Current Tonight | November 18, 2009 | 7 comments

New mammogram recommendations don't put most women at increased risk

source: http://crooksandliars.com/susie-madrak/why-new-mammogram-recommendation-real

Future_America
This New York Times article gives the same scary media narrative repeated everywhere else in the past few days:

'Despite new recommendations that most women start breast screening at 50 rather than 40, many doctors said Tuesday that they were simply not ready to make such a drastic change.

"It's kind of hard to suggest that we should stop examining our patients and screening them," said Dr. Annekathryn Goodman, director of the fellowship program in gynecological oncology at Massachusetts General Hospital. "I would be cautious about changing a practice that seems to work."

The recommendations, issued Monday by a federal advisory panel, reversed widely promoted guidelines and were intended to reduce overtreatment. The panel said the benefits of screening women in their 40s - saving one life for every 1,904 women screened for 10 years - were outweighed by the potential for unnecessary tests and treatment, and the accompanying anxiety. Women considered at high risk should continue to have early screening, the panel said.'

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/18/health/18doctors.html?_r=1&hp

But where's the data about the risk from radiation?

Here's important (and missing) piece of the puzzle in the San Francisco Chronicle:
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2009/11/18/MNLT1ALVJA.DTL

"Radiation causes 1 death for every 2,000 women screened annually starting at age 40, according to a study published in 2005 in the British Journal of Cancer. Another study shows that each mammogram increases the risk of breast cancer by 2 percent. Mammography also saves women's lives, so that's why it's a trade-off."

Here's some more info from Respectful Insolence, a medical research blog:
http://scienceblogs.com/insolence/2009/11/really_rethinking_breast_cancer_screen...

Got that? Statistically, some women have approximately as much chance of GETTING breast cancer from a mammogram as they have of it saving their lives. That's why it's considered a policy wash.

Yes, you might be one of those rare women saved by early detection. But you might also be someone who DEVELOPS breast cancer from the yearly radiation exposure.

By the way, the policy change recommendation does NOT apply to women with symptoms. It's for screening mammograms only, not the diagnostic kind.
  1. groups:
    Current Tonight,   Health,   Max and Jason: Still Up,   Women,   6 more
  2. tags:
    Health,  Women,  Breast Cancer,  Breast Cancer Research & Awareness,  2 more
  3.     
    |

7 comments // New mammogram recommendations don't put most women at increased risk // Video

  • JonRaymond
    • 0
      JonRaymond  
    • Image

    • http://current.com/items/91491225_mammogram-media-blitz-is-a-right-wing-attack-t...

      This is a Right Wing Media Blitz Tactic, pure and simple wing nut spin. The INDEPENDENT task force does not dictate official government policy. It merely suggests preventative measures. This task force report is highly suspicious as being an insurance industry backed ploy to make health care reform appear to be the exact opposite of what it really is.

      On the contrary, health care reform proposed by Obama and other proponents would increased preventative care for all. Read the statement from the White House at this link.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  
    • JonRaymond:

      Let me get this straight: you dismiss these findings as "right wing media blitz tactic[s]," but you don't see any possible presence of bias from a statement issued on the White House website?

      Outstanding.

    • 2 years ago
  • JonRaymond
    • 0
      JonRaymond  
    • JonRaymond:

      How would it benefit the White House? This is all too obviously a right wing agenda backed by the insurance industry and Fox News.

      On the other hand, I agree we must keep watch to make sure that this doesn't become part of health care reform, as did the Stupak-Pitts amendment. This could be pushed through by the right and spun as a left agenda.

      This benefits the health insurance industry and is counter to everything the reformers want. There are no SIDES. Things are not so moronically simple. We have to watch out for both parties and Obama as well. But that doesn't mean all health care reform should be killed.

      On the contrary, as we see with this kind of threat coming from the insurance industry (disguised as a task force report), we must push for socialized medicine - Medicare for all - all ages, all treatments.

    • 2 years ago
  • Ares
    • 0
      Ares  
    • JonRaymond:

      "How would it benefit the White House?"

      What, hyping up a piece of legislation to make sure as many people support it as possible? Well, trying to change people's minds might improve his abysmal approval rating, for one thing.

    • 2 years ago
  • JonRaymond
    • 0
      JonRaymond  
    • JonRaymond:

      This INDEPENDENT task force recommendation is not part of any legislation. I find it highly suspicious. Washington is a big place. How hard can it be to influence a task force when you're an insurance industry that already has Congress on it's payroll and has written the recently passed health care bill with lobbyists?

      Would you also be interested in some New Orleans delta properties?

    • 2 years ago
  • JohnA
  • rufescens
more from Current Tonight:
from the community

top videos