NBC Slams Komen: 'Why Did It Cut Off Funds For Critical Breast Cancer Screenings?'
Since announcing that it would no longer provide funding to Planned Parenthood on Wednesday, the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation has been subject to a vicious smear campaign by the abortion provider, a campaign which NBC News has worked to advance over the past 48 hours.
At the top of Wednesday's NBC Nightly News, anchor Brian Williams sounded the alarm: "Caught in the middle. Two of the biggest names in women's health, tonight in a bitter fight over money and it may be thousands of women who pay the biggest price." In a later tease of the upcoming report he made no secret of who he thought the villain of the story was: "A decision that's making a lot of women furious at the world's largest breast cancer organization. Why did it cut off funds for critical breast cancer screenings?"
One thing Williams failed to mention was the fact that Planned Parenthood does not actually provide mammograms.
In the report that followed, correspondent Lisa Myers proclaimed: "Susan G. Komen’s race is for the cure. They raised 271 million dollars last year to advance breast cancer awareness, but today many angry women, on Twitter and the radio, vowed their Komen racing days are over."
Two sound bites were included from women calling into a local National Public Radio affiliate in New York City, WNYC. One complained: "We are really upset by this decision and were not gonna do the Komen race anymore." Another announced: "I changed my mind and sent the money elsewhere."
After noting that congressional Republicans were currently investigating Planned Parenthood, Myers touted how, "Planned Parenthood’s CEO called the decision [by Komen] political and disappointing." CEO Cecile Richards condemned Komen: "The Komen Foundation has been the target of a right-wing political campaign, bullying them and unfortunately the results seems to be that they gave into it."
While completely ignoring Planned Parenthood's left-wing agenda, Myers worried that Komen had some how been co-opted by those "bullying" conservatives: "Not long ago, Komen also hired a new Vice President, Karen Handel, a former Republican gubernatorial candidate endorsed by Sarah Palin, who strongly opposed abortion and vowed to de-fund planned parenthood during her campaign."
Wrapping up the Planned Parenthood press release, Myers cited yet another staunch supporter of the group: "Leslie Dergen, a breast cancer survivor and an official with Planned Parenthood's Denver affiliate, says this will hurt the most vulnerable women who have nowhere else to turn."
On Thursday's Today, Myers offered an abbreviated repeat of the previous night's report, noting that it was "an increasingly bitter dispute" and signaled to Komen that slanted media coverage would continue: "If Komen thought its decision to end its partnership with Planned Parenthood would quietly defuse a controversial issue, it appears to have miscalculated."
Perhaps the oddest and most blatant advocacy for Planned Parenthood occurred in the 9 a.m. et hour on Today, when NBC's chief medical editor Nancy Snyderman awkwardly tried to shoe-horn the issue into a discussion of Mitt Romney's "not concerned about the very poor" comment:
So let me put this into context with regard to health care in this country. This is the same time that Planned Parenthood is losing money from the Komen Foundation which is a safety net for mammography for women. 37 million poor women now may not be able to get mammography. That's the safety net for the working poor? I don't care if he mis-spoke or not. Let's be real. Almost half of the U.S. now is, is not making it well. So I think it's a huge gaffe.
Once again, Planned Parenthood does not provide mammograms.
- Kyle Drennen's blog
- Login to post comments
Comments
stinkin' private charity
Submitted by kevtheweb on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 6:14pm.
Choosing which groups it wants to continue donating to.
Brian
Submitted by ray johnson on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 6:53pm.
- there's no way you're that daft!!
"Why did it cut off funds for
Submitted by kg on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 7:12pm.
"Why did it cut off funds for critical breast cancer screenings?"
But Brian, last week you told us it was taxpayer dollars paying for these screenings.
"DumbAssity of Dope"
Zero Sum Game
Submitted by ferv888 on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 7:07pm.
Liberals are so stupid, it is almost beyond my ability to comprehend at times. So Komen decides not to give any more money to PP, do these fools at the stupid PEACOCK NETWORK have a working brain. Do they not think that this great foundation will find another partner to donate to make sure they are done. I for one will be calling the local Komen office and donate my money now to them.
My Mother died from BC, My dear wife has had 5 biops done and know the angst waiting on things to happen. Having a partner that kills babies is not my idea of someone I worry about. Where is the worry about all the abortions that they perform and the millions of dollars they make each year from that?
I will continue to call them out whenever I see them at an airport or hotel, they are complete numbskulls.
General you were right in New Orleans, YOU CAN"T FIX STUPID!!!!!!!!!
FERV888
This is
Submitted by bobsmom on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 7:22pm.
such a steaming pile of BS. It's a liberal ox being gored, and they don't like it one bit. PP does NOT do cancer screenings, they take the Komen money, and send the patients somewhere else. No one will die from this decision. I live in a podunk town with a small hospital about 10 miles away, and at least twice a year they do clinics with all kinds of free cancer screenings so this is a load of crap that "women will DIE!!" I think this is perfect timing, it's all boiled over and people who weren't paying attention before, ARE paying attention now. And the Komen organization itself provides these screenings as well. I think the libs have jumped the shark with this one, and once Komen sees the $$ pouring in from those who support their decision, they'll know they made the right one. Poor progressives, seeing their whole world crumble around them......BWaaahahahahahhahahHAHAHAHA!! Sorry. Had to do it.
I would like to know what they consider a "screening"?
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 7:42pm.
A breast cancer "screening" can include anything from a clinical breast exam (there is great disagreement as to whether this is of value or not) which includes family and risk history, to asking the patient's age and writing a referral for a mammogram. A mammogram, along with a biopsy if so indicated by the mammogram results, constitutes the current practice standard for detecting breast cancer.
In women in the 20s and 30s with no other known risk factors, the clinical breast exam is normally done every one or two years as part of a normal check-up and in conjunction with any changes in oral contraception or hormonal treatment for endocrine conditions. It is also part of the annual "well woman" exam advocated by most preventative medicine expert panels.
What I find somewhat challenging about the notion of Planned Parenthood being so critical in this effort is that they are not primary care clinics or centers set up for that purpose. They are set up to provide STD screening, contraception and gynecologic services. The limited services they provide to men include sexual health exams, which is essentially STD screening and perhaps vasectomy services if the clinic and providers are properly licensed. I emphasize again--Planned Parenthood is NOT designed to be a primary care clinic where the bulk of health care would be delivered to any given population. Especially in those instances where Planned Parenthood's clinic is staffed only by a few medical assistants and a nurse practitioner or physician's assistant, I would add that the latter two (NPs and PAs) are usually not licensed to perform surgical procedures--precluding vasectomies and abortions where a properly trained physician is unavailable. NPs/PAs can prescribe subject to limitations on their licenses by their respective supervising boards, but they cannot perform procedures of any kind in most jurisdictions. There are simply not that many Planned Parenthood clinics around to provide the kind of reach and frequency necessary to be a complete medical service provider as they seem to contend. For every Planned Parenthood clinic out there, predominantly in urban areas, there are far more clinics which provide the same level of care focused on birth control and STD screening in addition to a complete medical referral center for other patient issues.
A primary care clinic or center staffed by appropriate professionals with proper credentialing usually does nothing more than refer the patient for a mammogram, which is performed by another facility (usually a hospital or attached outpatient clinic) and then "read" (interpreted) by a radiologist. If necessary, the patient is then referred to other specialists including a surgeon for a possible biopsy and/or an oncologist for chemo/radiation therapy management.
Planned Parenthood and its supporters are acting like Komen is required to fund it. As a private charitable institution, Komen is not required to fund anything for Planned Parenthood outside of the grant commitments it has already made, and provided that Planned Parenthood is complying with the terms of the contracts governing said grants.
Amen Dr Sam
Submitted by bobsmom on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 9:02pm.
and a "breast screening" can also mean the little plastic tag thing you are given to hang in your shower to remind you to "self exam" regularly. And in my little world "planned parenthood" means giving great thought to your financial, physical, emotional, and relationship status prior to thinking about having children. Maybe if they taught those things, abortion wouldn't be the biggest part of the "planning" they provide. Abortion should not be thought of as "retroactive contraception". That being said, I don't have children, and yes, that was part of my plan as I'm not sure what kind of parent I would have been, and I don't see children as biological/sociological experiments that I can "return" if they go awry.
Mammograms
Submitted by stratman on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 9:47pm.
Mammograms are the most litigated issue in health care currently. The legal and medical demands to have not only qualified personnel and equipment performing and reading mammograms, but also maintaining a sufficient volume of exams required to remain accredited is overwhelming for most outpatient clinics. Not any radiology tech or even radiologist (if they are smart) can perform or read mammograms these days. It truly is a sub sub-specialty for both tech and physician.
What hasn't been reported to my (limited) knowledge is whether Planned Parenthood pockets Komen's money when referring women to outside radiological services or if PP uses that money to pay for the actual mammogram. If so, how is the cost of services apportioned between Komen, PP, local, state, federal and the patient?
PP being a more sleazy operation than the Left would have America believe as based on recent exposure of disturbing and inhumane practices, sanitation and employees, I wouldn't be surprised if PP pockets some Komen cash.
Did the preventative care guidelines ever change?
Submitted by drsamherman on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 11:25pm.
Strat, I remember that wave of publicity that occurred in 2009/2010 about the preventative care task force trying to change the recommendation to eliminate a certain age bracket of women from annual mammograms? Did that ever change? Honestly, since I don't do any primary care, I confess I am not up to speed on what the mammography recommendations now say. I do know our hospital system in San Antonio requires a separate credential for radiologists and technicians to do mammography, and the training seems fairly intense.
My understanding of Komen's arrangements with Planned Parenthood was the money was to be used for screenings only, and the actual mammography was to be done offsite by referral. If Komen's grant arrangement with PP required them to apply Medicare standards, would not an apportioning arrangement essentially constitute fee splitting? Perhaps there is an exception for capitated services within the grant structure, but honestly I don't know their arrangements and they are none of my business. I do EEGs as one of the few sub-cert neurophysiologists in town, and that training took me two years to complete part-time and post-residency. I did what was then the equivalent of a PGY6 over those two years. That clinical neurophysiology evolved from an AQ to sub-cert and I was grandfathered with it and the neuropsych sub-cert. I can only imagine the radiology board is probably considering some kind of sub-cert for mammography.
The controversial USPSTF
Submitted by stratman on Fri, 02/03/2012 - 12:26am.
The controversial USPSTF breast cancer screening recommendation remain intact as far I know. However, the Gub'mint backtracked a little and announced these were only guidelines and that physicians were free to use whichever guidelines they would like. Would be interesting to see the statistics on who adheres to the USPSTF mammogram guideline and what their political ideology is. AFAIK, I have not heard more on the veracity of the guideline's research data as it pertains to the conclusion reached, but I haven't been actively seeking it as I rely on ACS/ACR/AAFP guidelines.
Speaking of ACR... they obviously are not in concordance with Obama and USPSTF: ACR Statement on Landmark Mammography Screening Trial
Ouch.
Within a few weeks of the USPSTF mammogram guidelines, the state of California adopted this new (Obama) guideline for their Medicaid population, admittedly in an effort to save money. Success #1 for ObamaCare rationing - camel nostril under the tent. I do not recall if other states have joined in with California but I won't be surprised when others do to decrease cost to the State as ObamaCare decreases it's funding for mandatory state increases in Medicaid enrollment.
Is their such a thing as fee-splitting when the Left do it? (Sarcasm/off)
Here's a suggestion for Planned Parenthood
Submitted by Marcus Porcius on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 7:47pm.
Instead of performing so many abortions, you could just say you were doing pre-birth breast cancer prevention?
After all, if you're never born, you can't get breast cancer!
Of course, maybe that's what they're already trying to do. Why else would "Planned PARENTHOOD" being breast cancer screening, except as a way to launder abortion money?
"Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." G.K. Chesterton
www.theconservativereview.com
Once again the U.S. media
Submitted by Pinetree3 on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 8:03pm.
Once again the U.S. media shows why it is totally untrustworthy. One can expect to see the truth in the U.S. media about as much as one could expect to see the truth in the old USSR's Pravda.
This is what dazzles me about
Submitted by Reaver on Thu, 02/02/2012 - 9:40pm.
This is what dazzles me about the liberal media machine, as they conduct an all-out assault on the Susan G. Komen Foundation to try and bully and intimidate them into restoring funding for planned parenthood they also accuse conservatives of bullying Komen to stop funding PP. It is just amazing.
Doesn't PP usually deal with
Submitted by Jimme on Fri, 02/03/2012 - 12:14am.
Doesn't PP usually deal with young women and teenagers, not exactly they type that would be advised for BC screenings. This stuff just gets stupider and stupider I swear.
With the implementation of
Submitted by big.league.slider on Fri, 02/03/2012 - 1:26am.
With the implementation of ObamaCare and universal coverage, aren't institutions like Planned Parenthood no longer necessary?
There is a simple reason....
Submitted by c5then on Fri, 02/03/2012 - 8:58am.
PP does not engage in breast cancer screenings. They refer the patient to outside facilities that do. All 300 of them a year.
What they do actually engage in is 300,000 abortions a year which studies have linked to much higher risk of breast cancer for the surviving patient. So PP is actually responsible for thousands upon thousands of new breast cancer cases each year because of their existence.
Madison and Jefferson and Franklin built a Republic - Roberts killed it!
Study
Submitted by djaymick on Fri, 02/03/2012 - 10:54am.
From abortionbreastcancer.com
In 1986, government scientists wrote a letter to the British journal Lancet and acknowledged that abortion is a cause of breast cancer. They wrote, "Induced abortion before first term pregnancy increases the risk of breast cancer." (Lancet, 2/22/86, p. 436)
As of 2006, eight medical organizations recognize that abortion raises a woman's risk for breast cancer, independently of the risk of delaying the birth of a first child (a secondary effect that all experts already acknowledge). An additional medical organization, the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons, issued a statement in 2003 calling on doctors to inform patients about a "highly plausible" relationship between abortion and breast cancer. General counsel for that medical group wrote an article for its journal warning doctors that three women (two Americans, one Australian) successfully sued their abortion providers for neglecting to disclose the risks of breast cancer and emotional harm, although none of the women had developed the disease.
I guess "Inconvenient Truths" are the words of the Democratic Party that hopes to build on to hide real science. Thanks Al.
HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA
Submitted by liberalsarefunny on Fri, 02/03/2012 - 1:19pm.
This kind of nonsense reporting is why ratings for the MSM continue to do down.
Even the dimmest of the population (read: liberals) are beginning to figure it out....