Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Uh...no. My argument has absolutely nothing to do with what you wrote above. I'm not even making an argument. I'm pointing out the fallacy of your argument, which seems to have changed from the original.
Nothing has changed sorry you could not figure out by me saying all those I have known have had BC before 40 which means by pushing the testing back later it would have cost those woman their lives. Hence early testing is good. Sorry you could not understand that.
Then don't wait. Nobody will stop someone from having a mammogram.
Fact is there will always be women who die from breast cancer. There will always be women (and men) who die from any number of things we aren't routinely screening for. We need to be conscious of our health without going overboard. It's a fine line and you can draw it anywhere you want but apparently statistics don't add up for this particular issue so there is no point in advising everyone to do it.
Great you wait but to set a "standard" so to speak that woman in general should is wrong IMO.
Everyone cannot be tested for Everything at every age. We have to look at risk factors. Mammograms are not pleasant. No one should be excluded from tests because of age but at what age should it be compulsary??????? Any woman with any fear of possible problems should be able to get tested, as is the case in the UK.
Great you wait but to set a "standard" so to speak that woman in general should is wrong IMO.
They set the "standard" when they recommended age 40 and now they are adjusting it. If you trust them to set it why not to adjust it? It's not like the idea of mammograms at age 40 are part of nature.
ah yes, but don't you think an oncologist could offer advice as to how many patients they see and how many of them die because they never had early detection???
I'm sure that data was available to the researchers.
Nothing has changed sorry you could not figure out by me saying all those I have known have had BC before 40 which means by pushing the testing back later it would have cost those woman their lives. Hence early testing is good. Sorry you could not understand that.
You: "All the women I've known, therefore..."
Me: "You don't know all women, which is why studies are conducted."
Nothing has changed sorry you could not figure out by me saying all those I have known have had BC before 40 which means by pushing the testing back later it would have cost those woman their lives. Hence early testing is good. Sorry you could not understand that.
And I will say again: the tests were recommended for women age 40+. Your friends/family members were already outside the boundary so how does changing the recommendation to 50+ make any difference in this case?
The point you are choosing to ignore is that women younger than the recommended age group will still have access to treatment, as your 'case studies' did. You cannot say that these women were treated because they were tested between age 40-49, because they weren't.
This morning I saw 2 doctor's on different channels disagreeing with the out come of what the recomendation is...they said it is saving life's!
Some have stated that breats cancer isn't the number 1 death cause for woman any more...what about the screening, maybe that is why it isn't!!!!!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
