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 05-21-2012, 09:12 PM
 
29,409 posts, read 21,650,285 times
Reputation: 5450

Advertisements

It is quite obvious they are looking for ways to try and pay for this nonsense and letting a few folks die to avoid paying for the screening is a good way to start. I wonder what will be next on the chopping block. So Obamacare wants to pay for birth control but let men die. Is this a war on men? If it were the other way around I know some would be howling at the moon right now. LOL

(CBS News) A top panel of health experts called the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force says that men should no longer get routine prostate-specific antigen (PSA) tests to screen for prostate cancer. The reason, it says, is that the tests may lead to treatments that do more harm than good.
U.S. panel recommends against PSA tests for screening prostate cancer in men of all ages
More than 33,000 American men die of prostate cancer each year. And, every year, 20 million get the PSA test to detect the disease early. The recommendation is already causing a lot of criticism. Dr. Jon LaPook reported on the issue.
For 20 years, the message has been the same: Get a PSA test every year or two, detect prostate cancer early -- and save your life. Dr. Michael Lefevre helped lead the panel that said the message was wrong.
"The problem is that in contrast to the small benefits, a significant number of men will be harmed by the test and treatments that follow prostate cancer screening," he said to CBS News.
The task force said:
  • The PSA is unreliable, giving a falsely positive result 80 percent of the time.
  • Prostate cancer is typically diagnosed in older men, and the disease usually progresses so slowly they die of something else.


Health experts: Routine PSA tests for prostate cancer not good for health - CBS News
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-21-2012, 09:15 PM
 
23,839 posts, read 22,762,598 times
Reputation: 9406
You know, that was the first thing that crossed my mind when I saw this report on the news tonight. My default position is that this whole change of heart is likely the result of the Obama Administration looking for ways to make Obamacare less costly to the government through fewer tests.

It's very transparent to me that that's what's going on here.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 09:20 PM
 
29,409 posts, read 21,650,285 times
Reputation: 5450
Actually this is round two. Wasn't it just a while ago that they came out and said women don't need pap tests done or something along those lines. Soon we will be told we don't even need doctors just to eat an apple a day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 09:27 PM
 
12,269 posts, read 11,122,560 times
Reputation: 8064
First it was mammograms, which they're now backing off of, now this silliness. Hopefully the SCOTUS will soon blow this bad law out of the water.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 09:27 PM
 
580 posts, read 441,552 times
Reputation: 351
Anything to blame the President...right guys? Death Panels? LOL!!!


Prostate cancer screening - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


<snip>
In 2002, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that "evidence was insufficient to recommend for or against screening." Currently, the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), answers the question, "Should I Get Screened for Prostate Cancer?" with a statement:
"Not all medical experts agree that screening for prostate cancer will save lives. Currently, there is not enough evidence to decide if the potential benefits of prostate cancer screening outweigh the potential risks."

<snip>
A study by the New England Journal of Medicine found that over a 7 to 10 year period, "screening did not reduce the death rate in men 55 and over." Former screening proponents, including some from Stanford University, have come out against routine testing. In February 2010, the American Cancer Society urged "more caution in using the test." And the American College of Preventive Medicine concluded that "there was insufficient evidence to recommend routine screening."

<snip>
According to Ablin, "testing should absolutely not be deployed to screen the entire population of men over the age of 50 . . ." He concludes that the primary promoters of tests are drug companies, which "continue peddling the tests," along with advocacy groups including the American Urological Association, all of which "stand to profit" by pushing continual tests. He states:
"I never dreamed that my discovery four decades ago would lead to such a profit-driven public health disaster. The medical community must confront reality and stop the inappropriate use of P.S.A. screening. Doing so would save billions of dollars and rescue millions of men from unnecessary, debilitating treatments."






/thread
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 10:04 PM
 
23,839 posts, read 22,762,598 times
Reputation: 9406
Quote:
Originally Posted by cjski View Post
Anything to blame the President...right guys? Death Panels? LOL!!!


Prostate cancer screening - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


<snip>
In 2002, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force concluded that "evidence was insufficient to recommend for or against screening." Currently, the American Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), answers the question, "Should I Get Screened for Prostate Cancer?" with a statement:
"Not all medical experts agree that screening for prostate cancer will save lives. Currently, there is not enough evidence to decide if the potential benefits of prostate cancer screening outweigh the potential risks."

<snip>
A study by the New England Journal of Medicine found that over a 7 to 10 year period, "screening did not reduce the death rate in men 55 and over." Former screening proponents, including some from Stanford University, have come out against routine testing. In February 2010, the American Cancer Society urged "more caution in using the test." And the American College of Preventive Medicine concluded that "there was insufficient evidence to recommend routine screening."

<snip>
According to Ablin, "testing should absolutely not be deployed to screen the entire population of men over the age of 50 . . ." He concludes that the primary promoters of tests are drug companies, which "continue peddling the tests," along with advocacy groups including the American Urological Association, all of which "stand to profit" by pushing continual tests. He states:
"I never dreamed that my discovery four decades ago would lead to such a profit-driven public health disaster. The medical community must confront reality and stop the inappropriate use of P.S.A. screening. Doing so would save billions of dollars and rescue millions of men from unnecessary, debilitating treatments."






/thread
Your post proves/disproves/determines what, exactly?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 10:08 PM
 
23,647 posts, read 17,131,181 times
Reputation: 7444
My brother was saved by the screening. They found cancer. He had the operation and chemo, now he is alive but would have been dead if he hadn't got the screening.

I think too many men and their doctors won't agree with this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 10:44 PM
 
Location: California
36,764 posts, read 41,220,864 times
Reputation: 34421
Quote:
Originally Posted by AeroGuyDC View Post
Your post proves/disproves/determines what, exactly?
Pretty much that it's not Obama behind anything here. The frequency of screenings is CONSTANTLY under review because at some point it becomes more of a problem than a solution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 10:45 PM
 
47,531 posts, read 68,634,628 times
Reputation: 22443
You can bet your last dollar that if this was taking place with a Republican in the White House, the liberals would be outraged.

But yes, politicians like Obama are looking at health care and counting votes. It's not about cutting spending, it's about redistributing the health care dollars to whatever brings in the most votes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-21-2012, 10:48 PM
 
47,531 posts, read 68,634,628 times
Reputation: 22443
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ceece View Post
Pretty much that it's not Obama behind anything here. The frequency of screenings is CONSTANTLY under review because at some point it becomes more of a problem than a solution.
So scientists are wrong? They were completely wrong just a few years ago?

All that nonsense about trying to catch cancer early -- and all our money that was wasted trying to catch prostate and breast cancer early.

The new scientific research apparently shows it's better to let cancers grow and spread before trying to diagnose them.
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

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2023, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top