For me there is nothing worse than getting a mammogram. Let me give all you fellas a glimpse into the fun that we girls go through once a year…..
First they give you this open-backed gown for modesty – kinda pointless as the tech does everything but motorboat your bazookas.
Seriously, your hooter is placed on a cold metal slab, and arranged as if being plated by a Michelin-star chef serving the Queen of England. To make the perfect presentation, it is then flattened a la Melon Crepe-style by another cold metal slab from above. As you exhale through your discomfort, you are told not to breathe (the perfect shot is essential.)
Perhaps this would all be fun if Hugh Jackman was my titty tech, but I guess they don’t let men do this kind of job…..or actors?
Imagine then, my rapt attention when perusing my Prevention magazine. The page I opened to reads: Creating Fear for No Purpose? Take a look at what happened over the course of a typical decade for women 50-74 who got mammas versus those who didn’t.
It then listed the stats for every 1000 women who did get screened and those who did not. Check this out:
Not Screened Screened
0 Women who learned after biopsy that their diagnosis was a false positive 100
0 Women whose breast-removal surgery was medically unnecessary 5
21 Women who died from all types of cancer 21
5 Women who died from breast cancer 4
Interesing, huh? Basically, Dr. Laura Esserman, a renowned breast surgeon and scientist, correctly asserts that we should do away with blanket mammogram guidelines, and make them the life-saving tool they were meant to be. Her research showed that while screening mammography was increasing breast-cancer diagnoses, it was not reducing cancer deaths. Esserman has designed a new system of screening that will dramatically lower the number of women who die from breast cancer. Don’t get your hopes up too high; mammograms are still part of the mix in her logical breast-screening trial called WISDOM.
To keep abreast, please read the full article in the November edition of Prevention. In the meantime, please pray that Jackman desires a career change.
*Shamelessly stolen from the Mel Brooks’ musical, Young Frankenstein
The Rio Norte Line 
Kells-
I will never forget my first time, it was in the late 80’s when the Mammogram machines were huge menacing meanies! I had to have my first at 35 since I had breast cancer in the family. They inserted my right breast & clamped down……hard. Just then the room started to rock & the technician yelled “Earthquake” & ran out of the room leaving me all alone, trapped in cold steel.
Every year when I go for my yearly mammogram I can’t help but remember that first one.
Trapped in cold steel while Trapped in Ca. !!!
I think it’s becoming a bit of a racket. Oh, and I know that once you were clamped in, you were there to stay!
Kells,
This isn’t some stealth attempt at : ” I’ll show mine…if you show me yours” is it ? … ;- )).
Wonder how much of ObamaCare cost cutting might be involved in all this.
Well, let’s talk about that. I am high risk, so I typically get a mamma and an ultrasound. This year they required two mammas and an ultrasound. WTF?
If any of you boys can fix my graph, I’ll be much obliged.
Was there a concern that needed to be ruled out perhaps ?
No doubt about “rackets”…..the whole increase in drug costs….and the ObamaCare/Insurance industry scam is one of the largest.
The reality is that any concern could be ruled out with the ultrasound.
My graph above is all misaligned, but basically, it says only one woman benefitted from a mammogram. Other countries are taking the cue from Esserman’s research, and other researchers. That is, that several factors should be included in a woman’s individualised chart, thereby, possibly, making her screenings less frequent than the standardized once-a-year in the US.
Kells,
Thanks for the info–always wondered what the mammograms were all about?
Nice play on words there: “To keep abreast…”
EdwardS
To keep a “Breast” in the manor to which she would like to become accustomed is an expensive proposition these days Edward. To keep TWO would break the bank….. ; – )).
Don,
“bust the bank…..” ;-))
EdwardS