Expert Panel Cites Doubts on Mammogram's Worth (NY Times article)

[Guest guest]

Because of diabetes they began giving me mammograms when I was 40. At age

47 breast cancer was diagnosed. I have not had another mammogram since the

lumpectomy and I will not have it again. Think about the treatment of the

breast just to have one. Good grief - anything that is prodded, manipulated

and squeezed((!) into such a tight UNCOMFORTABLE condition, and then

RADIATED by the machine, ... no wonder we get abnormalities in the breast!

True self-examination is the best way to KNOW if anything is changing in

the breast. EXAMINE YOURSELF! Every time you take a shower - soap up and do

a quick examination for any changes in the way the breast has been before.

The lump in my breast was there for 4 years before they diagnosed cancer.

Every year a mammogram was done. Maybe it was all that radiation that

changed the lump into cancer. Who is to know now?

 

Shirley

 

 

> Expert Panel Cites Doubts on Mammogram's Worth

>

> January 24, 2002

>

> By GINA KOLATA

>

> ROCKVILLE, Md., Jan. 23 - An independent panel of experts

> said today that there was insufficient evidence to show

> that mammograms prevented breast cancer deaths.

>

> The group, which meets regularly to assess evidence on

> cancer and provide that information to doctors and to the

> public, said that while it was possible that mammograms

> were beneficial, it was also possible that they were not.

>

> The group, called the P.D.Q. screening and prevention

> editorial board, agreed here today that seven large studies

> of mammography had serious flaws, weakening or casting

> doubt on the studies' validity.

>

> The group, which writes information for the National Cancer

> Institute's online database, said that it would rewrite

> previous statements to reflect its new view.

>

> Previously, the group, which does not make specific

> recommendations for medical practices, had said that the

> evidence showed that mammograms prevented breast cancer

> deaths starting at age 40.

>

> The decision by this group clouds a continuing debate over

> whether women should have regular mammograms. Since 1997,

> the National Cancer Institute has also recommended that

> women have regular mammograms, starting in their 40's.

>

> For now, the cancer institute, whose new director, Dr.

> Andrew C. von Eschenbach, was sworn in on Tuesday, has not

> announced any plans to revisit the issue, raising the

> question of whether the institute will end up with

> conflicting information on its Web site, with one statement

> saying that the screening is beneficial and another saying

> that those benefits have not been proved.

>

> The institute's Web site, www.cancer.gov, says that women

> in their 40's and older should have the test and that it

> reduces the breast cancer death rate by as much as 30

> percent.

>

> Members of the P.D.Q. board said they knew that it was not

> going to be easy for women and doctors to decide what to

> do. At the meeting, the members wrestled with the question

> of how much benefit, if any, mammograms confer. Some, like

> the board chairman, Donald A. Berry, chairman of the

> department of biostatistics at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center

> in Houston, said they thought it was unlikely that there

> were benefits that could make the test worthwhile.

>

> But others said that they were uncertain and that they were

> having a hard time coming to terms with the profound flaws

> they now saw in studies they had thought put mammograms on

> solid ground.

>

> " What this new material has contributed is a softening, at

> least in my mind, of what I thought was true, " said Dr.

> Isra Levy of the Canadian Medical Association. " I still

> think that for women aged 50 to 69 there might be something

> there. But we've had our confidence shaken. "

>

> In the end, the group decided not to deal with age, saying

> doubts persisted for women of all ages.

>

> The group focused on flaws in the studies that were

> recently uncovered by two scientists in Denmark. The

> report, published in October by Dr. Peter C. Gotzsche and

> Ole Olsen of the Nordic Cochrane Center in Copenhagen,

> concluded that the case for the screening was unproven. The

> studies were so poorly designed and carried out that they

> might have found benefits when there were none or

> exaggerated what benefits there were, the researchers said.

> None of the studies found that mammography prolonged life,

> and even when the studies were analyzed as a group, women

> who had the test lived no longer, dying of diseases other

> than breast cancer.

>

> Some experts have taken issue with Dr. Gotzsche and Mr.

> Olsen's analysis. But today, the P.D.Q. board said it

> believed that the scientists had found serious problems.

> The board's assessment of mammography is expected to be

> posted on the cancer institute's Web site in April.

>

> The P.D.Q. board said it would like to see others take on a

> detailed and independent analysis of the mammography

> studies and that some of the data that might settle

> questions about the quality of the studies could be

> obtained with difficulty.

>

> Some may be in medical records of women in a United States

> study decades ago. Others are held by Swedish scientists

> who, the board and others said, have refused to divulge

> them.

>

> The issue of whether women should have mammograms has been

> controversial for some time. In January 1997, when an

> independent panel convened by the National Institutes of

> Health took on the question of mammograms for women in

> their 40's, Congress got involved. That panel said then

> that there was no evidence that the test prevented breast

> cancer deaths in women under 50 and suggested that those

> women discuss mammograms with their doctors before deciding

> to have one.

>

> Before the week was over, the panel's chairman, Dr. Leon

> Gordis of the Johns Hopkins University, had been summoned

> by Senator Arlen Specter to testify before Congress. Later,

> going against the conclusions of the panel convened at its

> behest, the cancer institute said women in their 40's

> should have mammograms.

>

> The P.D.Q. board, which issues its statements

> independently, has also said over the last several years

> that mammograms prevent breast cancer deaths for women in

> their 40's.

>

> Today, the P.D.Q. board emphasized that mammograms have

> drawbacks, leading at times to excessive treatments for

> tumors that would not have threatened a woman's life.

>

> The group agreed that doctors should respect a woman's

> decision, adding that it was rational to decide to have

> mammograms and that it was rational to decide not to.

>

> Whatever they decided, Dr. Berry said in a telephone

> interview on Tuesday that he was acutely aware of the

> difficulty in questioning an enormous mammography business.

>

> " Screening programs bring in patients, " Dr. Berry said. " It

> isn't just the mammography, but it's the biopsies, the

> surgeries and the like. We know that screening is

> exquisitely fine at finding cancers. Therefore it brings in

> patients and they demand treatment. "

>

> The problem, he said, is if the women who have mammograms

> fare no better, or do even worse because of excessive

> treatment, than women who are not screened.

>

> Copyright 2001 The New York Times Company

 

 

******

Kraig and Shirley Carroll ... in the woods of SE Kentucky

thehavens

http://www.thehavens.com/

mail to: PerfectScience

606-376-3363

 

" Cancer was a blessing that continues to this day "

Expect Miracles

 

We only have one Earth.

There are NO SPARE PARTS.

We must PROTECT OUR WORLD!

Please protect your world.

..... Ayhan Doyuk, Chairman of Perfect Science

[Guest guest]

> Think about the treatment of the

> breast just to have one. Good grief - anything that is prodded,

manipulated

> and squeezed((!) into such a tight UNCOMFORTABLE condition,

 

I suspect this is fun for the doctors. At least enough of them that

it keeps being done despite a questionable record.

 

Andy

[Guest guest]

-

" andrewhallcutler " <AndyCutler

 

Friday, January 25, 2002 3:54 PM

Re: Expert Panel Cites Doubts on Mammogram's Worth (NY

Times article)

 

 

> > Think about the treatment of the

> > breast just to have one. Good grief - anything that is prodded,

> manipulated

> > and squeezed((!) into such a tight UNCOMFORTABLE condition,

>

> I suspect this is fun for the doctors. At least enough of them that

> it keeps being done despite a questionable record.

 

Hi Andy,

 

Here in Oz it is a regular occurrence and my wife has fainted from the pressure.

 

No, not a nice experience but who will carry the can for the deaths (and law

suites) which may occur if they stop? Sort

of a tiger by the tail situation.

 

========================

Optimal Health & Longevity,

Greg Watson,

http://optimalhealth.cia.com.au

Optimal_Health_and_Longevity