Mammograms and firearms... perpendicular rationing

The Mass DOT's online renewal "forgot" to send me my renewed registration this year, and I needed to pay $25 to get another copy although it was the state's fault. My wife is waiting for approval of amended federal returns submitted 6+ months ago. I suspect a request for mammography approval under the newly proposed system would result in a 6+ month delayed disapproval for a vasectomy.
 
Last edited:
Kalahari said:
To be fair, you then have to factor in the cost of biopsies for all the false-positives.
Click to expand...

The percentage of false positives is not really that big a factor, but even if you factor it in with an arbitrary 3-4x average mammogram cost, it doesn't compare with the high cost of treatment.

My personal belief is that O'care is a mathematical model to address the problem with too many people collecting Social Security and Medicare. Huge numbers will die before turning 65 (Medicare) or 66-67-xx to collect Social Security and thus it won't go bankrupt as quickly.

O is not stupid and his minions are cold, cunning strategists . . . thus I believe this stuff is all intentional.
 
LenS said:
The percentage of false positives is not really that big a factor, but even if you factor it in with an arbitrary 3-4x average mammogram cost, it doesn't compare with the high cost of treatment.
Click to expand...

I had heard that 98% of postiives are false-positives.
 
LenS said:
The percentage of false positives is not really that big a factor, but even if you factor it in with an arbitrary 3-4x average mammogram cost, it doesn't compare with the high cost of treatment.

My personal belief is that O'care is a mathematical model to address the problem with too many people collecting Social Security and Medicare. Huge numbers will die before turning 65 (Medicare) or 66-67-xx to collect Social Security and thus it won't go bankrupt as quickly.

O is not stupid and his minions are cold, cunning strategists . . . thus I believe this stuff is all intentional.
Click to expand...

Bullseye!
 
LenS said:
The percentage of false positives is not really that big a factor, but even if you factor it in with an arbitrary 3-4x average mammogram cost, it doesn't compare with the high cost of treatment.

My personal belief is that O'care is a mathematical model to address the problem with too many people collecting Social Security and Medicare. Huge numbers will die before turning 65 (Medicare) or 66-67-xx to collect Social Security and thus it won't go bankrupt as quickly.

O is not stupid and his minions are cold, cunning strategists . . . thus I believe this stuff is all intentional.
Click to expand...

Holy mother of god.
Obama is committing mass murder to prop up SSI??? [shocked]
[banghead]

Socialized health care is a monumental mistake, but I don't think they intend to kill people. The answer here is really simple. They are arrogant control freaks who think that they can do better. But instead of going to work for a health ins company or starting one of their own they want to use the hammer of thor to pound compliance to some ideal world they believe can exist.
  • That is folly.
  • That is arrogant.
  • That is going to backfire.
  • That will lower levels of care.
  • That will cause some people to die who wouldn't have.
But to think that last one is not only intended but designed to prop up another part of socialized care is insane.

Hickson had a great post with a great, fact filled argument why these arrogant control freaks are hypocrites. It was a good thread for a while.
[grenade]
 
terraformer said:
Holy mother of god.
Obama is committing mass murder to prop up SSI??? [shocked]

But to think that last one is not only intended but designed to prop up another part of socialized care is insane.
Click to expand...

SS was never intended to provide benefits for people for forty more years. SS was enacted when the average lifespan at birth for all Americans was 61.7. Today, it is 77.8. That is a 16 year difference in AVERAGES.

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0005148.html

When the bill was signed in 1935, 62 was the minimum age you could collect benefits because the men who wrote the bill did not foresee the average life expectancy to increase like it has over the past 60 years.

Technology has greatly increased our standard of living, our knowledge and practice of medicine and as a result has increased the average life expectancy.

SS would not have the problems it is going to have if:
A. There was less fraud.
B. The average life expectancy (and therefore the average length of benefit payout) was lower.
C. The idiots of a previous congress had not spent the surplus funds.

So yes, I do believe that the whole socialized health care colossus is designed to prop up SS by reducing the average life expectancy.
 
Kalahari said:
I had heard that 98% of postiives are false-positives.
Click to expand...

Somehow I don't think it's anywhere near 98% of positives. However, the number of positives certainly is NOT a high number compared to the number of mammograms performed.

Terra,

Rahm Emanuel's Brother, Dr. Ezekiel Emanuel has already gone on record that those under 15 and those over age 40 are "expendable". And he's the White House Health Care Policy Advisor!!

Read it for yourself here:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203706604574374463280098676.html
 
My wife was diagnosed with breast cancer at age 30. She's 38 now and all is good. We had our first children after she finished tamoxofin at 35.

She found the lump herself while doing a self-exam. Hmm. I guess they are useless.

Remember one thing folks. What makes the most sense froma public health policy is not necessarily in your individual best interest.

We will continue to get whatever diagnostic care we want, whether Obama or anyone else wants to pay for it. Its just that simple.

I've now got 2 gorgeous kids who need her around. There will be no health care rationing in our household.
 
Issues of economy (cost-benefit analysis here) are a natural byproduct of any healthy government agency/project/program. Call it rationing, cost-control, or whatever, there needs to be some way to control waste. There are compelling reasons to guarantee health coverage to those less privileged that a large portion (maybe majority) of people recognize, but a significant number (maybe majority) of people also don't want to be financially and medically burdened by the associated costs to this guarantee.

Additionally, there is a strong group of special interests that have a financial dog in this race, which I contend hold enough power to shift our representatives' decisions/positions away best interest of the American citizens as a whole and in the long term. This is a fact of politics and won't change quickly, if at all. Special interest doesn't care about SSDI.

So... putting this all together... there is a socially compelling and financially backed program (health care reform proposal) that will naturally be analyzed for waste. If our government is going to get into the business of reducing waste in health care at the expense of human life, it best be prepared to handle challenges based on the same analysis (firearms, drugs, jails, etc.).
 
Kalahari said:
Just telling you what I heard on the news. FWIW.
Click to expand...

Old article (2002) states 3.5-7.9% of mammograms result in false positives. Later they cite 10%.

http://www.cancer.org/docroot/NWS/c...Mammogram_Results_Vary_Among_Radiologists.asp

From a 1998-2005 study.
http://www.hemonctoday.com/article.aspx?rid=41057

For facilities, the overall mean false-positive rate was 6.5%
Click to expand...

Another article from 2007:
"3-D mammography cuts false-positive rates by half"
http://www.reuters.com/article/healthNews/idUSCOL97439820071129
 
My wife told me about this.

Mammography increases the risk of breast cancer.

http://www.drmercola.net/2009/10/5-tips-to-help-lower-your-breast-cancer.html

Friday, October 23, 2009
5 Tips to Help Lower Your Breast Cancer Risk
Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer among American women. If the American Cancer Society estimates are accurate, nearly 200,000 women would have been diagnosed with breast cancer this year.

After lung cancer, breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among women. And its threat is real because women have a one in eight chance of developing this disease during their lifetime.

The good news is that you can greatly reduce your breast cancer risk by taking control of your health.

Here are Dr. Joseph Mercola’s Top 5 Tips to Help Lower Your Breast Cancer Risk:

1. Get regular exercise and eat healthy to maintain an ideal body weight – Exercise for at least half an hour per day and eat according to your Nutritional Type to be as lean as possible without being underweight. Having a weight closer to the end of a healthy weight range will give you more protection against cancer. A healthy body mass index is above 18.5 but does not exceed 25.
2. Breastfeed exclusively for up to six months – Studies show that new mothers who breastfeed their babies reduce their risk of breast cancer.
3. Limit your alcohol intake.
4. Optimize your vitamin D levels – Getting safe sun exposure, using a safe tanning bed and taking vitamin D3 supplements will give you healthy vitamin D levels. Studies show that calcitrol, the active form of vitamin D, induces a tumor suppressing protein which inhibits the growth of breast cancer cells. In general, vitamin D helps protect against cancer by helping increase the self-destruction of mutated cells, reducing the spread and reproduction of cancer cells, causing cell differentiation and reducing the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones.
5. Avoid mammograms – Conventional doctors recommend that women ages 40 and up should have an annual mammogram to diagnose and screen for breast cancer. But Dr. Mercola warns that a mammogram may increase the risk of cancer because the radiation it emits is up to 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray. Mammograms are also painful and compresses the breast, which may spur the faster growth of malignant cells.
Mercola has recently added a radiation-free, painless and non-invasive diagnostic tool called thermal imaging or thermography, to his clinic, the Natural Health Center. Thermography checks for vascular changes in the breasts by creating a digital map using an infrared, scanning-type camera to draw heat patterns that may detect some condition or abnormality.

In light of Breast Cancer Awareness Month, the Natural Health Center is offering a 10% discount on ALL first-time thermography scans scheduled before November 13. Thermograms provide you with a greater opportunity of early detection of breast cancer than through self examination, doctor examination or mammography. Aside from detecting breast cancer, thermography screenings can also help check for conditions concerning your cardiovascular, digestive and muscular systems.
Posted by natural health guru
 
Dr Mercola is an unbiased expert! [rolleyes]

He's selling his alternative test procedure in the same article where he warns women to avoid mammography. Yup, I'll believe him. [rolleyes] [thinking]
 
Sam, I'm aware that there is another procedure that is statistically more accurate than mammograms, BUT the insurance companies don't want to pay for it (except in rare cases) due to the much higher cost. Don't recall what it is, but suspect it might be the 3D imaging I linked to above.
 
My wife’s doctor, a naturopath suggests Thermography and Ultrasound scans both of those procedures do not use tumor growing radiation.


LenS said:
Sam, I'm aware that there is another procedure that is statistically more accurate than mammograms, BUT the insurance companies don't want to pay for it (except in rare cases) due to the much higher cost. Don't recall what it is, but suspect it might be the 3D imaging I linked to above.
Click to expand...
 
K-DUB said:
I'm angry b/c the stinkin' government has no business telling me when to examine (or have examined) my breasts. That's between me & my doctor. They also have no right to force me to buy insurance, or to tell me what sort of treatment/medicine/doctor I'm entitled to. I want to pay my own way, make my own decisions, & be in charge of MY LIFE, but they're trying to make that illegal. That's why I'm pissed off. [wink]
Click to expand...

K-Dub, +1000 to you. When I heard the news about this asinine government proclamation, the very first thing I thought about was here is the future of government run socialized medicine.

Would someone please tell me where in our Constitution it states that the government has the right to dictate our health choices?

For the first time in the history of our Constitutional Republic, the current government is attempting to mandate the forced purchase of goods and services in order to be an American citizen.

WTF, over?

Where in the United States Constitution does it state that the government is granted the power to dictate what health insurance products and services we must purchase?

It doesn't!!

What ever happened to the principles of life, liberty and the right of the individual to pursue their own happiness? Every day I see my individual rights and freedoms being assaulted by a government that is out of control. Every day I become more and more angry. I honestly don't know how much more I can take before I walk across that threshold between peaceful protest and full blown revolution, and with a government that refuses to listen to the concerns of its citizens, I can feel my tipping point getting closer and closer. It's getting close now.
 
Last edited:
MassBites said:
K-Dub, +1000 to you. When I heard the news about this asinine government proclamation, the very first thing I thought about was here is the future of government run socialized medicine.

Would someone please tell me where in our Constitution it states that the government has the right to dictate our health choices?

For the first time in the history of our Constitutional Republic, the current government is attempting to mandate the forced purchase of goods and services in order to be an American citizen.

WTF, over?

Where in the United States Constitution does it state that the government is granted the power to dictate what health insurance products and services we must purchase?

It doesn't!!

What ever happened to the principles of life, liberty and the right of the individual to pursue their own happiness? Every day I see my individual rights and freedoms being assaulted by a government that is out of control. Every day I become more and more angry. I honestly don't know how much more I can take before I walk across that threshold between peaceful protest and full blown revolution, and with a government that refuses to listen to the concerns of its citizens, I can feel my tipping point getting closer and closer. It's getting close now.
Click to expand...

For one, I think where it says something about 'welfare' or such (and actually had someone tell me this is why Soc. Medicine is Constitutional). And I realize that probably 99% know that is NOT what the US. Constitution means by that word, but sadly some do.

Cancer is a subject that hits a lot of families, some even multiple times. Obama playing this card so early now may doom any chance for healthcare. Those opposing healthcare need to highlight this point in the bill and prove that there IS rationing, it just isn't called that.
 
SemiAutoSam said:
My wife told me about this.

Mammography increases the risk of breast cancer.

http://www.drmercola.net/2009/10/5-tips-to-help-lower-your-breast-cancer.html

Friday, October 23, 2009
5 Tips to Help Lower Your Breast Cancer Risk
Breast cancer is the most common type of cancer among American women. If the American Cancer Society estimates are accurate, nearly 200,000 women would have been diagnosed with breast cancer this year.

After lung cancer, breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among women. And its threat is real because women have a one in eight chance of developing this disease during their lifetime.

The good news is that you can greatly reduce your breast cancer risk by taking control of your health.

Here are Dr. Joseph Mercola’s Top 5 Tips to Help Lower Your Breast Cancer Risk:

1. Get regular exercise and eat healthy to maintain an ideal body weight – Exercise for at least half an hour per day and eat according to your Nutritional Type to be as lean as possible without being underweight. Having a weight closer to the end of a healthy weight range will give you more protection against cancer. A healthy body mass index is above 18.5 but does not exceed 25.
2. Breastfeed exclusively for up to six months – Studies show that new mothers who breastfeed their babies reduce their risk of breast cancer.
3. Limit your alcohol intake.
4. Optimize your vitamin D levels – Getting safe sun exposure, using a safe tanning bed and taking vitamin D3 supplements will give you healthy vitamin D levels. Studies show that calcitrol, the active form of vitamin D, induces a tumor suppressing protein which inhibits the growth of breast cancer cells. In general, vitamin D helps protect against cancer by helping increase the self-destruction of mutated cells, reducing the spread and reproduction of cancer cells, causing cell differentiation and reducing the growth of new blood vessels from pre-existing ones.
5. Avoid mammograms – Conventional doctors recommend that women ages 40 and up should have an annual mammogram to diagnose and screen for breast cancer. But Dr. Mercola warns that a mammogram may increase the risk of cancer because the radiation it emits is up to 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray. Mammograms are also painful and compresses the breast, which may spur the faster growth of malignant cells.
Mercola has recently added a radiation-free, painless and non-invasive diagnostic tool called thermal imaging or thermography, to his clinic, the Natural Health Center. Thermography checks for vascular changes in the breasts by creating a digital map using an infrared, scanning-type camera to draw heat patterns that may detect some condition or abnormality.

In light of Breast Cancer Awareness Month, the Natural Health Center is offering a 10% discount on ALL first-time thermography scans scheduled before November 13. Thermograms provide you with a greater opportunity of early detection of breast cancer than through self examination, doctor examination or mammography. Aside from detecting breast cancer, thermography screenings can also help check for conditions concerning your cardiovascular, digestive and muscular systems.
Posted by natural health guru
Click to expand...

She just wants you to stop grabbing her boobies. Counter with the one that shows that wearing bras increases breast cancer risks.
 
While riding my hampstah wheel this morning, the Today show had their resident Dr. talking about this. She pointed out some interesting things with regard to the panel that did this "analysis". Panel was appointed by the administration and if IIRC, there were no oncologists on the panel at all. She also mentioned that certain demographics were totally igonored. Apparently, there were a lot of factors that did not make it into the math at all. Go figure.

Now, as to the whole 'healthcare rationing' thing - I dunno, but it certainly seems like an attempt to justify the whole rationing methodology, I mean numbers don't lie, right? [hmmm]
 
What is really disgusting is the "harms" that provide the foundation for the recommendations...

Furthermore, one must also consider the harms associated with treatment of cancer that would not become clinically apparent during a woman's lifetime (overdiagnosis), as well as the harms of unnecessary earlier treatment of breast cancer that would have become clinically apparent but would not have shortened a woman's life. Radiation exposure (from radiologic tests), although a minor concern, is also a consideration.
Click to expand...

This is why they discourage routine screenings in women 40-49. Eff that. I'm woman enough to grab my skirt and deal with a little nervousness if I have a false positive. I don't want the .gov telling me that I can't handle it and should roll the dice.

The reason they discourage the self exams is
The 2 available trials (20,21) indicated that more additional imaging procedures and biopsies were done for women who performed BSE than for control participants.
Click to expand...
Umm, how about we see how many lives were saved by that rather than viewing imaging and biopsies as a bad thing. [puke]

By the way, the AHRQ was tasked with performing this type of analysis for 100 topics in the stimulus bill. Some may be beneficial if they nudge doctors away from old procedures to more successful new ones. Others are very wishy-washy. Check them out...
http://www.iom.edu/~/media/Files/Re...one List of 100 CER Priorities - for web.ashx
 
Kalahari said:
I had heard that 98% of postiives are false-positives.
Click to expand...

Ok, so 2/100 are positive. If it was $125 as Lens said (I think?), then the total biopsy cost for the 49 women you tested falsely per the 1 positive, it is $6125 "wasted". Compare that to $250,000 cancer treatment for the one who was positive.

Edit: looks like from other data that 98% number was pulled out of someones behind at the network. But even if it was true, the above math shows the cost to be insignificant in comparison.
 
Last edited:
TomH said:
Ok, so 2/100 are positive. If it was $125 as Lens said (I think?), then the total biopsy cost for the 49 women you tested falsely per the 1 positive, it is $6125 "wasted". Compare that to $250,000 cancer treatment for the one who was positive.

Edit: looks like from other data that 98% number was pulled out of someones behind at the network. But even if it was true, the above math shows the cost to be insignificant in comparison.
Click to expand...

The $125 was a figure for each mammogram, not for a biopsy.

But yes, it seems that the number I saw on CNN was complete crap. No surprise.
 
Kalahari said:
The $125 was a figure for each mammogram, not for a biopsy.

But yes, it seems that the number I saw on CNN was complete crap. No surprise.
Click to expand...

Almost correct (the Dr. quoted average of $135) and right.

A SWAG for an average biopsy would be probably $500. (probably less, usually done with a needle). Each might be a different but it's an outpatient treatment and lab analysis.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

B Kings Firearms Ohio
Replies
4
Views
325
Da_lucche
Da_lucche
What are your silliest, most useless firearms.
5 6 7
Replies
184
Views
5K
Tim_McD
Tim_McD
Bergen County Firearms lawyer
Replies
4
Views
277
GaryO
GaryO
NBC news and Asian Americans
Replies
14
Views
391
1sern
1
Headspace and reloading
Replies
28
Views
529
PatMcD
PatMcD
Back
Top Bottom