I can say from personal experience that if I hadn't done self-breast exams, I would have never found the lump in my breast when I did a few years ago. Luckily it turned out to be nothing more than a cyst. The idea of not pushing precautionary exams on a frequent basis seems absolutely asinine to me!

When I got my last pap, the lady at Planned Parenthood found little lumps most likely caused by high caffeine intake in both of my breasts. She didn't sound worried but told me to do self exams to keep them in check.

as someone whose mother found a lump in her breast from a self exam, i find this to be absolute rubbish.

well, as a person who has gotten two mammograms, I've never felt that the forced early mammograms were such a great idea, I mean, its radiation, that cant be good for your breasts! And you didnt mention all the false positives that get needlessly operated on every day and cause alot of anxiety, pain and money. It seems like common sense to me. I definitely think self exams are obviously still important, and i havent read any articles telling women not to do them.

I think recommendations about whether or not early breast scans and self exams are necessary is a concern, but not as worrying as the motivation in this case behind why they think they need to stop pushing exams so hard. The fact that the health of the public and the motivation behind medicine now-a-days seems to be money is what is worrying me. I am not a huge fan of socialism in practice, but as the health industry seems more and more to be a big money machine, I think a healthy dose of socialized medicine would be the shot in the arm needed to steer us away from what is becoming an overwhelmingly capitalism-driven business. If the health industry was really worried about over-diagnosing, over-treating, or over-medicating, the better place to start would be with the pharmaceutical companies and the rampant over prescribing of useless medications for the sake of making money, not a free titty squeeze you can do at home and at worst encourages a 'better safe than sorry' approach to any resulting lumps discovered. Breast self exams are free. If there was a pill they could sell you that would detect breast cancer, you can bet they would be pushing it hard in the name of early detection, and happily pocketing the resulting millions of dollars profit while patting themselves on the back at their 'good work'. I'm not disputing that the detection and prevention of breast cancer is a worthy cause, more a criticism of the fact that the healthy industry seems much more enthusiastic about jumping behind a cause if there's a buck to be had.

Also, I'm not calling all prescription medications useless. They have helped many people lead normal lives where they would have had serious problems otherwise. I'm talking about the practice of throwing a pill at any little thing because that's where the money is coming from. I can't tell you how many times I have had to sit through a doctor's schpiel about the newest and greatest pill, or had a sample pushed on me because 'they just give them to us, it's free, try it' despite vehement protests on my part that I didn't have the condition the medication was said to help. It's like blaming the rain for the boat sinking and ignoring the gaping hole in the hull

I think recommendations about whether or not early breast scans and self exams are necessary is a concern, but not as worrying as the motivation in this case behind why they think they need to stop pushing exams so hard.
Ultimate Acai Max

I think we should continue to be the intelligent, self-aware women that we are, not react with inflammatory, often incorrect statements about what was actually said, and continue to do self-breast exams and confer with our doctor to determine what is best for each of us, given our medical history. Is cost a factor in their recommendations? Probably. But the bottom line is that it might actually force more research into a better technology than mammograms, since by the time a tumor is showing up on a mammogram, it can often be felt with a self-exam. Doesn't say much for the technology.

I suspect that the medical insurance industry is behind this. Call me jaded.

The logic of the outrage around this is flawed. However, the emotion is on the flip side of the DHHS changes. The emotional narratives given by survivors, especially those

What I would like to know is, if smoking is the leading cause of preventable cancers and cancer deaths, why does Bust continue to make money by promoting cigarette smoking through American Spirit advertisements?

Many women are treated for breast cancers that wold never in fact kill them. This is the issue.

There are huge false positives from mammograms with a huge emotional price attached. I have been thru that and so has several women in my family. living in fear for several weeks to be told ti was nothing.

Second, many cancers are slow growing. So slow growing that changes are you would die from some other cause before this cancer ever killed you. Yet they approach all cancer detections like they will kill you unless you do something immediately. So you are scared into radiation treatment and breast removal and chemotherapy when you may have in fact needed none of them.

If men had penis cancer then they would certainly pay more attention to the fact that not all penis cancers mean you have to cut your dick off.

Let's see more research into how to determine slow versus invasive breast cancers so they are not so fast to pick up the knife.

Breast cancer is a billion dollar industry and aggressive treatment is what generates the money. So before you think it is a pathetic attempt to save on health costs maybe you should think about it as an educated attack on an industry that makes money quite often from simply fear.

What I want to know is what men's health screenings are being cut to 'save money'? Are frequent screenings for other diseases also being discouraged...or are breast cancer screenings being singled out? What I'm wondering in other words, is if this is another case of a "woman's affliction" being under funded and over cut. Any one know of any other screenings being discouraged due to money issues?

How's that hope and change working out for you? If we are going to have nationalized health care, procedures must be rationed. This is no surprise. It's going to get worse for the elderly.

I think we should also note that mammograms are very dangers in terms of radiation. A mammogram gives you up to 1000x times the amount of radiation as a chest xray. You're better off with self exams and a breast thermography since that doesn't have any radiation.

Beyond that, yea, shocking! No body cares about female health. Nothing new there...

I have breast cancer running on both sides of my family, my mother was diagnosed at 29, had a double masectomy and later died of various cancers and complications. Thus, even though I am only 27, I am extremely high risk. I was told by more than one doctor that I should start yearly mammograms 10 years before the age my mother was first diagnosed. I had my first mammogram 2 years ago when my gyno thought she felt a lump, needless to say, I was scared shitless and the technicians and doctor were confused why such a young person was there--until I explained my history. I'm told I should get a yearly mammogram. I researched self-breast exams extensively and it does not seem they are as useful as professional tests you can read about it more here: http://www.breasthealthproject...-exam.html

I understand that many women are without health insurance or with poor health insurance that doesn't cover it, but it is so incredibly important to get tested. I'm appalled at the lack of routine testing our country wants to promote, whether for breast cancer or STDs. We don't even seem to want to focus on prevention, but that's another topic. I know my local Planned Parenthood provided me with a referral for a cheaper mammogram so that might be an avenue for other women as well. It's also paramount to try to use a clinic with the most advanced technology.

We can all share our stories of one friend or family member who went through this or that with conflicting outcomes, etc., but please let's all agree this disease is very serious, it effects us all and we should be vigilant about preventing and detecting it.

I was diagnosed with breast cancer when I was 39! It was early stage but aggressive. I'd probably be dead if it wasn't for a mammo.

I am sick and tired of health cuts. Everyone deserves a pair of healthy hooters

Get some perspective: Our Bodies Our Blog post http://www.ourbodiesourblog.or...ake Sense"

There are no collective solutions for individual problems. We are not just government budget items! I will personally do (and have been doing) all I can to stop the Fed from running our health care!

This is very welcome news. The benefits of mammography for younger women have always been questioned, and the pain and cost of false positives are very real!

http://bcaction.org/index.php?page=does-mammography-screening-save-lives-let-s-talk-about-it

This is very welcome news. The benefits of mammography for younger women have always been questioned, and the pain and cost of false positives are very real! Self-exam is important of course.

here is a great summary from the brilliant activists at breast cancar action!

http://bcaction.org/index.php?page=does-mammography-screening-save-lives-let-s-talk-about-it

I'm often irritated with how the lay media covers health and science issues, and this is one of those times. The government isn't trying to kill women. Please go to the USPSTF (U.S. Preventive Services Task Force) website and read the studies, or at least the summaries of the studies, behind these recommendations, before deciding this is all about saving money at the cost of womens' lives. A couple of women on this thread wrote about how they noticed benign lumps on their own - they were benign, due to caffeine intake and cysts - the exact point the studies behind the recommendations are making - breast self exams are NOT correlated with decreased breast cancer deaths but ARE correlated with more testing and diagnosis of benign breast masses.
Please take the time to read the original info - articles from Annals of Internal Medicine, about the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force Recommendations: http://www.annals.org/content/151/10/716.full
http://www.annals.org/content/151/10/727.full


Also please keep in mind these are only recommendations - whether one gets mammograms and at what age and whether one does breast self exams is still something to talk about with your doctor and decide for yourself, based on your risks (for example, if you have a family history of breast cancer, this recommendation does NOT apply to you!) and how you feel.

i beleive you have only partial and/or incorrect information, and you've just jumped on the media and anti national healthcare bandwagon- the one using fear tactics saying healthcare will be rationed! I have NEVER heard or read in any respectable source that examinations were being discouraged or skipped. ONLY that mammograms before the age of 50 were being deemed less necessary, and less useful than originally thought. Science and technology constantly update, and past practices often change to reflect the new information we now have. There is an excellent article in the current Vogue magazine, where a Doctor explains the added radiation risk of the extra unneeded mammograms and also how , women are being treated unneccesarily for tumors that will never develop into anything. They are poisoning there bodies unneccesarily with chemo and radiation for no reason. This is similar to the additional medical technology now used for delivery of babies- fetal monitoring, ultrasound, etc., and because of this doctors can "see" additional problems, where in the past they could not. Now, with all the additional technology, something like 1 in 3 women gets sliced and diced open with a cesarean section, an insane number. Also, there are doctors that prescibe ultrasound for breast exams, no radiation. You lay over a vat of water, with your breast dangling into the water, totally painless. Some doctors have told me this may be less effective than the mammograms, I have not done the research as of yet--something the BUST writer should have done more thoroughly.

I was pleased to see this recommendation. Common sense tells me that repeated exposure to radiation and physical trauma (compression and biopsies that can spread otherwise non-problematic cancers) are the real dangers to breast health for most women, along with overtreatment.

my mother was diagnosed with advanced stage 3 breast cancer in her early 60s. the year before her mammogram was completely clean. if she had waited another year or two for her check-up, she would be dead now. instead, she survived and is doing great, and she and i, as well as all of her doctors, credit her mammogram for saving her life. this federal task panel's findings are highly suspect, inaccurately derived, or worse - both.

Sadly, this doesn't surprise me. The concern over how the U.S. is actually going to be able to afford health care reform is increasingly huge. I understand that over treatment can be traumatic, but why take the risk? Awareness can only be good, and self exams cost nothing. Years of unfortunate personal experience from so many people and scientific research has shown that skipping a doctor's appointment is never a good idea, and that it's always best to err on the side of safety. The only part that troubles me is the fact that the health care bill proposes to "focus more on prevention and overall wellness" in order to reduce costs. The argument against self exams doesn't jive with this. However, it is clear that death is cheaper than treatment, which just says to me that we cannot always trust government guidelines and that we as women must empower ourselves and each other to seek truth and continue to take care of ourselves, no matter what anyone else tells us.

My first mammo-smash at 40 revealed a fibroadenoma which had probably been there for years. It was biopsied nonetheless and a small, stainless steal "clip" was put on it to show that it had been tested. I was in pain for months, especially around my period. My sister was diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ a few months later and, within two weeks, had a mastectomy. Both of these actions felt like over treatment to me but, worse than that, now that my sister has had cancer, I am reminded at every juncture when I go for mammos how "high risk" I am and how I should be having MRIs in addition to mammos EVERY YEAR. There has been no other family history of breast cancer and my sister had risk factors that I don't share. Still, I feel terrorized every time I go and they've wanted to biopsy other things that turned out to be nothing via repeat mammos. What can this mean? That for the rest of my life I will be cut and "marked" with stainless steel clips every time there is a cyst or fibroadenoma until my breasts are full of them? All I get in response is some crap about how they won't set off airport alarms.
All of that being said, I don't believe that people should be deprived of the choice to have any of these procedures if they want them and that insurance companies should not take this as a reason not to pay. I just dislike the atmosphere of panic and think sometimes about the history of medicine and women and the "cash cows" we've sometimes been as the recipients of over-treatment (think of all the hysterectomies our mothers "had to" have).

As a woman with a family history of breast cancer deaths. I will continue to have mammograms, do self-checks and if need be voluntary double mastectomy etc. I am not willing to let the government, insurance companies or anyone else decide what is right for me. And I hope you do the same, whatever that means.

Just because a lump isn't malignant does not mean it will be that way in every case. Yes, treating benign cysts, etc. may cause unnecessary anxiety and unnecessary doctor's visits, but how is someone to know whether something is benign or not? Because not everything found in self-exams is benign. Some people wouldn't have found cancer without doing self-exams.

First off, to not teach SBE is ludicrous! We need MORE patient education in healthcare. An educated pt means a pt who becomes an authority of his own healthcare.

Second, mammograms DO have higher radiation levels. So if a woman is NOT at high risk, not having symptoms, then certainly a preventive mammogram every TWO years seems sensible. Why have a procedure you don't need? Why exposure yourself to more radiation? Do other things to prevent breast disease: eliminate caffeine, use a natural deordant, etc, etc., exercise, eat healthy, stop smoking, remove toxins from your environment.

When I was younger and learning how my breasts felt I had some scares that turned out to be my normal breast tissue. Still, I went to the hospital and had them checked out. The surgeon told me to keep checking my breasts every month. He said he knew that finding a lump in a bag of lumps was hard but that if I kept at it I would eventually know what was normal for me and what wasn't. I was reassured and told to come back if I had any more questions.

Not once did the surgeon say I was silly for having come in or that I was too young to have breast cancer, which is what these guidelines seem to be promoting. In fact, I was commended for coming in even though I was very young and very scared of "what it might be".

My point is that I trust the man who operates on breast cancer patients every day, who is there for every woman that comes in worried, a lot more than a government agency that mentions money-saving in the same statement where it talks about the health of my body. There is no way I am going to pass these guidelines along to other women or tell them to my own daughter if I have children. They are absolutely ridiculous.

I'm really shocked by the misinformation here. This is not a new study. A mammogram exposes your breasts to radiation. The chance that the radiation exposure will cause side effects is greater than the chance of the mammogram detecting early cancer. Think about it-zapping your breasts for 40 or more years, that may cause the cancer itself. I'll be waiting until age 50. The more I stay out of the Medical Industrial Complex the better I feel.

Educate yourselves:

http://www.naturalnews.com/010886_cancer_brst_cancer_mammography.html

bullshit, i know many women well below 50 who are survivors.

We should all be checking ourselves atleast once a month, I've just got into the habbit of checking myself every other day when I shower. Best to be safe - I love life.