November 19, 2009 in City

GOP women say study augurs perils

Jacob Barker Correspondent

The task force, an independent body of health professionals funded by the government, rocked the medical community this week by questioning the necessity of annual mammograms for women over 40 as well as self-exams to detect breast tumors. The study has drawn criticism from lawmakers in both parties and illustrates the increasing politicization of health policy.

“Especially as we have been debating health care reform in America, it is concerning to us that these recommendations mirror policies in single-payer nations like England, where women over 50 are invited once every three years to be screened,” McMorris Rodgers said.

She said the timing of the study “was very curious to me.” She said she saw it as “an example of how government-run decisions could be made.”

Insurance providers have raced to clear up questions about the study’s implications. A spokesman for Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, which oversees the Medicare and Medicaid programs, said the task force’s study “doesn’t really affect us.”

A spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans said other studies would have to be taken into account before an insurance provider changed its coverage.

Still, Rep. Jean Schmidt, R-Ohio, said she’s concerned that insurance companies will adopt the task force’s recommendation that women delay mammograms until age 50 and have them every other year.

“This is about cost of medicine; this is not about how you save a life,” Schmidt said.

The 16 members of the panel, none of whom was appointed during the Obama administration, say the benefits of screening women in their 40s are outweighed by the costs, such as anxiety, radiation exposure and unnecessary tests and procedures due to erroneous mammogram results. The study found it would take 1,904 screenings of women in their 40s to save one life but only 1,339 screenings of women in their 50s to save a life.

The chairman of the group, Ned Calonge, denied that the health care reform debate or cost played a role in the drafting the guidelines, the Washington Post reported.

Otis Brawley, chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, said in a statement he still recommends annual mammograms after age 40. The Susan G. Komen for the Cure Scientific Advisory Board noted that there has been a longstanding debate over when to begin screening and recommended that individuals and their doctors make the decision.

But the Republican women said that if a large bureaucracy is created by health care reform, it could use studies like this to limit care.

“We don’t know how far government will go in this bureaucracy, how far the decisions will be taken away from us,” said Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn.

A spokesman for Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash., said a study doesn’t constitute a “dictatorial rule” for doctors. Nor is the senator concerned that the government will ration care using scientific studies, said her communications director, John Diamond.

“As we read the bill, it’s not going to open the door to government dictating decisions,” Diamond said.

Eight comments on this story so far. Add yours!

Rifleman__Dodd on November 19 at 12:11 a.m.
McMorris should know. After reviewing the letters to the editor, most constituents think she is a boob anyway.

Flag as inappropriate
Diana on November 19 at 6:38 a.m.
Just more fear mongering from McMorris Rodgers, a follower who says only what she is told to say. This is not a political issue.

Flag as inappropriate
CalJones on November 19 at 8:23 a.m.
Get the Government out so we can enjoy affordable healthcare in which we have choices that are our choices.

Flag as inappropriate
lyle on November 19 at 9:15 a.m.
Cal you are so right. Ha, Diana you had breast cancer? I would say not. It is quite scary, but by your comments you could careless!!!

Flag as inappropriate
Mr. Natural on November 19 at 9:34 a.m.
A study if performed comprehensively and unbiased with proper parameters and formulas will at times result in a conclusion that seems surprising and unpredictable. For instance you can say that there is a lower incidence of certain cancers in third world countries…but then you find that the mortality is such that the population does not live long enough for these cancers to occur. Let's look at how well the study was performed and it's margin for error.
Regardless of the study I think people (women) would rather be safe than sorry. I’m annoyed that McMorris-Rodgers et al would see this as an opportunity to twist fears for political reasons.

Flag as inappropriate
Charles Cavanaugh on November 19 at 1:05 p.m.
Hey, enough criticism of Cathy McMorris-Rogers! She is ambitious, wants to climb the Republican ladder, and she would be a great vice-presidential choice on a Palin & McMorris ticket!

Flag as inappropriate
Lulubelle on November 19 at 3:29 p.m.
How disappointing, but not unexpected, that Ms. McMorris-Rogers has chosen breast cancer as a political tool to promote Republican opposition to health care reform. She says the new study is a “preview of what to expect from Democratic health care reform”.

Facts are, none of the panel members that came up the the new recommendations were appointed by the Obama administration and Kathleen Sebelius, Health & Human Services Director, said “The task force has presented some new evidence for consideration but our policies remain unchanged. My message to women is simple. Mammograms have always been an important lifesaving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today. Keep doing what you have been doing for years – talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions and make the decision that is right for you,”

Just another case of Republican fear mongering.

Flag as inappropriate
Fixer on November 19 at 3:58 p.m.
Ha, Lyle you had breast cancer? I would say not. It is quite scary, but by your comments you have clearly demonstrated your ignorance.

Folks don't need to have an experience with breast cancer to criticize Cathy McMorris-Rodgers when she politicizes an issue to further her party's agenda.

Flag as inappropriate