Frank - all good points

Phil - what are you on?!!It's about risk of death. Do mammograms increase cancer risk per se in woman with a very low breast cancer risk? Of course, but we don't know who those women are yet and may never because there are genetic and environmental, and gene x environment interaction causes. If you stop mammogram screening you may prevent a slightly increased risk in low risk women, but at the same time increase risk of death in high risk women.

Are these screenings over done because of the healthcare system in this country? Probably, but stopping them all together is an absurd idea that comes from ignorance.

Chemotherapy a carcinogen <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> It's worst than that. But let's see you presenting that to cancer patient as a good reason to not have treatment even though they WILL die without it. So should they not gamble the small risk of developing further tumors with a treatment that may allow them to survive in the long term? It's all about risk assessment in individual patients. We are getting better at it and we will keep improving. You are, yet again, looking at the current body of knowledge as static which is ridiculous.

A race for the cause? What in the world do you think we're trying to do?!! <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/rolleyes.gif" alt="" /> But like Frank said, should we ignore those with preexisting disease?

You know, it has crossed my mind numerous times that Phil is a troll. I find it difficult to imagine that someone who is obviously intelligent could be so misguided. May be I'm being naive <img src="/forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif" alt="" />