What Doctors Should be Telling You about Breast Cancer Screening

Some doctors are choosing to ignore the latest research findings on breast cancer screening.  Despite evidence that demonstrates how breast cancer screening may be doing more harm than good, women are still faced with ‘pink’ messaging and propaganda that promotes screening and ignores or downplays the harms.

When new medical research was published in the past, only physicians and academics had easy access to the findings.  The public wouldn’t hear about the new research until much later, if at all.  The Internet has changed that, and these days many women may be more aware of the latest research than their doctors appear to be.  When a new research study is published we can find ways to access the information, and sometimes the new research findings are splashed all over mainstream media.

For example, CTV news reported a study in 2012 which found that mammograms lead to overdiagnosis but have little impact on deaths.  More recently, a New York Times article presented a vast Canadian study which found that breast cancer death rates were the same in women who had undergone mammography and those who had not.

The media’s offerings of research findings and the ease of access to information via the Internet makes it all the more baffling when some doctors continue to practice without acknowledging the latest research evidence.

Fortunately, more women are doing their own research and are making their own informed decisions about screening.  However, because there is a great deal of propaganda and/or misinformation on the Internet, it can often be difficult to know what information is credible, and what information is not.

What follows is a compilation of the most well-researched information regarding breast cancer screening (Special thank you to Elizabeth of Australia and other contributors to this blog for providing the references, inspiration, and information for this post):

  • Mammography leaflet written by Peter Gotzsche, et al.   The leaflet presents information about both the potential benefits and harms of screening, based on the best scientific evidence available (i.e. randomized trials of breast cancer screening).    Excerpt from the leaflet:  Screening produces patients with breast cancer from among healthy women who would never have developed symptoms of breast cancer.  Treatment of these healthy women increases their risk of dying, e.g. from heart disease and cancer.  It therefore no longer seems beneficial to attend for breast cancer screening. http://www.cochrane.dk/screening/mammography-leaflet.pdf   Peter Gotzsche is a professor, chief physician, and director of the Nordic Cochrane Center, Rigshospitalet, Copenhagen, Denmark. 
  • The Nordic Cochrane Center summary on breast cancer screening: http://www.cochrane.dk/screening/index-en.htm

A speech by Peter Gotzsche titled “Time to Stop Mammography Screening” presented at the Evidence Live conference in Oxford in 2013:

  • Article in the New England Journal of Medicine titled Effect of Three Decades of Screening Mammography on Breast Cancer Incidence by Archie Bleyer, M.D., and H. Gilbert Welch, M.D., M.P.H.: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa1206809
  • Research article in BMJ titled Twenty five year follow-up for breast cancer incidence and mortality of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study: randomised screening trial: http://www.bmj.com/content/348/bmj.g366

Video by Professor Michael Baum titled Breast Screening: Some inconvenient truths

To conclude, a trailer from the film titled The Promise: truth about the breast screening program

About forwomenseyesonly

Hi. My name is Sue and I am interested in promoting holistic and respectful health care.
Gallery | This entry was posted in breast cancer, breast cancer screening, health, mammography and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

245 Responses to What Doctors Should be Telling You about Breast Cancer Screening

  1. adawells says:

    https://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-health/9654568/Screening-for-breast-cancer-caused-me-a-year-of-hell.html

    I haven’t seen this one before. No evidence at all that women under 50 have their lives saved by mammograms but the NHS is steamrolling it’s way ahead with this extension project to screen women at 47 in some parts of the UK. This woman seems to have ended up another martyr to our glorious screening programmes.

  2. Elizabeth (Aust) says:

    “I asked my surgeon at the London hospital what he thought. He answered that in my case we could not go back in time but that screening helped save lives”.
    What do they actually count as a life saved? They throw around large numbers but given lobular carcinoma and DCIS usually go nowhere, can we include these discoveries and “treatments” as a life saved? Sounds a bit too convenient to me…

    We know other breast cancers may not progress either and we know the most aggressive cancers will take lives regardless of screening.
    So how can we reasonably say screening saves 3500 or 8000 lives per annum…

    It’s helpful to throw around large numbers but I don’t buy it…we know most of the decline in breast cancer mortality is down to better treatments, not screening.
    The initial surge in breast cancer diagnosis is a feature of screening, the same applies to thyroid, prostate and some other cancers. The Japanese tried thyroid cancer screening but it was soon apparent that the huge increase in the diagnosis and treatment of thyroid cancer was more to do with screening, than actual cancer that would take a life. (or threaten to)

    I assume this woman would have gone down as a life saved if she’d had part of her breast removed and perhaps, she’s also counted after the radiotherapy…after all, lobular carcinoma “sounds” like cancer. It’s part of the reason they’re thinking of changing the names of these conditions, neither is cancer and is unlikely to ever be cancerous – you could argue many cells in our body are pre-cancerous, especially after a certain age. Some women hear the word carcinoma and would bolt for the operating theatre…cancer!
    The specialist believes screening saves lives, but he’s not having a breast removed – the implications of screening are so severe it can only be the woman who makes the decision, to screen or not. It amazes me that despite the uncertainty and potential for serious harm or even death, they still almost flippantly recommend screening like it’s a no-brainer.
    So to extend screening, against the evidence, to include younger (under 50) and older women (over 70)…well, I fear that will simply worry and harm more women….that’s certainly what the evidence tells us.

  3. adawells says:

    Margaret McCartney has been on the case for years about this:
    https://www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g5105

    Nobody seems to have approved it but it’s all “going ahead” anyway. By now it’s probably been rolled out across the UK – I’ve not been able to find out for sure.
    This article from the Telegraph just shows what the problems are: normally this lady would not have got her first mammo summons until about age 52, 5 years after this “trial” one at age 47. That’s another 5 years of not living a life of hell in and out of hospital under the shadow of a cancer diagnosis, and her daughters would have been able to finish their schooling without the worry of losing their mum. But what are these trifles to the screening evangelists who have convinced themselves they are saving us from ourselves?

  4. Elizabeth (Aust) says:

    I had lunch with a friend yesterday, she’s been sick with worry to the point of vomiting after a mammogram call-back – she’s been referred to a larger centre, they’ll do another mammogram or two, an ultrasound and, if necessary, biopsies.
    Thankfully, it’s not a long wait but it ruined the Easter break for her, she chose to send her family down to their weekender, she stayed here in Melbourne.
    She knows I don’t have CBEs or mammograms, she respects my decision but she’d be afraid to say no to screening, if she got breast cancer she’d always wonder if the mammogram would have picked it up earlier or saved her life. I don’t judge women who opt for screening, we’re all different, but even when the evidence against mammograms make sense to some women, they still choose to have screening – it sounds to be like the motivation is a fear of breast cancer and wanting to do everything to prevent that happening or at least “catching it early”.
    My friend accepts the NCI report, but while breast screening is recommended, while her GP recommends it, she’ll keep having breast screening.
    The insidious thing is, even if it’s DCIS or a cancer unlikely to take your life, doctors will usually say, “better to be safe than sorry” or “we don’t know what will progress so have to treat everyone”…

    Some women do find screening is far from a no brainer, when they’re presented with treatments for DCIS, do some research and find it’s not really cancer at all. I read an account recently by an American women who was facing a mastectomy for DCIS, she did some reading and decided to stop the surgery and get a second and third opinion.
    Of course, many doctors will side with caution, especially American doctors worried about legal liability. At the very least though, they should opt for conservative measures or watchful waiting rather than rush the woman into surgery.
    I felt for her, she’s clearly terrified, can only hope she gets the all clear next week.
    Funny thing is…she asked me if I was afraid that I might have cancer and not know it…I told her many of us have cancer after age 50, I only wanted to know about life threatening cancers.
    We now know there are tick-tick going-nowhere cancers and life threatening ones, screening exposes us to the risk of treating the tick-tick cancers, and these treatments are far from benign.
    Also, the life-threatening cancers tend to take our lives, with or without screening – it’s Dr Welch’s analogy, containing the turtles (DCIS etc.) and the birds.(life threatening cancers)

    Q: Are you more afraid of breast cancer because you don’t have screening?
    I’d be afraid having mammograms, knowing what I know…

    If I noticed a lump or a change, I wouldn’t let the GP refer me for a mammogram either, it amazes me that’s so often the next step – I wouldn’t be happy to crush a breast lump – an ultrasound is a better first step.
    With older women now having mammograms, those aged 71-74, I think we’ll see a lot more women siting waiting for their work ups – worried sick too.

  5. Elizabeth (Aust) says:

    https://www.smh.com.au/national/samantha-armytage-s-advice-on-mammograms-was-misguided-20180223-p4z1h9.html

    Great that Alexandra Barrett addressed the advice Samantha Armytage gave to viewers, to perhaps, start having mammograms at age 40. This has happened before, female hosts of morning television having an on-air mammogram – then the well meaning but misguided/inappropriate advice. Armytage ended up having a false positive…shame she didn’t spend some time looking at the research. I wish they’d drop this stunt, but I’m sure Breast Screen loves the publicity.

  6. katrehman says:

    UK ladies. BBC news. Thousands of women not “invited ” for their final breast screening due to computer glitch. It’s “horrifying in a programme designed to keep women safe…”

    • Kate (UK) says:

      Yep. Let’s not mention the women who have their health ruined and their lives cut short due to overtreatment, eh?

    • adawells says:

      How strange that this is all happening after the Irish cervical screening programme went into meltdown last week over sudden discoveries that the test isn’t accurate. Well I never!

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/amp/world-europe-43961552?__twitter_impression=true

      The director resigned and there are calls for further resignations. I saw one person say that if the government is going to be sued for every false negative, they will have to shut the screening programme down. Just the situation the UK was in during the 1990’s. No, they’ll go down the same road the UK did – say some poor cytopathologist made a mistake and has now been sacked. Cough up some damages like a couple of million and the programme will run as normal, completely blameless of any errors.

  7. adawells says:

    It’s all over the news. It’s a story cooked up. Any woman aged 68 would be having the last one anyway, and it clearly states in the leaflet that you can ask for one after this time. Such a dreadful load of hype…

  8. adawells says:

    It’s all kicking off here in the UK over the breast screening scandal. For those not in the UK and if you’ve not heard the story so far: a trial called AgeX to extend the screening programme from age 70 to 73 was started in 2009. It seems 400,000 were removed from our screening prog’s last and final letter as it was not their last screen but never got a letter at all, so didn’t get a last screen. Some of these women in their 70s are now saying it may be shortening the lives, and the news is reporting that maybe 200 may have already died as a result of missing that last screen…
    All the women in the trial are being sent a catch up letter but a group of doctors have written a public letter to get this stopped.

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44016206

  9. CHASUK says:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-44238496
    Tens of thousands more women in England may have missed out on breast screening invitations dating back further than previously thought – dating back to 2005 not 2009 as originally quoted.
    Guess that could mean many were saved from harm and treatment?

    • adawells says:

      https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/may/03/jeremy-hunts-rhetoric-over-breast-cancer-screening-looks-overheated

      Chas there seems to be a war on between the statisticians about breast screening in the UK at the moment. The above article quotes Richard Peto denying there was a problem at all. They are all arguing with one another. Sasieni has been paid by Jo’s Tosh to do research for them which enables them to come up with some of their “evidence-based” sensational stats (often taken completely out of context). Peto wrote the famous article from 2004 with the title about how the NHS cervical screening programme has saved Britain from a cervical cancer epidemic. It clearly states about halfway in that it is all pure conjecture, but it was the “research” which enabled the screening programme to keep operating even if flouting the Data Protection Act laws.
      Why are academics who were previously feeding the sensationalist media with how our programmes were world class, now saying they are rubbish? I don’t know if they are cooking up an excuse to launch an enquiry which may ultimately shut down the breast screening programme, or completely redesign it, targeting only specific groups? It’s entertaining watching their sacred cows fall on their knees, but I’m baffled all the same.

    • adawells says:

      https://amp.irishexaminer.com/ireland/futureof-breast-screening-at-risk-over-payouts-471062.html?__twitter_impression=true
      Where the UK breast screening programme is heading?
      Seen loads of ads from solicitors and lawyers offering compensation claims.

      • Elizabeth (Aust) says:

        Hope lots take legal action, these programs have been operating in a very suspect way from the start, women have been treated disgracefully, yet these programs get away with lying and misleading women, huge numbers harmed in the process.
        It was all avoidable – I hope there is some justice for women – heads should roll if there is any fairness in this world. You should not be able to behave in such an unethical way – I’d say some of the conduct was potentially illegal – arguably amounting to assault – it should not be okay because it was called women’s cancer screening. Coercion is arguably assault, so is excessive pressure to screen or misleading women to screen, releasing manipulated “evidence” – the whole rotten business.

  10. adawells says:

    https://www.bmj.com/content/350/bmj.h139/rr-0

    It will be very interesting to see how this all pans out. What has happened so far in the UK:
    By the end of this month, letters will have gone out to all those women (in their 70’s) who have been “affected”. If you don’t receive a letter you are not one of those who missed an invitation to our marvellous screening programme. The letter supposedly includes a warning that mammography at this age can be more harmful than a help. (Flies in the face of why they are extending the programme to 73 year olds doesn’t it?). I’ve seen some women say they won’t be taking up the offer, and others saying they’ve been offered an appointment next October at the earliest, but that assumes they get a full uptake of routine mammography in the meantime. Breast Cancer Now, right wing press and politicians are using it to engage in NHS bashing, but what we don’t hear from are the women themselves. My theory is only a small fraction will take up the offer. Big mystery why the issue was ever brought up at all. Publicise extension trial as a failure? Solicitors and lawyers touting for business from those who think they’ve got cancer as a result. Is it all a trigger to get many to take legal action and bankrupt the programme? But to do this, lawyers would need to prove mammography works. Not sure if it’s not a way to bankrupt programme through claims to shut it down? Very mysterious, and coinciding with the failures on cervical screening recalls in Ireland too, which could bankrupt programme….

  11. ChasUK says:

    Obtained via subscribing for screening updates from Gov.uk/PHE Screening. PHE Screening blogs provide up to date news from all NHS screening programmes. You can register to receive updates direct to your inbox, so there’s no need to keep checking for new blogs https://phescreening.blog.gov.uk/2018/08/15/kpi-data-published-for-end-of-the-2017-to-2018-screening-year/
    https://www.england.nhs.uk/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/service-spec-24.pdf
    This is a lengthy read but none the less I read it, quite a minefield of information and still notice the focus of increasing uptake!

  12. katrehman says:

    After the furore about the English breast screening scandal where the women weren’t “invited” to their final screen now seems problems has also hit the Scottish programme. …more lives “put at risk”

  13. katrehman says:

    According to the Express paper 1761 women were missed off the list for their final screening

  14. MOO says:

    So why not ask if people want to volunteer to take the BRCA genes test and see if they have a variant that MAY disposition them to breast cancer or other cancers factoring in other risk factors?????? Instead of having these expensive and damaging mammogram screening programmes. For EVERYONE????? Has anyone ever thought of that? Haven’t they collected enough data on breast cancer cases without consent throught the screening programmes or is that data off limits?

  15. katrehman says:

    Moo I’m sure the screeping programme thinks of nothing but that and keeps it under wraps so more misguided women “accept invitations ” to screening and keep the screener in jobs…

  16. katrehman says:

    I actually saw a comment from a cervical screening employee on the PHE website asking about possible redundancy during the UK switch to HPV testing….so they’re really concerned about women lol..

Speak your mind

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.