Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement
  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Reproductive Justice and Gender

U.K. and Australia Fight Breast Cancer with Free Screening for Women 50+

By Alice Alech, The Wip. Posted August 28, 2008.


Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide, with one in nine women affected at some stage in their lives.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

Working as a breast screen radiographer or x-ray technologist can be rewarding and challenging at times but I know that detecting even a small breast cancer can make a difference in a woman's life. That's what makes it all worthwhile.

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women worldwide, with one in nine women developing breast cancer malignancy at some stage in their lives. This is why Australia and the United Kingdom offer breast screening free of charge, providing programs that detect cancer at an early stage by offering mammograms (low dose x-rays can detect small changes in breast tissue which may indicate cancers too small to be felt by the woman or her doctor). These programs are funded by the government for a target age group of asymptomatic women, right through to the diagnosis. They have made a commitment to saving lives.

The National Health Service Breast Screening Program

The development of the United Kingdom program was based on a report produced by a working group chaired by Sir Patrick Forrest in 1985. The group investigated whether it would be efficacious to set up a mass screening, utilizing mammography as the screening tool for the early detection of breast cancer. They looked at evidence from several trials conducted overseas and compared it with the number of deaths from breast cancer in the U.K.

As a result of the Forrest report, the National Health Service Breast Screening Program (NHSBSP) was started in 1988 and achieved national coverage by the mid-1990s. Today there are 84 national screening centers in the United Kingdom.

The Australian Breast Screen Program

In 1987 statistics showed that breast cancer was by far the most common cause of death from cancer in Australian women. As a result, it was decided that an organized screening program be implemented. Randomized controlled trials were conducted, research from countries such as Sweden, Finland the Netherlands and the U.K. were studied, and in 1990 The Australian Breast Screen Program was launched. Health ministers responsible for the five states and two territories of Australia jointly agreed to fund the national mammography program. Today, there are 550 locations via fixed, relocatabe or mobile screening units in the country.

Both programs target women who are well and between 50 to 69 years (the U.K. provides screening up until 70 years), the age group that has the highest incidence of breast cancer.

Screening Outreach

Contacting women in the age group is the first step in both countries. In the United Kingdom, women who have reached the age of 50 and are registered with a general practitioner receive a letter inviting them for their first screen.

In Australia women are invited to call a toll free number which connects them directly to their nearest breast screen service where they are given an appointment for their first screen.

Once on the screening list, women receive letters every two years in Australia, and every three years in the U.K., inviting them to come in for their mammograms.

Younger women have less incidences of breast cancer and so are not included in the screening programs in either country. Pre-menopausal women also have dense breasts making it more difficult to detect abnormalities on the x-rays. With age, breasts become less dense and glandular, appearing clearer on the mammogram and thus allowing the film reader to make a more accurate diagnosis. Mammograms are most effective after the age of 50, when most women go through menopause. Some breast screen units in both Australia and the U.K. will, however, accept women aged 40, especially when there is strong family history of breast cancer. These women are so appreciative of the care they receive -- some have lost mothers, daughters, sisters, friends and many of them would not be able to pay for mammograms.

Each state and territory of Australia develops individually targeted messages to reach the general population. Similarly, each state does its utmost to reach the Aboriginal community through the group, Aboriginal Health Care Workers. This is not an easy task as language and cultural barriers do not make communication easy; interpreters are sometimes necessary.

Because of differing cultures among the indigenous population, outreach strategies vary from state to state; group bookings are often arranged along with transport and meals when the women have to travel great distances.

In 2005 I was part of a group that spent eight days x-raying women from the Aboriginal communities in South Australia. These women hardly ever venture out of their communities, so coming to us for screening required careful planning and coordination. They often arrived at the end of the day after traveling for hours so we greeted them with food and refreshments and tried to make them comfortable. An interpreter did most of the translating but we could easily see how relieved the women were to find an all-women team and we were thankful that most of those on our list had decided to come. It didn't matter that they turned up six hours late.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: health, breast cancer, mammography

Alice Alech is a qualified x-ray technologist and mammographer involved in the Breast Screen Program in both Australia and the U.K.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Reproductive Justice and Gender! Sign up now »

Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Oh...so you want to take $ from the hands
Posted by: hurricane hugo on Aug 28, 2008 10:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
of hardworking insurance and health CEOs?

How dare you.

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

ArroyoWash
Posted by: arroyowash on Aug 30, 2008 7:47 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
With good intentions you foster the use of mammography. I wish that it was thermography instead that you were using.

Mammography has a difficult time giving a good reading in women with dense breasts. It exposes women year after year to radiation, a carcinogen. As every woman knows who has undergone a mammogram, it hurts to have breast tissue squished between two pieces of metal. And there is the argument that compressing cancerous tissue will just spread the malignancy.

John W. Gofman, an authority on the health effects of ionizing radiation, estimates that 75 percent of breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or minimizing exposure to the ionizing radiation. This includes mammography, x-rays and other medical and dental sources

Many studies, including that of Dr. Peter Gotzsche published in 2000 in The Lancet, conclude mammograms are not nearly as effective as thermography, a process that does not use radiation. Thermography can diagnose breast cancer long before a mass has grown large enough to be detected by a mammogram. We all have cancer cells inside us. These cells can grow for 20 years before they become detectable by conventional means.

"The major, surprising finding of the Canadian National Breast Screening Study was that there is no evidence that screening for breast cancer with mammography is effective for women under 50 years of age. Not surprisingly, this conclusion has been vehemently attacked by American radiologists. Women in their 40s are the best customers for regular mammograms. As many as 40% of them have an annual mammogram at a cost of $50-100 each. Now another study in Sweden supports the Canadian findings. Dr. Lazlo Tabar followed 35,000 women aged 40-49 for 11 years. He found no evidence that regular mammographic screening of these women had any benefits." source: Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol. 148, No. 4, Feb 15, 1993.

"A large study of the benefits of mammography screening for breast cancer was carried out in 2001 by the prestigious Cochrane Institute. The study questioned the benefits of screening and pointed out that screening could be harmful in that it frequently leads to over-diagnosis and over-treatment. The Cochrane Institute has now released the results of a new study aimed at determining how fairly the benefits and dangers of mammography are presented on web sites. They evaluated 13 sites maintained by advocacy groups, 11 maintained by governmental institutions, and 3 maintained by consumer organizations. They found that all the mammography advocacy group sites accepted sponsorship from industry without restriction." source: British Medical Journal, Vol. 328, January 17, 2004.

The Susan G. Komen Foundation funded a study released in May, 2007, that essentially found that cancer is an environmental disease. More than 200 chemicals — many found in urban air and everyday consumer products — put women at risk for breast cancer.

It is not enough to screen women - safely with thermography - for breast cancer. We also need to teach that cancer is preventable. A polluted environment and nutrient challenged diet, combined with a weak gene, make a situation where the terrain inside the body is ripe to grow errant cells.

Early detection is what screening is all about. Thermography can pick up on cancer formation 10 years before mammography can.

Teaching women to avoid pesticides, toxic personal care products, sugar, etc - things we know are risk factors for cancer - has a place in screening programs too.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

We have a cure for cancer!! It's True!!!
Posted by: garry minor on Sep 1, 2008 9:26 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In 2000 Dr. Manuel Guzman of Complutense University in Madrid Spain rediscovered what researchers in 1974 at the Medical College of Virginia found but failed to tell us, that THC, the active ingredient in cannabis, injected into the brains of rats with a brain cancer, can completely eradicate the cancer with no negative side effects whatsoever. They also irrigated healthy rats brains with large doses of THC for seven day's to test for harmful biochemical or neurological effects and found none. The 1974 Virginia test was funded to find evidence that cannabis harms the immune system, but instead they found that it slowed three kinds of cancer in mice--lung and breast cancer, and a virus induced leukemia. Oddly, much of the research done on cannabis during the 60's and 70's has disappeared. Since Guzmans discovery the anti-tumoral power of THC has been proven many times around the world, even in the U.S.A. Dr. Guzman and other researchers have also found that THC can both prevent and cure Alzheimers. The Scripps Institute provided this information to us in the summer of 2006 but little has been said since. In 2005 Dr. Xia Zhang of the University of Saskatchewan found that unlike cocaine, heroin, alcohol, nicotene, etc.., that all destroy brain cells, THC actually promotes the growth of new cells. This discovery may lead to treatments that can repair stroke, and other brain related or nerve damage.
THC and cannabis have also been found quite useful in treating epilepsy, autism, arthritis, migraine, MS, ALS, ADHD, OCD, nausea, chronic pain, asthma, emphysema, lupus, muscular dystrophy, cystic fibrosis, tuberculosis, depression, diabetes, alcoholism, eating and skin disorders, herpes, glaucoma, Parkinsons, Huntingtons, Tourettes, Crohn's disease, and more.
All mammals, birds, fish, and reptiles have cannabinoid receptors throughout their body that work independent of those that govern the heart and breathing which is why cannabis cannot kill you. Not one death in the entire history of mankind can be attributed to it.
The cannabis hemp seed is the single most nutritiously complete food source on the planet. The ancient Zoroastrians called it "Royal Grain." Re-introduced to our diets it can prevent many of the above mentioned diseases and help to end world hunger.
If our environment is partly to blame for some cancers, many of the pollutants to blame can be replaced with industrial hemp. Anything made from oil, coal, timber, or cotton can be made ecologically friendly with hemp. All paper, plastics, fuels, lubricants, paints, varnishes, textiles, packagings, plywood, structural components, many cosmetics, health foods, and medicines, over 25,000 known products can all be made with it. It grows without most fertilizer, herbicides, or pesticides, to foul the soil and water, in climates and conditions other crops wont grow. Farming just six to eight percent of our farmland in hemp can satisfy our current demand for oil and gas. It is by far superior to corn, kenaf, or sugar cane for ethanol production or tree's for pulp.
Currently the United States is the only major nation not growing industrial hemp. China now grows 40% of the worlds crop and they are developing new technology for plastics, textiles, plywoods, paper, and more that will keep America at an economic and strategic deficit for years, as if we already aren't.
Hemp industrialization in the United States will create millions of Earth friendly jobs from the farm to the laboratory, make medicine affordable for all, end world hunger, begin a redistribution of wealth, and promote social harmony.
Food, fuel, shelter, medicine, pleasure, spirituality, and unity!
The Tree of Life, Kaneh bosm, cannabis, hemp!!!
The leaves of the Tree are for the healing of the nations!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]