Comments on: Clinical practice guidelines vs. routine screening mammograms https://ethicalnag.org/2011/04/13/clinical-practice-guidelines/ Marketing Ethics for the Easily Swayed Fri, 26 Aug 2016 00:40:50 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: Anon https://ethicalnag.org/2011/04/13/clinical-practice-guidelines/comment-page-1/#comment-16414 Tue, 16 Aug 2011 17:21:02 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=5421#comment-16414 My breast cancer was identified thanks to routine screening mammography. I do not believe studies that don’t support this type of life-saving screening test.

Like

]]>
By: Anneliese https://ethicalnag.org/2011/04/13/clinical-practice-guidelines/comment-page-1/#comment-11723 Sat, 16 Apr 2011 18:02:23 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=5421#comment-11723 This is a brave yet ultimately futile argument. On one hand you have science and evidence. On the other hand, you have the Big Money behind financial stakeholders who are spinning this as a bleak picture of necessary screening being WITHHELD from the poor patient. I would compare this dilemma to routine yet unnecessary PSA screening for men’s prostate cancer, a topic you have also covered here.

Like

]]>
By: Janessa https://ethicalnag.org/2011/04/13/clinical-practice-guidelines/comment-page-1/#comment-11705 Fri, 15 Apr 2011 23:01:15 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=5421#comment-11705 “….The other 1,899 women will receive no benefit from mammography, though they will field 1,330 call-backs for reassessment and 665 breast biopsies, and eight of them will be diagnosed with cancers whose prognosis will not be altered by detection via mammogram…”

But women buy into this routine screening policy despite such limited scientific evidence to support its use. Kathi, that information about the wholesale selling of digital mammography is also distressing.

Consumers need to look at the FACTS, not get sucked into the emotional siren song of high tech tools that are basically not warranted in this age group except for very clear indications.

Like

]]>
By: Carolyn Thomas https://ethicalnag.org/2011/04/13/clinical-practice-guidelines/comment-page-1/#comment-11669 Wed, 13 Apr 2011 15:14:21 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=5421#comment-11669 Thanks for that link, Kathi. Shocking stuff: “The rise of digital mammography is a tale of intense industry marketing, direct-to-consumer advertising, political lobbying, and strategic campaign donations to politicians … creating the financial incentive for clinics and hospitals to replace film machines with digital ones.”

Like

]]>
By: Kathi https://ethicalnag.org/2011/04/13/clinical-practice-guidelines/comment-page-1/#comment-11668 Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:46:09 +0000 http://ethicalnag.org/?p=5421#comment-11668 This is such a thorny subject. I always thought when I read the USPSTF’s mamm recommendations that they struggled mightily with the language, but still didn’t quite get it right.

For all women, especially younger women, including those who are under 40, it still comes down to each individual woman having a thorough conversation with her doctor and making the most sensible decisions.

Then there is the fact that mammography isn’t the best screening device for all breasts or breast tumors. Or even whether digital mammography has been a significant improvement over film mammography. Did you see this article? It raises similar issues about how the rush to replace film mammography units with digital ones took place.

Like

]]>