WSJ fearmongers that task force recommended “cut[ting] off all screening” for breast cancer in women over 75

WSJ: "[G]randma is probably going to die anyway, so why waste the money?" From the November 19 Wall Street Journal editorial:

The recommendation to cut off all screening in women over 75 is equally as myopic. The committee notes that the benefits of screening “occur only several years after the actual screening test, whereas the percentage of women who survive long enough to benefit decreases with age.” It adds that “women of this age are at much greater risk for dying of other conditions that would not be affected by breast cancer screening.” In other words, grandma is probably going to die anyway, so why waste the money to reduce the chances that she dies of a leading cause of death among elderly women?

The effects of this new breast cancer cost-consciousness are likely to be large. Medicare generally adopts the panel's recommendations when it makes coverage decisions for seniors, and its judgments also play a large role in the private insurance markets. Yes, people could pay for mammography out of pocket. This is fine with us, but it is also emphatically not the world of first-dollar insurance coverage we live in, in which reimbursement decisions deeply influence the practice of medicine.

Conservative media fearmonger that task force recommendations foreshadow government rationing. Responding to the task force recommendations, numerous conservative media figures have aggressively fearmongered that the nonbinding recommendations represent a preview of government rationing under health care reform, often likening the findings to the widely debunked death panels.

HHS task force recommendations do not lead to ending care for women over 75

HHS task force did not recommend doctors “cut off all screening in women over 75.” While the Department of Health and Human Services' U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) did weigh the potential harms against the potential preventable burden of mammogram screenings for women over 75, it concluded that there was not enough information to make a recommendation:

The USPSTF concludes that the evidence is insufficient to assess the harms or benefits of these methods for screening.

Rationing claim undermined: Task force recommendations not legally binding. In fact, the task force recommendations are not legally binding. Moreover, the task force encouraged policymakers to include additional considerations and “individualize decision making to the specific patient or situation.” In a Nightly News report on the task force recommendations, NBC chief medical correspondent Dr. Nancy Snyderman stated, “It's important to remember that these new recommendations from this independent task force are just that -- they're recommendations. They don't mandate any changes in who should get mammograms and when.”

Task force previously recommended against certain preventive cancer screenings under Bush, undermining efforts to connect guidelines to Obama. For example, in 2004 the task force recommended against screening for ovarian cancer, routine screening for testicular cancer in “asymptomatic adolescent and adult males,” and bladder cancer screening in adults; in 2005, it recommended against routine screening of peripheral arterial disease; in 2006, it recommended against screening the asymptomatic general population for hereditary hemochromatosis; and in 2007, it recommended against screening the general adult population for asymptomatic carotid artery stenosis.