Oh ho Ho

Nov. 19th, 2009 08:27 am
veronica_rich: (McCoy and Sulu)
[personal profile] veronica_rich
Listening to the news this morning, there was a Republican talking about how a government advisory panel's recommendation that women don't get mammograms until age 50 instead of 40, saying this is how health care will be restricted under a health care reform law. (Let us put aside for a moment that I think it's boneheaded to advise women to have LESS screening. Just for the record.) He then says the problem is how the govt. is getting between women and their doctors.

It doesn't take much probably to guess my reaction to this. You mean how you and your party want to interfere with a woman's access to abortion and birth control? Honestly, do these Repubs think, or just parrot?

Date: 2009-11-19 04:21 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] moonbeamdancer.livejournal.com
My mother is 45. She had breast cancer at 31. Thank you Republicans, for suggesting that people (namely women) not take care of themselves and scaring them in the process. I'd love to have access to health care and not have to worry (as much) about how I'm going to pay for it or worry about my job (as much) if I'm truely sick and need time off.

But then these idiots come along...

Date: 2009-11-19 05:13 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] veronica-rich.livejournal.com
The task force that made the new recommendations (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5j4W_qistYWRU8CC4dCvvMRJv3SVAD9C2K98G0) is organized under the auspices of Health and Human Services - whether that was done under Obama or the previous administration, I don't know. The fact is, the advice is being issued under this administration. Plus, the HHS secretary says this panel is independent (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/18/AR2009111802545.html?hpid=moreheadlines), so in any case, you probably can't blame Republicans for this one. (At least not until there's information to that effect. Might even be able to blame Democrats. I dunno.)

But MY larger point is, this isn't the first time I've heard this argument against the public option from a Republican against it (are there any in office for it?). There was a lot of this early being tossed around, how the government shouldn't interfere with patients and doctors and their relationships. BUT IT'S OKAY TO PREVENT OR RESTRICT ACCESS TO ABORTION AND/OR BIRTH CONTROL OPTIONS - in fact, we're going to tread dangerously close to women's rights and insert language in the health care bill that prohibits any of those funds going for abortion? (Gee, I sure hope no poor woman giving birth needs an emergency abortion to save her life. See, maybe it DOES provide for this - but I'm betting it doesn't. Welcome to the "partial birth abortion" debate - which is maddening, since THERE IS NO SUCH KIND OF ABORTION.) I'm sort of mad nobody in a high profile is bringing this up and pointing it out on a regular basis.

Date: 2009-11-19 04:46 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pktaxwench.livejournal.com
As someone who was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 30, I question this.

However, statistically, most women aren't at risk until an early age. I think, considering how agonizing they are, waiting until 50 for ROUTINE SCREENING mamograms is just fine. But when issues are suspected, and a doctor thinks it's medically necessary, insurance will still pay for it.

Of course, women should be doing their self exams. So many don't. The boob smasher isn't the best detector.

Date: 2009-11-19 04:47 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pktaxwench.livejournal.com
*late not early. Must proofread and not be petting kitties.

Date: 2009-11-19 05:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] veronica-rich.livejournal.com
But you know, some women don't know when they've found something abnormal. Some have odd nodules that come and go but aren't dangerous - but what if that changes at some point and it feels the same, but it's not?

I still think a combination is the best way to detect early cancer. Catch it early, it can be better treated. I wouldn't stand in the way of anything that does this.

Date: 2009-11-20 10:33 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pktaxwench.livejournal.com
So, how often do you go for that ever so pleasant experience?

Date: 2009-11-21 08:36 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] veronica-rich.livejournal.com
No mammograms yet; I'm not 40. I went almost 10 years with no annual exam because I didn't have insurance, but I have gone the last couple of years for appointments.

Date: 2009-11-19 08:44 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] the-dark-snack.livejournal.com
I honestly don't think that last week's South Park (Dances with Smurfs) could have been better timed.

Date: 2009-11-20 04:41 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] keechakatt.livejournal.com
I'm going to my first mamogram tomorrow, and this was strictly on the prodding of an appointment setter. I honestly at 44 thought I was too young to get one.

As for not allowing women to have access to one until age 50 well, I think that is foolish as well as all the anti-abortion clauses. I'm not big advocate on abortion. However with that being said, I am also not the type of person who feels they have a right to dictate what choices other people make. The option should be available to them should they chose it.

Date: 2009-11-21 12:29 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] a-silver-rose.livejournal.com
The way I heard it, the panel was recommending the delay of mammograms until age 50, with the exception of women with a family history and other high-risk groups. This it the first I'd heard of the delay being linked to health care reform.

Profile

veronica_rich: (Default)
veronica_rich

October 2020

S M T W T F S
    123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 31

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Aug. 2nd, 2025 08:33 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios