White Coats White Care

As we take to the streets or our screens we have to realize that systemic racism and sexism dominates most of the larger institutions established in our country. And none other is as large as the medical industrial complex, and the emphasis on complex has truly come to fruition with the Coronavirus and the exposures with regards to the failings of public health. We have for years found a lack of funding for public enterprises, from housing, to education and lastly to health care has lent itself to major disparities of equity when it comes to the working poor. And no group composes the working poor more than faces of color.
There is some roots in this vested in racsim but it is also with regards to gender and now sexuality identity. The AIDS crisis exposed again how the system failed when it came to helping those who identified as Gay and had contracted that disease. It was labeled the “Gay disease” and much like Covid today, contributed to a genocide of those who were not part of the acceptable mainstream aka White/Male/Christian. Women’s rights so fought for in the 70’s and ultimately leading to the failure of the ERA, also plays a factor as men in leadership roles found that by having women enter the workplace they may have expectations reagarding rights and privileges that were largely the domain of men. We finally saw that come to head with #MeToo and again with Covid the rights of Trans folks shows again another marginalized group shoved aside when it comes to crime, violence, and of course health care.
Below are two articles, one about the failings of the MIC to properly treat, diagnose and care for faces brown and black and that implied if not overt bias dominates the field when it comes to finding medical care. The next is on reproductive rights and how the BLM group do not see this as an issue. Well then remind me why again I am not to support you, a woman, a face of color and with the genitalia we share, with the same reproductive rights issues and needs regardless of the shade of our skin. Of all groups most affected again by denial of access to abortion it has also led to closures of clinics that do more than provide abortion and in turn provide pre and post natal care, two issues of import that again largely affect faces of color. When you take away one right you have a domino affect that leads to a reduction of rights across the spectrum. Again, we have the right to care and because of the complext needs of Trans folks the access to proper medical care is essential. Got tits? Well welcome to breast cancer and the ability to screed for that or any other cancer is again a reproductive sexual right. Safe sex is informed sex and these clinics again provide essential information and education to eliminate the transmission of sexually transmitted diseases and the necessary vaccine to prevent cervical cancer.
So agai you say you don’t have time for this? Okay then don’t ask me for any time to spend on your issue. As clearly you have one where your sexuality is not a part of your identity and your identity is more than skin color.



Racism in care leads to health disparities, doctors and other experts say as they push for change
 
The Washington Post

By Tonya Russell
July 11, 2020 at 10:00 a.m. EDT

The protests over the deaths of black men and women at the hands of police have turned attention to other American institutions, including health care, where some members of the profession are calling for transformation of a system they say results in poorer health for black Americans because of deep-rooted racism.

“Racism is a public health emergency of global concern,” a recent editorial in the Lancet said. “It is the root cause of continued disparities in death and disease between Black and white people in the USA.”

A New England Journal of Medicine editorial puts it this way: “Slavery has produced a legacy of racism, injustice, and brutality that runs from 1619 to the present, and that legacy infects medicine as it does all social institutions.”

The novel coronavirus has provided the most recent reminder of the disparities, with black Americans falling ill and dying from covid-19 at higher rates than whites. Even so, the NEJM editorial noted, “when physicians describing its manifestations have presented images of dermatologic effects, black skin has not been included. The ‘covid toes’ have all been pink and white.”

Black Americans die younger than white Americans and they have higher rates of death from a string of diseases including heart diseases, stroke, cancer, asthma and diabetes.

By one measure, they are worse off than in the time of slavery. The black infant mortality rate (babies who die before their first birthday) is more than two times higher than for whites — 11.4 deaths per 1,000 live births for blacks compared with 4.9 for whites. Historians estimate that in 1850 it was 1.6 times higher for blacks — 340 per 1,000 vs. 217 for whites.

Medical professionals describe the effects of racism across specialties and illnesses. Tina Douroudian, an optometrist in Sterling, Va., has observed differences in the severity of her patients with diabetes, as well as their management plans.

“Black folks have higher rates of diabetes and often worse outcomes. It’s universally understood that nutrition counseling is the key factor for proper control, and this goes beyond telling patients to lose weight and cut carbs,” Douroudian says.

“I ask all of my diabetic patients if they have ever seen a registered dietitian,” she says. “The answer is an overwhelming ‘yes’ from my white patients, and an overwhelming ‘no’ from my black patients. Is there any wonder why they struggle more with their blood sugar, or why some studies cite a fourfold greater risk of visual loss from diabetes complications in black people?”

Douroudian’s patients who have never met with a dietitian in most cases have also never even heard of a dietitian, she says, and she is unsure why they don’t have this information.

Her remedy is teaching her patients how to advocate for themselves:

“I tell my diabetic patients to demand a referral from their [primary care physician] or endocrinologist. If for some reason that doctor declines, I tell them to ask to see where they documented in their medical record that the patient is struggling to control their blood sugar and the doctor is declining to provide the referral. Hint: You’ll get your referral real fast.”

Black women are facing a childbirth mortality crisis. Doulas are trying to help.

Jameta Barlow, a community health psychologist at George Washington University, says that the infant mortality rate is a reflection of how black women and their pain are ignored. Brushing aside pain can mean ignoring important warning signs.

“Centering black women and their full humanity in their medical encounters should be a clinical imperative,” she says. “Instead, their humanity is often erased and replaced with stereotypes and institutionalized practices masked as medical procedure.”

Black women are more than three times as likely as white women to die of childbirth-related causes, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, (40.8 per 100,000 births vs. 12.7). Experts blame the high rate on untreated chronic conditions and lack of good health care. The CDC says that early and regular prenatal care can help prevent complications and death.

Barlow says that the high mortality rate, and many other poor health outcomes, are a result of a “failure to understand the institutionalization of racism in medicine with respect to how the medical field views patients, their needs, wants and pain thresholds. The foundation of medicine is severely cracked and it will never adequately serve black people, especially black women, until we begin to decolonize approaches and ways of doing medicine.”

Barlow’s research centers on black women’s health, and her own great-grandmother died while giving birth to her grandmother in 1924. “In the past, black women were being blamed for the maternal mortality rate, without considering the impact of living conditions due to poverty and slavery then,” she says. “The same can be said of black women today.”

Natalie DiCenzo, an OB/GYN who is set to begin her practice in New Jersey this fall, says she hopes to find ways to close the infant mortality gap. Awareness of racism is necessary for change, she says.

“I realize that fighting for health equity is often in opposition to what is valued in medicine,” she says. “As a white physician treating black patients within a racist health-care system, where only 5 percent of physicians identify as black, I recognize that I have benefited from white privilege, and I now benefit from the power inherent to the white coat. It is my responsibility to do the continuous work of dismantling both, and to check myself daily.

“That work begins with being an outspoken advocate for black patients and reproductive justice,” she says. “This means listening to black patients and centering their lived experiences — holding my patients’ expertise over their own bodies in equal or higher power to my expertise as a physician — and letting that guide my decisions and actions. This means recognizing and highlighting the strength and resilience of black birthing parents.”

DiCenzo blames the racist history of the United States for the disparities in health care. “I’m not surprised that the states with the strictest abortion laws also have the worst pregnancy-related mortality. For black LGBTQIA+ patients, all of these disparities are amplified by additional discrimination. Black, American Indian and Alaska Native women are at least two to four times more likely to die of pregnancy-related causes than white women, regardless of level of education and income,” she says.

As for covid-19, although black people are dying at a rate of 92.3 per 100,000, patients admitted to the hospital were most likely to be white, and they die at a rate of 45.2 per 100,000.

The CDC says that racial discrimination puts blacks at risk for a number of reasons, including historic practices such as redlining that segregate them in densely populated areas, where they often must travel to get food or visit a doctor.

“For many people in racial and ethnic minority groups, living conditions may contribute to underlying health conditions and make it difficult to follow steps to prevent getting sick with COVID-19 or to seek treatment if they do get sick,” the CDC says.

The CDC is urging health-care providers to follow a standard protocol with all patients, and to “[i]dentify and address implicit bias that could hinder patient-provider interactions and communication.”

In her 16 years in medicine, internist Jen Tang has provided care for mid- to upper-class Princeton residents as well as residents of inner city Trenton, N.J. She has seen privatization of medicine adversely affect people of color who may be insured by government-run programs that medical organizations refuse to accept. Some doctors complain that the fees they are paid are too low.

And that can make referrals to specialists difficult.

“Often my hands are tied,” says Tang, who now works part time at a federally qualified health center in California. “I try to give my patients the same level of care that I gave my patients in Princeton, but a lot of my patients have the free Los Angeles County insurance, so to get your patient to see a specialist is difficult. You have to work harder as a clinician, and it takes extremely long.”

Tang has also encountered what medical experts say is another effect of long-term racism: skepticism about the health-care system.

“Some patients don’t trust doctors because they haven’t had access to quality health care,” she says. “They are also extremely vulnerable.”

American history is rife with examples of how medicine has used people of color badly. In Puerto Rico, women were sterilized in the name of population control. From the 1930s to the 1970s, one-third of Puerto Rican mothers of childbearing age were sterilized.

As a result of the Family Planning Services and Population Research Act of 1970, close to 25 percent of Native American women were also sterilized. California, Virginia and North Carolina performed the most sterilizations.

The Tuskegee experiments from 1932 to 1972, which were government-sanctioned, also ruined the lives of many black families. Men recruited for the syphilis study were not given informed consent, and they were not given adequate treatment, despite the study leading to the discovery that penicillin was effective.

Though modern discrimination isn’t as apparent, it is still insidious, Barlow says, citing myths that lead to inadequate treatment, such as one that black people don’t feel pain.

“We must decolonize science,” Barlow says, by which she means examining practices that developed out of bias but are accepted because they have always been done that way. “For example, race is a social construct and not clinically useful in knowing a patient, understanding a patient’s disease, or creating a treatment plan,” she says, but it still informs patient treatment.

She calls upon fellow researchers to question research, data collection, methodologies and interpretations.

Like Douroudian, she recommends self-advocacy for patients. This can mean asking as many questions as needed to get clarification, and if feasible, getting a second opinion. Bring a friend along to the doctor, and record conversations with your doctor for later reflection.

“I tell every woman this when doctors recommend a drug or procedure that you have reservations about: ‘Is this drug or procedure medically necessary?’ If they answer yes, then have them put it in your medical chart,” Barlow says. “If they say it is not necessary to do that, then be sure to get another doctor’s opinion on the recommendation. Black women have always had to look out for themselves, even in the most vulnerable medical situations such as giving birth.”

Medicine’s relationship with black people has advanced beyond keeping slaves healthy enough to perform their tasks. Barlow says, however, that more work needs to be done to regain trust, and uproot the bias that runs over 400 years deep.

“This medical industrial complex will only improve,” she says, “when it is dismantled and reimagined.”

Some Gen Z and millennial women said they viewed abortion rights as important but less urgent than other social justice causes. Others said racial disparities in reproductive health must be a focus.

Emma Goldman|| The New York Times

Like many young Americans, Brea Baker experienced her first moment of political outrage after the killing of a Black man. She was 18 when Trayvon Martin was shot. When she saw his photo on the news, she thought of her younger brother, and the boundary between her politics and her sense of survival collapsed.

In college she volunteered for the N.A.A.C.P. and as a national organizer for the Women’s March. But when conversations among campus activists turned to abortion access, she didn’t feel the same sense of personal rage.

“A lot of the language I heard was about protecting Roe v. Wade,” Ms. Baker, 26, said. “It felt grounded in the ’70s feminist movement. And it felt like, I can’t focus on abortion access if my people are dying. The narrative around abortion access wasn’t made for people from the hood.”

Ms. Baker has attended protests against police brutality in Atlanta in recent weeks, but the looming Supreme Court decision on reproductive health, June Medical Services v. Russo, felt more distant. As she learned more about the case and other legal threats to abortion access, she wished that advocates would talk about the issue in a way that felt urgent to members of Generation Z and young millennials like her.

Continue reading the main story

“It’s not that young people don’t care about abortion, it’s that they don’t think it applies to them,” she said. Language about “protecting Roe” feels “antiquated,” she added. “If I’m a high school student who got activated by March for Our Lives, I’m not hip to Supreme Court cases that happened before my time.”

Her question, as she kept her eyes on the court, was: “How can we reframe it so it feels like a young woman’s fight?”

On Monday the Supreme Court ruled on the case, striking down a Louisiana law that required abortion clinics to have admitting privileges at local hospitals, four years after deciding that an effectively identical Texas requirement was unconstitutional because it placed an “undue burden” on safe abortion access. The Guttmacher Institute had estimated that 15 states could potentially put similarly restrictive laws on the books if the Supreme Court upheld the Louisiana law.

The leaders of reproductive rights organizations celebrated their victory with caution. At least 16 cases that would restrict access to legal abortion remain in lower courts, and 25 abortion bans have been enacted in more than a dozen states in the last year.

“The fight is far from over,” said Alexis McGill Johnson, the president of Planned Parenthood. “Our vigilance continues, knowing the makeup of the court as well as the federal judiciary is not in our favor.

Interviews with more than a dozen young women who have taken to the streets for racial justice in recent weeks, though, reflected some ambivalence about their role in the movement for reproductive rights.

These young women recognized that while some American women can now gain easy access to abortion, millions more cannot; at least five states have only one abortion clinic.

But some, raised in a post-Roe world, do not feel the same urgency toward abortion as they do for other social justice causes; others want to ensure that the fight is broadly defined, with an emphasis on racial disparities in reproductive health.

Members of Gen Z and millennials are more progressive than older generations; they’ve also been politically active, whether organizing a global climate strike or mass marches against gun violence in schools.

While Gen Z women ranked abortion as very important to them in a 2019 survey from Ignite, a nonpartisan group focused on young women’s political education, mass shootings, climate change, education and racial inequality all edged it out. On the right, meanwhile, researchers say that opposition to abortion has become more central to young people’s political beliefs.

Melissa Deckman, a professor of political science at Washington College who studies young women’s political beliefs, said that Gen Z women predominantly believe in reproductive freedom but that some believe it is less pressing because they see it as a “given,” having grown up in a world of legalized abortion.

“Myself and other activists in my community are focused on issues that feel like immediate life or death, like the environment,” said Kaitlin Ahern, 19, who was raised in Scranton, Pa., in a community where air quality was low because of proximity to a landfill. “It’s easier to disassociate from abortion rights.”

Continue reading the main story

Fatimata Cham, 19, an ambassador for the anti-gun violence advocacy group Youth Over Guns, agreed that the fight for reproductive rights felt less personal. “For many activists, we have a calling, a realm of work we want to pursue because of our own personal experiences,” Ms. Cham said. “Growing up, abortion never came to mind as an issue I needed to work on.”

Some young women said that they considered reproductive rights an important factor in determining how they vote, but they struggled to see how their activism on the issue could have an effect.

When Ms. Baker helped coordinate local walkouts against gun violence, she sensed that young people no longer needed to wait for “permission” to demand change. With abortion advocacy, she said, organizers seem focused on waiting for decisions from the highest courts.

And even as those decisions move through the courts, the possibility of a future without legal abortion can feel implausible. “I know we have a lot to lose, but it’s hard to imagine us going backward,” said Alliyah Logan, 18, a recent high school graduate from the Bronx. “Is it possible to go that far back?”

Then she added: “Of course in this administration, anything is possible.”

For many women in the 1970s and ’80s, fighting for legal abortion was an essential aspect of being a feminist activist. A 1989 march for reproductive rights drew crowds larger than most protests since the Vietnam War, with more than half a million women rallying in Washington, D.C.

Today, young women who define themselves as progressive and politically active do not always consider the issue central to their identities, said Johanna Schoen, a professor of history at Rutgers and the author of “Abortion After Roe.”

Continue reading the main story

“Women in the ’70s understood very clearly that having control over reproduction is central to women’s ability to determine their own futures, to get the education they want, to have careers,” Dr. Schoen said. “As people got used to having access to abortion — and there’s a false sense that we’ve achieved a measure of equality — that radicalism women had in the early years got lost.”

Some millennial women who can easily and safely get abortions do not connect the experience to their political activism. Cynthia Gutierrez, 30, a community organizer in California, got a medication abortion in 2013. Because she did not struggle with medical access or insurance, the experience did not immediately propel her toward advocacy.

“I had no idea about the political landscape around it,” she said. “I had no idea that other people had challenges with access or finding a clinic or being able to afford an abortion.”

Around that time, Ms. Gutierrez began working at a criminal justice reform organization. “I wasn’t thinking, let me go to the next pro-choice rally,” she said. “The racial justice and criminal justice work I did felt more relevant because I had people in my life who had gone through the prison industrial complex, and I experienced discrimination.”

Other young women said they felt less drawn to reproductive rights messaging that is focused strictly on legal abortion access, and more drawn to messaging about racial and socioeconomic disparities in access to abortion, widely referred to as reproductive justice.

Deja Foxx, 20, a college student from Tucson, Ariz., became involved in reproductive justice advocacy when she confronted former Senator Jeff Flake, Republican of Arizona, at a town hall event over his push to defund Planned Parenthood.

But abortion access is not what initially drew her to the movement. She wanted to fight for coverage of contraceptives, as someone who was then homeless and uninsured, and for comprehensive sex education, since her high school’s curriculum did not mention the word consent.

Continue reading the main story

“There’s a need to protect the wins of the generation before us,” Ms. Foxx said. But she believes the conversations that engage members of her generation look different. “My story is about birth control access as a young person who didn’t have access to insurance,” she said.

The generational shift is evident at national gatherings for abortion providers. Ms. Schoen has attended the National Abortion Federation’s annual conference each year from 2003 to 2019. In recent years, she said, its attendees have grown more racially diverse and the agenda has shifted, from calls to keep abortion “safe, legal and rare” to an emphasis on racial equity in abortion access.

“The political questions and demands that the younger generation raises are very different,” she said. “There’s more of a focus on health inequalities and lack of access that Black and brown women have to abortion.”

Amid the coronavirus outbreak, even the most fundamental legal access to abortion seemed in question in some states. At least nine states took steps to temporarily ban abortions, deeming them elective or not medically necessary, although all the bans were challenged in court.

Research from the Kaiser Family Foundation found that the pandemic led to various new legal and logistical hurdles. In South Dakota, abortion providers have been unable to travel to their clinics from out of state. In Arkansas, women could receive abortions only with a negative Covid-19 swab within 72 hours of the procedure, and some have struggled to get tested.

Image

Alliyah Logan, a recent high school graduate, near her home in the Bronx. “I know we have a lot to lose, but it’s hard to imagine us going backward,” she said.
Credit…Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times

But in spite of the threats, for some young women the calls to action feel sharpest when they go beyond defending rights they were raised with.

Advertisement

Continue reading the main story

“Right now, in a lot of social justice movements we’re seeing language about the future,” said Molly Brodsky, 25. “I hear ‘protect Roe v. Wade,’ and it feels like there needs to be another clause about the future we’re going to build. What other changes do we need? We can’t be complacent with past wins.”

  • Got Cancer?

    Well no you don’t or maybe you do. But how would you know?  Remember those people you trust to actually help you and give a damn?  Well they don’t.

    I literally have run out of words to describe my anger with regards to this.  I don’t take any pleasure anymore exposing the depth of fraud and idiocy demonstrated by the Medical “profession” its becoming too distressing to read another story of heartbreak.


    Former Ga. technician falsified mammogram reports

    In this April 15, 2014 photo, Rachael Michelle Rapraeger, center, sits with her attorney, Floyd Buford, after Sharon Holmes, left, read her statement to a Houston County Superior Court, in Perry, Ga., during a sentencing hearing.

    PERRY, Ga. (AP) — Sharon Holmes found a lump in her left breast quite by accident. At work one day as a high school custodian, her hand brushed up against her chest and she felt a knot sticking out. She was perplexed. After all, just three months earlier, she had been given an all-clear sign from her doctor after a mammogram.
    A new mammogram in February 2010 showed she in fact had an aggressive stage 2 breast cancer. The horror of the discovery was compounded by the reason: The earlier test results she had gotten weren’t just read incorrectly. They were falsified.
    She wasn’t alone in facing this news. The lead radiological technologist at Perry Hospital in Perry, a small community about 100 miles south of Atlanta, had for about 18 months been signing off on mammograms and spitting out reports showing nearly 1,300 women were clear of any signs of breast cancer or abnormalities.
    Except that she was wrong. Holmes and nine other women were later shown to have lumps or cancerous tumors growing inside them.
    Falsified mammograms: Sharon HolmesAP Photo: The Macon Telegraph, Beau Cabell
    Sharon Holmes.
    Holmes said the discovery was horrific enough. With a son in his 20s and another in high school at the time, she trembled at the thought of leaving them without a mother. “To me, that meant a death sentence,” she said. She underwent successful surgery the month after the cancer was discovered to remove the lump from her breast and followed that with chemotherapy and radiation treatments.
    Her breast has been cancer-free for four years and subsequent cancers found elsewhere, in her lymph nodes and thyroid, have been successfully treated. Now she just prays it doesn’t come back.
    But to find out later that she had been deceived made it even worse. “I’m thinking I’m doing what I’m supposed to do, getting my tests done, and then I find out someone else isn’t doing their job,” Holmes told The Associated Press.
    The tech, Rachael Rapraeger, pleaded guilty earlier this month to 10 misdemeanor charges of reckless conduct and one felony charge of computer forgery. She was sentenced to serve up to six months in a detention center, to serve 10 years on probation during which she can’t work in the health care field and to pay a $12,500 fine.
    The reasons she gave were vague. She told police she had personal issues that caused her to stop caring about her job, that she had fallen behind processing the piles of mammogram films that stacked up. So she went into the hospital’s computer system, assumed the identities of physicians, and gave each patient a clear reading, an investigative report says. That allowed her to avoid the time-consuming paperwork required before the films are brought to a reading room for radiologists to examine, her lawyer Floyd Buford told the AP.
    Her actions were uncovered in April 2010 after a patient who’d received a negative report had another mammogram three months later at another hospital that revealed she had breast cancer. As hospital staff began to investigate, it was determined that the doctor whose name was on the faulty report had not been at the hospital the day the report was filed. Rapraeger quickly confessed to her supervisor that she was responsible and was fired from her job about a week later, according to an investigator’s report.
    Rapraeger told police she knew what she was doing wasn’t right, but that she didn’t consider the consequences until she realized a patient with cancer had been told her scan was clear.
    She didn’t return a phone call from The Associated Press seeking comment. Her attorney said she feels great remorse about any pain that she caused.
    Cary Martin, CEO of Houston Healthcare, which operates Perry Hospital, released a statement saying he is “pleased this component of Ms. Rapraeger’s unfortunate action is concluded” and declined to comment further.
    Sara Bailey also received a false-negative report. By the time it was discovered, her breast cancer progressed to the point that doctors had to remove her entire breast rather than just going in and removing a lump, she said.
    The surgery was successful and the cancer hasn’t returned, but Bailey carries a bitterness inside her that surfaces when she talks about her experience.
    “I’m not hurting and I don’t think I have cancer, but I’m not a woman anymore,” the 80-year-old said, her eyes welling with tears and her voice catching as she talked about the loss of her breast.
    Falsified mammograms: Sara BaileyAP Photo: Kate Brumback
    Sara Bailey.
    The emotional wound was opened again this month when Rapraeger received a sentence that Bailey saw as a slap on the wrist.
    “I feel like we were thrown under the bus, and there will be an election day,” Bailey said, explaining that she plans to organize an effort to get Houston Judicial Circuit District Attorney George Hartwig voted out of office.
    Hartwig said he understands how Bailey feels and knows some people think Rapraeger got off easy, but he said his office weighed the evidence in the case very carefully and concluded the plea was a fair outcome. Even though Rapraeger did make statements and admissions to police, they were too general to prove specific instances of wrongdoing, he said.
    “Given the entirety of the case and the issues that were there, I really feel like we did the best we could do to get a measure of justice for these women,” he said, adding that it would have been even more disappointing if the case had gone to trial and she’d been found not guilty and walked out of there with no penalty.
    For her part, Holmes, 49, has tried to move on, and testifying at Rapraeger’s sentencing helped with that.
    “I wanted her to know I’m a person, not just a name on a paper,” she said.
    But she’s still angry because lingering effects from her chemotherapy and radiation — treatments she said her doctors told her might not have been necessary if the cancer had been caught by the original mammogram — have kept her from returning to work as a high school janitor.
    Like Bailey, she thought Rapraeger’s sentence was too light, and she was disappointed that Rapraeger didn’t speak in court, instead letting her attorney read a statement for her.
    “If she had gotten up and at least said, ‘I’m sorry for what I did. I’m sorry these women had to go through this,’ that, to me, would have meant that she was truly sorry for what we went through,” Holmes said.
    Mary Brown had a mammogram in August 2009. She was contacted by the hospital in May 2010 and told to come back for another. That one came back positive, and she had a mastectomy to remove her right breast. She considers herself lucky that she apparently had a slow-growing cancer and didn’t need to have chemotherapy or radiation.
    Brown, a 78-year-old Jehovah’s Witness, credits her strong faith in God with helping her get through the ordeal and with helping her forgive Rapraeger.
    “I don’t have any hard feelings about her. Whatever she did, she brought it on herself,” Brown said, though she conceded her relative good fortune might also be coloring her reaction. “Maybe if I had been dying sick from it I would feel different.”

    Test Not on Paper

    And again another study shows that Doctor’s might have been over prescribing – tests. Shocking, I know. And it is time to add one more to the list.

    I have officially lost count the number of bullshit tests our medical industrial complex puts us through to basically insure that they don’t get sued, get more money, or are simply lazy jerks who do nothing but pass the buck, literally and figuratively to others to do the dirty work.

    I am 54 and have steadfastly refused a Mammogram. I have been “invited” to partake the few times I have forced myself to see Western Medical Professionals,  where  I am also invited to have a proctology exam, which I have also declined.

     I have long decided to bypass any arduous cancer treatments should I be diagnosed and instead decided to travel to Paris, commission a Designer for a Haute Couture design and then jump into the Seine upon its completion. I think that is a hell of a way to go.  I have figured it is about the same amount of money and a way better way to spend it. But to each his own.

    In our lack of empathy, demanding and scolding nation I have heard many complaints, negativity and hostility with regards to my own personal plan and personal decision with regards to my own personal medical decisions using my personal funds or insurance which come from my personal account. Funny, with our same up by the bootstraps, intrinsic emphasis culture, the second you defer to follow the standard protocol you have insulted the individual with your individual choice.

    So it does make one wonder are we followers, leaders, or marchers to our own drums? I think we are sheep and there is a part of the 1% who are the Australian Retrievers who manage and control us and they are turn  owned and controlled by the .01 of the 1%.

    So ultimately the decision is yours or not.

    Vast Study Casts Doubts on Value of Mammograms

    By GINA KOLATA
    FEB. 11, 2014

    One of the largest and most meticulous studies of mammography ever done, involving 90,000 women and lasting a quarter century, has added powerful new doubts about the value of the screening test for women of any age.

    It found that the death rates from breast cancer and from all causes were the same in women who got mammograms and those who did not. And the screening had harms — one out of five cancers found with mammography and treated was not a threat to the woman’s health and did not need treatment like chemotherapy, surgery or radiation.

    The study, published Tuesday in The British Medical Journal, is one of the few rigorous evaluations of mammograms conducted in the modern era of more effective breast cancer treatments. It randomly assigned Canadian women to have regular mammograms and breast exams by trained nurses or to have breast exams alone.

    Researchers sought to determine whether there was any advantage to finding breast cancers when they were too small to feel. The answer was no, the researchers report.

    A large, 25-year study of Canadian women aged 40 to 59 found no benefit for women who were randomly assigned to have mammograms.

    The death rate from breast cancer was the same in both groups, but 1 in 424 women who had mammograms received unnecessary cancer treatment, including surgery, chemotheraphy and radiation.

    The study seems likely to lead to an even deeper polarization between those who believe that regular mammography saves lives, including many breast cancer patients and advocates for them, and a growing number of researchers who say the evidence is lacking or, at the very least, murky.

    “It will make women uncomfortable, and they should be uncomfortable,” said Dr. Russell P. Harris, a screening expert and professor of medicine at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who was not involved in the study. “The decision to have a mammogram should not be a slam dunk.”

    The findings will not lead to any immediate change in guidelines for mammography, and many advocates and experts will almost certainly dispute the idea that mammograms are on balance useless, or even harmful.

    Dr. Richard C. Wender, chief of cancer control for the American Cancer Society, said the society has convened an expert panel that is reviewing all studies on mammography, including the Canadian one, and would issue revised guidelines later this year. He added that combined data from clinical trials of mammography showed it reduces the death rate from breast cancer by at least 15 percent for women in their 40s and by at least 20 percent for older women.

    That means that one woman in 1,000 who starts screening in her 40s, two who start in their 50s and three who start in their 60s will avoid a breast cancer death, Dr. Harris said.

    Dr. Wender added that while improved treatments clearly helped lower the breast cancer death rate, so did mammography, by catching cancers early.

    But an editorial accompanying the new study said that earlier studies that found mammograms helped women were done before the routine use of drugs like tamoxifen that sharply reduced the breast cancer death rate. In addition, many studies did not use the gold-standard methods of the clinical trial, randomly assigning women to be screened or not, noted the editorial’s author, Dr. Mette Kalager, and other experts.

    Dr. Kalager, an epidemiologist and screening researcher at the University of Oslo and the Harvard School of Public Health, said there was a reason its results were unlike those of earlier studies. With better treatments, like tamoxifen, it was less important to find cancers early. Also, she said, women in the Canadian studies were aware of breast cancer and its dangers, unlike women in earlier studies who were more likely to ignore lumps.

    “It might be possible that mammography screening would work if you don’t have any awareness of the disease,” she said.

    The Canadian study reached the same conclusion about the lack of a benefit from mammograms after 11 to 16 years of follow-up, but some experts predicted that as time went on the advantages would emerge.
    Well Faces of Breast Cancer

    That did not happen, but with more time the researchers could, for the first time, calculate the extent of overdiagnosis, finding cancers that would never have killed the women but that led to treatments that included surgery, chemotherapy and radiation.

    Many cancers, researchers now recognize, grow slowly, or not at all, and do not require treatment. Some cancers even shrink or disappear on their own. But once cancer is detected, it is impossible to know if it is dangerous, so doctors treat them all.

    If the researchers also included a precancerous condition called ductal carcinoma in situ, the overdiagnosis rate would be closer to one in three cancers, said Dr. Anthony B. Miller of the University of Toronto, the lead author of the paper. Ductal carcinoma in situ, or D.C.I.S., is found only with mammography, is confined to the milk duct and may or may not break out into the breast. But it is usually treated with surgery, including mastectomy, or removal of the breast.

    Mammography’s benefits have long been debated, but no nations except Switzerland have suggested the screening be halted. In a recent report, the Swiss Medical Board, an expert panel established by regional ministers of public health, advised that no new mammography programs be started in that country and that those in existence have a limited, though unspecified, duration. Ten of 26 Swiss cantons, or districts, have regular mammography screening programs.

    Dr. Peter Juni, a member of the Swiss Medical Board until recently, said one concern was that mammography was not reducing the overall death rate, but increasing overdiagnosis and leading to false positives and needless biopsies.

    “The mammography story is just not such an easy story,” said Dr. Juni, a clinical epidemiologist at the University of Bern.

    Even experts like Dr. H. Gilbert Welch, a professor of medicine at Dartmouth University, who have questioned mammography’s benefits were surprised by Switzerland’s steps to reconsider its widespread use.

    “Wow, times they are a changin’,” Dr. Welch said.

    In the United States, about 37 million mammograms are performed annually at a cost of about $100 per mammogram. Nearly three-quarters of women age 40 and over say they had a mammogram in the past year. More than 90 percent of women ages 50 to 69 in several European countries have had at least one mammogram.

    Dr. Kalager, whose editorial accompanying the study was titled “Too Much Mammography,” compared mammography to prostate-specific antigen screening for prostate cancer, using data from pooled analyses of clinical trials. It turned out that the two screening tests were almost identical in their overdiagnosis rate and had almost the same slight reduction in breast or prostate deaths.

    “I was very surprised,” Dr. Kalager said. She had assumed that the evidence for mammography must be stronger since most countries support mammography screening and most discourage PSA screening.