I See Your Breast and Raise You a Penis: A Word Game

Today, the United States Preventive Services Task Force released its recommendation that women begin routine breast cancer screening at age 50, instead of 40. It has based this on the modest benefit of mammograms versus the harm of overtreatment.

First, let me explain that the study's idea of modest benefit is a fifteen percent reduction in breast cancer deaths. That number sounds kind of good to me. If I were one of those women, I'd be one hundred percent happy with that.

And the harm of overtreatment? Cancers might be removed that would have grown too slowly to kill the women in which they are detected. As you can imagine, this is a real drag for insurance companies who have to pay for the procedures when they would be happier to spin the Wheel of Fortune and bet their customers will die of natural causes. And since insurance companies are for-profit organizations, that's exactly what they do when insuring us.

The other egregious harm the task force cites? Can mammography kill us, as cancer can? No...but unnecessary tests can cause anxiety. Isn't it so much better for us just not to worry our pretty little heads about it? After all, only fifteen percent of our mothers, sisters and daughters will be saved. What a tough choice.

According to one statistician, although this will save billions of dollars in health costs, "the money was buying something of net negative value. This decision is a no-brainer. The economy benefits, but women are the major beneficiaries." I'm no number cruncher, but when did a fifteen percent reduction in mortality have a negative value?

So, what I'd like to do is play a little word game with the New York Times article about this subject. Wherever there's a mention of women and breast cancer, I'm going to substitute something else. See if you can tell where:

"Over all, the report says, the modest benefit of the exam — reducing the dick cancer death rate by 15 percent — must be weighed against the harms. And those harms loom larger for men in their 40s, who are 60 percent more likely to experience them than men 50 and older but are less likely to have their balls fall off, skewing the risk-benefit equation. The task force concluded that one death by cock rot is prevented for every 1,904 men age 40 to 49 who are screened for 10 years, compared with one prick withering for every 1,339 men age 50 to 74, and one fatal phallus for every 377 men age 60 to 69.

But the new report conflicts with advice from groups like the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiology. They are staying with their guidelines advising annual knob screening starting at age 40.

The cancer society...agreed that man-o-grams had risks as well as benefits but, he said, the society’s experts had looked at “virtually all” the task force and additional data and concluded that the benefits of annual exams starting at age 40 outweighed the risks of unnecessary dickectomy.

Private insurers are required by law in every state except Utah to pay for a chubby checker for men in their 40s.

But the new guidelines are expected to alter the grading system for health plans, which are used as a marketing tool. The message for most men is to forgo ensuring their johnsons aren't killing them if they are in their 40s. In fact, even though exams are of greater benefit to older men, they still prevent only a small fraction of dick cancer deaths.

Researchers worry the new report will be interpreted as a political effort by the Obama administration to save money on health care costs.

Of course, Dr. Dingle Berry noted, if the new guidelines are followed, billions of dollars will be saved.

“But the money was buying something of net negative value,” he said. “This decision is a no-brainer. The economy benefits, but men are the major beneficiaries.”

*****

Do you doubt that if the above were true, there would be a million men brandishing pitchforks and torches marching on Washington right now? You know the answer as well as I do. I'm just being a tease.

P.S. On a serious note, check out this study on digital mammography funded by the National Cancer Institute and published in 2005. Digital mammography is much more accurate in detecting breast cancer in women under 50 and in older women with dense breast tissue than traditional mammography. It saved my mother's life. I may need it to save mine someday. But even at high risk, my insurance will not cover the computer-assisted exam. Superior technology exists, right now, to save more women. Why isn't it recommended? Because it's a lot more expensive than telling us not to worry or to wait to have the inferior test. Statistically speaking, we're not worth it.

A Sneak Attack on Reproductive Rights

Warning: Today, as always, Magick Sandwich may be offensive to some readers...but not for the usual reasons.

In a back room deal brokered to get the votes necessary to pass the House health care bill, one amendment was allowed an up-or-down vote on the floor. The Stupak Amendment passed Saturday night with a vote of 240 to 193.

The amendment stipulates that private insurers who participate in the new exchange created by the health care bill will be banned from covering abortion -- a legal medical procedure -- as a part of women's reproductive health care. (Insurers may pay for termination in cases of rape and incest. The amendment's supporters are comfortable with that particular judgment call.)

I was informed of this vote by Credo Action. Twenty so-called pro-choice Democrats voted yes on this amendment. I signed a petition to "send a coat hanger" to those Democrats. Over 78,000 others have done the same so far. I was uncomfortable with its harsh symbolism. But in a time when people invent death panels and call the president a Nazi, perhaps brutal tactics are necessary.

I understand that this is a difficult issue. I also believe that Credo, Alternet and other progressive sites are getting it wrong. It's true that tens of millions of women will be affected by this back-door effort to take away their rights.

But I've seen no mention of its effect on the untold millions of people who love and support these women. The burden is not confined to whether or not one can find the money to have the procedure after making an incredibly difficult decision. The institutionally-sanctioned shame of this puts even more pressure on women and families that are struggling and unprepared financially or emotionally to raise a child. Grandparents become parents again. Children are raised in squalor.

It's hard to put this into words without sounding callous. I think it's important for everyone to understand that abortion is not an easy decision. It is not something that women use cavalierly as a form of birth control. Women are not demons who set out to murder children. Nor are the loved ones surrounding her whose lives will be irrevocably changed by her decision.

Though it's abhorrent to admit, we should not close our eyes to the reality of the life an unwanted child may face. I do not presume to know what is right in each case. I do not believe birth can be mandated when legislative care ends as soon as a child leaves the womb.

Now the Senate will vote. President Obama, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi have the power to ensure that the Stupak amendment is stripped from the bill that emerges from the Senate as well as the legislation produced by the merger of the House and Senate bills in conference committee.

I signed a petition appealing to them to defeat this amendment. This petition does not raise the specter of back alley abortions in such a stomach-turning way as the other does. If you feel strongly about this, you can sign this petition here.

I believe that the advent of grassroots movements on the internet gives us all the opportunity to be heard. It is up to us to gather information and stand up for what we believe. That's what I'm doing here in my little corner of cyberspace. I hope you understand that.

The Canyon of Zeroes

At Magick Sandwich, we love a parade. We're not made of stone, after all.

Once again, the Yankees are champions of baseball!!!

So, let me take a moment to explain the title of this post. When I say zeroes, I am not referring to a lack of talent, simply to the excess of zeroes on these people's paychecks.

It's been nine years since our home team dominated the sport. Considering the extremely well-paid guy pile above, what took them so long? Modell's Sporting Goods was swamped yesterday with fans buying Yankee memorabilia. Why not just wear a moth-eaten t-shirt from an old win and show you're not just a fair weather fan?

At 11 A.M. this morning, these players will take a ride up the famed "Canyon of Heroes" and enjoy the adulation of an estimated two million fans who will gather along the route. (Statistically, 10.2 percent of them will be unemployed and have nothing better to do than celebrate spoiled sports stars.)

This ticker tape parade has a long history: honorees have included John Glenn, Nelson Mandela, the Apollo 8 astronauts and lots and lots of other Yankee teams. It's been a long time since Wall Street has used ticker tape. Perhaps this year they'll shower the Yanks with shredded hopes and dreams?

Then, at City Hall, they will be presented with the Key to the City by Mike Bloomberg, the man who just bought himself a third term as mayor by spending ninety million dollars of his own money on his campaign. There's a certain symmetry to that.

I live in NYC and I love it, warts and all. I think it's the greatest place on earth. But I don't want to indulge the all-American denial mechanism so many citizens have when it comes to criticism. I think the Daddy Warbucks mentality on display today is a bit grotesque.

And it's going to be impossible to go anywhere downtown. As I said before, I love a a parade, with one caveat: it must not inconvenience me in any way. And that is the definition of a real New Yorker.