Women in a uproar, a glimpse into national health care
Mike Hunter
woman do not need monograms before the age of fifty, because it is not cost
effective to do so.
America women, the AMA and the Cancer Society are all saying that the
"medical" panels proposal is BS and should be opposed.
Several woman on TV said they would be dead if that were the law of the land
because THEIR Brest cancer was discovered when they were in their thirties
and forties.
This is just one of the first steps that proves how BO and the Dims in
Congress will control your healthcare if we ever let them pass that goofy
law.
.
badgolferman
I don't like monograms on breasts either.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:4b044174$0$18210$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
You're uninformed, as always. For decades, there have been debates over how
to interpret statistics related to the risks & benefits of mammograms. An
advanced search at any valid news source will reveal this truth.
But this time is different. You've been told to turn science into politics,
and you have obeyed.
Mike Hunter
People like you are the ones that SHOULD be concerned, I can afford what
ever medical procedure my doctor recommends for me and my wife.
When it is your turn Joe$#itFor Brains, to be denied a medical procedure
because one of BO's appointed "medical" panels has "determined" that
statistics related to the risks & benefits of YOUR heart surgery, transplant
or joint replacement show that YOU too old for those procedures, you opinion
will likely "change" and you will choose science instead of socialists
politics that will deny your Doctors opinion of what YOU need. LOL
"Joe$#itFor Brains" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:pmXMm.29564$X01....@newsfe07.iad...
Hachiroku ハチロク
> In article <4b044174$0$18210$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net>,
> Young women need MORE not less mammograms. It is the young women who are
> more likely to die from breast cancer, because it is more aggressive at
> the younger age. What in hell is this obama administration thinking.
You said "thinking". AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
Hachiroku ハチロク
> You've been told to turn science into
> politics
Bulllllllllllllllshittttttttttttttt!
You are an ignorant bastard, aren't you?
JoeSpareBedroom
news:pan.2009.11.18....@e86.GTS...
My statement is precisely correct.
Mike Hunter
"dbu`" <nos...@nobama.com.invalid> wrote in message
news:jrqdnfl1tICc95nW...@giganews.com...
> In article <4b044174$0$18210$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net>,
> "Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote:
>
> Young women need MORE not less mammograms. It is the young women who
> are more likely to die from breast cancer, because it is more aggressive
> at the younger age. What in hell is this obama administration thinking.
> --
>
JoeSpareBedroom
news:4b044174$0$18210$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
Funny. A used car salesman trying to interpret science. Give it up, Uncle
Jemima.
Hachiroku ハチロク
Almost as funny as you pretending to know everything about everything.
dr_jeff
> They THINK? Based on what it is doing seems to suggest otherwise. LOL
Gee, Obama administration is saying that it is sticking with the old
guidelines to begin screening at 40. I agree with Obama's administration
on this one, not the task force that looked at the data. The data showed
that you would have to screen about 1900 women in their 40s for breast
cancer to save one life while you would only have to screen about 1300
women in their 50s for breast cancer. While I understand that fewer
women's live would be saved by screening the younger women, fewer years
woudl be lost. In addition, for saving lives, 1 in 1900 seems like a
worthwhile screening.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/19/health/19cancer.html
Jeff
Hachiroku ハチロク
And tell me, who has told me that?
My Mom? She thinks it's utterly stupid, and asked me if I thought it was
to save money when the new "health plan" kicks in. I told her that's just
what I thought.
She's been a Registered Nurse for a lot longer than you have been on the
planet. I'd consider that being a 'health care professional'.
But, then again, she doesn't work for Obama, so that doesn't carry weight
as far as you're concerned. If this had come out during the Bush
administration you'd be all over it. You're a putz.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:pan.2009.11.18....@e86.GTS...
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:39:02 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>
>> "Hachiroku ????" <Tru...@e86.GTS> wrote in message
>> news:pan.2009.11.18....@e86.GTS...
>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:51:00 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>
>>>> You've been told to turn science into politics
>>>
>>> Bulllllllllllllllshittttttttttttttt!
>>>
>>> You are an ignorant bastard, aren't you?
>>
>>
>> My statement is precisely correct.
>
> And tell me, who has told me that?
>
The first Republican commentator you heard talking about it. The Republicans
jumped all over it instantly. You have original thoughts of your own.
> She's been a Registered Nurse for a lot longer than you have been on the
> planet. I'd consider that being a 'health care professional'.
That doesn't make her a statistician.
> But, then again, she doesn't work for Obama, so that doesn't carry weight
> as far as you're concerned. If this had come out during the Bush
> administration you'd be all over it. You're a putz.
All over it? Nice try. You lose.
Hachiroku ハチロク
>
> Mike Hunter wrote:
>> They THINK? Based on what it is doing seems to suggest otherwise. LOL
>
> Gee, Obama administration is saying that it is sticking with the old
> guidelines to begin screening at 40
Sure, after they were told about how unpopular their original statement
was.
Hachiroku ハチロク
> "Hachiroku ????" <Tru...@e86.GTS> wrote in message
> news:pan.2009.11.18....@e86.GTS...
>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:39:02 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>
>>> "Hachiroku ????" <Tru...@e86.GTS> wrote in message
>>> news:pan.2009.11.18....@e86.GTS...
>>>> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 13:51:00 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> You've been told to turn science into politics
>>>>
>>>> Bulllllllllllllllshittttttttttttttt!
>>>>
>>>> You are an ignorant bastard, aren't you?
>>>
>>>
>>> My statement is precisely correct.
>>
>> And tell me, who has told me that?
>>
>>
> The first Republican commentator you heard talking about it. The
> Republicans jumped all over it instantly. You have original thoughts of
> your own.
Really? What Republican Commentator was I listening to when I heard it on
the NBC Nightly News, and then switched to TCM? Bob Osborne?
Unlike you, I can form my own decisions without being told what to think.
>
>
>> She's been a Registered Nurse for a lot longer than you have been on the
>> planet. I'd consider that being a 'health care professional'.
>
> That doesn't make her a statistician.
Oh Gee! I didn't think of that! I just thought of her being, first of all,
a woman, and second of all, a member of the medical profession for about
50 years. I forgot all about those pesky statisticians!
Oh, and I also though about an old girlfriend who died from breast cancer
at the age of 42.
There's a statistic for you.
>
>
>
>> But, then again, she doesn't work for Obama, so that doesn't carry
>> weight as far as you're concerned. If this had come out during the Bush
>> administration you'd be all over it. You're a putz.
>
>
> All over it? Nice try. You lose.
No. Any woman who develops breast cancer before the age of 50 loses,
thanks to Obamacare.
When it comes to you, I never lose. Loser.
FridoLay
Past kindergarten, they call this sort of thing science.
JoeSpareBedroom
You'd have no such thoughts if the AMA made the same recommendations. You
hate it because you were told it was connected with Obama.
Mike Hunter
understand?
It was only thee days after the AMA and Cancer Society objected, causing the
uproar, that the Secretary come out and said, it wasn't "us" it was "them,"
dr_jeff. LOL
"dr_jeff" <u...@msu.edu> wrote in message
news:taWdnYsrRbiOLZnW...@giganews.com...
JoeSpareBedroom
about is not appointed by the president. Be very careful with your next
response. This is a trap.
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b056e4d$0$6741$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
Mike Hunter
appointed by the president, dummy. What I did was "quote" what was in the
Tribune News papers.
I don't know what you want but most sensible people do not want BO and the
Dims in Congress, to give people from the government the power to control
our healthcare, or THAT is the type of "change" they will be making.
"Joe$#itForBrains"a...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:RfeNm.43774$de6....@newsfe21.iad...
JoeSpareBedroom
If yes, why?
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b0575bb$0$6709$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
Mike Hunter
"Joe$#itForBrains" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:VBeNm.44150$de6....@newsfe21.iad...
JoeSpareBedroom
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b057cc9$0$6713$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
Mike Hunter
"JoeSpareBedroom" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:Y1fNm.44376$de6....@newsfe21.iad...
JoeSpareBedroom
2) The nomination process doesn't involve the president, unless something's
missing from the agency's web site. You've visited the site, so you probably
agree.
"The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) solicits nominations
for members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) through an
open process announced in the Federal Register, an official Government
publication for notices from Federal agencies and organizations. Anyone can
nominate a candidate for the Task Force. Self-nominations are also accepted.
Members of the Task Force are selected based on recognized expertise in
prevention, evidence-based medicine, and primary care."
3) Since the whining began about the mammogram issue, I haven't seen any of
the whiners indicate which, if any task force members were nominated by
Obama, or which members were already in place before Obama took office.
I'm always interested in new information if you have any, especially about
#3.
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b059680$0$6704$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
Mike Hunter
HOW they got to be on that panel.
The fact is if BOs healthcare plan is passed by the Dims in Congress, they
are exactly the type of people that will determining the type of healthcare
we will be subjected to.
A Government panel will make healthcare decision for the masses based on
need and cost. You can bet the farm, old folks like us will bear the
brunt of those government decisions
I don't know about you but I prefer my healthcare decisions continued to be
made between me and my doctor.
Why would any thinking person want a healthcare plan, run by government
bureaucrats, that is going to cost everybody more money to the tune of ten
trillions dollars, yet reduce the available healthcare?
"Joe$#itForBrains" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:b%gNm.44383$de6....@newsfe21.iad...
ByTor
news...@frontiernet.net says...
> Do you believe it's correct for ANYONE to connect the task force with Obama?
> If yes, why?
I think the fair question to ask, because this task force was created
*before* Obama, is how much *influence* will this *current*
administration have over the *current* task force.
ByTor
news...@frontiernet.net says...
> 1) The task force has been around since 1984.
>
> 2) The nomination process doesn't involve the president, unless something's
> missing from the agency's web site. You've visited the site, so you probably
> agree.
>
> "The Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) solicits nominations
> for members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) through an
> open process announced in the Federal Register, an official Government
> publication for notices from Federal agencies and organizations. Anyone can
> nominate a candidate for the Task Force. Self-nominations are also accepted.
> Members of the Task Force are selected based on recognized expertise in
> prevention, evidence-based medicine, and primary care."
>
> 3) Since the whining began about the mammogram issue, I haven't seen any of
> the whiners indicate which, if any task force members were nominated by
> Obama, or which members were already in place before Obama took office.
>
> I'm always interested in new information if you have any, especially about
> #3.
I think the fair question to ask, because this task force was created
*before* Obama, is how much *influence* will this *current*
administration have over the *current* task force.
I mean *all* administrations currently in power have their agendas that
they will push, just because some department existed already is really
irrelevant, leads me to believe that its just business as usual in
Washington, influencing what *needs* to be influenced to win.
I personally think that opposition is so fierce that they will *latch*
on to anything to stall & discredit this health issue, but that doesn't
mean that they may be wrong or spreading misinformation. The left
opposes the opposers & attacks with almost equal ferocity so it looks to
me like no one gets anywhere just more added drama & bullshit to the
issues.
JoeSpareBedroom
didn't think this was a problem, but when my doctor submitted records of the
exam, I was pretty worried about being arrested for waiting an extra year. I
stocked up on extra ammo.
Nothing happened, though.
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b05ab05$0$6751$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
JoeSpareBedroom
news:00818628$0$23805$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
None whatsoever.
ByTor
news...@frontiernet.net says...
Okay.....Again, I see you cut out the rest of my reply but that's okay.
I'll paste the rest so no one is confused by your answer because I think
its more relevant & fair to my first paragraph, I explained *both*
parties are responsible for influence as well, if anyone thinks they are
note they are in denial:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I mean *all* administrations currently in power have their agendas that
they will push, just because some department existed already is really
irrelevant, leads me to believe that its just business as usual in
Washington, influencing what *needs* to be influenced to win.
I personally think that opposition is so fierce that they will *latch*
on to anything to stall & discredit this health issue, but that doesn't
mean that they may be wrong or spreading misinformation. The left
opposes the opposers & attacks with almost equal ferocity so it looks to
me like no one gets anywhere just more added drama & bullshit to the
issues.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hachiroku ハチロク
>>>> But, then again, she doesn't work for Obama, so that doesn't carry
>>>> weight as far as you're concerned. If this had come out during the
>>>> Bush administration you'd be all over it. You're a putz.
>>>
>>>
>>> All over it? Nice try. You lose.
>>
>>
>> No. Any woman who develops breast cancer before the age of 50 loses,
>> thanks to Obamacare.
>>
>> When it comes to you, I never lose. Loser.
>>
>>
>
> You'd have no such thoughts if the AMA made the same recommendations. You
> hate it because you were told it was connected with Obama.
Sure. Of course. But the AMA didn't.
As a matter of fact, NO Doctor, Oncologist, OR medical professional had
anything to do with it.
If you leave now, you can probably make it to the store in time to buy
today's Wall Street Journal and fiuind this out for yourself. There was
not ONE SINGLE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL on the panel that came up with the 50
year old 'guideline'.
It was done by a panel, and most likely a panel of bureaucrats.
This is Bambicare. No science. No medicine. Just statiticians and
actuaries.
You know, like of like an insurance company.
Except most insurance companies do have medical professionals advising
them so they don't go and say something stupid.
So, keep on rooting for National health care! Just the same thing, only
run by the government instead of an insurance company. We don't expect any
more from you, or them.
Mike Hunter
treatments you may have under a federal healthcare plan, rather than what
the doctors in the AMA believe is right for you, because they ALL do it?
LOL
"ByTor" <By...@snowdog.com> wrote in message
news:00819f51$0$13122$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
JoeSpareBedroom
news:pan.2009.11.19....@e86.GTS...
>
>>>>> But, then again, she doesn't work for Obama, so that doesn't carry
>>>>> weight as far as you're concerned. If this had come out during the
>>>>> Bush administration you'd be all over it. You're a putz.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> All over it? Nice try. You lose.
>>>
>>>
>>> No. Any woman who develops breast cancer before the age of 50 loses,
>>> thanks to Obamacare.
>>>
>>> When it comes to you, I never lose. Loser.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> You'd have no such thoughts if the AMA made the same recommendations. You
>> hate it because you were told it was connected with Obama.
>
> Sure. Of course. But the AMA didn't.
>
> As a matter of fact, NO Doctor, Oncologist, OR medical professional had
> anything to do with it.
>
> If you leave now, you can probably make it to the store in time to buy
> today's Wall Street Journal and fiuind this out for yourself. There was
> not ONE SINGLE MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL on the panel that came up with the 50
> year old 'guideline'.
Can't leave here for a newspaper, and band rehearsal begins in a half hour.
Last I read, the recommendation came from the U.S. Preventive Services Task
Force (USPSTF). Is that still the case, as far as you know?
ByTor
> In article <4b05d276$0$6692$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net>, Mikehunt2@lycos says...
>
> In other words you think it will OK for the government to control what
> treatments you may have under a federal healthcare plan, rather than what
> the doctors in the AMA believe is right for you, because they ALL do it?
> LOL
Huh? Where did I say that? I'm not a one sided individual, my emphasis is on
*influencing* to meet agenda needs by both parties at anytime with any department.
It seems the main statement was that this report & this department is *connected* to
Obama right? He did not *create* it (this department), but what's to stop him from
influencing them to meet his *agenda* needs.....That's all I'm saying.
I think the government should stay the fuck out of it. All they have given us is a
bunch of smoke & mirrors with this proposed bill to fullfill their *EGOS* to be the
first to pass major legislation. And ya know what, they are goingto do what the
fuck they want anyway, they always do. Seems no one on either side has the *RIGHT* solution
because no one can fucking agree on anything, how's that for *responsible* governing?
Buncha whining crybabies that can't agree on anything, its pathetic.
JoeSpareBedroom
Cancer information is constantly evolving as new statistics are gathered.
Who do you think should be responsible for digesting and interpreting them.
It's not the job of individual doctors. It's not necessarily part of their
skill set and they're busy.
ByTor
I dunno Joe, obviously you guys miss the point because I don't take
sides & that seems to be what's being looked at so I'll pass on furthur
comment about this issue. This current administration will get what they
want anyway and all the lefties can cream in their pants on their
victory, I'm really just starting to not give a shit anymore. My
projection for 2012.........The same cycle starts all over again whether
its dems or repubs.
JoeSpareBedroom
I'm not taking sides. There's actually a name for researchers who analyze
data about diseases. That's what the horrible, awful "panel" has been doing
since its inception in 1984.
http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfab.htm
ByTor
Well whatever the case, I think I'm going to take a break anyway as it
seems I'm getting to the level of where I used to be about politics.
It's a shame because this election caught my attention way more than any
other in my life and maybe I had a hope that things would be a bit
different, but it seems its not & is business as usual, all talk,
arguing, demeaning, etc., etc., and no one doing the right things
without hidden agendas & improper motives. I guess I've been in a real
fantasy world this time around.
Hachiroku ハチロク
THat's what it says. I'd like to know what 'doctor' would recommend fewer
breast exams. Should probably have his license revoked.
Let's see Michelle O lead the way!
dr_jeff
> What part of the "health task force, appointed by Obama," did you not
> understand?
It is not appointed by Obama. From the Task Force website: "The Agency
for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) solicits nominations for
members of the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) through an
open process announced in the Federal Register, an official Government
publication for notices from Federal agencies and organizations. Anyone
can nominate a candidate for the Task Force. Self-nominations are also
accepted. Members of the Task Force are selected based on recognized
expertise in prevention, evidence-based medicine, and primary care."
So it is part of the government, but not appointed by Obama.
> It was only thee days after the AMA and Cancer Society objected, causing the
> uproar, that the Secretary come out and said, it wasn't "us" it was "them,"
And it was the Obama administration doing the right thing.
Jeff
JoeSpareBedroom
Thank you for saying that the agency in question was the U.S. Preventive
Services Task Force (USPSTF), whose advisors are all doctors and nurses
except for one. Now, how did you come up with this statement? "As a matter
of fact, NO Doctor, Oncologist, OR medical professional had anything to do
with it."
Bruce Nedrow (Ned) Calonge, M.D., M.P.H. (Chair)
Dr. Calonge, the Chief Medical Officer of the Colorado Department of Public
Health and Environment, is also the State Epidemiologist and the Executive
Director of State Bioterrorism Preparedness. He is an Associate Professor of
Family Medicine and of Preventive Medicine and Biometrics at the University
of Colorado Health Sciences Center. Dr. Calonge is also the President of the
Colorado Board of Medical Examiners, which licenses and provides regulatory
oversight for physicians and physician assistants. Dr. Calonge serves on the
Board of Directors for the Colorado Academy of Family Practice (President),
the Colorado Foundation for Medical Care (Board Chair), and the Colorado
Prevention Center. At the Colorado Medical Society, he chairs the Health
Affairs Committee. He is a member of the Colorado Patient Safety Coalition.
Return to About USPSTF
Diana B. Petitti, M.D., M.P.H. (Vice Chair)
Dr. Petitti is a Professor of Biomedical Informatics at the Fulton School of
Engineering, at Arizona State University. She was previously an Adjunct
Professor at the University of Southern California, Los Angeles, and Senior
Scientific Advisor for Health Policy and Medicine at Kaiser Permanente
Southern CA, Pasadena, CA. She is a member of the American Public Health
Association, the Society for Epidemiologic Research, and the American
Epidemiologic Society and is a Fellow of the American Heart Association
Council on Epidemiology. Dr. Petitti serves on the editorial board of
Epidemiology, American Journal of Preventive Medicine, and American Journal
of Medicine. She is also currently a member of the Institute of Medicine,
New Approaches to Early Detection of Breast Cancer; the California Office of
Statewide Planning on Health, and the Technical Advisory Committee.
Return to About USPSTF
Susan Curry, Ph.D.
Dr. Curry is the dean of the College of Public Health and distinguished
professor of health management and policy at the University of Iowa. She is
currently vice chair of the American Legacy Foundation's board of directors
and a member of the National Cancer Institute's board of scientific
advisors. Dr. Curry's research focuses on disease prevention and behavioral
risk factor modification with a primary focus on tobacco use. Dr. Curry's
research in tobacco includes studies of motivation to quit smoking,
randomized trials of promising smoking cessation and prevention
interventions, evaluations of the use and cost effectiveness of tobacco
cessation treatments under different health insurance plans and health care
costs and utilization associated with tobacco cessation.
Return to About USPSTF
Allen J. Dietrich, M.D.
Dr. Dietrich, a board-certified family physician, is a professor of
community and family medicine at Dartmouth Medical School and a member of
the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences. He is also
associate director for population sciences at the Norris Cotton Cancer
Center at Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center and serves as chair of the John
D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation Initiative on Depression and
Primary Care.
Return to About USPSTF
Thomas G. DeWitt, M.D.
Thomas G. DeWitt, M.D. is the Carl Weihl Professor of Pediatrics, Director
of the Division of General and Community Pediatrics, and Associate Chair for
Primary Care, in the Department of Pediatrics, at the Children's Hospital
Medical Center, Cincinnati, Ohio. Since the mid-1980s, he has served as the
Project Director for the Bureau of Health Professions (BHPr) grants in
General Pediatrics Residency Training and Faculty Development, both at
Children's Hospital Medical Center Cincinnati and at the University of
Massachusetts Medical Center. For 10 years, Dr. DeWitt served on the Board
of Directors of the Ambulatory Pediatric Association (APA), serving as
president from 1993-1994. He was instrumental in the APA's role in
developing BHPr supported educational guidelines in general pediatrics for
both medical students and residents. In 1996, Dr. DeWitt also served as
Chair of the Planning Committee for the first national conference on faculty
development, jointly sponsored by the BHPr and the American Association of
Medical Colleges. He has published and presented extensively on the subject
of community-based education and faculty development for community
preceptors.
Return to About USPSTF
Kimberly D. Gregory, M.D., M.P.H.
Dr. Gregory is Director of Maternal-Fetal Medicine and Director of Women's
Health Services Research at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, CA.
She is an Associate Professor at the David Geffen School of Medicine at
UCLA, Department of Obstetrics & Gynecology and at the UCLA School of Public
Health Department of Community Health Sciences. She is President of the
Perinatal Advisory Council, Los Angeles Communities and has served on
numerous advisory boards, including the Office of Statewide Health Planning
and Development-California Health Policy and Data Advisory Commission on
Lowering Cesarean Sections; the Department Health Services Maternal & Child
Health Branch; Department of Health Services Office of Women's Health; the
California Perinatal Quality Care Collaborative; and the March of Dimes. Dr.
Gregory is a member of many professional organizations, including the
American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology where she is currently on the
OB Practice Committee and ACOG District IX Legislative Committee.
Return to About USPSTF
David Grossman, M.D., M.P.H.
Dr. Grossman, a board-certified pediatrician recognized for his research on
injury prevention and Native American health, is medical director of
preventive care at Group Health Cooperative in Seattle. He is also a senior
investigator at the Group Health Center for Health Studies and a professor
of health services and adjunct professor of pediatrics at the University of
Washington. He serves on the Secretary's Advisory Committee on Injury
Prevention and Control for the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
In 2007, the American Academy of Pediatrics awarded Dr. Grossman the Native
American Child Health Advocacy Award.
Return to About USPSTF
George Isham, M.D., M.S.
George J. Isham, M.D. is Medical Director and Chief Health Officer for
HealthPartners, a large health care organization in Minnesota, representing
nearly 800,000 members. Dr. Isham is responsible for quality, utilization
management, health promotion and disease management, research, and health
professionals' education at HealthPartners. He is active in strategic
planning and policy issues. He is an experienced primary care clinician and
was chair of the Institute of Medicine committee that produced the report,
Priority Areas for National Action: Transforming Health Care Quality.
Return to About USPSTF
Michael L. LeFevre, M.D., M.S.P.H.
Dr. LeFevre is a Professor in the Department of Family and Community
Medicine at the University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia,
Missouri. He is the Medical Director for Family Medicine at Missouri
University Health Care; is Director of the Missouri University Health Care
Electronic Medical Record project; Chair of the Credentialing Committee for
the Department of Family Medicine; and Director of Clinical Services at the
Department of Family Medicine. He has served on the Commission on Clinical
Policies and Research of the American Academy of Family Physicians. Dr.
LeFevre is a researcher, a published author and consultant, and has been
invited to give many presentations across the country.
Return to About USPSTF
Rosanne Leipzig, M.D., Ph.D.
Dr. Leipzig, a board-certified internist and geriatrician is a professor in
the departments of Geriatrics and Adult Development, Medicine, and Health
Policy at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York. She also serves as
vice chair of Education in the Departments of Education and Geriatrics and
Adult Development at Mount Sinai. She has been a recipient of the American
College of Physicians Richard and Hinda Rosenthal award, given for the
notable contribution her work in evidence-based medicine has made to improve
clinical care in internal medicine.
Return to About USPSTF
Lucy N. Marion, Ph.D., R.N.
Dr. Marion is the new Dean and Professor at the Medical College of Georgia
School of Nursing in Augusta, Georgia, after several years as Associate Dean
for Academic Nursing Practice at the University of Illinois at Chicago
College of Nursing. As a researcher, clinician (family nurse practitioner),
published author, and international consultant, Dr. Marion has received
numerous honors and awards. She has served on state and national advisory
groups concerning mental health care, environmental risks to children, the
genetics workforce, and the practice doctorate for nurses, and belongs to
several professional organizations. Her NIH-funded translational research
focuses on sexual risk reduction interventions for high risk minority
populations. In Chicago, she developed a nurse-managed system in partnership
with Thresholds Psychosocial Rehabilitation Agency for the delivery of
integrated primary and mental health care for people with severe and
persistent mental illness.
Return to About USPSTF
Joy Melnikow, M.D., M.P.H.
Dr. Melnikow is a professor in the Department of Family and Community
Medicine and associate director of the Center for Healthcare Policy and
Research at the University of California Davis. She is currently a deputy
editor of Medical Care, standing member of the health services organization
and delivery study section at the National Institutes of Health,
contributing member of the California Health Benefits Program Task Force for
the University of California's Office of the President and associate medical
director of Healthwise, Inc. Dr. Melnikow's research interests include
cost-effectiveness analysis to assist clinical and public health policy
formulation, cancer prevention in women, patient preferences and decision
making, underserved populations and health disparities.
Return to About USPSTF
Bernadette Melnyk, Ph.D., R.N., C.P.N.P/N.P.P.
Dr. Melnyk is dean and distinguished foundation professor in nursing at the
Arizona State University College of Nursing & Healthcare Innovation. She is
a pediatric and psychiatric nurse practitioner whose research focuses on
improving mental health outcomes in children, teens, and parents. She
directs the National Association of Pediatric Nurse Practitioners' KySS
mental health promotion program. She served on the American Academy of
Pediatrics Mental Health Task Force in 2006 and the Institute of Medicine's
working committee on evidence-based practice in 2007. For her dedication to
innovative programming leading to health care solutions, the American
Academy of Nursing named her a 2006 Edge Runner.
Return to About USPSTF
Wanda Nicholson, M.D., M.P.H., M.B.A.
Dr. Nicholson, a board-certified obstetrician-gynecologist and a perinatal
epidemiologist, is an associate professor in the departments of gynecology
and obstetrics and population, family and reproductive health at the Johns
Hopkins School of Medicine and Bloomberg School of Public Health in
Baltimore. She is currently a member of the American College of
Obstetricians and Gynecologists' committee on health care for underserved
women and of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's public health
working group on preconception care and health care. Dr. Nicholson's
research focuses on the epidemiology of chronic conditions in women,
including gestational diabetes, type 2 diabetes, obesity and the effect of
depressive symptoms on health-related quality of life.
Return to About USPSTF
J. Sanford (Sandy) Schwartz, M.D.
Dr. Schwartz, a board-certified internal medicine specialist, is the Leon
Hess Professor of Medicine, Health Management, and Economics at the
University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine and Wharton School. He is past
president of the American Federation of Clinical Research and the Society
for Medical Decision Making, former Executive Director of the Leonard Davis
Institute of Health Economics, and past Editor of the American Journal of
Managed Care. An expert in the evaluation of medical practices and
guidelines, Dr. Schwartz has served on the National Institutes of Health and
Institute of Medicine committees in these areas. He is a member of the
Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Medical Care Advisory Committee
and the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Associations Medical Advisory Panel.
Return to About USPSTF
Timothy Wilt, M.D., M.P.H.
Dr. Wilt, a board-certified internal medicine specialist, is a professor in
the Department of Medicine at the University of Minnesota and the
Minneapolis VA Medical Center. As an investigator in the Minneapolis VA
Health Services Research and Development Center for Chronic Disease Outcomes
Research, his research interests include evidence-based chronic disease
prevention and management. Dr. Wilt served on the Outcomes Research &
Epidemiology Task Force in 1997 and currently sits on the editorial board of
the American Journal of Medicine.
larry moe 'n curly
Mike Hunter wrote:
>
> A report from one of BO's appointed "medical" panels has "determined" that
> woman do not need monograms before the age of fifty, because it is not cost
> effective to do so.
Why did you put "medical" in quotes, implying that it's not a
scientific panel? Here's the membership of the panel, the U.S.
Preventative Services Task Force
www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstfab.htm#Members
Of the 16 people on the panel, 13 are medical doctors, and the other
three have doctorates in nursing or public health. Are you angry
because no members are metallurgists?
The U.S. Preventative Services Task Force was created in 1984 --
during the REAGAN administration! So why do you think Ronald Reagan
was a Communist who wanted women to die of cancer at the hands of
socialized medicine?
larry moe 'n curly
Hachiroku ハチロク wrote:
>
> On Wed, 18 Nov 2009 20:39:02 -0500, JoeSpareBedroom wrote:
>
>> You've been told to turn science into politics
>
> Bulllllllllllllllshittttttttttttttt!
>
>> You are an ignorant bastard, aren't you?
>
> My statement is precisely correct.
>
>> And tell me, who has told me that?
>
> My Mom? She thinks it's utterly stupid, and asked me if I thought it was
> to save money when the new "health plan" kicks in. I told her that's just
> what I thought.
>
> She's been a Registered Nurse for a lot longer than you have been on the
> planet. I'd consider that being a 'health care professional'.
So are Lucy N. Marion and Bernadette Melnyk, two members of the panel:
www.ahrq.gov/clinic/uspstbio.htm
Why do they know less than your mother does? And what about the other
14 members of the panel, 13 of them MDs?
BTW, notice the panel did not recommend eliminating regular
mammography for under-40 women who have family histories of breast
cancer.
You, Mike, and your fellow crazy Republicans are trying to politicize
a purely medical matter. The only other group that turns everything
into politics is the Communists.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:da399da6-2a44-426e...@g10g2000pri.googlegroups.com...
The Hack doesn't know what the fuck he thinks. Seriously.
Mike Hunter
to stay out of our healthcare, they can do something else right as well
;)
"dr_jeff" <u...@msu.edu> wrote in message
news:NdudnbA8lOLwZ5jW...@giganews.com...
Mike Hunter
GOOD thing, even BO apparently disagrees with their conclusion.
At least for now that is. If we ever allow BO and the Dims in Congress to
get control of our healthcare, you can bet the farm that "consensus," about
who get what treatments will become the norm, as it is in practically every
county that has nationalized healthcare. LOL
"Joe$#itForBrains" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:QnpNm.18975$cd7....@newsfe04.iad...
JoeSpareBedroom
> Joe$#itForBrains, it just goes to prove, "consensus" it not necessarily a
> GOOD thing, even BO apparently disagrees with their conclusion.
>
> At least for now that is. If we ever allow BO and the Dims in Congress
> to get control of our healthcare, you can bet the farm that "consensus,"
> about who get what treatments will become the norm, as it is in
> practically every county that has nationalized healthcare. LOL
Sure, Mike. Whatever you say.
zzzzzzzzzzz..............
Mike Hunter
healthcare system in NOT political, dummy?
"larry moe 'n curly" <larrymo...@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:5599fd69-8b9e-47d2...@w19g2000pre.googlegroups.com...
Mike Hunter
not want to do a search for what is actually happening in practically every
county that has nationalized healthcare. Start with Great Britten, WBMS
LOL
"Joe$#itForBrains" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:uCANm.21532$gi1....@newsfe19.iad...
JoeSpareBedroom
bottle, Uncle Jemima.
"Mike Hunter" <Mikehunt2@lycos,com> wrote in message
news:4b0700fa$0$6713$ce5e...@news-radius.ptd.net...
Mike Hunter
Joe$#itForBrains LOL
"Joe$#itForBrains" <news...@frontiernet.net> wrote in message
news:ikDNm.45863$Xf2....@newsfe12.iad...
badgolferman
> I think
I think congratulations are in order today.
ByTor
REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com says...
> ByTor, 11/19/2009,4:19:33 PM, wrote:
>
> > I think
>
> I think congratulations are in order today.
An insult, how nice. Is this what you do to everyone you disagree with?
How's that going for ya?
It's amazing that I have *never* insulted anyone here or given any
reason to be insulted & yet you resort to it, nice.
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
>
> badgolferman is a great guy. He has a fantastic joke list, which you
> should get yourself on.
>
> What he said was just a little jab.
>
> Step back and watch him a bit. He makes sense and is a good guy.
I'm sure he is a good guy & fair, I have read his debates & opinions,
and if it's just a joke I obviously don't understand his sense of humor
* I'll stand corrected for my reply. But I'll let him explain that,
thanks for your input though.......;0)
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
It was in reply to me using the beginning of one of my replies, at least
that's the way it appears on my thread tree. I use a real
newsreader.....(LMAO)
> That is an impossibility, cause he always gets to personal insults
> when he runs out of 'facts'.
> I think you have seen this a few times, yourself.
>
> Mike aka badgolferman does not stand for much of Joey's crap.
Well, than maybe golferman don't like me for other reasons than.
Honestly I do lean a bit to the right but I won't hesitate to call the
*right* out there either, I take no particular sides, maybe that
confuses people, I dunno.
badgolferman
> In article <xn0ghx3e8...@news.albasani.net>,
> REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com says...
>
> > ByTor, 11/19/2009,4:19:33 PM, wrote:
> >
> > > I think
> >
> > I think congratulations are in order today.
>
> An insult, how nice. Is this what you do to everyone you disagree
> with? How's that going for ya?
>
> It's amazing that I have never insulted anyone here or given any
> reason to be insulted & yet you resort to it, nice.
I did not insult you. I was congratulating you for your special day.
FOB
ByTor
REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com says...
What that I was thinking?
Ah well, no big deal, I still don't get it but I guess that's my problem
than.
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
> he says.
I've seen enough believe me, why I was suprised. But no matter, as I
replied to him , it's my problem now no big deal.
> He does not need me to stand up for him, but I have quite a bit of
> respect for both of you and don't want to see you all get into it for
> no reason.
Well that's good to know.....But it does appear to be odd that we do get
along (as evidenced by all your fans here) & if we do disgree at least
the insults don't start flying......(LMAO)
Hachiroku ハチロク
Well, we get very few thinkers here. A lot of people *feel* but few think...
ByTor
says...
Now that you put it that way, good point.......;0)
badgolferman
Is November 21 significant for you in anyway?
ByTor
REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com says...
Huh? Are you serious?........Matter of fact it is, is that what this is
about? If it is how the hell you know that?
Your post was on the 19th though.
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
> for people that want to change my country to a socialist 'utopia'.
I hear ya........I just read this & found it very interesting. It kinda
borderlines a little I think but there are some important points that
can be picked out of it. My favorite part is what I've been saying all
along.........;0)
"The question that I would like to ask, is how far can the GDP go when
70% of the GDP is based on consumer spending? Where is consumer spending
going to come from when realistically over 16% of the people in America
aren?t working?"
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24020.htm
I mean I take this a lot furthur though. Way to much dependance on
consumer spending. I *understand* that's how our economy works but
jeeeeeeez how far are we willing to go looking where we are at now & the
result of it...;0)
dr_jeff
> In article <u3hig5lfbh7fcqo9r...@4ax.com>,
<...>
> I hear ya........I just read this & found it very interesting. It kinda
> borderlines a little I think but there are some important points that
> can be picked out of it. My favorite part is what I've been saying all
> along.........;0)
>
> "The question that I would like to ask, is how far can the GDP go when
> 70% of the GDP is based on consumer spending? Where is consumer spending
> going to come from when realistically over 16% of the people in America
> aren?t working?"
>
> http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article24020.htm
>
> I mean I take this a lot furthur though. Way to much dependance on
> consumer spending. I *understand* that's how our economy works but
> jeeeeeeez how far are we willing to go looking where we are at now & the
> result of it...;0)
And how far can it go when our economy is based on spending money that
isn't ours? I mean, a lot of people owe several months of wages on
credit cards. How can you spend money when you don't have it and when
the credit card companies won't lend it to you?
Plus, regardless of the above paragraph, people need to stop spending
money they don't have and start saving for things like houses, cars,
retirement and the most important investment: education.
Jeff
ByTor
says...
Hey, I agree 100%......It is a perplexing situation.
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
>
> Pass the Fair Tax.
>
> http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
>
> What this will do is give incentive to companies to bring back
> manufacturing to the US.
The anti-republican solutions dementia will not ALLOW this Scott, you're
in a fantasy world.........;0)
> Of course along with this we must get the Democrats out of office.
> They stand for socialism, which is a main reason the economy is in a
> tail spin.
>
> Capitalism is what built this country. It has its problems, but is
> far superior to any other method.
Yes I agree..........Has it gotten out of hand, fuck yeah......Time to
pull the reigns back, but than again other countries have & will accuse
us of protectionism.
JoeSpareBedroom
news:007aac18$0$8177$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
>> Capitalism is what built this country. It has its problems, but is
>> far superior to any other method.
>
> Yes I agree..........Has it gotten out of hand, fuck yeah......
You don't know the half of it. I'll show you tomorrow.
ByTor
news...@frontiernet.net says...
But just to be clear Joe I am not one of those conspiracy theory nuts &
anti-capatalism folks thinking its best for the *government* to run
things & *all* corporations are EVIL greedy bastards so I hope you won't
go there........;0)
But I am interested though in what ya may show me.........;0)
JoeSpareBedroom
Watch for a new thread whose subject line will be something like
"capitalists eating themselves". :-)
ByTor
>
> "ByTor" <By...@snowdog.com> wrote in message
> news:0085316e$0$17025$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
> > In article <dhdOm.77472$Wf2....@newsfe23.iad>,
> > news...@frontiernet.net says...
> >>
> >> "ByTor" <By...@snowdog.com> wrote in message
> >> news:007aac18$0$8177$c3e...@news.astraweb.com...
> >> > In article <hbnig5l28366364ce...@4ax.com>,
> >> > Mov...@outa.here says...
> >>
> >> >> Capitalism is what built this country. It has its problems, but is
> >> >> far superior to any other method.
> >> >
> >> > Yes I agree..........Has it gotten out of hand, fuck yeah......
> >>
> >>
> >> You don't know the half of it. I'll show you tomorrow.
> >
> > But just to be clear Joe I am not one of those conspiracy theory nuts &
> > anti-capatalism folks thinking its best for the *government* to run
> > things & *all* corporations are EVIL greedy bastards so I hope you won't
> > go there........;0)
> >
> > But I am interested though in what ya may show me.........;0)
>
> Watch for a new thread whose subject line will be something like
> "capitalists eating themselves". :-)
Okay.....
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
> attractive to manufacture in the United States.
Get on the *unions* asses as well & maybe that will happen.........;0)
badgolferman
My post was on the 21st. Yours was on the 19th.
mike
--
"Be careful of your thoughts; they may become words at any moment." ~
Ira Gassen
ByTor
Mov...@outa.here says...
> just fine.
>
> Just by pass the unions.
I just can't believe that in *todays* politically correct & social
conscience awareness we still *NEED* unions.......Perplexing isn't it
that we are still *fighting* an enemy????
ByTor
REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com says...
Yer right.....Ah well, there was NO way I could have known what you were
talking about though so forgive me for it going over my head & quite
honestly I don't remember your nic if you've seen me bouncing in other
places on usenet.......Thank you than, I appreciate the
sentiment......;0)
in2dadark
> A report from one of BO's appointed "medical" panels has "determined" that
> woman do not need monograms before the age of fifty, because it is not cost
> effective to do so.
>
> America women, the AMA and the Cancer Society are all saying that the
> "medical" panels proposal is BS and should be opposed.
>
> Several woman on TV said they would be dead if that were the law of the land
> because THEIR Brest cancer was discovered when they were in their thirties
> and forties.
>
> This is just one of the first steps that proves how BO and the Dims in
> Congress will control your healthcare if we ever let them pass that goofy
> law.
>
> .
I agree with them. Most women get free mamagrams from their signifi-
can't others up till at least 30 so waiting 20 years for another one
seems about right.
badgolferman
You know me by my name and my propensity to stick to my guns.
Mike Hunter
spending the highest amount per pupil, in the whole country is Washington
DC. The lowest rated public school district, in the whole county, is
Washington DC LOL
"dr_jeff" <u...@msu.edu> wrote in message
news:muudnXZTRr5g1ZTW...@giganews.com...
Mike Hunter
"Scott in Florida" <Mov...@outa.here> wrote in message
news:hbnig5l28366364ce...@4ax.com...
> Actually there is a very simple solution to the whole mess.
>
> Pass the Fair Tax.
>
> http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
>
> What this will do is give incentive to companies to bring back
> manufacturing to the US.
>
> Of course along with this we must get the Democrats out of office.
> They stand for socialism, which is a main reason the economy is in a
> tail spin.
>
> Capitalism is what built this country. It has its problems, but is
> far superior to any other method.
>
> --
>
> Scott in Florida
dr_jeff
> Really? Do a search and you will discover that the public school district,
> spending the highest amount per pupil, in the whole country is Washington
> DC. The lowest rated public school district, in the whole county, is
> Washington DC LOL
I was talking saving for college and continuing education, for oneself
and for one's family.
Jeff
ByTor
REMOVETHISb...@gmail.com says...
Now I know who you are, just figured it out. And yeah it is commendable
that you stick to your guns especially when you meet with a high volume
of resistance........;0)
Hachiroku ハチロク
Keeps him 'current'! (resistance...current...never mind...)
badgolferman
> Now I know who you are, just figured it out. And yeah it is
> commendable that you stick to your guns especially when you meet with
> a high volume of resistance.
Send my regards.