• Dept of Health and Human Services (HHS) Ofc on Women's Health has removed Breast Cancer pgs; Internet Archive has them

    Asked by Ejourneys on Monday, April 2, 2018

    Dept of Health and Human Services (HHS) Ofc on Women's Health has removed Breast Cancer pgs; Internet Archive has them

    The HHS Office on Women's Health has removed webpages related to breast cancer and ways to receive free or low cost screening via the Affordable Care Act. (This is one more way that 45 is trying to kill the ACA.)

    However, the Internet Archive's Wayback Machine has preserved those pages at:
    https://web.archive.org/web/20161208093811/https://www.womenshealth.gov/breast-cancer/index.html

    Please share this information so that people can get the care they need.

    I've checked the pages myself. The Ofc of Women's Health site still has pages related to cervical, ovarian, and uterine cancers. Its A-Z Directory includes breast reconstruction after mastectomy, but NOT breast cancer.

    53 Answers from the Community

    53 answers
    • Skyemberr's Avatar
      Skyemberr

      OMG!! That annoys me so much! I'm glad you put the wayback machine link up! HHS is supposed to HELP us.

      over 3 years ago
    • GregP_WN's Avatar
      GregP_WN

      Typical. Since they couldn't deliver on the big promise to repeal and replace, they keep finding everything that they can to sabotage

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      Thank God that the Internet is forever!

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      that's awfully strange. Makes no sense at all.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      I sent email:

      It has just been brought to my attention that this Web site has done away with Breast Cancer information. Since breast cancer is the #1 cancer to be diagnosed after skin cancer, it makes absolutely NO SENSE to me that you have deleted all information related to it.

      We found archives of information previously provided. Please explain ASAP why information on breast cancer is no longer available.

      You are doing women everywhere quite a disservice.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      the Women's Health site has nothing much on breast cancer, which is very, very odd, but the National Cancer Institute has a bunch of stuff. https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      When did this happen? Do you know?

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      Hate to get political here, but this is what happens when inexperienced and unqualified people get Cabinet positions because they look the part on TV, want to privatize their depts, and eliminate regulations, and will kowtow till the cows come home...

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      I will be interested in the response to my email. They are supposed to respond within 24 hours. For those who are really upset, why don't you call or write to them as well? https://www.womenshealth.gov/contact-us

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      LiveWithCancer - I emailed them as well.

      over 3 years ago
    • Ejourneys' Avatar
      Ejourneys

      @Dina and @LiveWithCancer, thanks for writing!
      Phone numbers to call (I've separated the numbers to keep them from being redacted) are:
      Women's Health helpline
      800
      994
      9662

      HHS
      877
      696
      6775​

      Dina, I've heard that the pages were removed in December 2017, but the news is just now coming to light.

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      I did a search on 'breast cancer' on the HHS site- and all there is is some stuff in their blog :(

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      While it makes absolutely NO sense not to include it on the Women's Health site, do you suppose they're migrating it to the National Cancer Institute (NCI) site? There's a ton of stuff there on it.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      HHS doesn't have anything about lung cancer either. I don't think they do cancers ... they refer you to NCI. https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      I am not going to assume they are doing anything. If so, in the A-Z list it (should) mention to go to XXX for info, rather than just not listing BC at all.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      Maybe this has more to do with the low-cost or free ways to get mammograms than political policies. Or maybe that's not a place people would look for info on free care.

      We still have our free mammogram clinics here.

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      I am involved in several ways with Breast Cancer Action and contacted them about this a short while ago. Here is the response:

      Hi Dina –

      Roxanne Nelson, a Medscape journalist, contacted us about this yesterday and you should be able to find her article online later today or tomorrow. We’re concerned, of course. This will have a disproportionate impact on women seeking access for screening and treatment. But all women, along with the oncology community, should be up in arms. The reasons the government has given are not accurate and don’t justify their actions. Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer in women and to think that the Office On Women’s Health should provide information only on breast reconstruction and mammography is outrageous!

      Women’s health and reproductive rights have always been politicized but under the current administration, we’re under attack. We need to remain vigilant – it’s going to be a long battle.

      Look for Roxanne’s article – and stay strong!

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      This doesn't add up. First, did any of you ever use that site for breast cancer info? Planned Parenthood is the controversial player related to this topic, so I don't think this is political.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      Lung cancer kills far more women than breast cancer and they have nothing about it either. I guess we should be up in arms about that, too.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      Dina, I wish your contact had actually told you something rather than just to watch for an article.

      I'm going to wait on a response from Women's Health site ... and see what they say. They say they get back to you within 24 hours, though they may be inundated right now with emails and calls.

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      LiveWithCancer - it was a conversation between BCAction and Roxanne Nelson, and the article is in process. My contact did express BCAction's position is on this, but they are not writing the article, but will undoubtedly be 'speaking up' on the issue. If you aren't familiar with the work of Breast Cancer Action - check them out https://bcaction.org/

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      Dina, thanks. I'm not familiar with BCAction ... but I do like this comment on their site:

      "We tell it like it is about breast cancer: 40,000 women die of this devastating disease every year, and we don’t have nearly enough to show for the billions of dollars raised in the name of breast cancer."

      I am very happy that there is a group out there speaking out against all BC money ignoring people with metastatic BC.

      (Not to belabor the point, but 70,500 women will die of lung cancer this year :( :( :( )

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      Well, I guess people will just have to go to National Cancer Institute site. It is very comprehensive - seems to have everything that was on the Women's Health site previously. If I was diagnosed with cancer I would go to NCI long before I would go to Women's Health ... I didn't even know that site existed until today :)

      With that said, they could have easily put a link to the information on NCI's site to keep everyone from getting into an uproar. And, I don't understand why they still address two other women's cancers ... I guess because ONLY women can get those ... whereas some men are diagnosed with breast cancer. Only explanation I can come up with.

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      It seems that people needing information wouldn't know about their site anyway.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      Well. I didn't hear back within Women's Health's 24-hour response period. I suspect I won't.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      I'm still wondering where the outrage is that there apparently never was anything about women and lung cancer ... it kills nearly double the number of women every year. No one seems to care about that little fact...

      I never went to that site before. Doubt I will start now :)

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      I did, in fact, go the site when I needed assistance as I had no insurance. And LiveWithCancer: I haven't heard back from my emailof yesterday either.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      Dina, women's health is not under attack politically There are women in all parties.

      According to the Constitution, the highest priority of the President is national defense and homeland security---keeping us all safe. Very little time has been spent on social issues.

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      From Breast Cancer Action, and from Roxanne Nelson on Medscape:
      http://fortune.com/2018/04/03/trump-hhs-breast-cancer-info/
      and
      https://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/894784

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      BarbarainBham:

      I love this site and we are all here to share our stories, get advice, support, answers to our questions. Everyone here has been incredible to me, and I hope that feeling is mutual.

      But sometimes things like this discussion happen. I never intended to become involved in a political discussion - I was only trying to help by passing on the info I knew. I do not want to get political. I do not want to offend anyone here. I love being a part of WhatNext.

      You say that women's health is not under attack politically. There are women in all parties.

      I completely disagree with the first part of your statement. What are your thoughts on what you have experienced, seen, heard, are hearing now? Do women (particularly low-income) now have the same access to information regarding breast cancer, screenings, access to screenings, education, that they had during ACA? Have they used this info in the past - yes: I did.

      Yes, I am an activist and with regard to breast cancer. The breast cancer epidemic is a public health crisis, and a social justice issue.

      I have my own opinions of why HHS has done this, and the administration's agenda, and I think best to keep those to myself.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      Since LiveWithCancer above says there's nothing on their website for lung cancer, I tend to believe the following "Trump HHS spokespeople" statement is likely true and this is not related to women's health or politics:

      "Trump HHS spokespeople told ThinkProgress, which reported on the Sunlight Foundation’s findings, that the information wasn’t actually gone—it’s just in other parts of the HHS website. . . ."
      I would bet that people managing that website don't even know Trump or anyone in his administration.

      There's no reason to jump to conclusions, which is what Andrew Bergman did (1) when he tweeted "'censorship sows real doubt' about the administration's dedication to health care services that would particularly help women of color and those with low incomes"; and (2) the Sunlight Foundation assumed it was "unexplained censorship" and further assumed it raised "questions about the administration's 'commitment to public health.'" (That was a BIG incorrect jump! We need sources who just give us the facts--- embellishment of facts is not helpful and needlessly "stirs the pot.")

      We all need to stop assuming negative things we don't know to be true, and make our best effort to get along to benefit the country.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      Dina, thank you for the cordial post.

      I retired from the Federal government and afterwards worked with a mammogram program for low-income women. That's been a few years, and I haven't heard recent comments. Alabama still has free mammogram clinics. I've also had breast cancer, so I have no reason to be against them.

      I wonder if you (and others) are confusing the Administration's agenda regarding Planned Parenthood with all women's health issues. PP specifically has done questionable things, and some only want to stop Federal money going to it.

      I'm glad you don't want to be political, because I don't either. I was just objecting to an assumption that this was done by the Administration. He's got bigger fish to fry, like North Korea and Iran.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      I heard back from OWH ...

      Thank you for contacting the HHS Office on Women’s Health and for sharing your feedback with us. We understand that you are concerned about the removal of breast cancer content on womenshealth.gov.

      The breast cancer pages were removed because they were last updated in 2010 and the information was outdated. We still have our web pages on mammograms and breast reconstruction after mastectomy.

      We are in the process of adding breast cancer information to womenshealth.gov. Please note that the best place to learn about breast cancer and all other cancer types is the National Cancer Institute’s website, cancer.gov.

      Thank you again for contacting the HHS Office on Women’s Health.

      Sincerely,

      OWH

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      NOW, I am going to write them again and ask why there is nothing for lung cancer posted there. It is far more deadly for women than breast cancer is. And, what's saddest is that most women have no clue that's the case.

      over 3 years ago
    • Carool's Avatar
      Carool

      I agree with everyone who is blaming this on Trumputin and his minions. I can't WAIT until Mueller gets finished. I really dislike watching our democracy be destroyed, and I'm very scared at what's happening. Had to get back into the fray that we left awhile ago. RESIST! And apology to anyone who feels differently.

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      Here's the email I sent about lung cancer:

      I wrote the other day concerning the lack of breast cancer information on OWH. I appreciate you getting back to me on that.

      I would like to ask you to add lung cancer information to the site. It kills nearly twice as many women as breast cancer does every year, but most women have no idea they are at risk, especially if they never smoked. I think you would be doing a real service to women to draw their attention to the fact that lung cancer is the number one cancer killer of women and that they can get it even if they never smoked a cigarette in their lives.

      Thank you so much for your consideration.

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      And Planned Parenthood never did anything "questionable," other than offer abortions (and it's questionable only to those who are anti-choice). All that stuff you saw on "fetus-selling" videos was cut, pasted, heavily edited, even overdubbed--the videos themselves were bogus, made by & starring the same pair of clowns who dressed as a XXX and a XXX to take down ACORN in 2009 (using the same editing tactics and spreading disinformation). Fetal tissue ("products of conception" of early abortions & miscarriages), not "fetuses," would have otherwise been discarded rather than used for life-saving (and fertility) research. PP didn't profit--all it charged was its transfer costs, which it couldn't afford. Don't believe the alt-right, cable, & Sinclair propaganda.

      Were it not for PP, I wouldn't have been able to afford my contraception (which treated my endometriosis), gyne exams (including breast) when I was younger, and my hypertension might have gone undiagnosed for another few years. And, BTW, the only "abortion" I ever sought was an emergency one, to follow through on what Mother Nature failed to complete--it was a very wanted pregnancy that turned out to be a retained "blighted ovum." Were it not for the fetal tissue research PP facilitated a few years earlier, my doctors might not have known about the phenomenon that caused me to spontaneously but incompletely miscarry (which if left alone could have led to a fatal infection, for something incapable of developing into even an embryo, much less a fetus).

      Meanwhile, I will believe HHS when I see the "updated" breast cancer info posted. At the very least, the Women's Health Initiative pages in question should have hot links to cancer.gov--you shouldn't have to complain to them in order to find out. And I agree--with lung cancer, not that much has changed since 2010 unless you count the costly biologics heavily marketed to the wide public...for a very narrow segment of stage IV patients with a specific subtype of non-small-cell, whose tumors carry a specific mutation, who have failed a specific type of chemo...and the drugs confer at best a 6-9 month survival extension (not without serious side effects, which could themselves be fatal).

      over 3 years ago
    • Skyemberr's Avatar
      Skyemberr

      @ChicagoSandy I had a similar sort of experience with planned parenthood saving me from a legitimate problem. I also had a VERY wanted pregnancy but mine was ectopic. My doctor took me I had to have it removed or it would rupture in my fallopian tube and that I'd most likely "bleed out" if I didn't have the ectopic pregnancy stopped right away because I lived in the mountains and wouldn't make it back to the hospital in time. Due to politics, the only place that would help me in that rural area was planned parenthood. They were also the major source in the area for women to get birth control pills and regular checkups if they didn't have insurance. We had no ACA back then.

      So I know they helped me and a lot of other women up there! I'm not trying to bash anybody or be political. I just want to support the good that PP did fit me and my family. Women would be much worse off without them.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      Nobody is trying to close down PP. Congress had only proposed that no Federal money go to it, because of questionable management practices. My understanding is that PP has other sources of funding than Federal, and would do fine without it. Other than that, I don't know of anything Trump's administration is doing against women's health---it wouldn't even be logical when there are women in his administration, too.

      The free mammograms in my state are funded by the state and county. Federal money can't fund all our needs. Why don't you suggest a 1 cent sales tax locally for health care?

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      PP's non-gov't funding is at the mercy of donors, one of which used to be the Komen Foundation until the latter's CEO decided abortion & contraception were immoral. The sliding scale PP charges for services is a wash--it covers only its expenses. "Questionable management practices?" It's a non-profit, by definition. Only the Repubs. (and a handful of Blue Dog Dems in mostly red states & districts) advocated defunding it, and they seem to have hornswoggled a large segment of the public into believing it has to do with anything other than PP allowing women (especially poor women) to have sex without consequences.

      State & county sales taxes hit the middle-class & poor disproportionately--and it's doubly cruel that only a small portion of them can now be deducted from one's income for Fed. income tax purposes (and in states with income taxes, those income taxes are based on one's Fed. income taxes). 1% extra sales tax is chicken feed to someone making >$100K/yr. It's a huge expense to someone earning minimum wage (or living on a fixed income). Here in Chicago, we pay >10% in sales taxes alone, as well as paying IL state income tax. (In NYC, the sales tax is almost as high, and there's a city, not just state, income tax). Tell me this IRC change wasn't a move to punish states that vote Democratic and I'll tell you about a wonderful ski chalet for sale down on the Gulf Coast.

      And "women in (Trump's) administration?" Oh, please. They're nearly all quite wealthy (some independently by inheritance, some as half of multimillionaire couples) and can either easily afford premiums (or self-insure), or are eligible for Federal employee health insurance that is essentially Medicare-for-all.

      Like it or not, our threads here are turning political because health care--especially women's--has become politicized by people in government seeking to impose their own personal (or religious) moral beliefs on the nation as a whole; as well as by those bent on privatizing as many things as possible that they or their cronies can make a buck off of (apologies for the misplaced prepositions--sometimes grammar has to take a back seat to effective expression).

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      ChicagoSandy: Can I just admire you for using the word 'hornswoggled'? :)

      over 3 years ago
    • LiveWithCancer's Avatar
      LiveWithCancer

      I'm done here.

      over 3 years ago
    • Dina's Avatar
      Dina

      Me too

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      Taxpayers who don't believe in abortion shouldn't be expected to pay for what they don't believe in. Women should get a job and pay for their own, like I did---probably would learn a lesson.

      This is a support group to make cancer patients feel better, so any politics especially with anger is inappropriate.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      P.S. In Alabama we also pay 10% + for sales taxes alone, so I don't think Chicago is unusual.

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      I don't believe in unnecessary wars, wasting our National Guard troops at borders, building a wall while roads and bridges crumble, deporting "Dreamers" who came here as infants, covering meds to help men have sex but not women's contraceptives, allowing corporations to pollute with impunity (mines, pipelines, etc.), governments paying for religious education, corporate subsidies...so by the foregoing logic, I shouldn't have to pay for those either.

      Yes, this is a support group to "make cancer patients feel better," but defending the actions or inactions of a President IS as "political" as criticizing them. Are you saying we should never post alerts about things that may impact the ability of cancer patients to receive help, guidance or treatment if the posts "don't make us feel better?"

      Like it or not, healthcare--especially women's--HAS become a political football, ever since Inauguration Day 2009, when the then-minority-party's actions in opposition to health insurance reform began in earnest. Last time I checked, sticking one's head in the sand is not standard-of-care treatment for cancer and its effects.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      ChicagoSandy, I'm not the only one here who has reminded everyone that this is not a place for politics. Factual help for cancer patients is welcome without an unproven reference to politics. You can expend a lot of energy on imagined theories.

      As I said above, according to the Constitution, the highest priority of the President is national defense and homeland security---keeping us all safe. Very little time has been spent on social issues.

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      Believe what you want to believe, but our President's statements, actions and obsessions say otherwise.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      ChicagoSandy, you don't know what I believe.

      There are people on this site who've said they are stressed and can't sleep after hearing about political news---furthermore, it's not necessary or appropriate on a cancer support website. People have left the site because of it, and everyone should respect the fact that this is a site for PATIENTS. (ACS)

      Any cancer news is welcome without the extraneous political digs.

      over 3 years ago
    • ChicagoSandy's Avatar
      ChicagoSandy

      This site is for cancer patients and their caregivers seeking cancer information and guidance from fellow patients. "Support" isn't just about "feeling good." Anything that impacts our cancer treatment and survival is germane--and if certain leaders with the power to influence health care policy do so in a way that affects us cancer patients adversely (while paying only lip service to their Constitutional duties), we should not be forced to shut up about it.

      over 3 years ago
    • BarbarainBham's Avatar
      BarbarainBham

      It's previously been discussed that others go to political websites to discuss political views. Interested cancer patients can go there also, but cancer patients who don't want to be around POLITICAL ANGER AND INSULTS shouldn't have to be subjected to it.

      The negativity is the issue, and we don't want it.

      over 3 years ago

    Help the community by answering this question:

    Create an account to post your answer Already have an account? Sign in!

    By using WhatNext, you agree to our User Agreement, and Privacy Policy


    Read and answer more mucinous (or colloid) carcinoma questions.  Also, don't forget to check out our Mucinous (or Colloid) Carcinoma page.