<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: This Just In: Breast Cancer Screening Essentially Useless</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/</link>
	<description>...Read This, Drug and Health Safety News Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 14:50:51 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Bremner</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-370</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Bremner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 19:03:47 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-370</guid>
		<description>Goodness. Yes mammographies are fairly useless and noone wants to read them. Half of tumors are found in between scheduled mammograms.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Goodness. Yes mammographies are fairly useless and noone wants to read them. Half of tumors are found in between scheduled mammograms.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: By Cynthia Affinito</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-369</link>
		<dc:creator>By Cynthia Affinito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:23:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-369</guid>
		<description>I could have traced the outline of the tumor with a pen, yet the mammogram was negative. The ultrasound was &quot;suspicious&quot;,
the MRI and PET scan conclusive.  I refused a needle biopsy.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I could have traced the outline of the tumor with a pen, yet the mammogram was negative. The ultrasound was &#8220;suspicious&#8221;,<br />
the MRI and PET scan conclusive.  I refused a needle biopsy.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Bremner</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-363</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Bremner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 13:41:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-363</guid>
		<description>Why did he order an MRI? Was there a lump?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Why did he order an MRI? Was there a lump?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave Affinito</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-361</link>
		<dc:creator>Dave Affinito</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Feb 2009 12:35:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-361</guid>
		<description>Doug, my wife had a mamogram which was negative. Thank God the doc had the foresight to order an MRI, which picked up the tumor in time.  If he hadn&#039;t ordered the MRI, who knows where she&#039;d be now. BTW Horizon B/C won&#039;t pay for her MRI&#039;s anymore.  They said the mamogram is all that&#039;s necessary.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Doug, my wife had a mamogram which was negative. Thank God the doc had the foresight to order an MRI, which picked up the tumor in time.  If he hadn&#8217;t ordered the MRI, who knows where she&#8217;d be now. BTW Horizon B/C won&#8217;t pay for her MRI&#8217;s anymore.  They said the mamogram is all that&#8217;s necessary.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Bremner</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-164</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Bremner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:28:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-164</guid>
		<description>From the bmj paper: &lt;blockquote&gt;Finally, it has not been proved that screening saves lives. There is an inevitable bias in assessment of cause of death that can be particularly difficult when women have more than one cancer.2 Trials show that breast screening does not decrease total cancer mortality. The relative risk was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.10) in the two most reliable trials and 0.99 in the others, and there is no reliable evidence that screening decreases total mortality,2 although half a million women participated in the screening trials. This indicates that the benefit of screening is likely to be smaller than generally perceived. &lt;/blockquote&gt;


Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(4):CD001877.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>From the bmj paper:<br />
<blockquote>Finally, it has not been proved that screening saves lives. There is an inevitable bias in assessment of cause of death that can be particularly difficult when women have more than one cancer.2 Trials show that breast screening does not decrease total cancer mortality. The relative risk was 1.02 (95% confidence interval 0.95 to 1.10) in the two most reliable trials and 0.99 in the others, and there is no reliable evidence that screening decreases total mortality,2 although half a million women participated in the screening trials. This indicates that the benefit of screening is likely to be smaller than generally perceived. </p></blockquote>
<p>Gøtzsche PC, Nielsen M. Screening for breast cancer with mammography. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(4):CD001877.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Marilyn Mann</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-161</link>
		<dc:creator>Marilyn Mann</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 16:22:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-161</guid>
		<description>This is not an issue for me since I was already diagnosed with early stage breast cancer in 2007, unfortunately.  It will someday be an issue for my daughter, however, and I am interested in the topic anyway.  Can you cite the evidence you are relying on for your statement that breast cancer screening does not reduce mortality?  Thanks.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This is not an issue for me since I was already diagnosed with early stage breast cancer in 2007, unfortunately.  It will someday be an issue for my daughter, however, and I am interested in the topic anyway.  Can you cite the evidence you are relying on for your statement that breast cancer screening does not reduce mortality?  Thanks.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Gianna</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-155</link>
		<dc:creator>Gianna</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 04:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-155</guid>
		<description>defy a doctor&#039;s &quot;orders?&quot;

if my doctor ordered anything I&#039;d run...that is how I got so hurt...

I learned the hard way in the end that I know more than most docs about my condition...and I paid dearly getting to this place...because for many years I trusted them.

now I never assume they know best. period.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>defy a doctor&#8217;s &#8220;orders?&#8221;</p>
<p>if my doctor ordered anything I&#8217;d run&#8230;that is how I got so hurt&#8230;</p>
<p>I learned the hard way in the end that I know more than most docs about my condition&#8230;and I paid dearly getting to this place&#8230;because for many years I trusted them.</p>
<p>now I never assume they know best. period.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Doug Bremner</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-154</link>
		<dc:creator>Doug Bremner</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 03:00:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-154</guid>
		<description>you can have a conversation about it, though.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you can have a conversation about it, though.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Therapy Patient</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-153</link>
		<dc:creator>Therapy Patient</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:08:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-153</guid>
		<description>Cousin, on researching ultrasound (sonogram) of the breast, I found that ultrasound is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a screening tool for cancer because &quot;it lacks the detail (spacial resolution) of conventional mammography. It cannot detect most calcium deposits on breast tumors (calcifications).&quot; Ultrasound is used more frequently to distinguish liquid filled cysts from solid masses.  More expensive is the MRI which is approved by the FDA and is not affected by scarring of surgeries, breast implants or dense breasts which interfere with x-ray mammograms.  My gyn wants me to get a mammogram in May.  Regardless of opinions expressed on blogs or in articles, in the end it always comes down to each individual patient having to defy her doctor&#039;s orders when it comes to mammography or any of a zillion other things which are prescribed or &quot;ordered&quot;.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Cousin, on researching ultrasound (sonogram) of the breast, I found that ultrasound is not approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration as a screening tool for cancer because &#8220;it lacks the detail (spacial resolution) of conventional mammography. It cannot detect most calcium deposits on breast tumors (calcifications).&#8221; Ultrasound is used more frequently to distinguish liquid filled cysts from solid masses.  More expensive is the MRI which is approved by the FDA and is not affected by scarring of surgeries, breast implants or dense breasts which interfere with x-ray mammograms.  My gyn wants me to get a mammogram in May.  Regardless of opinions expressed on blogs or in articles, in the end it always comes down to each individual patient having to defy her doctor&#8217;s orders when it comes to mammography or any of a zillion other things which are prescribed or &#8220;ordered&#8221;.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Cousin in Eastern Washington</title>
		<link>http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/index.php/2009/02/09/this-just-in-breast-cancer-screening-essentially-useless/comment-page-1/#comment-151</link>
		<dc:creator>Cousin in Eastern Washington</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:29:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.beforeyoutakethatpill.com/?p=272#comment-151</guid>
		<description>Hi Doug, you are talking about one of my favorite toys! I would like to know more about the sonogram deal. If it is as equal to the x-ray, why aren&#039;t they using this more? Anna just had one last week, and I am quite positive she would like to be more informed on this also. Her Gyn. sends her in every year, and if there is a less evasive test with equal results she should be able to make that decision right? My cousin had a double mastectomy 10 years ago, 6 months after her Mom died of cancer. She thinks she did the right thing as her Aunt died from it. She is now a nurse because of her life changing event. She has also dealt with tumors on her spine, shes a tough gal! I am quite sure she will want to know more about this. It makes sense!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi Doug, you are talking about one of my favorite toys! I would like to know more about the sonogram deal. If it is as equal to the x-ray, why aren&#8217;t they using this more? Anna just had one last week, and I am quite positive she would like to be more informed on this also. Her Gyn. sends her in every year, and if there is a less evasive test with equal results she should be able to make that decision right? My cousin had a double mastectomy 10 years ago, 6 months after her Mom died of cancer. She thinks she did the right thing as her Aunt died from it. She is now a nurse because of her life changing event. She has also dealt with tumors on her spine, shes a tough gal! I am quite sure she will want to know more about this. It makes sense!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

