Joyce Dunn

Mammograms and Breast Cancer Screening: the Latest Boogyman



Posted: Wednesday, November 18, 2009

by Joyce Dunn

If you believe what you hear and read in the media, every woman in America is up in arms over the new recommended guidelines for having a mammogram.

For years now, the recommendation has been that women should get a yearly mammogram, beginning at age 40, along with doing monthly breast self exams. That has now changed to having a mammogram every two years, beginning at age 50, providing there is no family history of breast cancer. The validity of self exams is also being questioned.

We are being told that many women have written to say they were diagnosed with breast cancer in their 40's, cancer that would not have been detected were it not for the yearly mammogram.

What we don't hear are stories similar to a woman I know. She was faithful about her yearly mammograms and monthly self exams. When she noticed a small lump a few months after her last mammogram, she made an appointment with her doctor, and had a double mastectomy a short time later.

What is also not being stressed is that these are recommended guidelines, not a written-in-stone edict preventing women from getting yearly mammograms.

It has also been suggested that these new guidelines have been encouraged by the insurance industry so they can avoid paying for so many mammograms. Given the insurance industries track record, especially in paying for preventative care, this accusation is understandable. Probably not true, but understandable.

What is also not being stressed by the media is that these guidelines are based on statistics. Statistics that take into account the many false positives of mammograms that resulted in further needless tests and procedures. Once again the media is presenting a worst case scenario, rather than rationally presenting all sides.

Medicine is not an exact science. Our bodies don't operate like a piece of machinery. There are many factors that contribute to disease, many that are poorly understood, or not understood at all. What works for one person may not work for everyone.

We seem to be too willing to accept every worst case scenario as fact, and turn over our decision making to someone else. We need to start demanding more rational reporting from the media, along with doing some investigating on our own, then base our decisions on that and on our own gut level' feeling, rather than accepting any recommendation as gospel.

Joyce has been writing for her own enjoyment for many years, and only in the past few years has gained the courage to "go public" with her writing. She has had two books published, and is involved with the Fine Lines magazine as a special editor. Her writing primarily reflects her own experiences, or the life experiences she has observed in others. She has her own blog, New Post on my blog: http://jottingsfromjoyce.over-blog.com/ Then click on " view comments" in the green box to read the blog.

Her website is www.strinz.com/healing.

Joyce would like to add that she always welcomes constructive criticism comments.

This Article has been viewed 289 times. (Not updated in real-time.)
Top-level comments on this article: (2 total)
» left by Jean Horst
2 years 178 days ago.
178 fans.
Thanks Joyce, for writing such a level-headed assessment of this situation. It seems like many believe that they are being forbidden to get yearly mammograms. I am one of those women who has no family history anywhere of any kind of breast cancer. Also, due to being self-employed, my health insurance is such that I pay for my own preventive care, so having yearly mammograms is pretty expensive. Not, of course, worth risking my health, but these guidelines seem a lot more sensible for me and others like me.
» left by Joyce Dunn 2 years 178 days ago.
33 fans.
Hi Jean, Glad you liked the article. Common sense is always a good idea, isn't it? :)
» left by Dr. James Brann
2 years 178 days ago.
2 fans.
Thanks for writing a cool article.
» left by Joyce Dunn 2 years 178 days ago.
33 fans.
What a nice compliment. Thanks
We want your comments! If you can read this, you don't have javascript enabled, so you can't use this comment system. Please enable javascript.