From the Wikipedia:

Fear mongering (or scaremongering) is the use of fear to influence the opinions and actions of others towards some specific end. The feared object or subject is sometimes exaggerated, and the pattern of fear mongering is usually one of repetition, in order to continuously reinforce the intended effects of this tactic, sometimes in the form of a vicious circle.^[citation

At first it was the Stupak amendment regarding abortion, and now its mammograms, and cervical pap smears.  

Question:  Aren’t insurance companies already telling doctors and hospitals what they will/will not cover for their patients?

I think the outrage about the new Task Force recommendations is about scare tactics and attempts to derail health care.  *I urge you to  not only LOOK at who stands to lose monetarily from the new recommendations, but who gains from receiving truthful information about their health, about their very lives…

Here is a summary of  the new recommendations for breast cancer screenings from the U.S. Preventative Task Force:

The USPSTF recommends against routine screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years. The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and take patient context into account, including the patient’s values regarding specific benefits and harms.
Grade: C recommendation 
 
The USPSTF recommends biennial screening mammography for women aged 50 to 74 years.
Grade: B recommendation.
 
The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of screening mammography in women 75 years or older.
Grade: I Statement.
 
The USPSTF recommends against teaching breast self-examination (BSE).
Grade: D recommendation.
 
The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of clinical breast examination (CBE) beyond screening mammography in women 40 years or older.
Grade: I Statement.
 
The USPSTF concludes that the current evidence is insufficient to assess the additional benefits and harms of either digital mammography or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) instead of film mammography as screening modalities for breast cancer.
Grade: I Statement.

For more information, read here.  The task force was comprised of bi-partisan staff, and the results were based on scientific evidence.

PDF of the clinical of the clinical guidelines can be found here. I urge you to read it to get informed and use your own good common sense and judgement. 

*Hat tip Sepia*

Here’s a video from Sunday’s Meet The Press interview with Dr. Nancy Snyderman and Nancy Brinker, Ambassador of the Susan G. Komen Foundation, discussing the new breast cancer screening recommendations:

*Hat tip Sepia*  But here’s the real scoop on Nancy Brinker and her connections -

An excerpt from the 9/16/02 article, The Marketing of Breast Cancer by Mary Ann Swissler on Ms. Brinker:

“…So most people would be shocked to find that the Komen Foundation helped block a meaningful Patients Bill of Rights for the women it has purported to serve since the group began in 1982.

Despite proclaiming herself before a 2001 Congressional panel as a “patient advocate for the past 20 years,” demanding access to the best possible medical care for all breast cancer patients, Federal Election Commission records show the Komen Foundation and its allies lobbied against the consumer-friendly version of the Patients Bill of Rights in 1999, 2000 and 2001. Brinker then trumpeted old friend George W. Bush in August 2001 for backing a “strong” Patients’ Bill of Rights, while most patient advocates felt betrayed.”

SNIP

“Not surprisingly, the Komen Foundation has owned $162,843 in Brinker International stock during 2000, the only year for which records are available. The Foundation also owns stock in several pharmaceutical companies and in General Electric, one of the largest makers of mammogram machines in the world.”

Read on if you can stomach it!

Mammogram Coverage Won’t Change, Companies Say

By Liz Szabo, USA TODAY

November 22, 2009

Insurance companies contacted by USA TODAY say they will continue paying for annual mammograms amid widespread fears that new breast cancer screening guidelines from a federal task force could lead women to lose coverage for those tests.

The guidelines – suggesting that most women under 50 don’t need routine mammograms and that women over 50 need them only every other year – were issued Monday night by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force.

Q&A: Experts answer questions about the new guidelines

CANCER FORUM: Share your mammogram experiences

Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebeliustried to ease women’s fears by affirming her support for mammography and noting that government policy won’t change. Medicare is required by law to cover one mammogram for women from 35 to 39 and annual screenings after that. Sebelius can change that coverage after consulting with the head of the National Cancer Institute.

Although task-force experts are government-appointed, “they do not set federal policy and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government,” Sebelius said in a statement.

“I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed  its mammography coverage,” she said.

Leaders of the American College of Radiology and the Society of Breast Imaging issued statements Monday that the new recommendations looked like an effort to cut costs.

At least so far, however, insurance plans have not proposed changing their coverage, says Susan Pisano, a spokeswoman for America’s Health Insurance Plans, which represents 1,300 companies covering 200 million Americans.

Some of the companies that told USA TODAY that they will continue paying for mammograms for women in their 40s include Kaiser Permanente, Aetna, Cigna, Geisinger Health Plan, Group Health Cooperative and WellPoint, which operates Blue Cross/Blue Shield plans in 14 states.

Together, these plans cover more than 73 million people.

A spokeswoman for Kaiser Permanente, Farra Levin, says, “We believe that focusing on prevention and early detection is critical in improving women’s health and saving lives.”

That doesn’t mean that companies are totally ignoring the task force’s advice. Source.

WEESeeYou’s Sepia calls a spade a spade: 

“The Komen Foundation’s financial connections to the pharmaceutical industry and anti-Patients’ Bill of Rights lobbyists is astounding! I really encourage folks to read that article. In light of the recent new breast cancer screening recs, it makes you think about WHO and WHY some folks are so outraged. Another excerpt from the article. Emphasis mine:

Batt finds Brinker “eerily reminiscent” of an earlier so-called cancer activist, Mary Lasker. “Her husband, the advertising executive Albert Lasker, created the famous cigarette ad, ‘Reach for a Lucky Instead of a Sweet.’ In the 1940s through the 1960s, Lasker used her business and social connections to transform the American Cancer Society from a small, local charity into the world’s richest, most powerful health charity. The ACS became a voice for policies that have made cancer research and early detection into lucrative business ventures with little connection to the welfare of patients or to breast cancer prevention. The Komen Foundation is a reincarnation of the ACS, but specific to breast cancer.”

**See what I’m saying?  These new recs = less screening. Less screening = less $$$ for companies – like General Electric – who make breast cancer screening equipment!”

So if coverage won’t change fro mammograms, why all the outrage and confusion?    Again, I think the outrage about the new Task Force recommednation is really about derailing health care reform.

As to Ms. Nancy Brinker, Ambassador of the Komen Foundation, she is fronting for profit.  Shame on you, Ms. Brinker!

Reminder to ACS aka Komen Foundation, WEESeeYou!

Now, who do you believe is looking out for you and your family’s best interest?