I believe that a "panel" also came out against PSA tests for men younger than 60.
Within the past month, 2 relatives in their 40s were diagnosed with stage 4 prostate cancer.

It would appear that like all government ´facts´ they are more concerned about false positives than positives. what the hell do they care about the positive findings.

DON"T even get me started. I have been home almost an hour from having my 11th radiation treatment. It was caught early so I didn´t have to have chemo. I am so sick of the fools saying they aren´t necessary I had a mammogram every year for last 10 years..NO false positives. They want women on Medicare to die..Period...
I am so happy I was screened every year

#3, thank you for sharing that. I believe you are right, and it´s only going to get worse. God bless you, and I hope you make a full recovery.

It would be interesting to know what Mrs. Obama, who is over 40 I am certain, does in regard to this issue. Of course the Left elitists in our country hold themselves to entirely different standards....no death panels for them I am sure.

We the People should be sueing for Equal Protection under the Law with regards to Healthcare. Take it all the way to the Supreme Court. WHY are we sitting still for this? All for one and one for all.
EVERYONE MUST be under the same plan. That means Congress, Supreme Court, all Federal workers and Union members.

Perhaps the lack of false positives among that group was because they had already got cancer and weren´t there to be counted. Now tell me, if infrequent mammograms show less false positives, does that mean they have more real positives? How´nhell can you find cancer if you don´t screen for it? So there are a few false positives; that´s better than missing cancer entirely, which will happen with infrequent scans. But that was not even discussed in the article. Stupid, stupid, stupid!

I have zero respect for the ACS. They should stay out of it.

Didn´t they just come out with a better mammography machine that reduces the risk of false positive ?

Shouldn´t a woman´s physician, that is treating her, make these decisions vs someone that has never seen the woman or had cancer ?

Thank you #4.. God has blessed me.. My oncoligist told me I have a 92% chance of it not recurring. To me..that is a cure. It is because of finding it early and having surgery right away..
I can´t see an upside to screening less often. I want all women including my daughter to be as fortunate as I have been.

Sure the test didn´t reduce the risk on average, but there is no average person. If you are the one person out of 100 that does get sick the test is very helpful. The problem is the life saving effect is lost in the noise of 99 others that the test does nothing for.

#8 yes, the digital or 3-D mammogram. I have had one & while it was still painful, they don´t ask you to hold your breath & it was over faster, so was worth the $50 co-pay for me.

Paul Krugman says death panels are needed.
The democrats obamacare has death panels to kill millions of Americans.

This is another story to tell doctors to not save lives.

Yes, we do have false positives or at least a re screen to see if what they saw was a problem, but I´d rather have a false positive than not have had myself check out. I´m 73 and have had one lumpectomy when I was in my thirties and no problems since. God bless modern medicine and don´t let things like this stop you from following through on your mammograms. I do believe that Obamacare will have us believe we need less screening to save money.

My neice had to have a double mastectomy at the age of 39 and two of her aunts have had the same as well as her paternal grandmother. Take care girls and keep alert.