2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session arts arts and culture author ballot measures basketball bomb books boy scouts budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal college courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana marriage media medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes technology television terrorism theater third parties transportation union university of oregon washington wildfire women

I am 65 but I had two sisters who got breast cancer in their early 40's and thanks to a mammogram, they bought many more years with their nine children.  There was no history of breast cancer in our family.  I have spent the last 14 years in breast cancer prevention studies (BCPT, STAR, and Sister's Study) for my sisters and our children.  So much progress has been made in research that I feel both of my sisters would be alive today with treatments available now.  Why would we now go backwards and not do mammograms after all the hard work and time and money spent on research??  We can make a difference if we make a stand against this recommendation.  Mammograms cost much less than cancer treatment and insurance will not cover them if the government gets their way in starting them at age 50!!!!  Very concerned, Carolyn

posted 3 years, 6 months ago
view in context