Every 3 minutes, a woman is diagnosed with breast cancer in this country.
we could afford it, and that is part of what Senator Harkin and I have done.
I believe that is true also, but I think early detection right now is still the best.
I do have a bill in to increase that reimbursement rate for radiologists.
I do not know how to respond to that. It would still seem to me, again as a layman, that the earlier you can detect a cancer, the better you...
We want to know odds-on what is the best thing to do.
I am wondering, though, if I will get comments on the floor that maybe this is not necessary.
Well, if it is detected mammographically, and fewer than 50 percent metasticize, that is because something has been done, right?
Well, again, we're trying to clear this up and trying to get a definitive answer to women out there.
I thought the answer to that was, all other things being equal, yes, it makes a difference.
It is very difficult to make up your mind when you are faced with a life-threatening illness.
Every single person I talked to yesterday in my State of Iowa answered yes.
You are more than generous in your remarks about my work in this area, but I can assure you that I am just following your lead.
we ought to leave that to the experts.
there is nothing more important than health.
Mammography is not the sole thing, but in combination with other things it is a useful tool for early detection.
You said in your testimony that we have got to ask if mammography screening is the best use of finite dollars.
I want to thank her for her foresight 10 years ago in addressing this issue.
