groups

IMHO you would be ok with that decision as long as there is no past history or family history of cancer. I didn't have one for years because they were so uncomfortable. Had one a few months ago and it wasn't that bad, so I might have another in a couple years.
I do however think it's wrong that women should not be screened til 50 as I read stories on the breast cancer voting site I belong to that women in their 30's have had to have a masectomy. My friend's DIL: just had one and she was only 32. Hope this new govener will not take this away from women.

Click on this link and vote every day so women who need it can get free mamograms. I also vote for the animals too while there (hint hint)

view link

to me this is women genocide (deliberate and systematic destruction, in whole or in part, of an ethnic, racial, religious, or national group.) I have not history of breast cancer, nor any cancer in my family, but I had a cousin of 28 die of it. She left 2 beautiful boys. Her fathers side has a history of cancers, her brother even got breast cancer. So if they stop the screening for women before 50 will that include men too, they get breast cancer. Her brother was 38, he is still alive and screening caught it.

This burns my buns and I urge everyone to get of the phone and emails, to congress and senate. I don't know who the people are on this committee but I will make every effort to find out. The American Cancer Society is even against this statement or policy.

I totally agree with Brigantiner. My daughter was just 35 when she died of breast cancer, leaving two beautiful daughters aged 4 and 18 months. There was absolutely no history of breast cancer in my family before this. I think it is the insurance companies behind this new study. They figure screening younger women only saves a few who have breast cancer. Even though it costs thousands to treat it, the insurance companies save money in the long run by having women wait to be tested. Please let me know if you find out who I can complain to.
Liz in SC

I tend to agree with the mammos for women under 50. But since we're all over 50, what do you think about the every 2 years screening?
I think that 20 years of yearly Xrays has got to add up. How do you think the risk of not getting an xray and possibly not identifying a problem, compares to too much radiation? I'm talking about over 50 year olds.

This new finding will not change my routine. There is no history of cancer in my family, but I have fibrous breasts and would not feel comfortable not doing what I have always done. Maybe for me, mammos are my safety net or comfort zone, either way, I don't plan to make any changes now.

At this point I will continue to listen and follow these discussions.

I am not at all comfortable with a mammogram every year. My first one was at age 40 and I think a baseline should be had by everyone..... if there is no history and no lumps or issues, then let the person decide for themselves.... most Dr's will recommend it based on medical history, what group has the right to decide for a whole gender of people?
I go every 3-4 years as I do not wish to be exposed to that much xray radiation... I will take my chances. We all have a right to freedom of choice. that is where the constitution should come in....

I do not think the governor elect will have any problems. I heard him on the radio already and he is looking forward to working with the present admin. to get a feel for what is going on and he is appointing his staff to help make budget decisions, and other important judgements for when he is sworn in.....

At least they are coming to their sense's... What idiot released this important info to have the whole country get upset for something that never should have been dealt with publicily. It is a private issue between physician and patient, but to say mammos are no longer needed..... I bet it was a man?????

Glad things have been righted again..... per the news.

I've decided to go ahead and get my yearly one this month. Then when I see my gyn. in June for my yearly, I'll see what she says. So it's a matter of the risk of cancer by not going to get it detected, or by going and having too much radiation. Apparently, the mammo screening is the lesser of 2 evils because I understand that the mammo xrays are a very low amount.