In ‘Stop ‘Selling’ Cancer Screening, Says Critic -Publicize Harms and Benefits’ (Medscape Medical News – Oncology) – Nick Mulcahy discusses a commentary ‘Uninformed compliance or informed choice? A needed shift in our approach to cancer screening’, by Michael Stefanek, PhD, Associate Vice President of Collaborative Research in the office of the vice president at Indiana University in Bloomington, published online 21 November in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, which concludes rather than persuading the public about screening, ‘It seems that it would be much more productive to devote such energy to educating screening candidates about the harms and benefits of screening and to engaging in shared decision making.’
But he points out that ‘both breast and prostate cancer screening suffer from a “similar ambiguity of evidence,”. However, guidelines “have typically recommended that men make informed decisions about prostate cancer screening,” whereas women have been summoned to breast cancer screening.’
Mammography wars, editorial, Fiona Godlee
and rapid responses, particularly this one from Miriam Pryke
and it’s easy to understand why the screening programme has been allowed to roll on and on despite mounting research evidence illustrating the level of harms.