I don't agree with this list. Women should consider the evidence before agreeing to screening tests, they carry risk. Only we can decide whether the benefits exceed the risks. All screening is optional, we can say NO.
I declined clinical breast exams, they're not recommended anymore, they are of no proven benefit, but cause excess biopsies.
I declined pap testing decades ago, the risk were too high for me, I was content to accept my near zero risk of cervix cancer rather than the 77% lifetime risk of referral for colposcopy/biopsy with our program.
For those who wish to test, the new Dutch program follows the evidence, putting women first, it will save more lives from this rare cancer, but also, protects the vast majority of women from a lifetime of unnecessary pap testing ad potentially harmful over-treatment.
They'll offer women 5 hrHPV primary tests at ages 30,35,40,50 and 60, or women can self- test for HPV, and only the roughly 5% of women who are HPV+ will be offered a 5 yearly pap test. (until she clears the virus)
HPV testing should always stand alone as the primary test, HPV- women cannot bnefit from pap testing. Those women who are HPV- and no longer sexually active or confidently monogamous might choose to stop all further testing.
Most countries don't follow the evidence and don't respect informed consent resulting in widespread harm to healthy women.
The routine pelvic exam is not recommended, it's of poor clinical value and can lead to some harmful places, even unnecessary surgery. It is not a screening test for ovarian cancer. I've never had one and never will...the American obsession with this exam is IMO, more about medical profits than women's healthcare.
It's a good idea to monitor blood pressure, especially from mid-life on...no argument there.
Mammograms are highly controversial, I've declined them. The Nordic Cochrane Institute, an independent not-for-profit medical research group, have produced an excellent summary of the evidence, it's at their website. The evidence is not good, about 50% of screen detected breast cancers are over-diagnosed, the fall in the death rate is mostly about better treatments, not screening, screening leads to more mastectomies, (not fewer, as claimed) and any benefit of screening is wiped away by those who die from heart attacks and lung cancer after treatments, so the risks exceed the benefit.
Read the summary and make your own informed decision.
Skin checks, my doctor said they were unnecessary for me, I have few moles, sunspots etc. she suggested I see her if anything changes.
So it's always important to assess your risk profile.
We also, have to be careful with supplements, so many women take extra calcium when their levels are normal, that can cause health problems.
Basically, IMO, most screening over-promises and under-delivers, the enormous profits generated by screening are, in my opinion, often behind recommendations. Non-evidence based screening and excess is not in our interests. Dr Gilbert Welch ("Over-diagnosed") and Dr Margaret McCartney ("Patient Paradox") have both written excellent books on cancer screening.
HPV Today, Edition 24, sets out the new Dutch Cervical Screening Program
Comment Reply
I don't agree with this list. Women should consider the evidence before agreeing to screening tests, they carry risk. Only we can decide whether the benefits exceed the risks. All screening is optional, we can say NO.
I declined clinical breast exams, they're not recommended anymore, they are of no proven benefit, but cause excess biopsies.
I declined pap testing decades ago, the risk were too high for me, I was content to accept my near zero risk of cervix cancer rather than the 77% lifetime risk of referral for colposcopy/biopsy with our program.
For those who wish to test, the new Dutch program follows the evidence, putting women first, it will save more lives from this rare cancer, but also, protects the vast majority of women from a lifetime of unnecessary pap testing ad potentially harmful over-treatment.
They'll offer women 5 hrHPV primary tests at ages 30,35,40,50 and 60, or women can self- test for HPV, and only the roughly 5% of women who are HPV+ will be offered a 5 yearly pap test. (until she clears the virus)
HPV testing should always stand alone as the primary test, HPV- women cannot bnefit from pap testing. Those women who are HPV- and no longer sexually active or confidently monogamous might choose to stop all further testing.
Most countries don't follow the evidence and don't respect informed consent resulting in widespread harm to healthy women.
The routine pelvic exam is not recommended, it's of poor clinical value and can lead to some harmful places, even unnecessary surgery. It is not a screening test for ovarian cancer. I've never had one and never will...the American obsession with this exam is IMO, more about medical profits than women's healthcare.
It's a good idea to monitor blood pressure, especially from mid-life on...no argument there.
Mammograms are highly controversial, I've declined them. The Nordic Cochrane Institute, an independent not-for-profit medical research group, have produced an excellent summary of the evidence, it's at their website. The evidence is not good, about 50% of screen detected breast cancers are over-diagnosed, the fall in the death rate is mostly about better treatments, not screening, screening leads to more mastectomies, (not fewer, as claimed) and any benefit of screening is wiped away by those who die from heart attacks and lung cancer after treatments, so the risks exceed the benefit.
Read the summary and make your own informed decision.
Skin checks, my doctor said they were unnecessary for me, I have few moles, sunspots etc. she suggested I see her if anything changes.
So it's always important to assess your risk profile.
We also, have to be careful with supplements, so many women take extra calcium when their levels are normal, that can cause health problems.
October 3, 2013 - 4:20pmBasically, IMO, most screening over-promises and under-delivers, the enormous profits generated by screening are, in my opinion, often behind recommendations. Non-evidence based screening and excess is not in our interests. Dr Gilbert Welch ("Over-diagnosed") and Dr Margaret McCartney ("Patient Paradox") have both written excellent books on cancer screening.
HPV Today, Edition 24, sets out the new Dutch Cervical Screening Program
This Comment
Reply