|
11 months ago ::
Jul 20, 2011 - 9:17PM
#1
|
|
|
www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/07/20/eveni...As reported on the CBS Evening News, The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has decided that women should start having annual mammograms at age forty, and that all women should regularly practise breast self-examination. This all sounds very sensible and I would hope that all women would follow this advice. I do wonder, though, if the cost of having a mammogram would be a factor in some women not being able to afford this test. Here in NZ, the cost runs from about $100-$175, depending upon the radiology centre in which it is done, although it is free for high-risk and older women. And, of course, if the mammogram is done in a public hospital, it is free.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 20, 2011 - 10:14PM
#2
|
|
|
That is a key screening that I believe most health insurers are happy to cover.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 20, 2011 - 10:30PM
#3
|
|
|
Most insurance companies cover the cost and so does Medicaid. Our free clinics and community health centers will cover the cost who don't fall under either group (insured/medicaid).
"No matter how dark the moment, love and hope are always possible." George Chakiris
“For those who believe, no proof is necessary. For those who don't believe, no proof is possible.” Stuart Chase
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 2:31AM
#4
|
|
|
Solf--hi. I know this if off topic but I have been thinking about you a lot lately. I saw on the news that NZ has had more earthquakes recently as well as many aftershocks since the other earthquakes. Are you and yours okay? How are New Zealanders coping with all of this? Let me know how things are going. Sending good thoughts your way. WGal
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 11:34AM
#5
|
|
|
Many women's health clinics and large hospitals also offer free or reduced cost mammography in the U.S. Any woman who says she can't get a mammogram hasn't tried very hard.
I'm here to emphasize how important a regular screening can be. The cancer I had was detectable only on my annual mammo. Neither I nor the breast surgeon could feel anything, but the path report after my surgery found it had already moved into nearby lymph nodes. You cannot assume that a tiny cancer as mine was won't already have migrated.
Luckily, the one I had was caught early, and having just completed treatment, I'm officially cancer free.
I urge all older women to follow the late Molly Ivins' advice, "Get the damn mammogram." Regrettably, she did not do that regularly and succumbed to breast cancer a few years ago.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 11:44AM
#6
|
|
|
First Congrads to Dot on being cancern free! I really hate Mamograms. I think the current wisdom like in the last few years is for normal women who have a clean baseline mamagram is to go to three times a year. I had insurance at the time but because I had not met my deductable the whole mamagram ordeal cost me $600.00. Yes I paid 600 dollars to be told - "hey, you look good see you next year". Basicaly they hit me twice. I have not had a mamogram since but I think when I do I will seek out the lower cost options.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 11:57AM
#7
|
|
|
My wife is very good about getting her yearly mammo. The cost isn't too bad, I think a $40 co-pay. But I wonder about the 40 year old limit. I understand there's a cost-benefit tradeoff to these things, but I know of a few women who have gotten breats cancer in their thirties or earlier. I'm a golfer, and there have been a number of cases in the golf world. A couple of years ago golfer Phil Mickelson's wife Amy was diagnosed and treated; LPGA golfer Heather Farr died of breats cancer in her twenties; and the wife of Darren Clarke, who won the British Open last weekend, died a few years back in her 30s. Seems especially tragic when this happens to young women who still have young kids.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 11:59AM
#8
|
|
|
I bet what happened was that they charged your insurance extra to cover their costs for the uninsured, Erey.
Something similar occurred on one of my statements for chemo. It's commonplace, I learned, so don't assume that $600 is typical. They wer probably testing your insurance to see if it would help cover their auxiliary costs.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 12:07PM
#9
|
|
|
I bet what happened was that they charged your insurance extra to cover their costs for the uninsured, Erey. Something similar occurred on one of my statements for chemo. It's commonplace, I learned, so don't assume that $600 is typical. They wer probably testing your insurance to see if it would help cover their auxiliary costs.
My insurance did not cover, I think they might have paid like 100 dollars or something No it was me that covered the cost.
The fact is the first time they were unsure about the Mamogram so they asked me to come back so I had two Mamograms. But still 300 bucks a pop out of pocket is steep. I have often thought I would do better if I did not have insurance
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Jul 21, 2011 - 12:09PM
#10
|
|
|
Any woman with a family history of cancer of any sort is well-advised to ask about starting mammos earlier than 40.
Part of why they're not recommended for younger women is that their breast tissue is more dense which makes spotting abnormalities far more difficult. The likelihood of a false positive is much greater as a result.
From what I've learned, I'd advise any woman with a family history of pre-menopausal breast or ovarian cancer to look into genetic testing. Having the gene markers for breast cancer means not only a greater likelihood of getting a more aggressive breast cancer but of getting one younger, too.
If you make it to age 60 cancer-free, your chances of having the gene markers are quite low, around 1-3%.
|
|
|