What is the issue/problem?
With a new health care program come new health care regulations of the health care needed. The government is saying that women now, don’t need a mammogram until there 50, which is going against what the American Cancer Society standards of starting at age 40 mammograms. The government is trying to save money, which they will, but not lives. The worst kind of breast cancer has been found in women in there 40’s and now they don’t think it is necessary to scan until 50. If people do get screening before, it has to come out of there own pocket, insurance companies will not pay for the screenings. Every cancer organization is speaking up and saying if this is passes, there will be more deaths from cancer then lives saved.
I looked at the bill H.CON.RES.158, which is supporting for early detection month for breast cancer and all other forms of cancer as well.
Who is affected by this issue?
Women in there 40’s and 50’s who have been going to yearly mammograms. This might not only be for women trying to fight off breast cancer, these guidelines might just start here and continue with colon cancer or prostate cancer as well. People who are trying to avoid and stay cancer free are going to lose, our government is telling them oh don’t worry, things will work out. What?! Who gains is the government and or insurance companies by saving money on yearly mammograms every year beginning at age 40. The consequences is lives are going to be lost, over an issue that there shouldn’t be a issue, anyone who has researched on cancer knows that early detection is how we save lives.
What are the consequences of the issue?
More people will be dying from cancer rather than having living longer cancer free. It will cost the American people thousands of dollars of their own money, trying to do prevented care. This also might make insurance hard to obtain by many Americans, not just the poor but also the rich.
What is the economic impact of issue?
Right now both sides of the issue bear the cost, the families battling cancer and the government/insurance companies that help pay some of the costs. It will be the same way after the new guidelines, but if people who want yearly mammograms will have to pay out of pocket if they want screening earlier than 50. The government is going to benefit the most with lower costs; this will not benefit anyone who is at a high risk for cancer either by genetics, age, or health.
What is the social impact of the issue?
The impact will be a problem between the government and the people, the government and other government and also government and cancer organizations. It will be a messy area in society. Also, all people will be affected not just the poor, but also the rich, anyone that is going to have to pay out of pocket if they want earlier mammograms is going to be affected. Another important issue is ethnicity, it is known that African Americans, or Hispanics have a higher risk of cancer and a lower percentage of life after, again the government is discriminate against a minority group.
What are the barriers?
Barriers are the government, people, and cancer organizations. The people and cancer organizations need to inform others of why the new guidelines would be bad for us, and how it may save money, it may not save lives. We need to inform and educate people on the issue, and get more people involved to break down the barriers. Also among the people there might be barriers, of people who can pay for mammograms at 40 if the new guidelines are in place and the people who can’t. Where are they going to get the funding to help save their own lives.
What are the resources?
Resources will have to campaign against the new guidelines, trying to inform as many people as possible. The government might put new guidelines in, but cancer organizations are going to say what they know and think is best for saving lives. With a new bill we have to go against the current proposed bill with facts, evidence, and statistics of they the guidelines we have now are the best.
What is the history of the issue?
Over the years, cancer organizations are coming up with newer and better ways for treating cancers. Each year they find more information on saving lives with help from events like Relay for Life to raise money and awareness. They think that getting more check-ups and mammograms will save lives, and it has shown that it does. We also have come into more technology on ways to treat cancer, and with early detection people are beating cancer and living cancer free after diagnosis. We may be far from finding a way to prevent cancer, but we are doing everything we can to beat it.
Allies & Opponents
Those who are for the new guidelines is the government, and people are trying to implement them. Who oppose are cancer organizations, people with cancer or who have beat cancer/cancer free, or anyone who knows someone who has had cancer, and women who are in there 40’s or 50’s who get mammograms. This also affects anyone if the new guidelines are actually passed.
Your recommendation
I feel that these new guidelines are extreme’. There is lots evidence on early detection and cancer survival rates, anyone that thinks its not important must not be informed. But this is the government who are trying to say; we don’t need to look for cancer as often, even though it is one of the higher death rates in the U.S. The American Cancer Society is speaking up as well as people who are fighting or have fought cancer and this will help with not implementing the new guidelines. I would never want my health to be at risk because the government wants to save money; I think that a life is more important than money any day. I understand we may need improvement in our health system, but this is to the extreme and needs not to be involved in the health care plan.
Sources:
American Cancer Society
Fox News ( New Cancer Guidelines Say to Start Mammograms at 50, Not 40)
Associated Press (Mammogram guidelines spark debate over health bill By PHILIP ELLIOTT)
Posts
