No mammograms under age 50?

She had breast cancer at age 47, and she was furious. My mom had suspected for years that something was wrong, but doctor after doctor told her it was all in her head. They couldn't find anything wrong with her.
Then she found the lump. It was near her armpit, and finally someone sent her for a mammogram.
The lump was cancerous. And it had a twin in her breast.
My mother lost the breast, lost her hair, and felt sick as a dog with both radiation and chemotherapy. She fought hard. She won.

This was 1983. No one got mammograms as a matter of prevention.
Imagine if my mom had been getting checked every other year for the previous 7 years. They'd have found the problem before it was big enough to be detected through a self-exam. She'd have gotten treatment rather than surgery. She'd have been told less often that she was imagining that something was wrong with her own body.

Because I have this family history, my doctor sent me in for my first mammogram at age 35. Even though my insurance pays for the exam only every other year, he makes me go every year anyway. He wouldn't hear of anything else.

The news broke Monday that women under age 50 shouldn't have mammograms. One report I heard said that not enough tests come back positive to say the exams were worth it.
Oh, really? Not enough? Isn't just one enough?

Don't try to tell me this is a good idea. I fear insurance companies will pounce all over this and not cover mammograms for ten more years. It sounds to me that someone is trying to save a buck at the risk of my health and those that I love.
(And, oh gee, they sat on this just long enough to get past Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Coincidence?)

I'm just a few years away from the age my mom was when she was diagnosed with breast cancer. Thanks to my doctor, I will have a 12 year head start. But this new recommendation will throw us back to the early 80's and abandon women like my mother with no family history.
Shouldn't everyone be protected?