(Untitled)

Oct 27, 2010 23:43

An essay in this month's Health Affairs is compelling reading, at least for folks like me. In brief, the author describes the reasons why she, despite a positive family history, does not get an annual mammogram.

The following paragraphs encapsulate the argument nicely, I think:

"If 2,000 women are screened regularly for ten years, one will ( Read more... )

Leave a comment

Comments 9

anaisdjuna October 28 2010, 04:29:33 UTC
Hmmm. What are the chances of harm? I'm ok with needless worrying to be sure. I've actually been there. I was in Holland and had a big painful lump that I found myself and saw about at the blessed Witte Jassen (doctors for po' folks and illegal immigrants such as myself). I went for a sonagram screening and they were so sweet and caring and cool and Dutch that they gave a broke sister a mammogram for free. (peace be upon them) The idea was that I should get a biopsy cuz it looked scary. So scared I was, I went home to the US of Outrageous Medical Costs to get it seen about in my own language at my oncology nurse aunt's doctor. (same aunt who'd had a pretty awful bout with it because she did not get herself screened in time though she knew better ( ... )

Reply

docorion October 28 2010, 12:56:25 UTC
That's a diagnostic mammogram, and needs doing. The discussion which is generating all the heat is about *screening* mammograms. You had a diagnostic mammogram, which is a different beast. (Difference: you had an obvious lump or other reason to get a mammogram; this gives you a higher probability of disease right out of the gate. And "probability of disease" is a factor in the equation which governs the predictive value of a test (any test, not just mammograms ( ... )

Reply

docorion October 28 2010, 13:00:02 UTC
Also? You know "Witte Jassen" means "White Coats" in Dutch, right? :-)

Reply


Thanks for sharing this beah October 28 2010, 13:44:18 UTC
I was just discussing this with a friend. She recently had a baby, and has to physically bolster one breast when breastfeeding. She attributes this to damage done by frequent mammograms on that side, all of which have turned up nothing.

I'd love to know more about the other popular screenersdiagnostics/treatments you allude to that also turn out not to work. Will you say more on them in future posts?

Reply


psongster October 28 2010, 14:37:17 UTC
Thank you for posting this. I have refused to have mammograms for exactly these sorts of reasons, and it took me a while to find a primary care doctor who was willing to work with me anyway and accept the smear on her record because of lower compliance rates. I really appreciate your helping spread the word on the science and sharing your perspective on the politics.

Reply


naiad October 28 2010, 16:20:54 UTC
Damn, my annual mammogram is in two hours. . .

Reply


OK I love and want to quote this drwex October 28 2010, 16:35:04 UTC
but...
reducing dust mites doesn't control asthma

Buh? Iz news to me.

(That is, I'm aware that taking one step doesn't control asthma - there's a whole regime that we put our kid through - but it's considered essential not to provoke allergies when trying to get asthma under control and dust mites are a major allergen, no?)

Reply


Leave a comment

Up