Comment: Guidance for breast cancer screening fails from women in Canada



[ad_1]

Changes to breast cancer screening guidelines have been major news since the introduction of the Canadian Visiting Group on Preventive Health Care in December.

It is now proposed that women aged 50 to 74 have a look at mammography every two or three years, and it is suggested that women 40 to 49 are not surveyed and not investigation of the chest, no matter how much density they have on the old woman.

But patients must be obliged to go through the proposals.

The new renewal of breast cancer is expected to continue until more than 400 Canadians are losing their lives every year. Incredibly these new guides were given without an expert in being involved in breast judging or healing. Instead, the panel included GPs, nurses, chiropody, occupational therapist and nephrologist (renal specialist).

Why? The action group said an expert in breast cancer research would be nesting with the guide development. Explain the enterprise group that radiologists give life by diagnosing breast cancer, that they will bring financial benefit over patient benefits.

As a doctor who has lost one of breast cancer, and as a mother, friend and co-worker of many women affected by breast cancer, I am finding out about this in particular – and much of my heart is affected. workers in Canada agree.

The ignorance workshop demonstrated the wide range of evidence that supports breast cancer screening.

A recent study carried out from Sweden which was published in the Cancer magazine showed that a screening mammogram resulted in 60% fewer deaths from breast cancer over a 20 year period. Other research published just last year in Cancer shows that mammography and advances in medicine nearly 615,000 showed deaths from breast cancer on 30 years alone.

A Canadian survey of over two million women exhibited for breast cancer over 20 years showed that women aged 50 to 70 had a 40% reduction in breast cancer, and that women aged 40 to 49 were on a lower level. of breast cancer when they were involved in mammography screening.

The Taskforce published its 2018 guidance to take account of these important investigations. Instead it was focusing on the 30-year National Breast Screening Study delivered in 2002 by the World Health Organization in response to poor mammography and poor school design. The panel would have avoided this error from a breast cancer specialist.

The taskforce aimed to harm the screening process. Members noted an estimate of 41 per cent of breast cancer in Scotland. A cognitive expert in screening does not discover that too many births have been more than 10 per cent, a number confirmed by the Swedish screening tests.

The 41 per cent are based on the old-fashioned survey of Canada which was badly damaged. This panel would have the ability to explain this panel of breast cancer experts.

The agency was also aiming for the serious threats of mammography. The number of false complaints was thought to be 30 per cent. Again again.

Canada's online database numbers are available online free of charge for remembering each region and country to survey a mammogram. Figures are consistent – less than 10 per cent. A breast cancer specialist would have been able to identify an error on this calculation.

And the enterprise group didn't think about one of the biggest injuries that involved in screening – the harm that could have been caused by serious injuries or viruses. Several studies show that women who are not scratched or found at an early stage have a higher rate of breast cancer.

Women with breast cancer have the greatest chance of being found late by breast cancer, often after spreading to lymph places, as flu can be injured. The task group did not add to this evidence and did not consider adding to the additional emergency. The panel would have been aware of this disease by a breast cancer expert.

Over 44,000 Canadians have signed a petition asking for these defective directions to be addressed.

So what needs to happen now?

The minister should refuse to give federal health a refusal to refuse all staff instructions. A new working group should be convened which includes experts in breast cancer mammography. And a Canadian action agency should update the breast cancer examination indicators to include evidence from recent trials and some real Canadian data on mammography screening.

To make it less than this it would fail Canadian women and their families.

Dr Jean Seely is president of the Ottawa Hospital and a professor of geography at Ottawa University. She is the president of the Canadian Canadian Canadian Association.

© Copyright

[ad_2]
Source link