion coverage could be included.
* Eighty-seven percent of employer-based insurance plans now cover abortion services, but if employers withdraw coverage and send their employees to the health insurance exchanges, those employees would likely lose abortion coverage under these new prohibitions.
There may be a modified version of this harmful amendment that is included in the Senate health care reform bill that will be debated next week. We want to make sure that Stupak-Pitts language is not used and that no variation of this harmful amendment is passed. Please send a message to your senators that you oppose any restrictions on insurance coverage of abortion. Thank you for all the work you do for women's rights.
________________________________________________________NOW (National Organization for Women) warns that the Senate will vote on an amendment... more
-
-
WASHINGTON - Congressional budget crunchers Thursday said the Democrats' latest health care plan would hold down federal red ink for at least a 20-year stretch, an assessment that boosted the bill's advocates as the Senate moved gingerly toward a historic debate.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office said that Majority Leader Harry Reid's 10-year, $848-billion bill would produce a net reduction of $130 billion in federal deficits in its first decade. Perhaps more significantly, the legislation would continue to give back over the next 10 years and beyond, the budget umpires said, because "added revenues and costs savings would probably be greater" than the cost of covering uninsured Americans.
The budget office put a big asterisk on its forecast, using words like "imprecision" and "uncertainty" to describe the long-range projection. It noted that, overall, health care spending remains on an unsustainable path.
However, the bill would not make matters any worse, and maybe even a little better.
With President Barack Obama pledging to tamp down ruinous health care costs, Democrats took the new CBO estimates to the bank, while skipping over the caveats. Preparing for a noontime rally with supporters, Reid, D-Nev., said the legislation would "save lives, save money and save Medicare."
The CBO said Reid's bill would extend coverage to 94 percent of eligible Americans, after subsidies to make premiums more affordable start flowing in 2014. That's one year later than in the House Democratic bill — and well into the next presidential term. Postponing the subsidies by one year allowed Reid to offer somewhat more generous assistance to defray the cost of insurance premiums.
Facing a key floor vote Saturday, Republicans remained unflinching in their opposition.
"Now it's America's turn, and this will not be a short debate," warned Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the Republican leader. "Higher premiums, tax increases and Medicare cuts to pay for more government. The American people know that is not reform."
Reid's bill relies on cuts in future Medicare spending to cover costs, as well as on higher payroll taxes for the well-off, a new levy on patients undergoing elective cosmetic surgery, and a laundry list of other taxes, fees and penalties.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34034975/ns/politics-health_care_reform/WASHINGTON - Congressional budget crunchers Thursday said the Democrats' latest health... more
-
-
This is insane. I can't believe our government is this blind, even if you do like the idea of single-payer government insurance, you can admit this is wrong.This is insane. I can't believe our government is this blind, even if you do like the... more
-
-
Senate Democrats made a big step toward comprehensive health care reform Wednesday night as Sen. Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) unveiled a bill that merges the two plans that passed the health and finance committees.
With the House having already passed its own bill, Congress is now closer to achieving health care reform than it has ever been in the six decades that Democrats have pursued it.
"We're now down to the week we've been waiting for for a long time," said Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) after emerging from a meeting of Senate Democrats.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/11/18/senate-dems-close-in-on-r_n_363094.htmlSenate Democrats made a big step toward comprehensive health care reform Wednesday... more
-
-
WASHINGTON – Democratic leaders in the Senate unveiled their proposal on Wednesday for overhauling the health care system, outlining landmark legislation that they said would cover most of the uninsured while reducing the federal budget deficit.
Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, said at an evening news conference that the legislation, which represents President Obama’s signature domestic initiative and will be subject to lengthy and heated debate on the Senate floor, would impose new regulations on insurers, extend coverage to 31 million people who currently do not have any and add new benefits to Medicare.
But he said the bill, despite a price tag of $849 billion over 10 years, would still reduce projected budget deficits by $127 billion over a decade because the costs would be more than offset by new taxes and reductions in government spending, particularly on Medicare.
Democrats expressed confidence that they would have the votes necessary to move forward when the legislation hits its first test in the Senate, probably on Saturday, in the form of a procedural hurdle that will require a united front from all 58 Democrats and the two independents aligned with them.
Mr. Reid wrote the legislation over the past several weeks, combining portions of two previous bills adopted by Senate committees. The House passed its version of the health care legislation earlier this month.
The official cost analysis of the new Senate bill by the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office also was not immediately available, but if the cost projection holds up, it would meet Mr. Obama’s requirement that the bill’s costs be held to about $900 billion.
Calling the bill “impressive,” the White House chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel, said: “This legislation meets the president’s objectives, provides protection from insurance companies, contains true cost controls and extends coverage to working families.”
“We all know that this legislation is tremendously important,” Mr. Reid said at the news conference. “Why? Because it saves lives, it saves money.”
The measure includes a government-run insurance plan, or public option, with a provision allowing states to opt out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/health/policy/19health.htmlWASHINGTON – Democratic leaders in the Senate unveiled their proposal on Wednesday... more
-
-
The Senate's top Democrat on Wednesday prepared to unveil a new health care bill that aims to meet President Barack Obama's goal of expanding coverage without adding to the federal deficit.
The Congressional Budget Office estimated the measure would cost $849 billion, reduce the number of uninsured Americans by 31 million and cut the federal deficit by $127 billion over a decade, NBC News reported.
The bill had been stalled in the Senate for weeks as Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada awaited the CBO report.
more at link...
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34017224/ns/politics-health_care_reform/The Senate's top Democrat on Wednesday prepared to unveil a new health care bill that... more
-
-
As luck would have it, I had my first mammogram right before the new federal guidelines appeared stating that women my age might as well skip the whole thing for another decade.
Like most women my age, I know too many people who have been diagnosed with breast cancer to be cavalier about the possibility. And while I didn't relish the idea of getting "squished," I felt like I was being good by overcoming my dread of the whole topic--not to mention the desire to avoid a misdiagnosis or, worse, bad news--and going in for my appointment.
I got a free nail file, and a lot of praise from the technician, who reinforced my sense that I was doing the right thing.
I particularly appreciated the heads-up that, as a first-time patient, I would likely be called back for follow-up pictures, but not to worry--this was standard protocol until a patient has a history of mammograms and the radiologists can identify normal lumps and distinguish these from abnormalities.
My mother, I found out late, spent my college graduation worrying about what finally turned out to be a benign lump, though she was left hanging by doctors who led her to suspect the worst but didn't give her more information for weeks.
Apparently, breast cancer screeners have become more sensitive to needless stress and are doing everything they can to make mammography more pleasant, overcome women's reluctance to get diagnosed, and promote early screening.
To little avail, as it turns out. The benefits of all that early screening--two-thirds of women in their 40s have received a mammogram in the last two years--turns out to be statistically very small.
The United States Preventive Service Task Force--a panel of medical experts appointed by the Department of Health and Human Services--has decided that, contrary to every bit of breast-cancer-awareness propaganda we've been bombarded with for the last seven years--there is real harm in overscreening, including extreme stress, unnecessary further tests, and overtreatment.
The report, released this week, prompted a lot of controversy right away. Everyone seems to know someone who has been diagnosed with breast cancer at a young age, and, thanks to early detection, been treated and recovered from the deadly disease.
According to the task force, cancer death is prevented for one in every 1,904 women in their forties who are screened for 10 years. But mathematical models of risk mean nothing next to the emotional impact of real-life stories of women we know. If you can do something to save your life, why wouldn't you?
As a society, much of what we do about breast cancer, as Barbara Ehrenriech points out in her new book Bright Sided, is more about shoring up women emotionally than actually attacking the disease in the most effective possible way.
The support groups and cancer runs and pink ribbons and, as Ehrenreich acidly observes, the teddy bears and other infantilizing breast-cancer-survivorship paraphernalia, seem to provide comfort mainly by reassuring women that we are good girls if we follow the prescribed regimens of screening and, if called for, treatments, and keep a cheerful, compliant attitude about it.
You can see the appeal of this approach. Cancer is a terrifying disease and the combination of solidarity and reassurance and the feeling that we are part of a team, led by competent, expert authorities, that is actively doing something to combat the threat, is a hell of a lot better than feeling helpless and afraid.
No wonder the new guidelines from the Preventive Service Task Force caused such and uproar.
The American Cancer Society has flat-out refused to accept them. And many women and doctors say they will plow right ahead with annual mammograms despite the panel's recommendations. The web is abuzz with rumors that cost-cutting is the real reason for the new federal guidelines, and women will die to save money on potentially life-saving screenings.
But overscreening and overtreatment are as much of a plague in the U.S. medical system as cost-cutting measures. And looking at breast cancer screening rationally, as the federal panel has done, makes a lot of sense.
Just because it gives people a feeling of psychological empowerment to do something does not mean promoting the hell out of dubiously effective screening is the right thing to do.
Aside from an irrational avoidance reflex, it turns out there are good reasons women might not be inclined to get mammograms.
much more at link...
http://www.progressive.org/rc111809.htmlAs luck would have it, I had my first mammogram right before the new federal... more
-
-
While some Americans believe that the way to pay for healthcare reform is to increase taxes on the rich, this strategy could hurt businesses at a time when the economy is already dragging.While some Americans believe that the way to pay for healthcare reform is to increase... more
-
-
Jenime
-
added this
-
5 days ago
- |
