[Laurel]

I think we are missing the bigger picture here, or at least no one has been willing to address the 800 pound gorilla in the room. Look, this revision to mamo screenings was floated last year after the new administration took power. It was trial-ballooned in the media with little reaction. I did not miss the effort and do not miss the reason behind it. Yes, it is to save money. Rich referenced all the new treatments in the pipeline for cancer. It is true. New and amazing drugs and therapies are on the horizon, BUT they will cost millions. Think about how much your own treatment has cost. My treatment tally is over a quarter of a million dollars and I am only Stage I. What does treating breast cancer cost? If indeed it will become, or has become a "chronic" illness, albeit an EXPENSIVE chronic illness, what will the cost of care be???? Too much for universal health coverage. If you are going to insure every person, the simple math confirms that resources will have to be rationed.

My dear fellow survivors, you are a liability, a drain on the "system." If my cancer had been found 2 years later, on my first screening at age 50 as proposed, and not earlier at my annual mammogram at the age of 48 which was when I was diagnosed, I would have been Stage IV. Now what if Stage IV cancer is deemed to be too expensive to treat as it is not "curable" and therefore not worth the cost? Oh, I know we are still treating metastatic cancer at present, but for how long? Under this scenario, I would be Stage IV and therefore untreatable. Getting nervous yet? I am.

Remember Lani's recent post where she said we would not like this and posted a review of brain mets treatment not having supportive data to validate treatment. That is where we are headed. They will begin to deny treatment for mets patients as they are "terminal." What a cruel irony to think that we are so close to breaking the cancer code, and they want to produce more stage IV victims so they can deny them care because they are stage IV.

Oh, I hear you scoffing that they will never deny aggressive treatment to metastatic cancer patients. Really? Are you sure?