So you want to mess with my right to bare boobs under the watchful eye of the mammo meter, huh? You call yourself a Task Force? I'll show you force, boys. You can have my mammogram when you take it from my cold, dead breasts.
We've all heard the news from the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force--a panel of 16 medical experts (half of them women) appointed to advise the Department of Health and Human Services on the effectiveness of various screening techniques. They're saying that women in their 40s should not routinely have mammograms and that women over 50 should have mammograms every two years instead of annually. Why? They say that every-other-year screenings could provide 80 percent of the benefits of annual screening while cutting the risks almost in half. And just what are the benefits? Mainly not dying from breast cancer. The risks? The possibility false positives and unnecessary biopsies.
Okay, ladies, let's think about this. This panel is supposed to tell us whether mammograms do more good than harm for women of various ages. But what good are they talking about and what harm? They're talking about statistics. They say that ff screening begins at age 40 and
is performed every other year, mortality reduces by a median 19.5% compared with beginning screening at age 50, but false-positives, unnecessary biopsies and anxiety increase.Mortality. That means if you're in the 19.5%, you're dead. Right? Or am I missing something?
Anxiety. Hmm. Does the picture on the right scare you? Me neither. I've given birth three times and had a kidney removed. I can smile all the way through the mammogram. I've had two breast biopsies--both turned out to be calcifications. Were they unnecessary? Daddy's two sisters died from breast cancer. Just because my results were negative (hooray!) doesn't mean the tests were unnecessary. "Chances are, it' a calcification," the doctor said. "But we can't know for sure without a biopsy." Not having the biopsy is going to give me some anxiety. So I say, let's find out for sure, Doc.
I'm not convinced by statistics. I'm interested in people. I have to check several of the risk boxes when I fill out the form on mammogram day, but I know that most people who get breast cancer--upwards of 80% (some say 75, some say 90)--are not in any of the high risk categories. But I'm wondering what other women know. We need to talk, ladies. Do you have a story to tell? Because that's how women get to be so smart. They talk to each other.
Here's my story. I'
m the kind of kid who goes by the rules, so I've always had the annual physical, complete with mammogram starting at 40. When my baby sister reached her 40th birthday, she hemmed and hawed around. "Get thee into the vise," said I. And she did. She had a stage 2 tumor. Malignant. She was a single mom, and her little girl was 5 years old. My sister is a survivor. Now, remember, they used to say that breast cancer on your mother's side was a risk factor, but not your father's side. They used to say a lot of things. In ten years, the new recommendations will fall under the category of what they used to say.So what do you think of the new report? What have you heard? What's your experience? I'll send
out an autographed copy of In Care of Sam Beaudry to one of today's commenters.P.S. Sam's brother's book, ONE COWBOY, ONE CHRISTMAS, has been spotted at B&N, which is a surprise to me. It's a December book. Merry Thanksgiving!
