MAMMOGRAMS Now Recommended Starting at Age 40 - Instead of Age 50.

Tuesday, May 9, 2023

Mammograms are apparently very safe and need to be started sooner/earlier in life...

Breast cancer is very treatable when caught early, and mammograms, which are X-ray images of breasts, are a reliable screening test to detect it.

Now, new draft recommendations released Tuesday from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force urges all women to get screened every other year, starting at age 40.

The recommendation is based on a review of new evidence by an independent panel of experts at the task force. Until now, women in their 40s have been encouraged to have a conversation with their health care provider about when to start mammograms based on their personal risks.

The task force's previous recommendation was for women to start mammograms at 50, and for women ages 40-49 to consider it, depending on personal risk.

Source: www.npr.org...

Are mammograms also useful for biological MEN who have breasts, either intentionally or provided by nature?

Since most cancers and diseases actually get their start early in our life, and remain invisible most of our life, why not conduct deep MRI scans of our entire body every other year, or a DNA analysis, starting at age 40...or even age 30?

What do YOU think of the recommended Mammogram/Breast Exam age being lowered from 50 to 40? My first thought was "Money Grab", since I work in the business side of the insurance/medical world, and am exposed to the "revenue" angle of decisions all the time.

-CareWeMust

a reply to: carewemust

The article you linked goes out of it's way to say this.

The new recommendation applies to all people assigned female at birth who are at average risk of breast cancer.

Which is odd because later on it says this.

Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer death among women. About 42,000 women and 500 men die from the disease each year, according to the CDC.

Men can get breast cancer too. But beyond that, the article goes on to say that if all women adopt these recommendations it could reduce mortality by about 20%.

As someone who had the experience of being "too young" to have breast cancer, I will say that early detection is the most important thing. However, some argue that it increases the risk of "false" detection. I don't know what the case is, but I personally would never have even considered getting a mammogram at age 32 if I had not had obviously something wrong with my breast. So I think it is a good thing to get whatever "screenings" anyone wants to get. I don't see why this is controversial.

With all the microplastics getting into our bodies it just makes good sense to get checked for disease earlier, especially for the upcoming generations who will ultimately have higher amounts of poisons, toxins, hormone disruptors, and who knows what else causing havoc and horror with their bio.

a reply to: Antimony

Its startling that 500 men DIE of breast cancer each year. Per Capita, the death percentage for men may be higher than the death rate for women!

Obviously you did the right thing by not ignoring any signs of breast cancer because you were "too young". God wanted you to stay healthy and alive for a long time, for a reason.

Early Detection is important with most diseases. Smokers should get lung-MRI every year, unless its cost prohibitive, or they simply don't want to know.

originally posted by: carewemust
Tuesday, May 9, 2023

Mammograms are apparently very safe and need to be started sooner/earlier in life...

Breast cancer is very treatable when caught early, and mammograms, which are X-ray images of breasts, are a reliable screening test to detect it.

Now, new draft recommendations released Tuesday from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force urges all women to get screened every other year, starting at age 40.

The recommendation is based on a review of new evidence by an independent panel of experts at the task force. Until now, women in their 40s have been encouraged to have a conversation with their health care provider about when to start mammograms based on their personal risks.

The task force's previous recommendation was for women to start mammograms at 50, and for women ages 40-49 to consider it, depending on personal risk.

Source: www.npr.org...

Are mammograms also useful for biological MEN who have breasts, either intentionally or provided by nature?

Since most cancers and diseases actually get their start early in our life, and remain invisible most of our life, why not conduct deep MRI scans of our entire body every other year, or a DNA analysis, starting at age 40...or even age 30?

What do YOU think of the recommended Mammogram/Breast Exam age being lowered from 50 to 40? My first thought was "Money Grab", since I work in the business side of the insurance/medical world, and am exposed to the "revenue" angle of decisions all the time.

-CareWeMust

Watch, they lower the threshold for Blood Pressure from 120/80 to 110/70.

Sell them meds!

a reply to: carewemust

I am glad that this is becoming an issue, I hated mammograms, all my life ever year I hate that day to get one.

I call the machine a female torture machine, where you breast is pancake into oblivion.

Yes males that are under female hormones are now coming down with breast cancer too, the numbers has increased in the last decade.

But, I found the hard way that mamos save lives, yep is saving mine, a month ago I had my yearly, something suspicious was found, yep I got the horrible painful biopsy, two of them, to add to the already 3 I had in my left breast, all benign.

But no this time, this time in my left breast was cancer cells found, thankfully soo early that I am considered stage 0 and will not need radiation if I remove the breast.

Breast cancer is a leading cause of dead among women these days, yes, it is, I am waiting for my surgery any day, I will have double mastectomy and reconstruction after.

Mamos save lives, is not joke, I also had the DNA test done for markers for cancer and it came back negative.

a reply to: marg6043

I wonder if you heard the good news? Blood test developed to detect early stages of breast cancer.

I mean really, what took them so long? Oh yes, those women already have that mammogram machine, so let's stop there for the next several decades.

www.medicaldevice-network.com...#:~:text=The%20study%20demonstrated%20that%20the,cancer%20is%20unl ikely%20to%20return.

a reply to: quintessentone

After I was diagnosed with breast cancer, I was asked to participate in study to help women with cancer detection in the future.

Interestingly the DNA test I had does not shows I have cancer markers at all. The type of cancer I have is called in situ, it stays within the calcium grains and does not spread at least for years.

But taking into consideration that is still cancer, I want it out of my body as soon as possible.

a reply to: carewemust

They might save lives, but extra radiation seems counter productive. So at 65 im in good health, not on any meds, and I will pass on having my tit squeezed, blasted with radiation, to tell me I'm ok. It seems the less medical attention I receive the better off I am.

a reply to: marg6043

I am glad you were lucky enough to catch it early and rid your body of it. Anytime I am asked to participate in furthering help for women's health or just allowing university students in to learn, I always say yes.

It's interesting that the cancer biomarkers in your body were not detected by DNA testing. However DNA testing variability is growing by leaps and bounds, so who knows, maybe soon they will be able to detect specific cancer biomarkers that are elusive.

a reply to: quintessentone

I guess the testing of DNA for cancer is still in early stages, the test included every organ in my body, I had not idea that can be done.

a reply to: carewemust

Standard American diet + shady vaccines + Fukushima + general environmental factors overall = increased rates of cancer.

You better get checked earlier if you know better. There's no excuse not to. IMO.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: quintessentone

I guess the testing of DNA for cancer is still in early stages, the test included every organ in my body, I had not idea that can be done.

I'm not going to give that test a lot of credence only because my father and every sibling he had (11) died of some form of cancer. Granted, they all lived fairly long lives, into their 80's on average, but cancer was the culprit in the end.

My DNA test, just recently, cleared me of those markers which was surprising not only to me, but my doctor as well.

Doesn't mean however that I'm good to go, it just means I have less of a genetic predisposition for cancer. Good news nonetheless.

a reply to: carewemust

But just imagine the increased revenue stream!

a reply to: incoserv

I agree but taking into consideration the number of males now taking hormones for feminization, cancer is going to bloom, I worked for a year in our breast cancer center as a volunteer, something I learned is that when cancer is found in younger females is more aggressive than in older females and usually found in advance stage once the females notice something is wrong.

Something very interesting.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: quintessentone

I guess the testing of DNA for cancer is still in early stages, the test included every organ in my body, I had not idea that can be done.

I was just reading an article where dogs are being trained to detect through smell, Covid-19 and I just checked the interwebs and dogs can also detect many types of cancer. Who knows if dogs' exceptional olfactory senses will be the way to go in the future.

a reply to: 38181

Watch, they lower the threshold for Blood Pressure from 120/80 to 110/70. Sell them meds!

Do You Really Have HIGH BLOOD PRESSURE? Your Doctor is Doing it Wrong!


Are blood pressure measurement mistakes making you chronically ill? LINK

Blood Pressure Targets in Adults With Hypertension: A Clinical Practice Guideline From the AAFP PDF LINK

originally posted by: quintessentone
With all the microplastics getting into our bodies it just makes good sense to get checked for disease earlier, especially for the upcoming generations who will ultimately have higher amounts of poisons, toxins, hormone disruptors, and who knows what else causing havoc and horror with their bio.

As a child in the 1970's, I vividly remember the huge emotional movement to clean up the AIR, the WATER, the Soil where factories once were, the Beaches, and the local Michigan community where I grew up.

Was pollution removal a failure, after so much effort and expenditure?

originally posted by: 38181

originally posted by: carewemust
Tuesday, May 9, 2023

Mammograms are apparently very safe and need to be started sooner/earlier in life...

Breast cancer is very treatable when caught early, and mammograms, which are X-ray images of breasts, are a reliable screening test to detect it.

Now, new draft recommendations released Tuesday from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force urges all women to get screened every other year, starting at age 40.

The recommendation is based on a review of new evidence by an independent panel of experts at the task force. Until now, women in their 40s have been encouraged to have a conversation with their health care provider about when to start mammograms based on their personal risks.

The task force's previous recommendation was for women to start mammograms at 50, and for women ages 40-49 to consider it, depending on personal risk.

Source: www.npr.org...

Are mammograms also useful for biological MEN who have breasts, either intentionally or provided by nature?

Since most cancers and diseases actually get their start early in our life, and remain invisible most of our life, why not conduct deep MRI scans of our entire body every other year, or a DNA analysis, starting at age 40...or even age 30?

What do YOU think of the recommended Mammogram/Breast Exam age being lowered from 50 to 40? My first thought was "Money Grab", since I work in the business side of the insurance/medical world, and am exposed to the "revenue" angle of decisions all the time.

-CareWeMust

Watch, they lower the threshold for Blood Pressure from 120/80 to 110/70.

Sell them meds!

I think if you take a blood pressure medication when your normal blood pressure is 112/75, you'll pass out when standing up, and have trouble keeping an erection too. (Happened to my dad, due to a pill-happy doctor.)

I guess the medical industry and pharma industry need some income boost.

www.medicalnewstoday.com...