tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2308282620289958037.post52983433935747455..comments2023-08-08T08:41:19.586-04:00Comments on The Medical Contrarian: More data on the uselessness of screeningThe Medical Contrarianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09240492315542223258noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2308282620289958037.post-18780204607322089612010-03-27T10:29:54.093-04:002010-03-27T10:29:54.093-04:00Patients would be shocked and enlightened at how m...Patients would be shocked and enlightened at how modest the benefits of mammography are to individual patients. Their benefit is apparent when studying populations, as is true for many screening tests, but this translates into only a slight benefit to the person before us. Exaggeration and hype are commonplace in the medical world. www.MDWhistleblower.blogspot.comMichael Kirsch, M.D.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07555280388086931097noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2308282620289958037.post-90869615200349480302010-03-26T15:11:17.339-04:002010-03-26T15:11:17.339-04:00Question: Has there ever been a comparative study...Question: Has there ever been a comparative study of the mortality rates of the same histological type of breast CA diagnosed by screening mammography vs. detected clinically either by self or professional examination?CAMnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2308282620289958037.post-9305575582349579162010-03-26T12:16:58.138-04:002010-03-26T12:16:58.138-04:00Excellent article on the topic of screening mammog...Excellent article on the topic of screening mammography. I was actually impressed at the level of the information. Many of the points have been raised over the years by other critics of screening mammography, and in my opinion, valid criticisms. <br /><br />Especially disturbing is that mammography screening generates large numbers of procedures, biopsies and surgeries, with little impact on the numbers of advanced breast cancers. This point was raised <br />by Laura Esserman in her JAMA article. This new study by Karsten Juhl Jørgensen, M.D., of the University of Copenhagen in Denmark is very supportive of Dr Esserman's conclusions. <br /><br />One looming issue is the large numbers of DCIS detected by mammography as <br />small calcifications. Although DCIS is treated aggressively as an invasive cancer, it is really very indolent. DCIS has a 98% -5 year survival with no treatment, and pathologists have been thinking about changing the nomenclature by removing the word "cancer" from its name. <br /><br />For more: http://www.drdach.com/Mammogram_screening_cancer.html<br /><br />jeffrey dach mdAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com