Breast screening

[Purpletop]

For the ladies only - if you've been invited to take part of the breast screening, do you attend regularly?

I've had my first screen 3 years ago and it is now time for the second. I'm reluctant to expose myself to yet more radiation.

I was wondering what your views are about breast screening.

[PMRpro]

Modern screening machines use a very low dose of radiation and compared to other sources a single exposure every few years is a minimal addition to the exposure you have anyway and may save you a very large amount of dose if you were to require radiotherapy if a lump is found late. For example, two years worth of your food is more than a single mammogram.

"Mammography exposes people to 0.4 mSv, while the extra dose from spending 2 days in Denver is 0.006 mSv, the dose from the airplane flight is 0.04 mSv, the average annual dose from food is 0.3 mSv, the average yearly background dose is 3.1mSv, and the limit for a radiation worker per year is 50 mSv."

Maybe you'll find this interesting;

medscape.com/viewarticle/82...

[Purpletop in reply to PMRpro]

Well, in the end I went and had it this afternoon. Last time I had it 3 years ago they asked me back for a second look (so more radiation) but it appeared that it was overlapping breast tissue. I sincerely hope this time all is well, fingers crossed.

I can't believe that the limit of radiation for a radiographer is so high! And that they are given a year,y limit, given that the radiation risk is cumulative. I don't understand that.

Thank you for your response, very useful, as usual x

[PMRpro in reply to Purpletop]

They are given a yearly limit that is within the sort of levels that is unlikely to cause problems. Slowly acquired radiation dose is far less problematic than a high dose received in a short time - such as that in Hiroshima. After all - if radiographers COULDN'T be exposed to that then we wouldn't be able to have broken bones x-rayed or angiography for our dodgy cardiovascular systems!

And people living in certain places should have to be moved out elsewhere...

[Elfie1]

I should go for breastscreening ,the radiation exposure is minimal.we have enough problems without any additions like breastcancer.it's not pleasant for a few seconds having your boobs squashed ,but very worth it . Good luck . Elfie

[Purpletop in reply to Elfie1]

I've been and had it this afternoon in the end, after reading the posts here.

Squashing the breast is, as you said, a minimal inconvenience!

Thank you for your encouragement x

[hmbuss]

l think it is good to be screened I've had it done regularly every three years and am going to ask for extension when I,m over 70. They found a lump which l couldn't feel and thankfully was benign but am just glad to have it checked out

[Purpletop in reply to hmbuss]

Thank you, that's useful to know. I'm keeping fingers crossed that they won't find anything, each time I have a test, I have to prepare myself for bad news.

[Kingdom_lady in reply to Purpletop]

Hi there Pupletop. I'm new to this group. I had been diagnosed with sle 2 years ago having had the appropriate tests. Fotutunately I have no symtoms!

I having gone through routine breast screening was diagnosed with breast cancer dcis in situ, the 'best' one to get I was told!! I had no lumps or pain and saw no visual changes in my breast, so I can vouch for routine screening everytime! I had a lumpectomy and currently having radiotherapy. I experienced so much pain at the beginning of my treatment with radiotherapy which I kept being told is unusual so early on. I then mentioned this dormant lupus to the Radiotherapy Nurse, who sought advice, came back and said that because of the lupus the effects of the Radiotherapy may affect me more so.

I'm doing fine, although still have pain and discomfort, it's really nothing compared to what some women experience. I don't know anything really about radiation exposure, i know its dangerous. But I also believe in treating what's going on at the time - especially cancer (high grade), was best for me and by knowing the risks, making a decision and trusting it will be the best option.

I would love to hear from anyone with similar experience.

I wish you well.

KL 💕

[Purpletop in reply to Kingdom_lady]

As with everything, we need to weigh risk agains benefit and when cancer is present, then of course all bets are off!

I'm glad they found the more stable of the cancers in your breast, rather the aggressive one (best if they didn't find any, of course). I know they offer the cancer treatment to any type of cancers, regardless, although as I understand it the one you've been diagnosed with is very slow acting and might not do anything during a life time. But how can we take that risk?

So thank you for sharing your experience, I much appreciate it.

[bones-bones in reply to Purpletop]

If I didn't have regular mammograms they wouldn't have found the cancer deep in my breast (no lump) I had a mastectomy and am still alive.

I can't advise anyone strongly enough to go for a mammogram regularly.

[Purpletop in reply to bones-bones]

Thank you, I've decided to have it in the end. I now have to wait 2 weeks for the results, fingers crossed there's nothing to worry about.

I'm sorry you've had to have a mastectomy, were there no other options offered to you or did you decide on this course yourself?

[Tubamags]

Everyone I know who has had a mammogram says it hurts a lot! If anybody just touches me I go through the roof with pain so that has put me off this test. I have never responded to invitations to come for a mammogram but it does worry me. Firstly there are too many false positives causing much stress and unnecessary surgery. I know that is a whole lot better than a false negative but it still makes me nervous.

My mother died of breast cancer years ago and she suffered so terribly from the treatment I truly think she would have lived longer if they had left her alone. She wouldn't have had to suffer all that invasive and agonising treatment which didn't do any good in the end anyway.

[Purpletop in reply to Tubamags]

This is indeed one of the reasons I debated when considering whether to have the screening or not. Because now there is a chance that there is something on the images that isn't clear, so another mammogram will be needed (more radiation). If something sinister is found, there seems to be either a slow developing tumor or an aggressive one. The doctors are offering the cancer treatment for both, although the slow developing one might not do anything during the patient's life. Apparently there are 3 women receiving unnecessary treatment for 1 woman who needs it. That means 3 women are exposed to unnecessary radiation and increased risk of cancer. 

But so far there have been no non-invasive methodologies or devices found to detect breast cancer and predict a prognosis. Recent research seems to have found a particular gene which instead of repairing DNA, it causes breast cancer instead. Presence of that gene as a biomarker would mean no need for mammograms and fumbling in the dark.  But we aren't there yet, hopefully we'll get there soon.

I'm sorry about your Mum. It must have been very hard for both you and her. It's never easy to take decisions about health - do we dare forgoing treatment and hope the disease won't kill us? Many don't. Not having the screening doesn't mean cancer won't hit, it just gives the illusion of being healthy. By the same token, having the screening doesn't mean that cancer will be detected, we are in the hands of the radiologists interpreting what they see and radiographers' experience in taking the images. 

As I said, such a difficult decision to take.