It is a good idea to get a baseline mammogram sometime in your forties. I have never thought that blasting breasts with radiation every year for no reason, was a good idea.

I think that most of the time the mammograms are routinely done and nobody even bothers to look at them. They just file them away and ring up the cash register.

I had a friend who got them every year. She had to switch doctors because of a change in her insurance plan. The new doctor found cancer in both breasts. They called up for the previous mammos and found it was obvious but apparently the previous doctor never bothered to look at them.

I read a story like this in the news about pap smears and cervical cancer. They never even bother to analyze the sample.

OMG Dilly that's horrible! I can't imagine how people could push that stuff through without even looking at it. Wonder how they sleep at night? Apparently fine.

I found this posted 5 hours ago from here and disagree: The recommendations from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force say women should begin getting routine mammograms at age 50 instead of the previous recommendation of 40, and that those exams should come every two years instead of every one or two years....The task force, an independent panel of primary and preventive care experts funded by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, also advises against training women to perform monthly self-exams, which the panel said have no proven record of saving lives.

I've known two women, both breast cancer survivors, and both were diagnosed via mammogram in their early 40's. That's only in my small world. Statistically speaking, similar scenarios have to be out there. Imagine the women that would go undiagnosed or get much later detection in their 40s w/out a routine mammo?

And I've known a couple who detected a lump that thankfully turned out to be benign. All of the ladies here probably know at least someone who's been in a similar situation.

It just seems like opening a pandora's box to me.

Early detection is so important. I had a baseline mammo before I even turned 40 (had a thickening under one arm in lymph node area). After age 40, I have had them every couple of years.

I do believe it is important WHERE you have your mammograms. Make sure you are getting a digital mammogram. The center where I go, there are always radiologists there to do a preliminary read. When I had the first one, because of the thickening, the lead radiologist (director of the center) even came out and personally did an ultrasound. It is nice to have preliminary results at least, although I know they are read again. I feel comfortable in the center I go to. It is a dedicated breast health center - not part of a hospital.

I think we are seeing more and more women diagnosed with breast cancer at a younger age, so for me, even though I am not 50 yet, I plan to have a yearly or at the very least, bi-yearly mammogram.

tina

I'm with you, Morton. I'm 47 and have never had a mammogram. I check my own body periodically and do not have a familial history of cancer, so I too chose to ignore what I felt was my doctor's standard recommendation to all of her patients "of a certain age." To be honest, I may choose to never have a mammogram, but then again I hold what most here would consider to be an alternative point of view when it comes to many medical procedures. I think the bottom line is that we must each do what we're comfortable with, no matter what "they" recommend.

I would be long dead by now if these new guidelines were in place 12 years ago. I am one of the ones that a mammo found cancer at a very early stage and I had absolutely no risk factors.
I think my life was worth it and so does my family.
It makes me so angry as a BC survivor I could spit. The new guidlines recomnending not teaching breast self exam and the new mammo guidelines are taking us back to the dark ages of medicine.

Just last year my MIL was diagnosed with breast cancer that was discovered through a mammogram. Her lump was very tiny, it never would have been found so early through just a physical exam. Becuase they caught it so early they were able to remove tumor through minor surgery and she was then treated with radiaton. No chemo necessary. She felt fine through the entire process, never lost her hair, was able to maintain her everyday life, and came through it all with no complications. I think a mammogram did for her what they were intended for.

Having lost 4 close family members on my side of the family to breast cancer in the last 10 years, I don't question their value.

I think it's very convenient that this information is being released at the very time new insurance measures are being taken by this administration. I was pleasantly surprised this morning when I saw a doctor come out on tv and say exactly what first came to my mind, that it's just a cost saving measure by the government and insurance companies and is setting back the progress made regarding breast cancer by 30 years.

I thought the very same thing this morning when I heard, Luk. Made me pretty angry, frankly. But the Little Blue Pill isn't likely to be cut now, is it?

I just lost a dear Aunt to BC, she'd been fighting it for years.

I haven't got a direct family history, but I believe that environmental factors can be an attribute, and lord knows I've exposed myself to more of those than I should have. I get my mammo like clockwork every year. Last year they discovered a lump...benign, but still there.

I forgot to mention I was only 44 when I was diagnosed and the mammogram picked it up... pretty glad it did!

My niece was diagnosed with BC when she was 21 years old. (DH's side of the family.)

I don't know anyone in my family who actually had BC but plenty of other cancers, for sure. I just had my annual check ups a couple months back but I hadn't had a mammo prior for about 8 years. I know way too many people around here that has had BC. We live in a gold mining area and we've wondered about our water since many people with BC have wells.

We have an imaging center here that has a great reputation. I totally trust them. They called me back for a swollen gland! They showed me the tiny area they were concerned about and I was impressed they picked it up at all.

I think we should consider our lifestyles, age and genetics when deciding how often we get a mammo. In Robert's side of the family, not one related female has escaped the BC diagnosis. Thankfully, they all survived because of early detection via a mammo.

If this gets put through, women need to revolt.

Does anyone seriously think that if MEN had the breasts we'd be having this debate? What a crock of horse s...

And how can a mammogram on 50 year old breasts be considered "baseline?" By definition, doesn't "baseline" mean "starting point?" I would think 35-40 would give you a better reference point.

Medicine by statistics/committee is not a great thing. I'm very disappointed by this :(

My sister (54) receives yearly mammograms. A malignancy was found in her latest mammogram which, had it not been discovered for another year, may very well have killed her.

IMO this is just a precursor to health care rationing and a sign of things to come when/if this horrid health care bill passes.

Because of the increase in BC cases in younger women, my gynecologist is recommending her patients get their baseline by 35 rather than 40+ or even 50. She told me when she set me up for my baseline this year (at 38) that she has had way too many BC patients with none of the standard risk factors and no really overt "symptoms" (lumps, dimpling, etc.) and/or who were "too young to get BC" whose cancer was detected on mammo - SURPRISE! She said (I paraphrase) "I'm tired of going to funerals that didn't have to happen." I just double-checked the stats from the National Cancer Institute and almost 12,000 women under 40 are diagnosed with BC each year.

Mine was done at a specialized women's breast-and-bone-imaging facility with digital equipment, which apparently uses MUCH less radiation than equipment from even ten years ago, and the preliminary read was done while I was still standing there in the johnnie so they could take more views if needed.

IMO it's one thing if YOU CHOOSE to skip the whole thing, but to have the choice taken away from you is another whole kettle of fish.

In regard to the OP's question, my sister could not feel the lump even after it was detected by mammogram due to the location. I'm forever grateful she was diligent about her annual mammos.

I mentioned above that I had lost 4 close family members to BC. One of them was a cousin who was 34 when she died. Her mother fought BC, and then other cancers, for 14 years before she died at 55. IMO, 50 is way, way too late for a first mammogram.

My mom discovered a lump in her breast at the age of 49. She had never been offered a mammogram.

She died 9 years later, after receiving state of the art therapy.

I really think she would be alive today if she had been offered a mammo in her forties. Her tumor was not discovered until it has spread to her lymph nodes. That is the whole reason for mammography: to pick up tumors before they are large enough to be felt on physical exam, and hopefully before they have micrometastasized.

I know several other women who have had BC diagnosed before the age of 50 on a routine screening mammo. My conclusion is that being female puts you in a high risk category for this disease.

I really think people need to take their health and healthcare into their own hands. Just because it's not covered by insurance doesn't mean you can't get one anyway. Ask your doctor for an order routinely, as you see fit.

I was diagnosed with BC at age 40. My GYN wanted me to go for a baseline and I kept putting it off as I had no family history and low risk factors.

It is NOT TRUE that they don't read the films. My tumor was VERY small, and even my oncologist was very impressed that they were still able to find the lesion. I have my complaints about unnecessary medical procedures, but mammograms are not one of them.

It is ridiculous that they are wanting to move the age up to 50 when the number of cases of younger women with BC is on the rise.

I totally agree that we need health care reform in this country, but socialized medicine is not the answer. This mammogram guideline is just a glimpse of what else "they" have in store for us.

Nicole

Thanks for all the thoughtful responses.

I have to admit that after reading the guidelines, I am perplexed, as the panel also advises against manual self breast exams, and questions the value of breast exams by doctors. So how is the cancer supposed to be detected? Once the skin starts dimpling or puckering?

For those who think this is a left wing conspiracy to ration health care-- why stop there? Maybe it is a right wing conspiracy to undermine health care reform. These recommendations could not come at a more problematic time for the administration.

Who did these recommendations come from? I thought it was from the Dept. of Health and Human Services.

Nicole

Found it! Actually, recommended by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. How are they appointed? Does anyone know?

Nicole

Here is a link that might be useful: WASHINGTON POST ARTICLE

A good friend of mine just went through BC surgery. She is a little over 50, no family history of BC, mammo last year was fine. She felt a small lump in a casual self-exam, got it checked, and yup , it was cancer. They caught it early, and for now she's OK. If she waited two years for the mammogram, she'd be in a lot worse shape.

I'm very suspisious as to why these new guidelines are coming out now, and really don't know what to think.

For those who think this is a left wing conspiracy to ration health care-- why stop there? Maybe it is a right wing conspiracy to undermine health care reform. These recommendations could not come at a more problematic time for the administration.

I would think that the administration would want to stifle a report like this while the health care plan is still being debated.

Just because it's not covered by insurance doesn't mean you can't get one anyway.

True, but what about the people who can't even afford health insurance, let alone elected screenings?

Heard today there wasn't a single oncologist on that task force panel.

True, but what about the people who can't even afford health insurance, let alone elected screenings?

They probably weren't getting mammograms anyway.

Its more than what is covered or not. These new guidelines have the potential to change the mindset of future generations of women.
In 2o years who will know how to do a breast self exam if it is not promoted and taught? Who will teach the physicians to do breast exams if it is no longer deemed necessary?
It can't be a good thing.
By the way this group and I can't remember the acronym, comes up with guidelines for medical issues periodically, so I doubt either party is involved.

I am crying reading this, it hits too close to home. One of my coworkers was just diagnosed, in her late 40's on her routine mammo. The very next day one of my best friends went in for a biopsy of a suspicious spot on her mammo, and MRI. She was just diagnosed with BC at age 35, her mom has been fighting BC for the past eight years. Just last week, I found a small lump in one of my breasts, I have an appointment next week, I'm so scared. Both of my grandmothers had BC.
These new recommendations are carp...

Its more than what is covered or not. These new guidelines have the potential to change the mindset of future generations of women.

In 2o years who will know how to do a breast self exam if it is not promoted and taught? Who will teach the physicians to do breast exams if it is no longer deemed necessary?

Very true. What's the thinking behind this? Why do they want to teach people not to do self-exams?

I read one of the reasons to skip mammo's and BSE was because the false negatives caused too much "anxiety and unnecessary biopsies". Hey, I had a biopsy that ended up just being a fibrous lump, but the two days of nerves was nothing compared to what I would have had if I had cancer detected at the stage 4 level. I'll take that two days of worry anytime to prevent dying of cancer. One other statistic I read was that annual mammos for women in their 40s "only saved 15% more". Well, like one of my pathology professors told us, a 1% death rate may not be statistically significant, unless YOU are in that 1%.

The panel that made this recommendation was established during the Bush administration. Occasionally some members leave and others join. It has made several recommendations about other types of cancer, and none of those have been controversial, as far as I recall.

I don't see this as in any way political and really, really wish that politics would be left out of it. This is not an issue of "bad Bush"/"bad Obama care".

I am so offended by the suggestion that it would spare women "anxiety". What do they think we are - delicate flowers that wilt at the first wind or rain? What if they recommended that men should no longer bend over and cough, since men dread that and it hurts.

I remember being sky-high with fear and planning my cremation urn while waiting for biopsy results to come in (luckily, benign). Better that than ignoring the lump that I found and being dead three years later.

It was indeed reported that there were no oncologists or diagnostic radiologists on this panel.

And being in that 1%- it matters a heck of a lot to me!! Sue