Community Chat

[terrier3]

On 9/18/2014 mominohio said:

On 9/18/2014 biancardi said:

it is based on age. I get them yearly and they are covered

it is just a "guideline" - your 0b/gyn doesn't have to follow it and you can ask for it.

why is the HPV vaccination a "bad thing"? I think it is a life saver and is no different than other vaccinations that saved lives and prevented disease.

What I fear is that what is now just a "guideline" will soon be practice, because if insurance companies and the government can get out of paying for these tests, they will, and if they aren't covered by insurance (eventually, maybe some are already limiting them to the new guidelines) many women won't get them.

I don't think this applies to ALL women - just women who have had clear Pap tests for years, who are in a monogamous relationship and have no cervical cancer in their family.

I look at it from the other angle - we have far too many tests that are unnecessary in the USA. I'm sure these guidelines were studied for YEARS - and I think they are more in line with other countries too. Why go through procedures that are expensive if they are not helpful or required? It's the same thing with prostate cancer tests too. It's slow growing in senior men and testing every year isn't required.

BTW - I'm sure that finances played a very reduced role in this decision. It's more cost effective for insurance companies and Medicare to catch cancer in it's earliest stages - not wait until someone needs extensive surgery, chemo, etc.- that's what costs them a TON of money! If they feel that 3 years between tests will not lead to more extensive cancer treatments later on...it works for me!

[Mominohio]

On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:

On 9/18/2014 mominohio said:

On 9/18/2014 biancardi said:

it is based on age. I get them yearly and they are covered

it is just a "guideline" - your 0b/gyn doesn't have to follow it and you can ask for it.

why is the HPV vaccination a "bad thing"? I think it is a life saver and is no different than other vaccinations that saved lives and prevented disease.

What I fear is that what is now just a "guideline" will soon be practice, because if insurance companies and the government can get out of paying for these tests, they will, and if they aren't covered by insurance (eventually, maybe some are already limiting them to the new guidelines) many women won't get them.

I don't think this applies to ALL women - just women who have had clear Pap tests for years, who are in a monogamous relationship and have no cervical cancer in their family.

I look at it from the other angle - we have far too many tests that are unnecessary in the USA. I'm sure these guidelines were studied for YEARS - and I think they are more in line with other countries too. Why go through procedures that are expensive if they are not helpful or required? It's the same thing with prostate cancer tests too. It's slow growing in senior men and testing every year isn't required.

BTW - I'm sure that finances played a very reduced role in this decision. It's more cost effective for insurance companies and Medicare to catch cancer in it's earliest stages - not wait until someone needs extensive surgery, chemo, etc.- that's what costs them a TON of money! If they feel that 3 years between tests will not lead to more extensive cancer treatments later on...it works for me!

Terrier3, you are right, she did mention the part about having good pap history, and that part does make some sense, that it isn't a blanket guideline for all women.

I wish I could be as sure as you about the finances part. I think that more and more of our society (including the government and insurance companies in this case) are looking for the easy now (saving billions? by reducing testing) and turning a blind eye, or will worry about the long term costs down the road. I just don't have that much faith in "the system".

[Sushismom]

Here are some of the steps that may be taken when a Pap test detects even precancerous changes.

1. HPV screening

2. Colposcopy and biopsy

3. Cone biopsy

These are all way more expensive than a Pap test.

[brii]

I'll continue to get a yearly Pap and mammo.

I have not had my girls vaccinated with Gardisil, and I don't think I will. They can get it up to age 26; if they feel they want to get it, they can do it themselves.

[terrier3]

On 9/18/2014 mominohio said:

Terrier3, you are right, she did mention the part about having good pap history, and that part does make some sense, that it isn't a blanket guideline for all women.

I wish I could be as sure as you about the finances part. I think that more and more of our society (including the government and insurance companies in this case) are looking for the easy now (saving billions? by reducing testing) and turning a blind eye, or will worry about the long term costs down the road. I just don't have that much faith in "the system".

There are now a LOT of new protections for consumers re: health care, thanks to the ACA.

There are no restrictions on pre-existing conditions - you can receive a new insurance policy even if you have a disease now, you can't reach an annual treatment "cap" or a lifetime "cap" - insurance must continue paying for your treatments. You can't be dumped from a plan if you become sick & need costly treatments.

All of those things could happen in the past.

Of course insuring that people continue receiving treatment for expensive diseases costs a lot of money - so saving money by not performing tests on people with reduced risk (like the 3 year Pap testing for healthy women with no family history) will help offset that.

[biancardi]

you can always pay for it out of pocket if you really want the test.

[Qwackertoo]

On 9/18/2014 biancardi said:

you can always pay for it out of pocket if you really want the test.

IF my BCBS were to stop covering, that is exactly what I would do. For me, personally, it would be a "small" price to pay for a little piece of mind . . . while not a guarantee . . . I'd gladly pay. One of those ounce of prevention better than a pound of cure . . . or however that old saying goes . . . I usually manage to mangle them up.

[Lila Belle]

On 9/18/2014 terrier3 said:

On 9/18/2014 mominohio said:

Terrier3, you are right, she did mention the part about having good pap history, and that part does make some sense, that it isn't a blanket guideline for all women.

I wish I could be as sure as you about the finances part. I think that more and more of our society (including the government and insurance companies in this case) are looking for the easy now (saving billions? by reducing testing) and turning a blind eye, or will worry about the long term costs down the road. I just don't have that much faith in "the system".

There are now a LOT of new protections for consumers re: health care, thanks to the ACA.

There are no restrictions on pre-existing conditions - you can receive a new insurance policy even if you have a disease now, you can't reach an annual treatment "cap" or a lifetime "cap" - insurance must continue paying for your treatments. You can't be dumped from a plan if you become sick & need costly treatments.

All of those things could happen in the past.

Of course insuring that people continue receiving treatment for expensive diseases costs a lot of money - so saving money by not performing tests on people with reduced risk (like the 3 year Pap testing for healthy women with no family history) will help offset that.

Just adding that many tests doctors ordered in the past were unnecessary and expensive for the patient.

[Suziepeach]

mominohio, I knew about the new guidelines a while back & thanks for this thread- my three years due is the end of October- got that bad boy scheduled.

[Mominohio]

On 9/18/2014 Peachysue said:

mominohio, I knew about the new guidelines a while back & thanks for this thread- my three years due is the end of October- got that bad boy scheduled.

Seems like I'm late to the party on this one. Don't know if our office was just being conservative and waited longer to implement the new guidelines, or what, but I had never heard it before yesterday.

Regardless, we ladies can think of a million other things we'd rather do that get the yearly stuff done, even though it isn't terrible, so I hope my starting this at least gives a reminder where needed to get on the phone and get those appointments made. I think we all need a push now and then for this stuff.