Mammograms Have Flaws

I'm loving the articles questionning the universal value of the mammogram. There are cases when the screening is not enough and when it's too much.

Here's a link to the New York Times article that includes these great sections:

"One risk factor is having dense breast tissue, which is a double threat: cancer is more likely and harder to detect, because X-rays do not penetrate this tissue as well as they pass through fat. The only way to find out whether you have dense breasts is with a mammogram, and the radiologist’s report should mention density, Dr. Esserman said. Patients may have to request the full report."

"Younger women, she said, are less likely to have cancer, and they tend to have dense breast tissue, so mammograms are more likely to miss tumors. For them, she said, “it’s radiation without much benefit.” (Dr. Susan Love)

But the article falls short because it doesn't tell women what they should do if the report says they have dense breast tissue.

I'd say if you're following up about something odd that you or your doctor feel, demand a sonogram and a MRI and biopsy if they're not offered--whatever it takes to find out for sure what you're dealing with.

If it's just annual screening, I'd suggest talking to your doctor about MRI as a better screening tool for you.

A couple key takeaways for me: mammograms aren't good at catching the very aggressive cancers, and they can't penetrate young women's dense breast tissue. Young women very often have more aggressive cancers. So, ergo, let's put more effort behind studying this disease as it affects young women.

My favorite paragraph is this one:

"In a certain sense, I have to confess that I’m happy if the public gets offended or infuriated” by the debate, Dr. Formenti said. “I want taxpayers to say: ‘You have no clarity. Study it. Stop telling us you are a good girl if you get a mammogram.’ ”

Yes, let's talk about it, and then let's really do something about it!!