"Why have a mammogram, if you can't afford the cancer?"

[SoCalDem]

MSNBC just interviewed a woman who said that.

Unfortunately she's not alone. If a doctor "finds something", and the insurance company decides to cancel you, what have you really gained?

[polichick]

1. And why squeeze a tumor if you have one - worst thing you can do. nt

[noiretextatique]

24. mammogram must be cheaper than ultrasounds

and breast mris.

[polichick]

27. The cancer industry is a powerful entity. One test that some women choose...

...instead of mammography is thermography, which is heat sensing. It may not find the smallest growths but it doesn't involve squeezing, which can spread cancer. Also, many small growths come and go on their own. The cancer industry makes a load of money on unnecessary surgeries.

[noiretextatique]

29. thanks...i will ask my breast surgeon about thermography

as a breast cancer survivor who underwent radiation, i am not thrilled about having mammograms every six months.

[polichick]

30. I don't blame you for not wanting to do that every six months...

It's possible a surgeon wouldn't like the idea of thermography, I don't know. The doctor who told me about it tries to avoid invasive treatments. Best of luck! :)

[noiretextatique]

116. i am going to ask about having ultrasounds instead of mammograms

given my history, it would make sense to have the most accurate test.

[JenniferJuniper]

86. You're correct about non-harmful growths

see my post just below. The analysis of the statistical data can no longer be denied. The over-diagnosis (and hence over-treatment rate) of breast cancer is horrifying.

Of course, however, once a cancer is located, according to the standard of the day, a physician must recommend immediate treatment and many women are frightened into going as aggressively as possible with that treatment.

Having lost a friend to radiation treatment related heart disease, I've seen first hand what the harm cancer treatment can cause and think we need to spend far more time and money figuring out the nature of cancer instead of frantically and blindly diagnosing and treating everything in the same way.

[havocmom]

88. One wonders if part of over diagnosis of breast cancer is partly a method to have insurers pay

for 'boob jobs'. Not all practitioners are completely ethical. When a well-heeled and aging woman wants a younger silhouette and plastic surgeons want a steady income, it seems likely they would find other doctors who will see anything as a breast cancer to get it all paid for.

Just something I wonder about when watching a few very vain people grasping at straws to deny the aging process and medical companies that will do anything for the right price.

[JenniferJuniper]

93. I don't' think that's been a part of any of the studies, however,

It does all come down to money. The mammography industry alone is a multi-billion dollar one. And the breast cancer treatment industry? Can't imagine.

The over-diagnosis is related in large part to the sensitivity of mammography (MRIs can be even more sensitive. I know very little about thermography). More cancers are found and treated as a result of rigorous, yearly screening. A very few women's lives are indeed actually saved by non-symptomatic mammography screening, but far more are being treated for a condition that will never kill them, indeed if never detected they may well have died of old age never knowing of it's existence. Here's a chart that helps illustrate. It's staggering to think that of 1,000 women screened over 10 years, only one will actually have her life saved by those years of screening. We don't know what happened to the 2 - 10 who were treated needlessly, but no doubt some were quite seriously, perhaps fatally, harmed. And other studies say the over-diagnosis rate may be over 50%.

"In an effort to provide physicians and their patients with a "balance sheet" of the harms and benefits of mammography, Dr. Welch included a tabular display along with his editorial. The credits and debits are for every 1000 women undergoing annual mammography for 10 years starting at the age of 50 years.

1 woman will avoid dying from breast cancer

2–10 women will be over-diagnosed and treated needlessly

10–15 women will be told they have breast cancer earlier than they would otherwise have been told, but this will not affect their prognosis

100–500 women will have at least 1 "false alarm" (about half these women will undergo biopsy)."

http://cancerology.blogspot.com/2009/07/breast-cancer-overdiagnosed-with.html

I'm not anti-mammograms. But I'd give serious consideration before getting involved with routine asymptomatic mammography screening. Seek and ye shall find. Unfortunately, we cannot differentiate between what needs to be found and what does not. And that's were the money needs to be going.

[alarimer]

90. The problem is being able to tell the difference

between something that needs investigation and something that can safely be ignored.

They also say that some tumors go away on their own.

[JenniferJuniper]

94. Exactly!

I just posted the same thing with some numbers.

The "going away" thing is intriguing, although I'm not sure yet what to make of it. I don't think we have enough data yet. Either way, I'd say we have the cart before the horse, and it's precisely because the cart is a cash cow.

[AllyCat]

103. I asked an oncology nurse about thermography (I had one instead of mammogram)

and she said they find tumors too late as they measure blood flow "heat". By the time a tumor has blood flow high enough to be measured, it's too late. While this sounds logical, she also didn't really seem to know a lot about thermography.

Why on earth someone would want to squeeze a potentially cancerous tumor and burst it is beyond me. The last time I received a reminder from my insurance company to get a mammogram, my milk had just come in after having a baby. At the time, I could think of nothing more horrible than a mammogram!

[JenniferJuniper]

104. It's not logical because

no one knows what "too late" means. A larger tumor is not necessarily going to be more lethal than something found small that can't be contained or won't respond to treatment. Breast cancer is not necessarily a linear disease. Women need to understand that, but after years of hearing "Early detection is the best prevention" (talk about illogical) over and over and over, it can be difficult to look at the facts - and the statistics - objectively.

[AllyCat]

122. That makes sense Jennifer. Thanks for your input!

[glitch]

97. I was told by my mammogram tech that they had to keep using it until it paid for itself

despite the fact that they already had the ultra sound wands and the techs trained to use them, and that the ultra sound wands were much more accurate and safer.

Economic inertia, the curse of progress everywhere.

[noiretextatique]

115. i think i may have to press the issue and demand an ultra sound

since i am at a higher risk of developing breast cancer (again). i'd like to hear the insurance companies explanation for forcing me to undergo mammograms that hurt my healing breast.

[glitch]

123. I sure would.

I can't believe anyone would insist on putting a healing breast into a mammogram.
Oh wait, we're talking about the American medical insurance industrial complex aren't we.
I do believe it, I just find it astounding.

[arikara]

62. Not only the squeezing

but the radiation involved, they are x-rays after all and frequent x-rays are carcinogenic themselves. Personally, I choose to pass on mammograms just as I choose to pass on all the pill pushing, needle sticking and other modern medical treatments.

[JenniferJuniper]

84. More importantly

Why have a mammogram if it is considerably more likely to diagnose (and lead to subsequent harmful, aggressive treatment) a cancer that did not need to be diagnosed in the first place than it is to ever save your life from breast cancer?

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/jul09_1/b2587

As always, follow the money.

[madmax]

2. Tell me about it....

I'm lucky I have insurance but, I became covered just a breath away from becoming a casualty of 'pre-existing conditon'. And if my husband loses his job I'm a dead woman walking.

Even if you have insurance don't stop fighting - it's not a gurantee.

[sasquatch]

3. Winner, winner, chicken dinner!

Rec'd the thread as well.

[orleans]

64. now there's an expression i don't recall ever hearing before.

(i recommended the thread as well)

[wroberts189]

80. Its from a recent blackjack movie.... I will add a knr nt

[Solly Mack]

4. K&R

[DesertFlower]

5. K&R. nt

[Uncle Joe]

6. Kicked and recommended.

Thanks for the thread, SoCalDem.

[katmondoo]

7. That is a point I would never had thought of

There is some truth to it.

[CrispyQ]

8. A tragic commentary on health 'care' in the US.

Also, there is fear your insurance company will drop you & then you have the pre-existing condition thing on top of it all.


Damned if you do, damned if you don't.

[LuckyLib]

9. Those of us with insurance, who have not had a major illness,

have NO IDEA how quickly that "insurance" begins to look like swiss cheese, and how fast the bills start rolling in once you are in treatment. We can be smug in our good health, but we are one illness away from financial catastrophe. All of us (except Congress and the very wealthy, of course).

[SoCalDem]

12. and every year older you get, the MORE it's gonna cost you

good health or not.. and when you need it the most, ....it goes away:(..

You get no "brownie points" for NOT using it for all those years you paid premiums, but never got sick.

and MOST people will get sick, and suffer before they finally pass on.. Very few have "movie-style" deaths..you know the ones I mean,.. where the person is perfectly coiffed, painfree, and then just breathes their last.

Most people are in a LOT of pain, they are afraid, and many are ashamed of having "spent" all their children's "inheritance". That's how too many people pass on..

[Lorien]

52. That's very true. And even those who think that they have done EVERYTHING

right can still become ill. Look at Linda McCartney. Look at my friend Julie; a world class bodybuilder, has the cleanest, healthiest diet imaginable, is very positive and upbeat, but at age 50 (and she looks 35) she has had skin cancer, meningitis and severe back issues. Illness and injury can hit even the healthiest people on the planet at one point or another. No one is immune.

[unpossibles]

79. but all of the conservatives tell me that getting sick is always your fault

price of sin or something. You know, like how everyone who is hard working is rich, and how all poor people are lazy.

That's not how the world works? </sarcasm>

Sadly, many do seem to think that, although I have no idea how.

[SoCalDem]

112. God wants some people to be sick... n/t

[unpossibles]

113. well, that is some of it perhaps, but I mean the 'fiscally conservative' ones

who think that only people who eat poorly or smoke get cancer, and that if you are uninsured it means you're lazy and unemployed. I would bet it's a similar subset of people who think that women are raped because they were asking for it or drunk, and that everyone who is rich not only deserves to be so, but is also an American hero, risking their incomes to create new jobs.

in short: they are assholes who blame the victim and pat themselves on the back for being born rich (and white and male, typically)

[SoCalDem]

114. This is a main reason FOR public coverage

it shifts things from the individual under a microscope, to the WHOLE..with no one person or one group "standing out" for scrutiny.

Of course it takes "power" from the finger-pointers & self-appointed morality & decency squads, who love to tell other people how to live their lives.

The fact is this.. live an unhealthy lifestyle, and you will not live as long..no matter how much medical intervention is offered.. cumulative damage cannot be un-done by pills & surgery.. people who misuse their body, will die younger and "save" us all money in the long term .. crass, but true.

[AllyCat]

107. while our family is relatively healthy, our son has a birth defect

It has cost a small fortune for repair (it is cosmetically and neurologically repairable), but the physical therapy and eye problems that go with it are a continual battle. Every time we see a new specialist, we get a friendly computerized call from Ingenix, our insurance company's subrogation firm, trying to figure out how to not pay for the care. Even with the covered care, we pay 20% and then the remainder of the cost that our insurance company decides is not "customary". We shell out about $350 a month in preventive as well as the specialists' fees. And we have GOOD insurance.

He has to have another surgery this fall and possibly another reconstructive surgery in a couple years to correct some of the asymmetry in his face. We keep wondering what will happen when we hit our "lifetime maximum" or if I lose my job and our insurance changes. Or, if my hospital succeeds in getting rid of our "good" plan and providing only the hospital insurance plan that won't cover the pediatric specialists we need to see.

I'd GLADLY pay $350 a month to the government if everyone was covered and we didn't have to worry about the portability of care for our son.

You are right, people with good insurance who are healthy have NO IDEA what will happen when they get sick.

[LuckyLib]

109. You have outlined the tremendous invisible "costs" for all of us: worry, fighting with crazy

bureaucrats in the insurance companies, always wondering how it will all play out -- emotional costs that none of us should have to bear. And our poor fellow Americans with no coverage? They have been abandoned by their country.

[SoCalDem]

110. Our son, born in 1973 (our first child) had a serious birth defect

(extrophy of the bladder), and had 29 surgeries before his 8th birthday. The first was when he was just 19 days old, and weighed about 5 lbs.

We had medical coverage through my husband's job. None of the local doctors were particularly interested in anything but removal, and doing a bilateral-urostomy..(a tube from each kidney & two drainage bags , one on each side).

He remained in the hospital post-birth for 19 days, and during that time we frantically searched for someone,,,anyone, who could offer this little guy a better future.

one phone call to our old family doctor, back in Kansas, led to an immediate referral to Mayo Clinic.

Mayo Clinic & St.Mary's Hospital in Rochester treated him for 8 years, often three surgeries a year (6-7 week stays each time).

THEY NEVER ASKED FOR MONEY "UPFRONT". The only thing we ever had to "sign" was the admittance paperwork, so they knew where we were staying & how to reach us.

I don;t know how Mayo operates these days, but their treatment of us, and of him, made a horrible situation somewhat bearable.

We did have to pay something, but it was AFTER we returned home, and we just paid what we could.

Truthfully, I have employed "selective amnesia", to deal with a LOT of that whole ordeal. Some things are just too painful to dwell on.

[AllyCat]

121. Hugs to you and your little one (well, now big one :)

I can't even imagine. I don't think Mayo runs like that anymore, but maybe I'm wrong. I can't imagine the strife of dealing with this and a new baby. You are strong parents! We are lucky with our guy. He has/had craniosynostosis (fused skull suture) and at least it is largely correctable, but the sequelae are a real exercise.

[glitch]

10. ***** K & R nt

[myrna minx]

11. .

:-( Too true.

[Maru Kitteh]

13. K & R #22

[Catshrink]

14. This hits really close right now...

My sister has insurance, a policy she and her husband pay through the nose for even though it's through her husband's job. And there's a $5,000 deductible. Because of this, she skipped her mammogram last year. She did have one this year and... you guessed it, they found "something."

The radiologist wanted a more in depth mammogram to look at areas of "calcification." She did this and now needs a biopsy because they are irregular. The good news is that if these are cancerous, they are "stage 0" and can be treated with a lumpectomy and radiation. She thinks that they are so tiny they can't be anything and thinks the doctor is making something out of nothing. I think she is worried about the cost.

BTW, she voted for McCain and loves Palin but she isn't rabid about it like one of my other sisters. I need to find the right time to talk to her about a public option -- it isn't now.

[SoCalDem]

16. I hope everything works out ok for her..

I should have one myself.. I flunked one last year and had to go back three times for "more studies".. I was supposed to go back in January, but haven't yet.. .and yes we have insurance,..I'm just lazy:(

[Catshrink]

20. Git 'er done!

I'm two months overdue for mine and my sister's result has me all worried now.

[SoCalDem]

22. I plan to call next week & set up an appointment to get squished

:)

[Catshrink]

44. Good! Should we nag you?

[immoderate]

42. Hope all goes well...

For you and your sister. :hi:

--imm

[Catshrink]

43. Thanks...

She has an appointment with the surgeon for next week. Meanwhile.... my nephew is in Afghanistan and the elections are starting shortly. I worried crazy about his safety. A bit of high anxiety in the family right now....

Hope all is well with you.

:loveya:

[immoderate]

46. Above ground. All the way.

--imm

[madmax]

76. Lazy!?!

Call right now, and get it done. :grr: Don't make me hurt you ;)

[Berry Cool]

28. Here's some good news for your sister.

If her calcifications are cancerous and stage 0, she may want to consider the option of doing without the lumpectomy and radiation. Of course, she should carefully consider whether she will ever personally feel any regret that she didn't do more. But there's a growing belief among medical professionals, depending on the pathology, that there may not be a need to treat some of these smaller tumors at all because they will never grow to the point where they spread and cause problems.

Obviously a lot depends on the biopsy. Is it in situ or not, is it invasive or not, what is the actual cell pathology? And I don't think I'd make a decision like that without getting a second opinion. Above all it's important to listen to what the medical professionals have to say and consider it carefully before making a decision. But the really good news is, it looks from what you say as if the worst she'll have to deal with is a lumpectomy and radiation. Even so, it's expensive, and she needs to consider all her options. Including the likelihood of recurrence based on all the factors learned through the biopsy. But knowledge is power, and it sounds like she's one of the luckier ones. I wish her well.

[Catshrink]

45. Thanks for the information.

She has an appointment next week and we'll see what the recommendation is.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

49. I've had those calcifications for, oh, about 20 years at this point

Been biopsied twice.

[Carni]

15. Truer words have not been spoken! NT

[Skidmore]

17. Last week I posted a thread about

actually agonizing over whether to go to the doctor or not because I had chest pain. I was afraid it would be something more serious than he found when I went. I have already survived cancer and keep waiting for something to happen that removes me from care entirely.

There were many responses with similar concerns, but there were catcalls too. I wonder what type of person finds the misfortunes of another something to mock.

[SoCalDem]

19. That's the most frustrating part. Paying for insurance

and then having to be afraid to use it.. It's something, isn't it?

I remember my mother being afraid to turn in tornado damage one time.. she was afraid of being canceled.

She had used the same insurance company for decades, and she was right..a few months after they paid the claim (the ONLY one ever), they canceled:grr:

[Fire1]

41. I DID turn in two claims. One subsequent to the other. Their

fault, mind you, and got cancelled. Thankfully, I've never had that problem with my health insurance.

[pengillian101]

48. So sorry to hear that.

"There were many responses with similar concerns, but there were catcalls too. I wonder what type of person finds the misfortunes of another something to mock."

******

Ya know, unless it affects them personally, it don't mean NOTHING to them, just ignore the naysayers and their posts.

[Soylent Brice]

18. DING DING DING

K&R

[closeupready]

21. This reminds me of the days before HIV cocktails,

and people would refrain from getting tested, because it was effectively a death sentence, with no treatment in sight. I suppose even today, if you were someone who is more at risk for HIV but unaware of one's HIV status and uninsured, you would still be more likely to say this, since how are you going to afford the prescriptions without health insurance?

[noiretextatique]

23. that's what happened to me

felt the lump two years before i got insurance, but i couldn't afford to get diagnosed until i had insurance. i was very, very, very lucky: stage 2, lumpectomy, radiation and tamoxifen for five years. but...if i could have afforded to be diagnosed sooner, i might have caught it at an earlier stage. and earlier stage means less medical intervention. given my radiation treatments were $100k alone, a lot of money could have been saved if i could have had the problem diagnosed earlier.

[Contrary1]

25. And please, don't just rely on a mammogram...

I got the "all clear" postcard in February of '97. I found a lump that following September.

While had carrying all the films to the surgeon, I took a look at them. Turns out the tumor did indeed show up on that earlier mammogram. Highlighted with a circle and a question mark. For whatever reason, it was never written up on the report. Stage 2, Infiltrating ductal that had spread.

Educate yourselves. Ask to see the films, and get a copy of the written report. You have a right to do so. Research the terms you do not understand. Know your own body.

Knowledge is the best defense.

[Berry Cool]

26. I've said it before and I'll say it again.

There's a lot of effort made to ensure women can get a free annual mammogram, but what if the mammogram ends up leading to a diagnosis of cancer? Then where does the woman get the money to pay for her treatment?

Free mammograms are better than nothing, but what we really need are better means of diagnosis (safer, for one) and a way for those diagnosed with cancer to pay for their treatment. A mammogram alone never saved a life.

[G_j]

34. jus like the free screenings for skin cancer, nt

[katsy]

31. That's where I am at this point in time.

I haven't seen a Doctor or Dentist in 8 years.

Worth more dead than alive.

[Saphire]

35. I'm with you in that boat. I have not been feeling well...something is

wrong with me, but I cant afford a Dr., much less any treatment. If it turns out to be something I guess I'll just have to die.

[katsy]

38. Oh no.

:cry: :pals: :cry:

Many people advised going for a free mamogram. Good luck with that right now with so many women in need and never mind if it's far away.

I thought about just cold calling doctors and seeing if they would take payments... but what can I do if I know something is wrong.

How about you? Have you made any calls?

[orleans]

65. this is me also

"what can I do if I know something is wrong."

so...i don't bother and try not to think about it. can't afford to get checked out, and if i did and there was a problem i'd be shit out of luck...and depressed. not knowing at least keeps the depression away.

[Javaman]

91. As far the dentist is concerned...

what I do is go to dental colleges. Here in Texas I go to the University of Texas San Antonio.

I have to get two dental implants. In the real world they would cost me around 5 to 6 thousand bucks. That's a game ender for me. However at the school, it's costing me 1300 bucks. I'm only charged for materials used.

The only draw back is that it takes longer to complete the process.

If you can deal with that, I would suggest trying to find a dental college in your area.

nothing sucks worse than painful teeth.

Good luck.

On edit: This school maybe in your are of CT: http://sdm.uchc.edu/

Just call the dental school and ask how you can become a patient.

[katsy]

120. Hey... thank you so very much.

It's not that far.

I'm in pain every day.

I'll call them tomorrow & again - thanks

[johnfunk]

32. Hay LAAAAAADY: Why have a lobotomy if you don't have a BRAIN???

:evilgrin:

[winyanstaz]

59. yes and then you too can be like john :)

[johnfunk]

81. Completely misread the original entry. ONE-PAYER NOW!!

[winyanstaz]

117. sorry I did not recognize that post as sarcasm....

I have to agree...one payer now!!!

[eShirl]

72. FOAD

[johnfunk]

82. Completely misread the original entry. Thought we were being FReeped. ONE-PAYER NOW!!

[eShirl]

83. heh, I know what that's like

:hug:

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our third quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[rucky]

36. Bumper Sticker!

though mine would say, Why have a mammogram when you don't have breasts?

[JBoy]

37. Wow, that question cuts right to the heart of the matter.

[NashVegas]

39. Gained? Time To Settle Your Affairs

But not much else.

[WillyT]

40. K & R !!!

:kick:

[femrap]

47. Exactly....

k and r

[Lorien]

50. My dad told me that if I ever get cancer I should just end it

because there's no way it hell my shitty insurance will cover it, and no way for anyone in the family to either. I would probably try some "alternative" treatments at least, but he does have a point.

[winyanstaz]

58. you might want to do a bunch of research on Issiac's Tea....

also known as Native Legend Tea.
That is what I will use if it comes down to it.

[eShirl]

75. "essiac tea"

not me, I'd use cannabis for it's tumor-suppressing, pain-killing and anti-depressant qualities
luckily I live in a state which has legalized medicinal-use cannabis

[winyanstaz]

118. thanks..I forgot to check the speeling on that one...you are correct.

and why not do both????

[OwnedByFerrets]

51. Big Kick

[JDPriestly]

53. Been there. Done that.

The last thing you want is to have a medical record that will raise your insurance costs. Fortunately, I can admit to that now because I'm on Medicare. Wish you all could join me.

[Odin2005]

54. Health insurance is a scam.

Health insurance is like lending someone with an umbrella for a fee and then demanding the umbrella back when it starts raining.,

[havocmom]

89. Perfect metaphor!

:thumbsup:

[2Design]

55. my thoughts exactly - if they find something - if and when I can afford

insurance it would be pre-existing condition

[Sirveri]

56. Why have a mammogram if you can't afford the mammogram?

My wife doesn't get health insurance, so she doesn't get to have a mammogram, god forbid she get one and they find something, then she'd never get insurance.

[Hekate]

57. When charities started sending mobile mammo-trucks to underserved areas: exactly what I thought

It seemed like such a nice idea -- but what exactly were poor women who couldn't afford mammograms to do if the news was bad? Write their wills?

Christ on a trailer hitch, we need to fix this.

Hekate

[tj2001]

60. It's not just cancer

There are so many treatable diseases that are not being treated because the patient does not have insurance.

[juno jones]

61. K&R! n/t

[beac]

63. Sad but true. K&R. n/t

[cleverusername]

66. Barriers to care

My own personal nightmare was a breast tumor while breastfeeding. I couldn't find a dr who would treat me. The drs have no idea what to do with a lactating woman. Yet another barrier for women seeking health care. I'm in the 6th largest city in the U.S. so you'd think that I could find appropriate care?!?

My dr gave me an order for a mammogram. The hospital refused to do it. I told them that I was not leaving without the mammogram. They called the dr and agreed to do it. That dr sent me to another dr The second dr aspirated a sample then patted my head and sent me home. I went to another dr who finally agreed to remove it. Fortunately, the tumor was benign. The surgeon said that the tumor was active and that it was good that I had it removed. If I hadn't been aggressive in finding treatment, who knows what would have happened.

Moral of the story: Women need to push for treatment. Don't let the dr dismiss symptoms. Keep going to professionals until you get what you need.

[AtLiberty]

67. AND, why have a mammogram if...

...you're hoping to obtain insurance soon knowing you'd be placed into the pre-existing condition category if anything was found?

One can't afford the cancer, nor can one afford to that information in their medical record...

[Daphne08]

68. People may think I'm crazy, but I feel the same way.

I'm 60 and have lived a good life, and I REFUSE to saddle my husband with thousands of dollars of medical bills. It would bankrupt us and completely demoralize him. (He's already worried sick because they've laid off most of the people in his company.) I've had four surgeries so I know how expensive health care has become.

My husband doesn't know my feelings, and he would vehemently protest if he knew I felt this way. Fortunately, he never reads the DU forum.

You know, I used to believe that we lived in a compassionate country. I no longer feel that way.

[condoleeza]

98. Feel exactly the same, Daphne

I have some health issues right now that my husband is pressuring me to have diagnosed. I know that if what we fear is real, I would choose to NOT be treated because the standard treatment for this would be incapacitating. My biggest fear is having to be dependent and I would rather die than be a drain on anyone.

We can and must do our own investigations into what ails us and try to find alternative treatment to the unnecessary surgeries and toxic drugs that doctors prescribe w/o any care as to the side effects - which are often worse than the illness. Our generation is the most toxic generation alive. Most of the illnesses we have relate to autoimmune disorders that are caused by toxins such as lead, mercury and pesticides we were exposed to throughout our lives, most of which could be chelated out. But western medicine makes no money from actually fixing you, they make money from the drugs and unnecessary treatments - chelation is considered "experimental" even though it works, so insurance will not cover it.

[mulhollanddriven]

69. Pretty much mirrors my situation

I don't want to tar myself with a "preexisting condition" so I don't go to the doctor. (which is somewhat of a moot point because I can't afford it anyway)

[rurallib]

71. yeppers

when I go to the doctor she says she wants me to take a bunch of tests. I tell her why bother. If they find something, I can't afford the treatment
She gets mad, I get mad. This is the state of "the best health care in the world" for me.

[Kindigger]

95. You must have a doctor with good sarcasm radar

I recently said exactly what you wrote and was told I was having suicidal thoughts. Claimed some law obligated them to call the Policia. Took some quick thinking to get out of that one :crazy:

A few days before that I talked to this redneck receptionist on the phone:

"Is there anyone there with you?"

'No.'

"Why not?"

'Okay, yes there is--my cat.'

"Is there anyone there with you?"

'I live alone. Is there something wrong with that?'

"Is there anyone there that can drive you to the office?"

'My cat isn't even a year old. I don't think he can drive yet.'

[lamp_shade]

70. So very true.

[rosesaylavee]

73. She's got a point.

Have to admit to that way of thinking too.

[Imalittleteapot]

74. With insurance, breast cancer, mastectomy

the ovary removal the docs recommended and repair of the ureter that was damaged when the ovaries were removed cost almost $20,000 out of pocket, doubled my monthly premiums to over $1,000 per month - forcing me to go on my husband's employer's plan with a $5,000 deductible. I am terrified of cancer appearing it's ugly head. Why? Because of the cost, not the availability of treatment for a possible cure. I wonder if I would choose to go down the insurance path again.

[Serial Mom]

87. With insurance, it can cost about $20,000 THIS IS WHY NO CO-OPS

Becasue again, even in a co-op, you can only afford what you can afford and therefore, those with limited funds, get limited insurance AS MOST OF US CURRENTLY DO! We have $7,000 deductible for just husband and me and it still costs $450+ a month.

Too many people going bankrupt even with insurance due to medical bills - but a hospital must get paid!

[harun]

77. My mother and law gets hers done in the Philippines, because she can

afford it, and whatever treatments are required, there.

[dgibby]

78. If you haven't done so yet, please send this to the White House.n/t

[Lydia Leftcoast]

85. One of my long-term unemployed friends has told me

that if she's ever diagnosed with cancer, she'll refuse all but palliative care.

I think that position is more common than we realize.

[upi402]

92. recommended! kick n/t

[DailyGrind51]

96. I was successfully diagnosed and treated for cancer nearly 30 years ago.

My out-of-pocket was around $75,000 and I had employer-provided 100% hospitalization, 80/20% major medical, 30 YEARS AGO!

[happygoluckytoyou]

99. TIME TO TALK....OR TIME TO ACT.... B O T H... and HERE IS HOW--> --> -->

6 degrees of separation..... how to spread this word......

FACEBOOK.... MYSPACE.... EMAIL FRIENDS LISTS....

tell your friends to:

1) SIGN THE PETITION AT FIREDOGLAKE.COM

2) WRITE THEIR OPINION TO SENATOR.GOV

3) WRITE THEIR OPINION TO WHITEHOUSE.GOV

------- and here is MY opinion...... I AM A SINGLE ISSUE DEMOCRAT ON THIS... SUPPORT SINGLE PAYER OR LOSE MY VOTE FOR 4 YEARS.....
NOT JUST YOU.... for president.... for senate.... for congress.... for house... for STATE offices....
IF THE DEMOCRATS WANT MY SUPPORT... i better hear a lot of LOUD VOICES

BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT A POLITICIAN FIRST JOB IS TO GET REELECTED........
http://www.senate.gov / where you should send every article which matters

[JAbuchan08]

100. I just got billed $195 for a mole removal

I realize this was elective surgery, and cosmetic at that, but the actual surgery did not cost me $195. It cost me $195 for a lab to conduct a litany of tests to determine whether my mole was cancerous, and all those tests came back negative - and that's WITH insurance.
Not to say that they should not have run the tests, but I personally would have preferred if they charged $195 for the elective surgery to subsidize the precautionary testing.

[otohara]

101. Shit I Can't Afford The Needle Biopsy $650.00

it's a procedure that costs $1400.00 and because it's done in a surgical center - my co-pay is $650.00.

[valerief]

102. K&R

:kick:

[Posteritatis]

105. I became dumber just seeing that question. Argh. (nt)

[happygoluckytoyou]

106. FUNNY FUNNY FUNNY.... DID I MENTION I FOUND A FUNNY..... HERE IT IS--> -->

Levi Johnston's mom cops plea: addiction blamed on no health insurance

By GottaLaff





Hey Chuck Grassley, et al. Look what a health care crisis can do:

The mother of the man former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin's daughter Bristol had planned on marrying has reached a plea deal in her drug case.

Sherry Johnston pleaded guilty Wednesday to one count of possession with intent to deliver the painkiller OxyContin. Five other felony counts were dropped.
I feel sorry for her, and I hope she gets treatment for her problem. However, I can't help but point and laugh a teeny tiny bit at this next part:

"That's pretty," Johnston said as a state trooper's pink handcuffs were placed around her wrists.
Okay, fun time over. Let's get to something that will most likely get overlooked elsewhere:

Although Johnston could receive 20 years in prison, her attorney and prosecutors agreed to a five-year sentence, with two years suspended, Butler said, considering the small quantities of drugs involved. <...>

Sherry Johnston has two pain pumps implanted in her body to deliver medication because she suffers a rare condition involving scurvy and chronic pelvic pain from prior medical surgeries, Butler said. She was receiving professional pain relief treatment but the problems arose when her insurer refused to pay for the medication, Butler said.
I'm sorry, what? Her insurer wouldn't pay for prescribed medication that her own doctor ordered for her? So they got between her and her physician? Isn't that called "rationing"? Was Ms. Johnston held hostage by her insurance company?

Would, say-y-y...a public option have helped prevent her drug abuse problems?

Nah, a government run program have just gotten in the way of her privately uninsured addiction, what with the Feds sticking their medical noses where they didn't belong and all.

Yeah, better to force someone to resort to committing felonies than to allow proper care.

"People want to think she was just a drug addict," he said. "She made a poor judgment choice. But what do you do?"
Why, you run a lying, corporate smear campaign to prevent Americans from getting the care they need, that's what! Silly question.

Assistant District Attorney Richard K. Allen said prosecutors considered Johnston's criminal-free background as well as her physical problems in agreeing to the mitigated sentence.
Levi didn't attend the hearing.

She really does need rehab. Let's hope she recovers and has no further drug issues... and that she has access to health care sooner than later... public health insurance... that she can afford.

[cascadiance]

108. You can genetically test people for alzheimers after death too...

My grandfather likely died of it. My father soon will likely die of it. Do I want to find out if I'm genetically predisposed for alzheimer's now? Especially when I'm on COBRA at the moment and not employed?

NO!

Would I if there were no such thing as "pre-existing conditions"?

HELL YES!!

This and the example above is how the system works against preventative care from taking place! All in the name of their DAMN PROFITS!

[SoCalDem]

111. The skeptic in me has always wondered if these fancy tests

were more for the people potentially hiring/insuring the patient, than for their own knowledge.

I have a friend whose husband died at 35, of polycystic kidney disease, and the doctors suggested she have her 3 kids tested, so they could be "watched"...she did, but also found out that her 9 yr old had it, so did her 11 yr old, but not the 6 yr old..

She chose not to tell them right away, but knows that she will have to clue them in , and of course they will all be un-insurable.:(

[Delphinus]

119. Thank you!!!

I've asked that question myself - haven't heard an answer that resonates.

[earth mom]

124. Now that's one of the most powerful arguments for single payer if I ever heard one.

:cry:

[KamaAina]

125. NO ONE can afford the cancer.

Except Bill Gates, Donald Trump, or Dick Cheney, maybe.

Read the fine print. Clause 18(j)(iii): "Your lifetime maximum benefit is set at one million dollars."

Seems reasonable, right? Unless it's cancer: that $1 mill is gone in a year. Two at the max. :(

[JenniferJuniper]

126. Sadly true.

And a million bucks ain't what it used to be, either.

As baby boomers (remember that the youngest ones are still only in their mid 40s) continue to age, we'll all be hearing and experiencing more sad stories about people losing everything they have because of health problems.

Single payer or bust.

[SoCalDem]

127. It's the SuperBowl/AcademyAwards of Darwinian Health care

and finance, all wrapped up in one.

No matter how "well" you live, no matter how many hours you spend in Bally's Fitness Center, no matter how "careful" you were with your investments, or how early you paid off your home. No matter how skilfully you tap-danced your way through the Wall Street debacle, you may someday (sooner than you may think), be faced with the "mugger's choice"....Your money or your life..and sometimes it's both.

One illness,(personal, or that of a loved one) and it all goes away, and force a complete re-do, at an age, and in a financial climate that makes it impossible to regain your footing.

Thom Hartmann once said that what we are seeing is the greatest transfer of generational "wealth"..only the accrued wealth of the Boomer generation will be "transferred" not to their children, but to hospitals, nursing homes, and pharma.