November 18, 2009 2:01 PM

Sebelius: Mammogram Recommendations Won't Set Policy

By
Stephanie Condon
Topics
Obama's Cabinet
(AP Photo/Jacquelyn Martin)
Updated at 6:30 p.m. EST

A new set of breast cancer screening recommendations has caused some anxiety for women, leaving them wondering whether or not to schedule regular mammograms or whether the new recommendations will impact their insurance policies.

Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius issued a statement on Wednesday to address the confusion, saying that the recommendations will not impact government policy and should not impact private insurers' policies, two concerns voiced by Republicans today. She added that mammograms remain an important live-saving tool.

In an interview with CBS News anchor Katie Couric Sebelius said that she wasn't refuting the recommendations, but that women should "do what they've always done" and talk to their doctors about health care decisions.

"It's one panel of scientists and heath officials who have actually waded into an area where the recommendations have gone back and forth for years," Sebelius told Couric. "Unfortunately, there remains a lot of confusion about what age is the appropriate age to begin routine screening."

Watch Couric's full interview with Sebelius:



Earlier this week, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force issued new guidelines that recommend against both routine mammograms for women younger than 50 and breast self-exams. The independent panel concluded these screening procedures have been causing too many false alarms and unneeded biopsies without substantially improving women's odds of surviving the disease.

"The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations," Sebelius said in her statement. "They do not set federal policy, and they don't determine what services are covered by the federal government."

"There has been debate in this country for years about the age at which routine screening mammograms should begin, and how often they should be given," the secretary added. "The Task Force has presented some new evidence for consideration but our policies remain unchanged. Indeed, I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action."

What is clear, Sebelius said, is the need for more research and innovation in breast cancer prevention, detection and treatment.

"Mammograms have always been an important life-saving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today," she said. "Keep doing what you have been doing for years - talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions and make the decision that is right for you."

Some opponents of the current health care reform plans in Congress are concerned such findings could be used to set standards for health insurance coverage under the Democrats' proposed overhaul, the Washington Post reports.

Also watch last night's discussion on the mammogram recommendations with CBS News medical correspondent Dr. Jon LaPook and Dr. Freya Schnabel, Director of Breast Surgery, NYU Langone Medical Center and Professor of Surgery NYU School of Medicine.

More Coverage:

New Advice: Skip Mammograms in Your 40s
New Mammogram Advice Sparks Concerns
Mammogram Guideline Controversy
Experts Debate New Mammogram Guidelines

Add a Comment See all 49 Comments
by Shirjean1972 November 19, 2009 3:48 PM EST
Government Task force? Looks like the government is trying to save money before the bill is signed. What I don't understand the the comment that breast self-exams are of no value. We are supposed to trust some government task force that tells us not to check ourselves? The guidelines are for women who are not at high risk of breast cancer? How do you know if a woman is at high risk of breast cancer? My sister-in-law got breast cancer in her 30's. Her Mother, Mother's Mother, Mother's four sisters and her father's two sisters all lived to be in their 80's cancer free. Sounds to me that the Democrats want to pay for health care by putting women with breast cancer 6 feet under.
Reply to this comment
by Lawyers-Guns-n-Money-01 November 19, 2009 11:34 PM EST
Reading is fundamental. Where did you get government task force from the article ? (It's an independent group of doctors and scientists.) Where did you get where ANYONE said breast exams are of no value?

Hey, I know a GUY that got breast and lung cancer when he was 18. Knowing that fact and the one about your sister-in-law getting cancer before the age of 40 plus $1.80 will get you a cup of coffee at Starbucks.

This is a recommendation that, according to the actual government, will NOT affect policy and should only be taken into consideration individually.

You DO spin a good yarn though.
by DrAmd November 19, 2009 11:48 AM EST
1) Mammograms are terrible exams, the MRI is much better, but isn't cost effective. Many more lives would be saved if MRI's were available cheaply.
2) This is just the beginning of Healthcare rationing. Policy groups will choose cost effective medicines, procedures and work-ups. Cost effectiveness will be the first "medical question" that will need to be answered. Just as Dr. Spock said,"In any case, were I to invoke logic, logic clearly dictates that the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few." -- Spock
"Or the one." -- Kirk (Star Trek II)
Reply to this comment
by nowhiningallowed November 19, 2009 8:00 AM EST
I've heard news accounts that presumably women have been canceling their scheduled mammograms in light of the government's announcement. Now how intelligent is that for anyone to cancel screenings just because a non-researched entity, like this government agency, gives their opinion. Didn't these women check with their doctors? Where are the women's groups in all of this? Why haven't they said anything? Where are the advocates for poor women on this? Why haven't they said anything? They'll remain silent because of fear of taking a stand that might shed negatively on their president. They will remain silent.
Reply to this comment
by sandy19731 November 19, 2009 8:12 AM EST
Silly democrats, listening to scientists!
by chevyhotrod November 19, 2009 8:59 AM EST
Sandy,
I guess the women from ages 40-50 are just out of luck, because silly democrats are listening to accountants and not scientists.

Ask yourself a question, why would a scientist not recommend screening for people under the age of 50?

The only reason I can think of would be cost, does that sound like an "outside independent panel of doctors and scientists"? I don't think so.

Ask yourself a question, how many woman have been saved by early screening? Where is this data? What do these so called scientists have to say about the lives of these women? The ones that actually benefitted from early screening? What are these numbers?

It's a numbers game, nothing more nothing less.
by gangesdak November 19, 2009 7:56 AM EST
fdskli November 19, 2009 6:11 AM EST

Can CBS do something about this guy? This space is not to be used to sell your products, please.
Reply to this comment
by mammographer November 19, 2009 4:44 AM EST
Congratulations to Kathleen Sebelius for her stand. She has demonstrated good judgement on this issue. Computer models lead to interesting results that sometimes overshadows the simpler conclusions derived from the well established scientific basis for medicine, the randomized clinical trial. We can expect a 15% to 30% reduction in breast cancer mortality if we do annual screening between age 40 - 50. That was demonstrated by the only new evidence gathered since the USPSTF recommendation for screening guidelines in 2002. A doctor in clinical practice of medicine would be happy to be able to save 1 in 1900 women of any age. It's mostly the academic types who don't ever meet the patients who would balk at that number. This is a screening process of healthy people. We have to screen lots of healthy people to find one that we can save their life. But for a thousand patients across the nation every year, it will mean they will not die early.
Reply to this comment
by chevyhotrod November 19, 2009 9:01 AM EST
"Sebelius said that she wasn't refuting the recommendations"

Just thought I would point this out.
by on_alert247 November 18, 2009 10:23 PM EST
by th9876 November 18, 2009 9:31 PM EST
Now everyone knows that insurance companies look for any way possible to NOT pay for something, so they could use this recommendation as an excuse to drop coverage. If so, then I think we really do need a strong public option to compete with these greedy companies. By the way, government officials do not HAVE to take the recommendation of an Advisory Board (note the word "advisory"). So please just get a grip. The only issue would be whether insurance companies drop coverage. If so, this would not be the government rationing care, it would be insurance companies rationing care (which they already do in so many more instances.)

TH,
You've got this completely backwards. The advisory board is made up of 16 members appointed by a govt. agency. There is not one, not a single representative from an insurance company. Why would a govt. agency make a recommendation that they don't intend to enforce in Medicare and Medicade insurance? Private insurance companies can or cannot at their choice decide whether to accept the govt. recommendation. This is why you've got Sebelius trying to explain the decision. A public option will only have more people directly impacted by such decisions at this. BTW, part of the research used to indicate the trade off between screening and the mortality for the 40-49 age group came from China and Russia. You think they have the same level of intervention there as here?
Reply to this comment
by reveal4 November 18, 2009 11:08 PM EST
This is an independent group, organized under the Bush...Bush...Bush administration. They are an independent group. HHS is in in absolutely no way beholdin' to this group. This group does not..... does not set policy for HHS. The insurance industry said this will not result in rationing of care. Mammograms will be done, as usual, on the recommendation of doctors.
Don't be fooled.
by nowhiningallowed November 19, 2009 7:58 AM EST
Oh another lib opportunity to blame this on Bush. Maybe this group was organized during the Bush Presidency, but it's now the Obama Presidency and this is at his door. So stop your whining and blaming. It's the Obama Administration that's in charge now. Like it or not, any errors are because of Obama. If he wants to change things, he can.
by searingtruth November 18, 2009 10:15 PM EST
"Truth is defined by the weakest of us who must suffer through it."
SearingTruth

A Future of the Brave
Reply to this comment
by RandomUser1886 November 18, 2009 9:53 PM EST
Hey guys, a government task force has just released a new study saying you don't really need your first prostate exam until you're 70.
Reply to this comment
by reveal4 November 18, 2009 11:10 PM EST
I believe your post is complete nonsense, Random. Prove that a government panel restricted prostate exams to 70+ year olds. It is complete, absolute nonsense.
by michaelm07 November 19, 2009 7:26 AM EST
Hey reveal4, too bad you don't make the same demands of the bozos ramming the Hellcarebill through. They shouldhave to prove it is worthy. Random is obviously being tongue and cheek.
by RandomUser1886 November 18, 2009 9:51 PM EST
They're setting the stage for rationing health care, folks.
They're setting the stage.
Reply to this comment
by novamba November 19, 2009 8:23 AM EST
I must agree with you... at the very least, lowering expectations. We will end up with prostate exams and colonoscopies at 50 just the same.
by MzSoniaV November 18, 2009 9:42 PM EST
The power of insurance companies amaze me. So far one openly welcomes this report....the rest will follow, when we stop talking about it and it becomes yesterdays news. Ladies sharpen those claws !
Reply to this comment
by voxpopulus November 18, 2009 9:45 PM EST
When I got my insurance policy the company was telling me what it would or would not cover before I signed. It was tryin to sell to me. Sane people go for the policy with the best coverage. I thought Republicans believed in market competition!
by retm-w November 18, 2009 10:00 PM EST
which insurance company? and it wasn't an insurance company paid for study, it was a government study paid for by the taxpayers.
See all 49 Comments
.

Follow Political Hotsheet

Scroll Left
Scroll Right More »
CBS News on Facebook
  • Building You a Better Morning

  • CBS This Morning

    "CBS This Morning," anchored by Charlie Rose, Gayle King and Erica Hill, airs weekdays from 7 to 9 a.m. ET and at the same time in other time zones.
    Learn more...