Re: Mammogram

Well said Julie! It is time that Realist stopped poking his nose into other members personal decisions on health care & accepted that, if we want advice , we are all capable of looking things up on the internet!

Re: Mammogram

No Twink, it is not 'time he stopped', it is way, way past time.

Why on earth can't people just stick to their own beliefs and allow others to do the same?

Look what trouble it causes in religion when one tries to impose their beliefs on others. It is so very wrong IMO.

Re: Mammogram

I had a routine mammogram for the first time this year. I'd had one 11 years ago after I found a lump on self examination. It was checked and found to be a harmless cyst. It's a relief that nothing has developed. The radiation dose is a fraction of what you're exposed to when living in Cornwall for a year.

Re: Mammogram

Annie, I am sure there is a blood test (CA-125) for ovarian cancer. I had it done last year when l kept getting pain in my stomach and being bloated. It came back negative but it was later discovered l had impacted gallstones.

Re: Mammogram

Hi

A life without vaccinations, X Rays and Scans.

Would that be wise?

It is not a choice that I would make.

My recent CT scan revealed a potentially life threatening condition which is responding well to treatment.

I am happy I had the scan.

Re: Mammogram

I think we are all glad you had your scan swim. These things do save lives.

Re: Mammogram

Another interesting article here to be considered

Why Mammography Screening is being Abolished in Switzerland

http://cyrcadiahealth.com/why-mammog...n-switzerland/

"The board spend twelve months reviewing all available evidence and its implications. They reported becoming “increasingly concerned” about the widely believed notion that mammograms were safe and capable of saving lives. They said “As we embarked on the project, we were aware of the controversies that have surrounded mammography screening for the past 10 to 15 years. When we reviewed the available evidence and contemplated its implications in detail, however, we became increasingly concerned.”

In fact they concluded that statistics clearly indicated that mammograms appeared to be preventing only 1 death per 1,000 women screened, and actually caused harm to many more. Their thorough review left them no choice but to recommend that “no new systematic mammography screening programs be introduced, and that a time limit should be placed on existing programs.”


2. BENEFITS DID NOT OUTWEIGH THE HARMS

"The panel referred to a recent study published in The Lancet, recognized as one of the largest and longest studies of mammography to date. This study involved 90,000 women who were followed for a period of 25 years. The study concluded that mammograms have absolutely NO impact on breast cancer mortality (iii). These conclusions were widely publicized at the time and showed that the death rate from breast cancer was virtually identical between those who received an annual mammogram and those who did not, while 22% of screen-detected invasive breast cancers were over-diagnosed, leading to unnecessary treatment."

"The Swiss experts stated: “This means that 106 of the 44,925 healthy women in the screening group were diagnosed with and treated for breast cancer unnecessarily, which resulted in needless surgical interventions, radiotherapy, chemotherapy, or some combination of these therapies. In the best case, the small reduction in breast-cancer deaths was attenuated by deaths from other causes. In the worst case, the reduction was cancelled out by deaths caused by coexisting conditions or by the harms of screening and associated overtreatment. Did the available evidence, taken together, indicate that mammography screening indeed benefits women?”

3. WOMEN’S PERCEPTIONS OF MAMMOGRAPHY BENEFITS ARE NOT MIRRORED IN THE REALITY

"The Swiss panel said “we were disconcerted by the pronounced discrepancy between women’s perceptions of the benefits of mammography screening and the benefits to be expected in reality.”
One survey found that the majority of women believed that mammography screening programs reduced the risk of breast cancer deaths by at least half and prevented at least 80 deaths per 1,000 women screened "


"In conclusion the Swiss said “It is easy to promote mammography screening if the majority of women believe that it prevents or reduces the risk of getting breast cancer and saves many lives through early detection of aggressive tumors.

We would be in favour of mammography screening if these beliefs were valid. Unfortunately, they are not, and we believe that women need to be told so. From an ethical perspective, a public health program that does not clearly produce more benefits than harms is hard to justify. Providing clear, unbiased information, promoting appropriate care, and preventing over diagnosis and overtreatment would be a better choice.”


"We expect our health professionals to know what they’re talking about, and to give the best advice possible. But this research suggests that doctors can be just as confused and misinformed as the patients, compounded by mis-infomation and media propaganda in a powerful and profits driven industry which often chooses to dismiss research that dramatically contradicts their profit-based agenda.

The industry as a whole has a responsibility to no longer ignore mounting research showing that more women are being harmed by regular mammograms than are saved by them."

Re: Mammogram

*** no name calling, please.

Post removed

Re: Mammogram

A rather heart-breaking tale here in this article. A testimony to the power of medical "Campaigns Of Fear" and a stark warning to us all to look at the truth and stop giving in to fear.

https://www.motherjones.com/politics...breast-cancer/

What If Everything Your Doctors Told You About Breast Cancer Was Wrong?

"I lost a breast and six months of work, “for stage zero cancer that probably wouldn’t have killed me,”

Re: Mammogram

Art yes they have blood tests for tumour markers etc. but the problem is that by the time ovarian cancer shows itself in symptoms it's often too late. But the new test has been publicised at picking up changes far earlier so I hope it will be available in the next few years so that we can just have a blood test to screen for several cancers instead of all these invasive and painful procedures.