Cancer Confusion: Shaun Hautly

Upon reading that less frequent exams are recommended. I raised an eyebrow. There are two schools of thought here and I find myself in both. The first is the "Better Safe that Sorry," and the other is "I can handle that." While medical evidence and studies may now point to one, it should be noted that these are scientific studies. Scientific studies report trends. Just because "most people's early scans are negative," doesn't mean that people should stop getting them. This is where Safe vs Sorry kicks in.
Now, if this study changes health care plans to exclude these extra visits, we're going to have some problems. As it stands now, I think many women would opt to have the "unnecessary" exams, so long as it doesn't cost too much. If the plans begin to exclude it and women are forced to pay out of pocket to make sure they don't have cancer, they should be compensated if it's found. Heavily. Call it an "I told you so fee."

With the subject of national health-care on the tips of everyone's tongues, it seems like an appropriate time to settle this issue. Until there is evidence that frequent exams is detrimental, these tests and procedures should be covered by the provider. Besides a few extra exams is WAY cheaper than treating late-stage cancer. So why don't we all take the routine tests, put our minds at ease, and have a barbecue. 

Email Shaun