Obamacare vs. Women's Health

  1. 0
    "President Obama is campaigning hard on his promise to give women access to free oral contraceptives and surgical sterilization, benefits that are guaranteed under ObamaCare. But women should also know about all of the health services they stand to lose."

    http://www.nypost.com/p/news/opinion...j9vd4C7EBRbiAP
  2. Get our hottest nursing topics delivered to your inbox.

  3. 2 Comments so far...

  4. 1
    There are no useful services that are at risk of being cut, the services that may not be covered are those that serve no purpose.

    The idea that cervical cancer screenings serve no purpose in women over 65 who have had normal previous screens did not come from the Preventative services task force, it comes from the American Cancer Society and the large base of evidence they have compiled on the subject.

    Blanket routine MRI screenings for breast cancer also serve no purpose. MRI is a poor way to screen to cancers because it misses more cancers than traditional mammography, it does play a role in diagnosing and staging cancers identified through traditional methods, but it's a less effective and far more expensive way to screen.

    Personally, I'm not a fan of wasting my money on things that serve no purpose. Maybe we should make 2 insurance pools, one for those who want to help pay for services that only waste money, and those that don't, that way people are free to chose to pour their money down the sink, or through an MRI machine this case.
    KelRN215 likes this.
  5. 0
    Quote from MunoRN
    There are no useful services that are at risk of being cut, the services that may not be covered are those that serve no purpose.

    The idea that cervical cancer screenings serve no purpose in women over 65 who have had normal previous screens did not come from the Preventative services task force, it comes from the American Cancer Society and the large base of evidence they have compiled on the subject.

    Blanket routine MRI screenings for breast cancer also serve no purpose. MRI is a poor way to screen to cancers because it misses more cancers than traditional mammography, it does play a role in diagnosing and staging cancers identified through traditional methods, but it's a less effective and far more expensive way to screen.

    Personally, I'm not a fan of wasting my money on things that serve no purpose. Maybe we should make 2 insurance pools, one for those who want to help pay for services that only waste money, and those that don't, that way people are free to chose to pour their money down the sink, or through an MRI machine this case.
    How about a Dr. teaching how to do self breast exams? Is that a waste of money? What about digital mammograms?

    No doubt they will find some things that can be cut out, like the cervical cancer screenings you mentioned. However, many things are not as cut and dry. In fact, there is info on cancer.gov that suggests MRI screening trials indicate that MRI's may actually be more sensitive then mammograms.

    And don't forget, these cuts are in large part to pay for the mandates to provide FREE contraceptives and sterilization procedures for everyone.

    I think the more important message from this is that a relatively small group of gov't officials are going to determine what kind of healthcare is best for all. Very scary!


Top