Cullis on the Mamography Controversy
Nov 21st, 2009 by David Anderson
November 17, 2009 Contact: Dan Miller, Media Director
CANDIDATE ENDORSES MAMOGRAMS
FOR WOMEN’S BREAST CANCER SCREENING
Republican Congressional candidate Fred Cullis was shocked to learn the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) had, on Monday, recommended against routine mammograms to screen for breast cancer in women aged 40-49 and over 74.
This comes despite the fact that AHRQ’s previously recommended routine screenings begin at age 40 and noted experts’ concern of evidence that tumors grow more rapidly in the 40-49 age group. AHRQ also claims no benefit is seen for routine screenings in women over 74.
“We know early detection of cancers can lead to better outcomes. Prevention is key to saving lives and reducing the overall cost of healthcare. Why then is this agency of the U.S. Department of Health & Social Services now advocating against routine screenings?” asks Cullis.
“Is this a first step in rationing healthcare?” he asked earlier today. “AHRQ’s recommendations are often incorporated into Evidence Based Practice Guidelines used by healthcare providers and insurance underwriters. It leads me to wonder if this is just the first round of belt tightening in an effort to reduce costs by private insurers and the federal government via Medicare and Medicaid. Could this be part of an overall strategy by the Obama administration and the Democratic controlled Congress to help pay for their proposed healthcare reform initiatives?” he questioned.
“In recent months we’ve heard lots of debate about healthcare reform. One concern deals with the rationing of healthcare. I’m here to tell you that this move by the Obama administration may become a first step at rationing mammography as a breast cancer screening tool, and I have had enough!” said Congressional candidate Fred Cullis.
“I stand solidly with the American Cancer Society, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Delaware Breast Cancer Coalition and numerous other healthcare organizations in opposing this almost laughable recommendation by our “enlightened representatives in Washington. I promise the voters of Delaware that when elected to Congress in 2010 Fred Cullis will protect your right to mammograms and other life saving medical care!.” pledged Cullis.
#30#
Ignoring for a moment the fact that the AHRQ can’t make healthcare policy:
For the sake of full disclosure, the AHRQ site states, in full:
The USPSTF recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and take patient context into account, including the patient’s values regarding specific benefits and harms.
Beneath this appears the following:
“So, what does this mean if you are a woman in your 40s? You should talk to your doctor and make an informed decision about whether a mammography is right for you based on your family history, general health, and personal values.”
Diana Petitti, MD, MPH
Vice Chair, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
November 19, 2009
So let’s be clear: the AHRQ is NOT advocating healthcare rationing. They are simply stating a general rule of thumb, subject to each woman’s reasoned review of her own situation. If that review leads individuals to pursue mammograms prior to age 50, then the option still exists, under the terms of their recommendation
And so goes the latest outrage by the Radical Right. Nevermind that insurance companies would — for years — deny such coverage as not medically necessary. Only when most states finally passed laws mandating coverage for certain cancer screenings was this issue actually addresses.
Again, it goes to show the hypocrisy. When it’s the insurance companies making decisions against the healthcare of patients, then it’s just “free-market capitalism” at work. But when a toothless government agency makes a observation, it’s socialism run-amok. HIGHlarious!
As much as I would like to debunk the conspiracy theorists… the thing is, HR3200 defines the “essential benefits package” as including preventive services as defined by this panel.
Breast cancer advocates and their supporters should show up in force during reconciliation hearings.
Mike -
Yes, absolutely correct.
Cullis et al clearly will use whatever means possible, simply to gain office.
So much for new ideas and bringing change to Washington.
Just another middle aged male, who has achieved some modicum of success in the private sector, seeking new conquests – in this case Washington.
And exploiting anyone or anthing to get there.
It is time to debunk the apologists of rationing.
1. 48 states mandate this coverage based upon the American Cancer Society standards. In which of those states run by conservatives or liberals did the radical right oppose this coverage? Mike Mathews, your argument is specious. Most insurance companies covered it anyway. It was only a few that did not and we saw what happen to the dissenters. They were condemned as being against women. When the government does it, it is alright with you all? That is the only source of hypocrisy here.
2. One of the central arguments was cost based. There is no negative health consequences if you get the screening. The mental health argument of stress that comes from waiting for a biopsy that comes back negative is inane. The radiation agrument has been debunked decades ago and was only a throw away. The only serious argument was a cost one.
3. That means that it is all about rationing. The fact that women under 40 are 1/7 as likely to be affected as those over is still a very significant number. Implementing those guidelines would kill more women than most diseases do in total. If they recommendedf every two years until 50, that would fit with some studies. This idea of not teaching self exams and no testing contradicts the science in their own study. It would kill 1 in 1900 women.
If that is not something to be outraged about, I am in the wrong country.
David,
Fine job of developing a faulty premise to its incorrect conclusion.
If you look at the quoted section above:
“So, what does this mean if you are a woman in your 40s? You should talk to your doctor and make an informed decision about whether a mammography is right for you based on your family history, general health, and personal values.”
Diana Petitti, MD, MPH
Vice Chair, U.S. Preventive Services Task Force
November 19, 2009
The decision to have a mammogram is left completely in the hands of the individual. Remember, this is a *recommendation* based on large scale studies, not a *prohibition*. The choice is still left in the hands of the individual. Get a grip.
Cancer does not care about political registration or voting habits.
Cancers among women in their 40′s tend to be fast growing and can be missed by mammograms conducted less than a year ago. Also, if you have breast cancer pre menopause your incidence for another episode goes from the usual 1 in 9 to 2 in 9, or double.
A bit of personal experience comes with this post.
This medical recommendation will be one of the type we will see a lot of in the future.
Mike Protack
The AHRQ members are appointed by Department of Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius. I would imagine that their studies are funded by the Obama administration. They also give out grant money from the stimulus funding. There’s not one oncologist on the panel. Anyone who thinks their “study” didn’t have predetermined guidelines as the outcome is delusional.
There is a history of breast cancer in my family. Many of them found it through self-exams between yearly mammograms. To think that this panel would recommend not teaching women how to perform self-exams, and to put off regular mammograms until after age 50 – and then only every other year, makes me so angry I can’t express it.
To put money before a life is as disgusting as it gets.
The only good news is that this panel only has influence not power. If they get their way, that will change.
CANDIDATE ENDORSES BREASTS
That’s what I see, and it’s one hell of a platform because I like breasts too.