• Cruel Wait Not Breast Practice

    • Robyn Riley
    • From: Sunday Herald Sun
    • April 11, 2010 12:00AM

    I AM no doctor, but as someone who was a medical writer for many years, I consider myself reasonably well informed on medical matters.

    But I did not know that BreastScreen Australia provided a screening mammogram only – not a diagnostic mammogram.

    There is a big difference, as I found out last week.

    A screening mammogram is only for women who do not present with symptoms. So the first thing to remember is that anyone with symptoms – and that can be anything from a lump to a discharge or even changes in colour – should not use the free BreastScreen program.

    They should have a GP refer them for a diagnostic mammogram.

    Why? Because it can save you several weeks of worrying. A diagnostic mammogram is also more specific and the results can be returned within a day. [Read More…]

  • Christine O’Gorman Suffers Misdiagnosis at BreastScreen

    Cruel treatment … Cancer sufferer Chrsitine O’Gorman with her partner, Glen Fitzpatrick. Picture: Stephen Cooper Source: The Daily Telegraph

    CHRISTINE O’Gorman was lying in bed reading when she scratched an itch in her left breast and felt a lump “as hard as concrete”.

    For the 57-year-old single mum, the subsequent diagnosis last year of a cancerous tumour was at odds with every mammogram result she had ever received – and she had been diligently having her breasts screened every two years since 1994.

    Like thousands of women aged between 50 and 69, O’Gorman visited a government-funded BreastScreen clinic to have her mammograms. It was convenient, free of charge and she was able to fit a visit in during her lunch hour.

    To her immense relief, after every mammogram examination O’Gorman received a letter from BreastScreen stating “there was no visible evidence of breast cancer”.

    Shockingly, it now emerges that there was visible evidence. Those reassuring letters from BreastScreen turn out not to be worth the paper they were written on. [Read More…]

  • “Mammography Saves Lives” questioned by CANSA and UK and USA authorities.

    The USA website of Curves Health Clubs for women claims over 4 million members worldwide.  So it is has considerable outreach to women. But it is an exercise club.

    So it is disturbing when it engages in  highly controversial promotion of screening xray mammography of all asymptomatic older well women not at increased risk, the safety and utility of which has been increasingly questioned the past two decades.  Read complete story.

  • The Real Incidence Of Breast Cancer Risk Is Far Lower Than Claimed

    An authoritative new study from USA and Switzerland  “Breast Cancer in  Postmenopausal Women:  What is the Real Risk?”  has been published on line exposing the scaremongering mythology that the  risk of breast cancer is between 1:8 and 1:3.

     The risk is in fact probably closer  to 1:1000 per year post menopause, ie  over a lifetime far below 1:20 for average women world wide .

     Thus there is no substance for the slogan Mammography Saves Lives, which was designed by the massive Breast Cancer Industry to scare women into having dozens of unnecessary and harmful screening xray mammograms over a lifetime.  Read Complete Article.

  • Concerns About Recommending Routine Screening Mammograms for Women Age 40 to 49

    By Jacquelyn Paykel and William H. Wolberg 

    The controversy concerning the usefulness of screening mammography in younger-than-50 women continues. In general, two factors are consistently overlooked that should bear heavily on screening recommendations, particularly as they pertain to national policy. First, understanding why screening is more beneficial after as opposed to before age 50; second, assessing the societal cost of routine screening in younger women. 

    Pivotal to this discussion – and unavailable from any of the current studies – is the menopausal status of the patients being screened. Biological age is more important than is chronological age. At the time of menopause, the ovaries cease to produce estrogen. Lacking bodily estrogen, the breast glandular tissue involutes, and cancerous nodules become more apparent by mammogram. Therefore, screening is going to be as advantageous to a woman who is postmenopausal at age 48 as it is to a woman at age 55 or older. The reported screening studies have been conveniently designed based on the subjects’ date of birth (age), rather than on the appropriate standard which is the menopausal status of the subject. Furthermore, women who started to receive mammograms before age 50 continued to receive them after their fiftieth birthday. Not only was the menopausal status ignored, but any beneficial effect of screening before 50 could not be distinguished from that occurring after 50. 

    Some otherwise undetectable cancers are found by mammography in younger-than-50 women. Women in this age group who have been mammographically diagnosed become strong advocates for screening. However, the radiation given with mammograms undoubtedly causes some cancers particularly in younger women when the breast is under estrogen stimulation. What is unclear is whether mammograms result in curing more cancers than they cause in this age group. The available data indicate that there is a close trade off.  [Read More…]