Mammograms

[237SJ]

A post from someone on here (and the ads on US tv) made me think. The guidlines in the UK state that mammograms should be undertaken every three years from age 48. In the States, they recommend having a mammogram every year. The powers that be in the UK state that too many mammograms can do more harm than good so who is right?

[Sqad]

Mammography screening costs the NHS £50million a year, money better spent, in my opinion,in reducing waiting times for the diagnosis, investigation and treatment of breast cancer.

It is, as slaney has pointed out, whether this saves one life and a right battle is being fought among the medics.

For gness.........between 2 yearly mammograms one could develop a highly malignant breast cancer before the date of your next mammogram. Not much help there then, but fortunately an uncommon occurrence.

Now your symptomless "lump" picked up on mammogram may well be benign, so missing it would be no big deal.
However it could well be malignant and if it was the aggressive type mentioned above, then one has "missed the boat." If one waited for the lump, highlighted on mammogram to become palpable then it is almost certain that quick referral
and treatment will give the same satisfactory survival rate.

The answer to cancer, of any kind is good luck with the site of occurrence, type of cancer and agressive treatment.

[Old_Geezer]

It is possible different experts may hodld different opinions. In which case the issue isn't clear cut and one ought not worry about which is best. Just so long as it isn't used as an excuse not to get a regular check.

[237SJ]

Thanks for the replies and links. I was thinking (re: harm) about the amount of radiation. Two yearly mammograms would be what I would have, given the choice. It`s interesting from Slaney`s link that they suggest mammograms until age 74. My aunty was found to have breast cancer at her very last mammograme aged 69. It hadn`t formed a lump but had already gone to the lymph nodes. I will certainly be asking for mammograms past the age of 70, given the family history.

[Peter Pedant]

good ref slaney thx

"It found that the death rates from breast cancer and from all causes were the same in women who got mammograms and those who did not. And the screening had harms: One in five cancers found with mammography and treated was not a threat to the woman’s health and did not need treatment such as chemotherapy, surgery or radiation."

and 237 SJ asks: The powers that be in the UK state that too many mammograms can do more harm than good

and slaney's ref explains why....

[Peter Pedant]

Oh the radiation is peanuts - 0.1 rad quoted ( old units) which apparently is near 0.02 grays for ea mammogram.

for radiotherapy i think I had 20 grays, - which is a thousand times more.

[Peter Pedant]

Mammograms - do they work ?

the fight continues: this week NEJM May 22 2014 p 1965

Abolishing mammography screening programs ? A view from the Swiss Medical Board.

some discussion on perception - does SJ think the screening program performs better than it really does ? The article makes much about the results of treatment in mammorgraphy communities isnt much different to those who skip.

which brings us back to - does mammography work ?