Comments on: Breast cancer prevention and evidence

By: Gaile M

Gaile M — Tue, 02 Aug 2011 01:44:00 +0000

Breast Thermography is not a replacement for mammography, any more than MRI or Ultrasound are. It is meant to be used in conjunction with mammography.

By: tamgoddess

tamgoddess — Sun, 31 Jul 2011 01:37:00 +0000

Breast thermography is vasty better at detecting cancers, years before a mammogram can find them, but we don’t hear about it because it costs more. And the fact that they are completely risk free means young women can get them and detect cancers that might otherwise have gone undetected for years. Worth the cost, if you can afford it.

By: Itsumishi

Itsumishi — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 08:15:00 +0000

This is the information that is most pertinent to this debate.

Anecdotal evidence is fine for adding some emotional weight to a debate, but despite the comment above, the plural of anecdote is never fact.

I would question the NBCCs stance on the issue however, certainly in Australia routine mammograms are encouraged.

By: fanciulla

fanciulla — Sat, 30 Jul 2011 05:00:00 +0000

Add me to the list — my life was saved by a routine mammogram.

And the plural of anecdote is, in fact, data:
http://listserv.linguistlist.org/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0407a&L=ads-l&P=8874

By: Kim Sicklick Tankersley

Kim Sicklick Tankersley — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:09:00 +0000

Everyone has anecdotal evidence about someone or something that defies NBCC’s position statements, and that is exactly what it is–ANECDOTAL, case by case. Scientific evidence is the only reliable evidence, people.

By: Parliament & Wake

Parliament & Wake — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 23:08:00 +0000

While we’re sure that the NBCC is an incredibly great organization – its position is at odds with (to name but a few) the American Cancer Society, the Mayo Clinic, and the American College of Gynecologists. In part this is because many of the analyses described in the pdf link have been robustly criticized (http://www.ajronline.org/cgi/content/abstract/196/2/W112) but in part because mortality may not be the absolute best measure here. Breast cancer treatment has got much better in the past twenty years and even more advanced cancers may now be survivable. However, the data is clear that getting to cancers later means a greater need for far more invasive/disfiguring surgery (http://rsna2010.rsna.org/program/event_display.cfm?em_id=9012348). Perhaps annual screening mammograms for women in their 40′s doesn’t save lives (but it probably does), but it certainly results in fewer mastectomies.

By: Bonnie

Bonnie — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 20:07:00 +0000

My mom’s first mammogram at 40 saved her life. They found calcium deposits which can hide small tumors. During the biopsy they did find a small tumor, removed it, and she had radiation treatments. Ten years later my mother found a second lump in her breast during a self-exam. Again, it saved her life, and she’s still here 17 years later. Early detection is key, so in this case I have to strenuously disagree with this post.

By: Jenonymous

Jenonymous — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:56:00 +0000

What Josh said. Don’t let scaremongers and greedy insurance companies try to make women get LESS diagnostic screening. Early detection for ANY cancer is 100% key to survivability across ALL CANCER TYPES.

By: Joshua Howe

Joshua Howe — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 17:16:00 +0000

Routine mammogram just saved my sister in-law’s life. B/c she has them annually and caught it early, she should be fine. “the harms and public health costs of screening mammography may outweigh the modest benefits of the intervention.” – not in my opinion.

By: mellowknees

mellowknees — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 16:33:00 +0000

The thing that makes me less likely to donate is the Susan G. Komen foundation’s nasty habit of suing the crap out of any little fund raiser that uses the words “For the Cure” in their marketing.

By: Charles Boulakia

Charles Boulakia — Fri, 29 Jul 2011 16:25:00 +0000

…and in Harvard Business Review this month, apparently the use of the colour pink in campaigns makes women less likely to donate.