In the UK, unless there are special circumstances, they provide women with a mammography every 3 years, if they are over the age of 50. From the web site that I looked at for more details, it appears that they send out notices to eligible women every three years; they call it being 'invited'. Based upon that, if women are going to a mobile radiology unit for their scans, I have to believe that they are going there because they are on the 'scan due' list: i.e. they ain't just walking in on impulse and asking for mammography. The mobile units are, of course, an excellent way of providing easier access to the services.
Here's the source that I used for the information:
http://www.patient.co.uk/health/Breast-Screening.htmLet me explain why I am bringing this up. One of the themes that keeps being tossed out by critics of President Obama's approach to greatly expanding access to health care, is that the services it will offer will be inadequate. Comparisons to European health systems are often used as part of that argument, since if they receive all the healthcare that they need for free, the unwillingness of the President to immediately adopt such a plan is de facto evidence that he is a lying! cheating! conning! varmint!!.
But 'need' and medical practices in some European countries varies quite a bit from what folks imagine is the coverage which we should have in America. Mammography screening is a good example of this. Last month, when that health policies group came out with a suggestion that mammographies not be performed annually, a lot of people went batshit crazy over it, accusing Obama of beginning the assault on our barely adequate healthcare. (I'll leave out the fact that the committee is not a group that sets policies for Medicare and Medicaid.) They clearly defined adequate healthcare as including annual mammograms.
The unwillingness to acknowledge that it may not be possible to offer ideal care is a major stumbling block in the discussion since many people do not want any trade-offs for universal coverage. It leaves them believing that no comprises should be necessary. That's a real problem.
I hope that this makes some sense. Please believe that this is not directed at you but rather at the notion of the nirvana that the other member described.
PT
ETA: added left out word.
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
