More

Mammograms: Half Of Women Over Age 40 Are Skipping Them

By MARILYNN MARCHIONE   12/ 9/10 11:07 AM ET   AP

Mammograms

SAN ANTONIO -- Remember the uproar last year when a government task force said most women don't need annual mammograms? It turns out that only half of women over 40 had been getting them that often to start with, even when they have insurance that covers screening.

The information comes from a review of insurance claims that show what women actually do – not what they say in surveys.

"We all support many things – fast food isn't what we should eat for dinner every night – but that isn't what we do," said Dr. Milayna Subar of Medco Health Solutions Inc., which manages benefits for many large insurers, including some Medicare plans.

She did the study, using records on more than 1.5 million women, and reported results Thursday at a breast cancer conference.

The finding is disturbing, said Dr. Judy Garber of Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston and president-elect of the American Association for Cancer Research, one of the conference's sponsors. "Here's an insured population where cost is not a barrier," and yet many women are not getting tested.

Rates of screening are likely even lower among women without insurance, though government programs pay for mammograms for many women who lack such coverage.

Mammograms are X-rays of the breast that can reveal tumors when they're too small to be felt. But they also raise many false alarms, leading to worry, expense and overtreatment. How often and when women should get mammograms has long been controversial.

In November 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force said women in their 40s at average risk for cancer do not need mammograms and that women 50 and older need them only every two years. Many groups, including the American Cancer Society, still advise annual mammograms starting at 40.

Everyone agrees that the age group that most benefits from mammograms is women 50 to 64, and the government estimates that roughly three-quarters of women in this age group had a mammogram within the previous two years, based on surveys.

However, the review of insurance claims from 2006 through 2009 put the true number at 65 percent. It also found that only 54 percent of women in this age group had been getting mammograms every year.

Among all women 40 to 85, only half had been getting annual mammograms, the study found.

Doctors will not be surprised by these results, said Dr. Peter Ravdin of the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio, one of the organizers of the cancer conference. Women forget or lose track of when they last had a mammogram, and that's one of the downsides of advice not to go every year, he said. Some may even lie when asked how often they go.

"There's both a conscious and mostly unconscious desire to please the person asking that question," because most women know they should be getting one, Ravdin said.

Dr. Marisa Weiss, a 51-year-old Philadelphia breast cancer specialist who founded the consumer Web site breastcancer.org, is glad she had been following her own advice to get screened every year. She was diagnosed in April with breast cancer found through a routine mammogram.

"It was a very favorable diagnosis and I feel very lucky about that. I was a true beneficiary of early detection," she said.

If she'd followed advice to get screened just every two years, it could have meant "a real difference in my prognosis," Weiss said.

___

Online:

Array

Array

FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTH

SAN ANTONIO -- Remember the uproar last year when a government task force said most women don't need annual mammograms? It turns out that only half of women over 40 had been getting them that often to...
SAN ANTONIO -- Remember the uproar last year when a government task force said most women don't need annual mammograms? It turns out that only half of women over 40 had been getting them that often to...
Filed by Rachel Martin  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 50
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
07:12 PM on 12/13/2010
"New study: Breast cancer deaths lower in areas without mammograms"

http://www.naturalnews.com/z028530_brst_cancer_mammograms.html
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sharon Hanson
Skeptical of the *pseudo-skeptics*
08:42 AM on 12/13/2010
Thermography detects changes on a cellular level 10 years before mammography when you can actually do something about it. Even though I have one of the highest risks out there BRCA gene mutation positive I have been advised not to get them anymore due to my exposure to gadolinium based contrasting agents (GBCAs). I'm just too toxic these days and I won't be going through the screening at the airports either.
10:02 AM on 12/11/2010
For heavens sakes. Get to know your body. Nuture the confidence that you'll know when something isn't right, or the way it should be. Pay attention. Not that difficult. Stop listening to people who say you are too stupid to know. It's your body, you're living with it every day, and for how many years now??

Mammograms find cancer that already exists. Nothing about preventing cancer there.
02:54 PM on 12/12/2010
In fact mammograms do find various markers of breast cancer that are not in fact cancers. Some of them are identified prior to the actual presence of cancerous cells/tissue.
This is about preventing breast cancers.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:34 PM on 12/12/2010
Good luck to you.

I just had my annual mammogram last week.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
TequilaMockingbird
ALL Hail The Lords of Funk Entropy
02:17 AM on 12/11/2010
Environmental Contamination is the greatest danger to our health and we can make ourselves feel better with a yearly dose of radiation or we can get serious about cleaning up the air, water and soil..


Large Corporations poison us with impunity..
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sharon Hanson
Skeptical of the *pseudo-skeptics*
08:44 AM on 12/13/2010
You have that one right TequilaMockingbird. I can't add to that.
02:37 PM on 12/10/2010
One of the reasons women don't get mammograms is they hurt - a lot.
I was putting off a mammogram but recently had thermography instead. I can only recommend it. It was not painful at all. Well worth it.
06:00 PM on 12/10/2010
mammograms dont hurt! they are uncomfortable yes, your boob gets pulled and squished...big deal!. As tests go the mammogram is the LEAST painful of all of them, think of colonoscopies, biopsies, surgeries...all that stuff. All you do is stand there for a few minutes while your boob gets stretched out and pressed. its a very easy test!!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ncyim
09:17 AM on 12/11/2010
There are different types of breasts! Some of us are extremely sensitive. I almost passed out at my last mamo 5 years ago. Never again. Now I do weekly or monthly breast massage to push fluids out and maybe prevent the issue. This looks about right:

http://www.ayurvediccure.com/breast_massage.htm
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sharon Hanson
Skeptical of the *pseudo-skeptics*
08:46 AM on 12/13/2010
No they actually damage tissue.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
himaui
11:13 PM on 12/10/2010
thermography picks up on cancer activity 7 years before a mammogram can. they're about $300.

i will never ever get mammography. radiation damages DNA, if i'm already at risk for breast cancer, why put me over the top with more radiation exposure? or accelerate the process?

i'm tired of people talking about estrogen dominance, why are they not addressing progesterone deficiencies? when your cells are estrogen dominant, they keep dividing and start getting funky. progesterone keeps it in check. there are progesterone receptors all over the body - heart, kidney, digestive tract, brain, nervous system. i often wonder how much our degenerative diseases are related to progesterone deficiencies. our entire body needs progesterone to function, we literally are not a female species wihtout it. for guys, its testosterone. for us, it's really progesterone + estrogen. and they need to be balanced for the rest of our lives.

i really wish the medical community would start looking at progesterone more and more and stop bad mouthing estrogen. there's nothing wrong w/estrogen when its balanced with progesterone.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:44 PM on 12/12/2010
I certainly don't have $300. I'll stick with mammography.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
11:54 PM on 12/12/2010
Estrogen dominance happens because of progesterone deficiency.

Don't forget Vitamin D deficiency. That can be very serious.
12:59 AM on 12/10/2010
With the amount of radiation we are being bombarded to daily via EMF, I think it's time to promote Breast Thermography.
In 1982, the FDA approved breast thermography as an adjunctive breast cancer screening procedure.
* Breast thermography has undergone extensive research since the late 1950's.
* Over 800 peer-reviewed studies on breast thermography exist in the index-medicus literature.
* In this database, well over 300,000 women have been included as study participants.
* The numbers of participants in many studies are very large -- 10K, 37K, 60K, 85K …
* Some of these studies have followed patients up to 12 years.
* Strict standardized interpretation protocols have been established for over 20 years.
* Breast thermography has an average sensitivity and specificity of 90%.
* An abnormal thermogram is 10 times more significant as a future risk indicator for breast cancer than a first order family history of the disease.
* A persistent abnormal thermogram caries with it a 22x higher risk of future breast cancer.
* An abnormal infrared image is the single most important marker of high risk for developing breast cancer.
* Research has shown that breast thermography significantly augments the long-term survival rates of its recipients.
* When used as part of a multimodal approach (clinical examination + mammography + thermography) 95% of early stage cancers will be detected.
A friend had a scan that detected cancer at microscopic stage-twice. Family history. Mammogram would never had detected it. Less invasive & safer.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
VanessaFas
11:09 PM on 12/09/2010
Many women skip the test, as many women skip their annual OB/GYN appointments. I've heard some women actually tell me that even though there is a history of cancers in their family, that they don't want to get the test, or see the doctor, so that they WON'T know if they have it. Like it'll jinx them. Yikes. I say play the odds. And if mammogram radiation is a concern, then ask a doctor you trust.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Margie Kronewitter
10:49 PM on 12/09/2010
The Cure for Cancers would be to ELIMINATE THE CAUSES. However, the AMA & ACS are unable to comprehend this. Some KNOWN CAUSES are radiation (from mamograms) and endocrine disruptors that mimic estrogen: chemicals such as pesticides, fungicides & PCBs (plastic related). The ACS advise (wait until you have cancer, then we'll "treat" you) makes about as much sense as the Diabetes Society advice to continue to eat sugar & starch and we'll give you diabetes drugs and then we'll give more drugs to TREAT the side effects. Pay attention to the side effects listed at the end of drug ads. The solution to most diseases (that these organizations thrive on) is PREVENTION & EDUCATION. Diseases have become Indu$trie$ that merely promote drugs & treatment and SELDOM MENTION OR RESEARCH CAUSE & PREVENTION. Harvard revealed research this week that components of Cannabis shrink tumors by 50% yet marijuana is classified as a drug that has 'no therapeutic value' by the FDA, yet 15 states acknowledge its value as a 2000 year old medicine. At age 19 I found a lump while in a sauna in Finland. I started more vitamins, avoiding chemicals, eating health food fare. I'm now 60 and have had no problems. I also started smoking marijuana about that time. It makes tumore shrink and new neurons grow. (maybe pot saved me?) Check it out at NORML or PubMed.
12:25 AM on 12/10/2010
What a great post! You're one clever cookie Margie! Fanned and faved!
05:48 PM on 12/10/2010
Right on Margie!! Couldn't have said it better myself. The near complete lack of mainstream media information re: causes of cancer, especially breast cancer, is incredibly frustrating.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
himaui
11:16 PM on 12/10/2010
yes...incredibly frustrating is an understatement at best. a lot of bad information is perpetuated out there, and there are so many easy things we can do to support breast health (which is actually lymph health if you think about it).

i am SO PLEASED to see so many smart women here with open minds, giant hearts, and intelligent information.

amen, sisters!
06:57 PM on 12/09/2010
a mammogram saved my life. Ladies, you need to get them. Breast cancer caught early is treatable! There are many programs that help w/the costs. Don't delay. Get them regularly!
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
C Karen Stopford
10:14 AM on 12/10/2010
Very happy for you and I do not mean to criticize your opinion, but there is no proof that you would have died since you did not die (yay!)
My good friend had a mammogram less than a year ago that came up fine, only to have cancer shot through one breast less than a year later.
Radiation causes mutations - this is a scientific fact. So while I am very happy for you and would not discourage women from doing whatever they feel is right, I choose to opt out and examine myself.
10:28 AM on 12/10/2010
Of course there's proof. Me! the type of cancer I have could be deadly as it is an invasive type. It was caught early w/mammogram and NOT thru self exams since the cancer cells were too small to detect manually.
Re: your friend:  the mammogram did not give your friend cancer. It probably saved her life. Some cancers are fast growing. she's lucky she got it diagnosed. I wish her the best of luck. Please do some research on reliable websites like www.cancer.org or American cancer society's website. There is alot of bogus info out there. The more you know, the better your chances are of catching the disease early. 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed.

I really do hope you rethink your decision not to get mammograms regularly, especially beginning at age 40. If you have a daughter, would you advise her not to get checked too?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe3245
How can we have lost control we never had?
06:28 PM on 12/09/2010
Maybe if we offered free preventative healthcare this wouldn't be so much of an issue...
10:22 AM on 12/10/2010
To C. Karen Stopford. I wish you the best of luck w/your self exams. Unfortunately many cancers are missed this way. Mine was so small it was only detected w/mammogram and later a biopsy confirmed it.

I hope you rethink your decision to skip regular mammograms.
04:10 PM on 12/09/2010
Perhaps some are recognizing that this procedure may be more about the Dollar than about saving lives. A very recent study http://health.usnews.com/health-news/family-health/cancer/articles/2010/03/24/mammograms-may-not-boost-survival-danish-study-suggests.html ..... '"Mammography screening is not as good as we hoped years ago," said study author Dr. Karsten Jorgensen, a researcher at the Nordic Cochrane Centre in Copenhagen, Denmark.

"It is questionable if it saves women from dying from breast cancer, but we are certain that it has serious harms such as overdiagnosis and overtreatment of lesions that would otherwise never have caused problems, unnecessary recalls with long-term psychological consequences, and unnecessary biopsies and worries," Jorgensen added. .....
07:06 PM on 12/13/2010
unfortunately, that's not the case w/me. A mammogram found cancer cells lurking in my breasts. Undetectable thru manual self exam and caught early. I have an invasive type that could have killed me down the road. The biopsy confirmed thru tissue sample this very fact.

We are real women, not statistics.
07:12 PM on 12/13/2010
the denmark conclusion is being hotly debated right now throughout the cancer community. Mammograms save lives, period.
Re: Overtreatment, yes that's a concern but if you read the more recent study, where 188% increase in bilateral prophylactic mastectomies are being preferred by YOUNGER women now, you'll understand that this is more than just overtreatment. It's about quality of life. These are real women. I urge those who are interested to go to www.breastcancer.org and check out the survivor discussion forums.
02:49 PM on 12/09/2010
Not all of us forget to have mammograms. Some of us choose not to have radiation burned into our bodies. With no family history or anything else to indicate that I might be at risk, I opt to skip things that cause cancer.
03:10 PM on 12/09/2010
Fanned. Mammograms are more of a marketing ploy than a life-saving test.
03:29 PM on 12/09/2010
Very True
07:07 PM on 12/13/2010
good luck w/that
06:58 PM on 12/09/2010
I had no family history of breast cancer and a mammogram caught some breast cancer cells early.

It literally has saved my life. You may want to rethink your views.
dididangerlove
subverting political perversion
01:12 PM on 12/09/2010
I was very close to someone who skipped mammograms for three years and ended up being diagnosed with stage 4 breast cancer.
06:58 PM on 12/09/2010
exactly. It's worth it. Get them!
11:47 AM on 12/09/2010
The problem with "modern" cancer treatment is that radiation causes cancer. So do chemical drugs. So your fighting cancer with things that are proven to cause cancer. Makes no sense.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Joe3245
How can we have lost control we never had?
06:30 PM on 12/09/2010
The radiation perhaps, but not all chemicals are carcinogenic. Too bad we banned the cure for cancer back in 1937 though.
12:26 AM on 12/10/2010
And it's still banned.
07:01 PM on 12/09/2010
mammograms do not cause cancer. A mammogram helped me catch early breast cancer. Undetected by self exam. The cancer cells were tiny and looked suspicious w/mammogram. I had a biopsy and it turned out to be cancer cells. It was caught super early stage 0 and it's treatable. I have a good chance of living a long healthy life because the mammogram caught it early. 1 in 8 women will be diagnosed w/breast cancer throughout their lives.This is no joke.
11:39 AM on 12/10/2010
Mammograms do in fact cause cancer.