<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Skipping nuchal translucency screening</title>
	<atom:link href="http://zerotobaby.com/2009/10/skipping-nuchal-translucency-screening/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://zerotobaby.com/2009/10/skipping-nuchal-translucency-screening/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 18 Jul 2011 01:34:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milton</title>
		<link>http://zerotobaby.com/2009/10/skipping-nuchal-translucency-screening/comment-page-1/#comment-62</link>
		<dc:creator>Milton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:59:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zerotobaby.com/?p=106#comment-62</guid>
		<description>Lori, seeing the baby again is a good reason to do it if it&#039;s free.  Also, with the better equipment required for this test, it&#039;s sometimes possible to find out the gender (not with 100% accuracy).  Now, that&#039;s one piece of information that I AM 100% excited about finding out as soon as possible.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Lori, seeing the baby again is a good reason to do it if it&#8217;s free.  Also, with the better equipment required for this test, it&#8217;s sometimes possible to find out the gender (not with 100% accuracy).  Now, that&#8217;s one piece of information that I AM 100% excited about finding out as soon as possible.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Milton</title>
		<link>http://zerotobaby.com/2009/10/skipping-nuchal-translucency-screening/comment-page-1/#comment-60</link>
		<dc:creator>Milton</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:55:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zerotobaby.com/?p=106#comment-60</guid>
		<description>Yeah, I think it&#039;s pretty similar to the quad screen.  

To be honest, we&#039;re not NOT doing it because it costs too much.  We&#039;re not doing it because I really don&#039;t think there&#039;s a point.  The screening doesn&#039;t tell you if your baby has a problem, it just says that there&#039;s an either tiny, small, or medium sized chance of there being a problem.  And, shouldn&#039;t hospitals be equipped for complications during labor and birth?  I don&#039;t buy the only possible to correct if you do all these expensive tests first.  Doctors are paid to be ready.

I don&#039;t think it&#039;s skimping.  I think it&#039;s avoiding unnecessary tests that only fuel paranoia rather than alleviate it.  All of the studies I&#039;m reading point to the fact that these screening don&#039;t decrease the likelihood of complications, they only increase the chance of introducing new risks.

But yes, health insurance is a mess.  At the same time, we shouldn&#039;t waste money simply because it&#039;s possible to.  I am guessing that the way to save health insurance is by reducing the number of high tech, expensive, unproven tests and screenings and drugs and whatever that we opt into merely because we feel like we&#039;re entitled to since we have to pay a ton for health insurance.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Yeah, I think it&#8217;s pretty similar to the quad screen.  </p>
<p>To be honest, we&#8217;re not NOT doing it because it costs too much.  We&#8217;re not doing it because I really don&#8217;t think there&#8217;s a point.  The screening doesn&#8217;t tell you if your baby has a problem, it just says that there&#8217;s an either tiny, small, or medium sized chance of there being a problem.  And, shouldn&#8217;t hospitals be equipped for complications during labor and birth?  I don&#8217;t buy the only possible to correct if you do all these expensive tests first.  Doctors are paid to be ready.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t think it&#8217;s skimping.  I think it&#8217;s avoiding unnecessary tests that only fuel paranoia rather than alleviate it.  All of the studies I&#8217;m reading point to the fact that these screening don&#8217;t decrease the likelihood of complications, they only increase the chance of introducing new risks.</p>
<p>But yes, health insurance is a mess.  At the same time, we shouldn&#8217;t waste money simply because it&#8217;s possible to.  I am guessing that the way to save health insurance is by reducing the number of high tech, expensive, unproven tests and screenings and drugs and whatever that we opt into merely because we feel like we&#8217;re entitled to since we have to pay a ton for health insurance.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jana Kleitsch</title>
		<link>http://zerotobaby.com/2009/10/skipping-nuchal-translucency-screening/comment-page-1/#comment-58</link>
		<dc:creator>Jana Kleitsch</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 21 Oct 2009 21:44:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zerotobaby.com/?p=106#comment-58</guid>
		<description>Sad! Is this what they call the &quot;quad screen&quot; blood test? I know it is controversial because of the high chance of a false positive and if you need to know this info at all, but I heard a nurse once give a good argument in favor of these tests. If there is some sort of neural tube disorder (what the heck am I typing? not really sure if this is right) this can be corrected immediately after birth but only if it is known before the birth. I can put you in touch with the nurse/friend who gave me this spiel if you are interested in hearing it correctly for yourself.

Also sad because it seems like this little test shouldn&#039;t costs that much (IMHO). It saddens me to think of skimping on standard health care procedures just because your insurance isn&#039;t that great. I don&#039;t blame you at all, just the screwed up system that says you need a lot of money or a lame corporate job to get decent health care in this country.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sad! Is this what they call the &#8220;quad screen&#8221; blood test? I know it is controversial because of the high chance of a false positive and if you need to know this info at all, but I heard a nurse once give a good argument in favor of these tests. If there is some sort of neural tube disorder (what the heck am I typing? not really sure if this is right) this can be corrected immediately after birth but only if it is known before the birth. I can put you in touch with the nurse/friend who gave me this spiel if you are interested in hearing it correctly for yourself.</p>
<p>Also sad because it seems like this little test shouldn&#8217;t costs that much (IMHO). It saddens me to think of skimping on standard health care procedures just because your insurance isn&#8217;t that great. I don&#8217;t blame you at all, just the screwed up system that says you need a lot of money or a lame corporate job to get decent health care in this country.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Lori</title>
		<link>http://zerotobaby.com/2009/10/skipping-nuchal-translucency-screening/comment-page-1/#comment-54</link>
		<dc:creator>Lori</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 19 Oct 2009 10:46:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://zerotobaby.com/?p=106#comment-54</guid>
		<description>Where I live (France), the NT Scan is a standard procedure that is in fact part of the mandatory pre-natal follow up that all French women have to comply with (if they want to get their benefits). The blood test and CVS/Amnio is optional. 
So, over here, cost is absolutely not an issue, the NT Scan doesn&#039;t cost a cent. Looking at it from a standpoint of &quot;it won&#039;t cost me anything and I get to see my baby on the ultrasound again&quot;, I see no reason not to do it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Where I live (France), the NT Scan is a standard procedure that is in fact part of the mandatory pre-natal follow up that all French women have to comply with (if they want to get their benefits). The blood test and CVS/Amnio is optional.<br />
So, over here, cost is absolutely not an issue, the NT Scan doesn&#8217;t cost a cent. Looking at it from a standpoint of &#8220;it won&#8217;t cost me anything and I get to see my baby on the ultrasound again&#8221;, I see no reason not to do it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

