U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:20 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,056 posts, read 99,058,791 times
Reputation: 31544

Advertisements

From FOX News itself:

The guidelines are unlikely to be met with the kind of rebellion that accompanied new breast cancer screening guidelines this week, which were largely based on computer projections, Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, said in a telephone interview.

"There is a lot more agreement about the science of cervical cancer screening," Lichtenfeld said.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:21 AM
 
2,229 posts, read 1,312,593 times
Reputation: 623
If none of you can see how the timing of these "recommendation" revisions are convienent to current political tides in this country... you are just plan being dishonest.

Not even naive. Dishonest.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:23 AM
 
Location: Foot of the Rockies
85,056 posts, read 99,058,791 times
Reputation: 31544
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
. . . the chance of cancer didn't increase or decrease, the risks haven't increased or increased, it's the fact that the government takeover of health care means the government decides who gets what and when. When it's the government, it's all about politics.
The American Cancer Society made these recommendations; it is not part of the government.

Using your reasoning, we should still be applying leeches. Why should treatment ever change?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:24 AM
 
Location: San Antonio
4,149 posts, read 9,129,526 times
Reputation: 3307
Alright, take notes...this is two in a week. The government says this has nothing to do with them, but it's a little strange that we're on the verge of a govt takeover of health care and now we have people saying that you need certain tests less often.

And the same cast of characters is saying, "oh you right wingers, you always panic and make something out of nothing"

"Nothing" has happened twice this week. Remember this when they change the guidlines for a 3rd test. And a 4th.

It's not a coincidence. Where there's smoke.....

I just pray that after a few of these, at least a few supporters will have their eyes opened. The far left will deny this to their grave, but they'll never change their mind no matter what evidence they see.

If the moderates and ones that aren't blinded by the halo see it, we'll be able to get our country back before it's too late.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:25 AM
 
39,088 posts, read 23,221,001 times
Reputation: 12159
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
If an insurance agent had justified denying a claim based on the same information, the liberals would be using that to demand more government care.

Nothing has changed but the politics, the chance of cancer didn't increase or decrease, the risks haven't increased or increased, it's the fact that the government takeover of health care means the government decides who gets what and when. When it's the government, it's all about politics.

It's much like when the Reagan administration classified ketchup because it is made from tomatoes as a vegetable and the liberals screamed bloody murder over it but when the Clinton administration did the exact same thing with salsa, the liberals quickly nodded their heads in full agreement.

It's all politics and the government takeover of our health guarantees our health and health care will be all about politics.
You're right, the chance of cancer didn't increase or decrease, the risks haven't increased or decreased. But we know more now, because we have years of results to look at. And the scientific analysis, the review of those years of results, says that there is more harm in those early screenings than benefits. That more women have been harmed by being rendered infertile or by losing their babies, than have been saved. And it doesn't take much, because the science only shows one woman being saved out of a million. When many more woman were rendered infertile or lost babies.

That's the science. And the only people politicizing it are the people opposed to the health care reform bill. Shame on them for trying to deny the science in the name of political partisanship.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:25 AM
 
Location: 38°14′45″N 122°37′53″W
4,152 posts, read 9,600,169 times
Reputation: 3399
Quote:
Originally Posted by TigerLily24 View Post
Details, details. These researchers knew Obama was going to be president now. It's in the Mayan calendar, doncha know.
LMAO!!!

I know! Isn't it so nice when things just come together like this?!
Anybody got a big bow we can put on it?
Ya gotta love them Mayans and all their crystal ball abilities!
Nevermind reality & facts or anything.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:26 AM
 
47,576 posts, read 58,840,989 times
Reputation: 22174
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Irregularities that are common, and the more invasive tests and treatments can lead to infertility or to women not being able to carry a pregnancy full-term. .
And I'm sure we can all see the irony is that statement - abortions for any reason will be paid for by the Obama health care, they won't be called invasive or dangerous to fertility or harming the ability to carry a pregnancy full term but Pap smears are out for those reasons.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:28 AM
 
Location: Home, Home on the Front Range
21,146 posts, read 15,297,565 times
Reputation: 11832
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcarlilesiu View Post
If none of you can see how the timing of these "recommendation" revisions are convienent to current political tides in this country... you are just plan being dishonest.

Not even naive. Dishonest.
I have no reason not to take this woman at her word. If Sen. McCain had been elected I would feel the same:

"But the timing was coincidental, said Dr. Cheryl B. Iglesia, the chairwoman of a panel in the obstetricians’ group that developed the Pap smear (http://health.nytimes.com/health/guides/specialtopic/pap-smear-and-treatment/overview.html?inline=nyt-classifier - broken link) guidelines. The group updates its advice regularly based on new medical information, and Dr. Iglesia said the latest recommendations had been in the works for several years, “long before the Obama health plan came into existence.” She called the timing crazy, uncanny and “an unfortunate perfect storm,” adding, “There’s no political agenda with regard to these recommendations.”"


http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/20/health/20pap.html?hp
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:29 AM
 
25,366 posts, read 37,612,722 times
Reputation: 13286
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
And I'm sure we can all see the irony is that statement - abortions for any reason will be paid for by the Obama health care, they won't be called invasive or dangerous to fertility or harming the ability to carry a pregnancy full term but Pap smears are out for those reasons.
The timing of it all is so clear....now everybody is upset about the mammograms and pap smear tests and Obama, Reid, Pelosi can push abortus back in through the backdoor...nobody apys attention...that is what they want, distraction....
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-20-2009, 09:35 AM
 
39,088 posts, read 23,221,001 times
Reputation: 12159
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
And I'm sure we can all see the irony is that statement - abortions for any reason will be paid for by the Obama health care, they won't be called invasive or dangerous to fertility or harming the ability to carry a pregnancy full term but Pap smears are out for those reasons.
STOP!!! Take a breath. Read what you have posted. Read what I have posted. These scientific recommendations are about promoting women's health. PROMOTING women's health. These tests have risks. Very real risks. Risks that lead to women suffering irreversibly. The doctors who looked at these issues are SCIENTISTS, not politicians. They take their responsibility to advise women very seriously. They are not groups that have taken any political stands.

Every year medical boards and panels issue recommendations. The recommendations are not political. The recommendations are based on the science.

In the name of politics, you are ignoring the science. Because of politics, you are taking a position that HARMS women. The tests are not 100% beneficial. They do harm as well. They do harm as well. They can harm women. They have a good side and a bad side. The bad side shouldn't be ignored to serve your political bias. Women have a right to understand that these screenings are not benign. Women have a right to have scientists gather the statistics, examine the records, and to do a stringent analysis to tell them if the harmful results outweigh the positive results. Women deserve this kind of care.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top