Yes, I believe annual GYN exams and paps are fully covered.
Errr, now that you mention it, I think paps may be every 3 years? I think up until 30 or something...? I vaguely remember mine saying something about 'oh, since you're 30 now, we'll do a pap this year' at my annual.
Either way woman, get your hooha checked.
They changed the protocol again. A few years ago they decided it was only necessary to have a pap 3 years if you were NOT in a higher risk category. Now it is back to yearly.
Are you saying you've never had a gynecological exam?
Had one last year, and not the first one (for those of you who are questioning that). Can't remember which one was which, but I had cysts on one ovary and lymph nodes on the other.
Ok. This is just to prevent any further confusion.
You do not have lymph nodes on/in your ovaries. The lymph nodes are located in your groin (separately from your reproductive organs). These lymph nodes can become swollen when/if you have ovarian cyst. However, they do not go hand in hand. You can have swollen lymph nodes in your groin without having an ovarian cyst and vice versa.
Oh... ovarian lymph nodes. Did you have those removed?
I am dying over here. WTAF? OP, please reconsider reproducing.
Oh HELL no. I know we're a bunch of teasing bitches, but this is fucking not okay.
Everyone has stupid fucking questions. Yeah, you get some ribbing for it, but let's not fucking lower to the level of deciding their ignorance is something that cannot be learned from. You don't take a confused fucking person and call them unworthy of doing something pretty much ALL of us are trying to do. Take a goddamn step back. You owe her an apology.
Post by seattleblondie on Dec 11, 2015 1:03:38 GMT -5
I loooourve moulin rouge.
OP - talk to your doctor about all of your concerns before you TTC and then you will have answers. Or bring it up at your next physical/pap whatever.
And there is no reason you should be without heath insurance. it's like food and electricity. you need it. if you don't qualify for the state coverage (free to you, paid for by tax payers) then you can get coverage though the exchange (obama care) which can be subsidized (discounted for you, mostly paid for by tax payers) based on your income.
OP - talk to your doctor about all of your concerns before you TTC and then you will have answers. Or bring it up at your next physical/pap whatever.
And there is no reason you should be without heath insurance. it's like food and electricity. you need it. if you don't qualify for the state coverage (free to you, paid for by tax payers) then you can get coverage though the exchange (obama care) which can be subsidized (discounted for you, mostly paid for by tax payers) based on your income.
m
Something about your reference to "paid by tax payers" is rubbing me wrong. You realize if OP (or any person) is working she is a tax payer? She's paying into the system that would be providing her the healthcare. It's not being provided to her "for free."
Number One: Born 06.16.2009 BFP: 01.17.2014 / MC 02.05.2014 BFP: 03.08.2014 / MMC: 05.07.2014 Dx: Partial Molar/GTD. Benched until 01.2015 Number Two: Born 07.22.2016
OP - talk to your doctor about all of your concerns before you TTC and then you will have answers. Or bring it up at your next physical/pap whatever.
And there is no reason you should be without heath insurance. it's like food and electricity. you need it. if you don't qualify for the state coverage (free to you, paid for by tax payers) then you can get coverage though the exchange (obama care) which can be subsidized (discounted for you, mostly paid for by tax payers) based on your income.
m
Something about your reference to "paid by tax payers" is rubbing me wrong. You realize if OP (or any person) is working she is a tax payer? She's paying into the system that would be providing her the healthcare. It's not being provided to her "for free."
I don't know if the OP is working or paying taxes (would depend on how much she makes, what she can claim on her return, etc). I don't like to call the coverage "free", even though it is free to the person receiving it, because there is a cost, it's just being paid by someone else.
I think we are saying the same thing - the coverage isn't free, someone is paying for it.
Something about your reference to "paid by tax payers" is rubbing me wrong. You realize if OP (or any person) is working she is a tax payer? She's paying into the system that would be providing her the healthcare. It's not being provided to her "for free."
I don't know if the OP is working or paying taxes (would depend on how much she makes, what she can claim on her return, etc). I don't like to call the coverage "free", even though it is free to the person receiving it, because there is a cost, it's just being paid by someone else.
I think we are saying the same thing - the coverage isn't free, someone is paying for it.
She's discussing her coworker, therefore we can assume she's working. If she's making minimum wage or above, she's paying taxes.
I don't think we're saying the same thing. I'm implying that she is taking part of a benefit she pays in to, you're implying that she is taking something for nothing and it's the burden of tax payers to provide her healthcare.
Last Edit: Dec 11, 2015 13:22:56 GMT -5 by icaughtfire
Number One: Born 06.16.2009 BFP: 01.17.2014 / MC 02.05.2014 BFP: 03.08.2014 / MMC: 05.07.2014 Dx: Partial Molar/GTD. Benched until 01.2015 Number Two: Born 07.22.2016
I don't know if the OP is working or paying taxes (would depend on how much she makes, what she can claim on her return, etc). I don't like to call the coverage "free", even though it is free to the person receiving it, because there is a cost, it's just being paid by someone else.
I think we are saying the same thing - the coverage isn't free, someone is paying for it.
She's discussing her coworker, therefore we can assume she's working. If she's making minimum wage or above, she's paying taxes.
I don't think we're saying the same thing. I'm implying that she is taking part of a benefit she pays in to, you're implying that she is taking something for nothing and it's the burden of tax payers to provide her healthcare.
I don't know that just because she says she has a coworker, that we can say *for sure* that she's paying taxes. we don't know.
it's possible she doesn't work very many hour a week or only works a few weeks/months of the year. it's possible she has a lot of deductions or credits which would result in her not actually paying taxes, I don't know.
my reason for saying "tax payer paid" was not to impy the OP either does or doesn't pay taxes, it was to note that the coverage is not "free" in the sense that sunshine or rainbows are free, someone pays for it.
She's discussing her coworker, therefore we can assume she's working. If she's making minimum wage or above, she's paying taxes.
I don't think we're saying the same thing. I'm implying that she is taking part of a benefit she pays in to, you're implying that she is taking something for nothing and it's the burden of tax payers to provide her healthcare.
I don't know that just because she says she has a coworker, that we can say *for sure* that she's paying taxes. we don't know.
it's possible she doesn't work very many hour a week or only works a few weeks/months of the year. it's possible she has a lot of deductions or credits which would result in her not actually paying taxes, I don't know.
my reason for saying "tax payer paid" was not to impy the OP either does or doesn't pay taxes, it was to note that the coverage is not "free" in the sense that sunshine or rainbows are free, someone pays for it.
Yeah, we better make sure she knows other hardworking people are paying for her to enjoy the luxury of qualifying for free or discounted healthcare.
Number One: Born 06.16.2009 BFP: 01.17.2014 / MC 02.05.2014 BFP: 03.08.2014 / MMC: 05.07.2014 Dx: Partial Molar/GTD. Benched until 01.2015 Number Two: Born 07.22.2016
I don't know that just because she says she has a coworker, that we can say *for sure* that she's paying taxes. we don't know.
it's possible she doesn't work very many hour a week or only works a few weeks/months of the year. it's possible she has a lot of deductions or credits which would result in her not actually paying taxes, I don't know.
my reason for saying "tax payer paid" was not to impy the OP either does or doesn't pay taxes, it was to note that the coverage is not "free" in the sense that sunshine or rainbows are free, someone pays for it.
Yeah, we better make sure she knows other hardworking people are paying for her to enjoy the luxury of qualifying for free or discounted healthcare.
Tell me your thoughts on Skittles for the poor?
are you just looking for something to pick at me about?
Number One: Born 06.16.2009 BFP: 01.17.2014 / MC 02.05.2014 BFP: 03.08.2014 / MMC: 05.07.2014 Dx: Partial Molar/GTD. Benched until 01.2015 Number Two: Born 07.22.2016
Errr, now that you mention it, I think paps may be every 3 years? I think up until 30 or something...? I vaguely remember mine saying something about 'oh, since you're 30 now, we'll do a pap this year' at my annual.
Either way woman, get your hooha checked.
They changed the protocol again. A few years ago they decided it was only necessary to have a pap 3 years if you were NOT in a higher risk category. Now it is back to yearly.
It's back to yearly for everyone??
Huzzah. I feel strongly about it being yearly. And HPV in general. Even though the NIH sure doesn't want to give me money to continue drug development for it.
I never knew it was ever 3 yrs. I've always gone yearly and for several years I went every 6 months due to HPV and pre-cancerous cells (in addition to a few other procedures for that).
I never knew it was ever 3 yrs. I've always gone yearly and for several years I went every 6 months due to HPV and pre-cancerous cells (in addition to a few other procedures for that).
My GP told me 2 years ago that they were recommending every 3 for women who were considered low risk, so because I had minimal risk factors I could wait another year or two (I'd had one the year before) if I wanted to.
Ok. Maybe I was wrong about the protocol. My gyn still was felt it was important to do annually. I'm attaching a lovely pdf from the CDC. It appears no one thinks pap smears are really thar important. Fuck that shit. I want to know what is going on up in there at all times. www.cdc.gov/cancer/cervical/pdf/guidelines.pdf
Same. I mean, had my pre-cancerous cells or whatever not been caught and removed, who knows what could go down over 3 yrs. I thought being proactive was a good thing lol
Same. I mean, had my pre-cancerous cells or whatever not been caught and removed, who knows what could go down over 3 yrs. I thought being proactive was a good thing lol
They don't recommend screening before age 21 regardless of risk status?
I had aggressively invasive cells removed from my cervix at 23. I started having sex at 19 and really regularly at 21. I don't know when I got HPV, but let's say it was once I started regularly. That was TWO YEARS between infection and serious invasion. If I started having sex at 16 (which fucking happens), then thanks for the cancer.
I know that traditionally HPV-driven cervical cancer moves very slowly. But, that's not always the case. And women already don't know why they need a Pap smear/think that the vaccine (which covers TWO of the > TWENTY different kinds of HPV that cause cancer) will keep them from getting it.
I have more feeling on this subject, but I'll spare you my thoughts on the vaccine, pap smears, and the need for greater education across the globe as well as the need to bring regular pap smears to third world countries where most women will never be able get the ridiculous expensive vaccine. Pap smears are cheap and the single greatest line of defense against cervical cancer, which is a leading killer of women worldwide.
joy I am with you 100%. And I was one of those people having sex at 16. Regularly. I went annually starting at 19. I didn't get HPV until my mid 20s I guess. Thankfully I was going regularly and it was caught and my doctors handled it well with increased screening and procedures to remove cells.
I mean, would they really rather treat people for cancer instead of giving them a silly Pap smear?
I don't know much about the vaccine. But I have heard not good things about it and many have said not to get it for my daughter (I have 6 years to research and decide this though- who knows what will change in that time- so I'm not concerned about it now).
Post by thechickencoop on Dec 14, 2015 11:53:51 GMT -5
Wait WTF? How do they not recommended a pap until 21? I'm floored. I had my first exam/pap after I started having sex - at 16. At 18 I had an abnormal pap and had a colposcopy which, thankfully, was all clear. And i feel like I had annual paps until sometime mid twenties when I skipped a year but then got KU so they started yearly again? I don't quite remember But wtaf to delaying testing like that.
I had my first one at 22 but I also wasn't have sex yet. I had annual ones until late 20's. It then went to every three years due to being low risk. I think it is back to annually now. While I don't like pap smears (who does) I would rather do those every year than have cancer because I only had them done every three years.
Engaged May 2003 Married June 2005 TTC #1 since October 2014 H-1% morph, low motility, low count Me-.1 AMH levels, low AFC, DOR/POI, perimenopause Foster Care journey begins March 2016-licensed 11/7/16 Foster parents to A & J 1/31/17 www.fertilityfriend.com/home/5525ef
The new guidelines actually make a lot of sense when you consider the pathology and pathogenesis. Before the age of 21, regardless of how sexually active a person is, the likelihood of clearing the HPV virus is extremely high. Hence why they don't recommend a Pap smear in that age range now. They've found that by doing so, they pick up more cases of HPV that eventually get cleared on their own, leading to increased unnecessary medical interventions that colposcopies or LEEPs. Since cervical biopsies and LEEPs increase the risk of complications during pregnancy, it's important to avoid unnecessary procedures in women of reproductive age (or younger).
In general, the presence of pre-cancerous cells has a very low likelihood of leading to cancer. In fact, less than 1% of patients who have low-grade pre-cancerous cells on a pap smear will progress to cancer. The vast majority clear the infection with no longer term damage to the cells of the cervix. Of those with high-grade pre-cancerous cells, the risk of progression to cancer is still low, at less than 2%.
Since the typical cervical cancer is very slow growing, annual pap smears do not necessarily increase the chance of picking up an actual cancer and lead to an increased number of unnecessary interventions (see above). The atypical types of cervical cancer are way too rare to make annual pap smears very effective as a screening tool.
Sorry if that's full of medical jargon, I tried to put it in laymen's terms as much as possible. Pathologists are the ones making the actual diagnosis of normal vs atypical cells vs low-grade vs high-grade vs cancer, so we have to know a lot about the guidelines and the thought process behind them. Keep in mind that guidelines are for the entire population and are designed to weigh all the factors that influence clinical decision making, not just "does the screening test catch cancer?". If you are concerned, your physician can go over your personal risk factors with you and together you may decide to test more frequently than the guidelines recommend.
Met in May 2011 Engaged November 2011 Married November 2013 Started TTC November 2015 Began Infertility Workup November 2016 BFP! Lucky #13 Cycle TTC Due Date: 9/5/2017
If you are concerned, your physician can go over your personal risk factors with you and together you may decide to test more frequently than the guidelines recommend.
Yup - my gynecologist agrees that I should still be getting annual pap smears, which we are both happy with.
Then Comes Family, LLC is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising
program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.