Why Are Women Skipping Their Mammograms?
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources.
Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content.
While healthcare costs may be on the rise, one in three women are skipping their mammograms even when it's covered at $0 out of pocket.
That's according to newly released data from Nomi Health, which revealed the major gap in preventative care.
"The problem isn't that services like mammograms are not covered," said Chris Fong, CEO of Smile Insurance and a Medicare specialist, to Newsweek, "but more about communication."
Why It Matters
Breast cancer is the second most common cancer among women in the United States, and it's the second leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States, according to the CDC.
While roughly 42,170 women will die from breast cancer in 2025, based on the American Cancer Society's analysis, many of those deaths can be prevented by early detection via yearly mammograms.
A woman waits outside the mammogram and women's health services area on the first day of the fourth annual free health clinic at the Los Angeles Sports Arena in downtown Los Angeles September 27, 2012....
A woman waits outside the mammogram and women's health services area on the first day of the fourth annual free health clinic at the Los Angeles Sports Arena in downtown Los Angeles September 27, 2012. More
ROBYN BECK/AFP/GettyImages
What To Know
Many women are skipping their yearly mammogram even when it's fully covered by insurance, according to Nomi Health's new report.
While one in three will skip the procedure, delaying screening can result in 18 percent higher costs for breast cancer treatment.
That amounts to $120,000 per episode for advanced breast cancer in unscreened patients, around $44,000 more than patients who were screened early and often.
Altogether, breast cancer screening compliance improved from 59.8 percent in 2021 to 64.2 percent in 2023, the report found.
Women who go without regular mammograms risk being diagnosed with breast cancer at a much later stage when health outcomes are less promising.
Women without regular screenings are twice as likely to reach advanced stages (8.92 vs. 3.79 percent), according to Nomi Health.
What People Are Saying
Mark Newman, CEO of Nomi Health, said in a statement: "Behind every delayed diagnosis is a person, a family, and a harder road ahead. Making preventive care accessible isn't just about managing costs; it's about protecting your workforce and their loved ones."
Chris Fong, CEO of Smile Insurance and a Medicare specialist, told Newsweek: "The problem isn't that services like mammograms are not covered but more about communication."
"As an insurance agency, we include going over the preventative services which are covered at a $0 copay but a lot of times that piece of information is hard for our clients to retain. That is the reason why we send out reminders about covered preventative services that are covered."
What Happens Next
Fong said insurance companies likely need to increase communication and send out reminders to improve the rate of mammograms being done, especially when the exam is covered at a $0 copay.
"The insurance can help people get access to care by eliminating the barriers such as financial, transportation, and health education," Fong said.
Moving ahead, mammograms could become less accessible depending on the result of a new Supreme Court case.
In April, the Supreme Court heard arguments in Kennedy v. Braidwood Management. This case is challenging the Affordable Care Act's requirement that insurers cover preventive services without cost share.
If the Court rules in favor of Braidwood, private insurers would no longer be forced to cover preventive services recommended since the ACA, including mammograms.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
10 hours ago
- Forbes
Republicans Like Health Savings Accounts
Should the government allow HSAs to cover gym memberships? Health Savings Accounts (HSAs) are a popular and important way many people pay for medical expenses. They are also a great way to save—better, for example, than an IRA or a 401(k) plan. Because of various quirks in the law, HSAs are not available to a large number of people—including people on Medicaid or Medicare and most people who buy their own insurance in the (Obamacare) exchanges. Under the reconciliation bill just passed in the House of Representatives, more people will have access to these accounts and there will be new opportunities to use them. Currently, individuals and their employers can make tax-free deposits to HSAs, provided the individual is also covered by third-party health insurance with a high deductible. Money can accumulate and grow tax-free. After age 65, the money can be withdrawn for non-health expenses without penalty, but it is subject to normal income taxes. As of 2023, there were 37.4 million accounts with $46.4 billion in assets. Industry experts think the House bill will lead to an additional 20 million people with an HSA. Here is a summary of the hits and misses in the Republican bill, as it faces a vote by the Senate. The Good. By far the best feature of the bill is a provision making all bronze and catastrophic insurance plans offered through the (Obamacare) exchanges automatically eligible for an HSA account. This is likely the main reason why the number of HSA accounts is likely to soar. Another provision would allow the use of HSAs to pay monthly fees for direct primary care (DPC). This used to be called 'concierge care' and in the past it was available only to the rich. But the price has come way down. Atlas MD in Wichita, for example, charges $50 a month for a mother and $10 for a child. In return, the family has 24/7 access to a physician's practice that provides all primary care. Often, the family has the doctor's personal phone number. DPC has become increasingly popular, and employers often pay the monthly fee for their employees. Under current law, however, the employer cannot put funds in an HSA account, let the employee choose a DPC doctor and pay that doctor from the account. The House bill will create that opportunity. According to the Congressional Budget Office (CBO), the ten-year cost of all of the HSA changes combined is almost $44 billion. Yet the cost of the two best provisions is less than $6 billion. More on that below. The Questionable. The bill allows annual withdrawals of $500 (individuals) or $1,000 (couples) for gym memberships and other physical activities. (No sailing or golfing expenses, however.) The problem is that these are not medical expenses. If we are going to allow gym memberships, why not hundreds of other nonmedical expenses – including sailing and golfing? The CBO says the cost of this provision is $10 billion. The bill also doubles the annual HSA contribution that is allowable for individuals with incomes up to $75,000 and couples who earn up to $150,000. The problem here is that only about one in ten account holders are contributing the maximum allowable right now. At a cost of more than $8 billion this is an expensive change that will only affect a small part of the market. Instead of these questionable measures, the Senate should consider making all Obamacare silver plans (the most popular choice) automatically eligible for an HSA. Missed opportunities. While the House should be congratulated for making many desirable improvements in the HSA law, it unfortunately failed to correct a fundamental flaw: an inflexible across-the-board deductible. Common sense would suggest that different medical expenses need different deductibles. The biggest problem with chronic illness, for example, is noncompliance with a drug regimen. That is why some Medicare Advantage plans make maintenance drugs for chronic patients (such as insulin for diabetics) available for free or at very low cost. In the first Trump administration, an IRS ruling waived the deductible requirement for 14 specific services and medications that serve as treatments for such conditions as diabetes, asthma, heart disease, and depression. This was an executive branch decision to modify existing legislation, however. To make it permanent, Congress needs to codify it. Ideally, Congress should remove the deductible requirement altogether and let the role of deductibles be determined in the marketplace. One way to think about the combination of allowing gym memberships and failing to address the deductible issue is to see that the House risks being accused of creating benefits for the healthy while ignoring the sick. Another missed opportunity was the failure of House Republicans to give 80 million Medicaid enrollees access to what I will call a Roth HSA. Private companies managing Medicaid (or the state itself) should be able to make deposits to an account that would cover, say, all primary care. Enrollees could use the money for health care during an insurance year. Afterward, they could withdraw any unspent funds for any purpose. If there were no taxes or penalties on non-medical withdrawals, health care and non-health care would trade against each other on a level playing field under the tax law. People wouldn't spend a dollar on health care unless they got a dollar's worth of value. An early study by the RAND Corporation suggests that these accounts would reduce Medicaid spending by 30 percent. Aside from payments for the disabled and nursing home care, if Medicaid spending could be reduced by 30 percent, the savings would amount to almost $1 trillion over ten years. This saving would be shared by the beneficiaries and the taxpayers who fund Medicaid.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Republicans are also sweating Medicaid cuts in Big Beautiful Bill, poll finds
More than four in 10 Republicans are worried about the Medicaid cuts being contemplated as a part of President Donald Trump's domestic policy mega-bill, a reminder that key parts of President Donald Trump's base also stand to be adversely impacted by the sprawling legislation. One-third of respondents to the new KFF poll identify as MAGA Republicans, reflecting the overall enrollment in the joint state/federal health care program. Among enrollees, more than a quarter are Republican, including 1 in 5 who identify as MAGA Republicans, according to the pollWhil. Republicans who control the U.S. Senate now have the bill, which passed the U.S. House by a single vote late last month. The upper chamber is contemplating its own changes to the legislation, which would blow up the deficit and impose sweeping social service cuts as it seeks to make Trump's first-term tax cuts permanent. The poll found that a large majority of rural Americans and those with lower household incomes, another key part of Trump's base, are worried that Medicaid reductions would lead to more children and adults losing coverage. They said they also feared it would harm health care providers in their communities and make it more difficult for them and their families to access care, according to the poll. Those findings broke down along partisan lines. Nonetheless, half of rural Republicans said they were worried about people becoming uninsured, according to the poll. Rural health care providers, who often rely on Medicaid funding, may be "especially vulnerable to the decreased federal spending included in the reconciliation bill," according to KFF pollsters. Public views on how the Republican White House's policies will impact the nation's health care system are largely partisan. But overall, most of the public says the administration's policies will weaken Medicaid and Medicare, including most Democrats and independents. Republicans said they expect those policies to strengthen or have no impact on these programs. Read More: A 'historic battle': Mass pols protest Medicaid cuts in 'Big Beautiful Bill' | John L. Micek Among Republican Medicaid enrollees, however, 'views are mixed with similar shares saying the policies will strengthen, weaken, or have no impact on the program they rely on,' according to the poll. In Massachusetts, Democratic Gov. Maura Healey and her allies in the state Legislature have predicted grim consequences for MassHealth, as Medicaid is known in the Bay State. As it's currently written, the bill that passed the U.S. House by a single vote last week would reduce Medicaid spending by nearly $700 billion over a decade, according to an analysis by the Congressional Budget Office. That would cost the state's health care system $1.75 billion, affecting 250,000 people statewide, MassLive previously reported. This is my classroom. ICE isn't welcome here. What a monk, a librarian and a dentist have to do with Harvard's fight with Trump Harvard relinquishes possession of slave photos after years-long dispute Trump says Musk has 'lost his mind' as he disses peace offering Judge blocks Trump admin from banning Harvard international students from entering US Read the original article on MassLive.
Yahoo
13 hours ago
- Yahoo
Alpha Cognition Inc. Common Stock (ACOG): A Bull Case Theory
We came across a bullish thesis on Alpha Cognition Inc. Common Stock (ACOG) by anygal on r/investing on Reddit. In this article, we will summarize the bulls' thesis on ACOG. Alpha Cognition Inc. Common Stock (ACOG)'s share was trading at $9.33 as of 30th May. ACOG's forward P/E was 26.88 according to Yahoo Finance. A chemist in a laboratory analyzing data from the various therapeutic tests conducted. Alpha Cognition Inc. (NASDAQ: ACOG) represents a potentially overlooked opportunity in the Alzheimer's treatment space, having recently launched its oral drug, Zunveyl, at the end of March. With a current market cap of $150 million and $45 million in cash, the company is targeting the underserved segment of the Alzheimer's population—specifically, the 50% of patients in long-term care (LTC) not taking any current medications due to severe side effects. Unlike other galantamine-based drugs, Zunveyl significantly slows disease progression and improves short-term memory with a markedly better safety profile—only one serious side-effect case was reported in its Phase 3 trials, versus a 50% rate seen in traditional options. The drug's Medicare coverage further eases affordability, lowering monthly out-of-pocket costs to $30–$190. Initial demand appears promising, with nearly 500 patients starting treatment in the first two weeks of launch. Even a modest 1% market penetration into the LTC segment could yield $135 million in annual revenue, with $67.5 million in net income assuming 50% margins. A 5% penetration would put net income at $675 million, dwarfing the current valuation. Alpha Cognition has also secured a distribution deal with a major Chinese pharmaceutical firm, creating a royalty-based revenue stream in Asia. While the upside is substantial, key risks remain—most notably, the emergence of unforeseen serious side effects post-launch, which could lead to FDA scrutiny or suspension of sales. Still, the market's underreaction and the company's positioning as a safer, effective alternative in a high-need space make ACOG a high-upside, high-conviction bet for risk-tolerant investors. Previously, we have covered ACOG in March 2025 wherein we summarized a by BullishDoctor on Twitter. The user highlighted that Alpha Cognition Inc.'s drug ZUNVEYL addressed the major side effects of existing Alzheimer's treatments, making it highly tolerable and poised for adoption in long-term care facilities, a $2 billion market. The company was pre-revenue but launched in March 2025 with strong physician support, a nearly complete sales force, and promising catalysts like a Phase 4 study and sublingual formulation, projecting breakeven within three years. Since our last coverage, the stock is up 61% as of 30th May. Alpha Cognition Inc. Common Stock (ACOG) is not on our list of the 30 Most Popular Stocks Among Hedge Funds. As per our database, 8 hedge fund portfolios held ACOG at the end of the first quarter which was 10 in the previous quarter. While we acknowledge the potential of ACOG as an investment, our conviction lies in the belief that some AI stocks hold greater promise for delivering higher returns and have limited downside risk. If you are looking for an extremely cheap AI stock that is also a major beneficiary of Trump tariffs and onshoring, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock. READ NEXT: 8 Best Wide Moat Stocks to Buy Now and 30 Most Important AI Stocks According to BlackRock. Disclosure: None. This article was originally published at Insider Monkey. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
