Answered Conundrum Next Conundrum
Is it time to re-evaluate cancer screening tests?
The American Cancer Society has come forward with information that the benefits of screening for cancer have been overstated, especially for breast and prostrate cancers. Screening is not improving early detection and successful treatment of deadly cancers, but it is increasing detection and unnecessary treatment of smaller and insignificant conditions. Should this information change how you think about cancer screening?
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33408887/ns/health-the_new_york_times/
Interesting Question?
Yes (0)
No (0)
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33408887/ns/health-the_new_york_times/
- In Health and Fitness |
- |
- Report |
-
Share
RSS
Best Answer Chosen by Asker
Marked as Best!
October 22, 2009 10:54 PM
Helpful Answer?
(0)
(0)
Permalink |
Report
I think there is a danger here in oversimplifying the results of the cited study.
quote -
“I am concerned that the complex view of a changing landscape will be distilled by the public into yet another ‘screening does not work’ headline,” Dr. Begg said. “The fact that population screening is no panacea does not mean that it is useless,” he added. ~~ Dr. Colin Begg, biostatistician at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York
- endquote
I think that the screening processes are still valid and needed. Early detection will never be a mistake. But what I think may need significant improvement is a better way to tell how aggressive a cancer might be. It seems to be a completely new concept, and one which is disputed within the medical community, that some cancers might be "benign" and even disappear on their own.
Despite what the article seems to assert, the problem does not appear to be over-diagnosis, but rather over-treatment. Knowing that a potential problem exists is still very valuable. But in some cases, treatment too early might be more dangerous than potential cancer.
quote -
“I am concerned that the complex view of a changing landscape will be distilled by the public into yet another ‘screening does not work’ headline,” Dr. Begg said. “The fact that population screening is no panacea does not mean that it is useless,” he added. ~~ Dr. Colin Begg, biostatistician at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York
- endquote
I think that the screening processes are still valid and needed. Early detection will never be a mistake. But what I think may need significant improvement is a better way to tell how aggressive a cancer might be. It seems to be a completely new concept, and one which is disputed within the medical community, that some cancers might be "benign" and even disappear on their own.
Despite what the article seems to assert, the problem does not appear to be over-diagnosis, but rather over-treatment. Knowing that a potential problem exists is still very valuable. But in some cases, treatment too early might be more dangerous than potential cancer.
| Asker's Rating: |
(0)
(0)
Permalink |
Report
Reply
keepontryi...
windowshop...
I just completed a 6-month follow-up mammogram to check for growth of a suspicious mass found the time before. While this might exemplify your article (a case of "over-diagnosis"), I am still glad to have found the mass (likely a calcification despite it's odd shape) so that it can be monitored. I was given the option to wait and check it in 6 months or to submit for a needle biopsy when it was first found. I opted to wait.