Skip to main content

View Diary: Mammography screening in the general population has been proven not to save lives (261 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  PS: Speaking as someone whose cancer was found... (4+ / 0-)

    Okay, I was outside the age range - I was about 54 when a mammogram found calcifications indicating Ductal Carcinoma in Situ, which was removed via surgery and then treated with radiation. But it never would have been found by palpitation, as there was no lump yet. So it's hard for me to understand that I needn't have bothered....

    "I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father Jor-El to save the Planet Earth."

    by lesliet on Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 08:09:01 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The problem with DCIS (11+ / 0-)

      is that it won't kill anyone -- but if it turns into a more lethal tumor it could. We don't know whether that is a common occurence because we treat aggressively in almost every case. And some people die from the treatments that might have been unnecessarily. Unfortunately because aggressive treatment is now the standard of care it is impossible to do a study to see whether there is benefit to it.

      All my IP addresses have been banned from Redstate.com.

      by charliehall on Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 08:12:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  This does show how hard it's going to be (15+ / 0-)

        to cut health care costs. If people are unwilling to give up a test that has been shown to have no benefit... and even worse, see this as some sort of plot against women.

        And we're all a little more sensitive in these days of the Stupak amendment....

        "I was actually born on Krypton and sent here by my father Jor-El to save the Planet Earth."

        by lesliet on Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 08:16:47 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  very well said (5+ / 0-)

          If we are to have health care for all, with serious government funding; women must have some say about what WE want for health care. That means if we want abortion to at least the first trimester, without questions, on demand; we should get it. At any age, and without any parental consent being required, because of all the parental RAPE going on, to say the very least.

          Meanwhile, we are to worry about whether we have the right or money or should pay taxes to have our tits checked endlessly, lest they might maybe possibly perhaps have a little something that might be cancerous and have to get cut out, and then we would not be so pretty.

          Need I say more?

          The whole point of separation of church and state was about protecting the people from the church. It wasn't about protecting churches.

          by mieprowan on Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 08:24:04 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Early trimester abortions also (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            SoCalSal

            aren't very expensive. Medical abortions can be done in any doctor's office.

            I'm more concerned about having medically necessary late trimester abortions covered, and about having save early trimester abortions available at all.

            All my IP addresses have been banned from Redstate.com.

            by charliehall on Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 04:35:20 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  The great nontroversy in the media wurlitzer (5+ / 0-)

          Seems to be designed to shore up the "Obama wants to kills us with his death panels" meme.

          Remember: these people NEVER give up. They always target the opponent's strength to turn it into a weakness (thus sensible, science and fact-based medical decision-making that saves us all money and has no negative effect on overall health = death panels).

          Cancer is a particularly effective boogie man - think of it as the Al Queda of health care...

      •  DCIS WONT KILL??? (0+ / 0-)

        Can I get some of that weed you're smoking???

        DCIS can indeed kill. Undiagnosed DCIS will metastisize over time.

        Just because it is in-situ doesn't mean it cannot move through and into surrounding ducts and tissue over time...undiagnosed.

        •  We actually don't know (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          lakehillsliberal

          whether most DCIS tumors will eventually metastasize, because they are all aggressively treated today.

          All my IP addresses have been banned from Redstate.com.

          by charliehall on Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 04:36:15 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Do all doctors recommend aggressive treatment... (0+ / 0-)

            are their any reputable doctors that take a more realistic approach and give women options of watching these tumors or is everything...cut, chemo and radiate.  

            "When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

            by lakehillsliberal on Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 10:02:51 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Well of course there would be some who are (0+ / 0-)

              more reasonable. More holistic docs. Docs who make a point of being reasonable, patient centered, health-centered. Vs "liability centered."

              Holistic docs even have an association, the AHMA, have conferences, etc. Really great people. I've been to a number of their conferences. They write books, too. Then there are naturopaths, acupuncturists, osteopaths, etc.

              The AMA are the cutters, the alarmists. What can you do? There's always someone in a crowd who sees things negatively.    :-)

              This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

              by AllisonInSeattle on Sat Nov 21, 2009 at 12:05:47 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

    •  It is another part of the findings which are even (9+ / 0-)

      more concerning...some breast abnormalities disappear without treatment so we may be treating things as cancer which are not actually be cancer so our breast cancer survival information may be extremely contaminated.

      "When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

      by lakehillsliberal on Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 08:13:44 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  there are some cancers (7+ / 0-)

        that may go away, or may get worse. That makes it even more difficult, for all cancers. It's not black and white, it's not easily predictable.

        The whole point of separation of church and state was about protecting the people from the church. It wasn't about protecting churches.

        by mieprowan on Wed Nov 18, 2009 at 08:14:49 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  cancer doesnt "go away" (0+ / 0-)

          are you serious? That's a very dangerous comment. Cancer doesnt just "go away"

          Cancer will kill eventually--unless you're 88 and have prostate ca, in which case you'll likely die of "old age" instead of the cancer.

          •  You have never seen cancer go into remission or (0+ / 0-)

            tumors disappear? Ever...

            "When fascism comes to America, it'll be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross." Sinclair Lewis

            by lakehillsliberal on Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 10:04:37 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  spontaneous remission is real (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            AllisonInSeattle

            and does happen.

            I understand your concerns. We don't really know very much about cancer, and that makes all of this scary.

            Treatment has dangers, not treating has dangers. Screening has risks, not screening has risks. It's a numbers game, and that's hard to come to grips with. No one likes to be considered as a number. But if we are to have a reasonable health care system, we must look at statistics.

            What's important is that we ensure they are real and unbiased.

            The whole point of separation of church and state was about protecting the people from the church. It wasn't about protecting churches.

            by mieprowan on Fri Nov 20, 2009 at 10:56:42 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

          •  Well there are many cases of remission happening (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            mieprowan

            I wonder about your model of cancer, if it conforms to the more modern version I heard (albeit some 10-20 years ago).

            Namely, that our body produces cancer cells reasonably frequently, and our immune system kills them. Out with the rest of the trash they go.

            Sometimes also, cancer cells get a bit of a start, small tumor or whatever... and then the immune system does them in.

            Other times, the cancer cells get a start, and for some reason, or for a specific reason, begin to grow. Sometimes slowly, sometimes rapidly.

            Sometimes they kill people, sometimes the people die of old age, with a small tumor somewhere inside them, discovered on autopsy, that wasn't really growing or threatening their survival.

            You sound like (maybe not, but this is just email), you sound like you see cancer as black or white, on or off, ROAR or nothing. Killer or nothing.

            My understanding is that it's much more nuanced in form, function, results.

            We all have one guarantee, that we're going to die. I wonder if people who are highly fearful of cancer, or highly focused on the "evils" of cancer -- might instead be just fearful of death, period.

            When my father was dying, his doctor was doing rounds in the hospital, trailing a little intern. When we, my father's family and the doctor talked, I thought she was going to need to be de-fibbed. She looked ready to code out at any moment. One got the impression that she'd become a doc to "save people from dying", vs to "make their lives better, to keep them healthier as long as they'd live". Clearly, the fact that we were all discussing death, clearly the fact that it was inevitable, was scaring her, making her far beyond uncomfortable.

            I wonder if people who think cancer should be stopped for everyone, have seen people live with dementia for years at the end of their lives. Or have spent time with Alzheimer's patients. Both those situations, in my personal opinion, make cancer look downright helpful and friendly.

            YMMV -- I'm fairly sure it does.

            This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

            by AllisonInSeattle on Sat Nov 21, 2009 at 12:18:02 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  And some cancers do relatively nothing (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        sngmama, phonegery

        Just set, don't grow.

        We might grab a bit of sanity about it all.

        Or not.

        This health care system is a moral atrocity. Dr. Ralphdog

        by AllisonInSeattle on Thu Nov 19, 2009 at 12:22:14 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site