Petrified after Mammogram

chrissy3634

I'm pleased to report after my visit to Seacroft Breast clinic that I'm fine. 6 more x rays and US scan revealed that the "problem" area was over lapping breast tissue.
I could have kissed the consultant radiologist

Pollycat

chrissy3634 wrote: »

I'm pleased to report after my visit to Seacroft Breast clinic that I'm fine. 6 more x rays and US scan revealed that the "problem" area was over lapping breast tissue.
I could have kissed the consultant radiologist

Great news, chrissy.

Amber_Sunshine

I think this points out how it's always worth having the checks done - most times there's nothing wrong, and if there is you hopefully pick it up early enough to deal with. Better to find out you've no need to worry, than avoid the checks and worry unnecessarily!

Pollycat

Amber_Sunshine wrote: »

I think this points out how it's always worth having the checks done - most times there's nothing wrong, and if there is you hopefully pick it up early enough to deal with. Better to find out you've no need to worry, than avoid the checks and worry unnecessarily!

There was a recent-ish thread about whether posters accept invitations for a mammogram or not, based on research.
This article may be of interest.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/feb/16/should-i-have-a-mammogram

Personally, I've always accepted appointments for mamograms and smears but it seems that not everyone thinks the same.

ERICS_MUM

What a relief for you. You'll sleep well tonight ! Sounds like they've been very thorough, which should give you some comfort. Xx

Amber_Sunshine

I should have specified that I was referring to all cancers that you can be screened for, not just BC. After all, you can't do your own smear!

Pollycat wrote: »

There was a recent-ish thread about whether posters accept invitations for a mammogram or not, based on research.
This article may be of interest.

https://www.theguardian.com/lifeandstyle/2014/feb/16/should-i-have-a-mammogram

Personally, I've always accepted appointments for mamograms and smears but it seems that not everyone thinks the same.

Pollycat

Amber_Sunshine wrote: »

I should have specified that I was referring to all cancers that you can be screened for, not just BC. After all, you can't do your own smear!

My point was that the article - specifically about mammograms - said:

A new study shows that breast cancer screening is no more effective than self-examination

So you might think it's always worth having the checks done (which I personally don't disagree with) but not everybody has the same opinion.

nuttywoman

bouicca21 wrote: »

I was called back. And then sent for a biopsy ... A week after the biopsy results I was on the operating table.

Just keep telling yourself that if there is anything to discover it is better discovered early than late. I had no symptoms, without the mammogram it would not have been spotted.

That was me as well , no symptoms at all , had the op then 5 weeks radiotherapy
Grateful for my mammograms x

Amber_Sunshine

I'm not saying that everyone has to have the same opinion. But as a cancer patient (with a cancer that couldn't be screened for), I'm all in favour of getting all the checks you can. My belief always has been that it's better to know if you have a problem, as well as being reassured if you don't. Your study may disagree.

It's true that medical advice may need revising at times, but I don't think women should be put off from having tests until there is CLEAR evidence that the screening programme is not necessary. Is one study, however extensive, enough?

Pollycat wrote: »

My point was that the article - specifically about mammograms - said:
So you might think it's always worth having the checks done (which I personally don't disagree with) but not everybody has the same opinion.

Pollycat

Amber_Sunshine wrote: »

I'm not saying that everyone has to have the same opinion. But as a cancer patient (with a cancer that couldn't be screened for), I'm all in favour of getting all the checks you can. My belief always has been that it's better to know if you have a problem, as well as being reassured if you don't. Your study may disagree.

It's true that medical advice may need revising at times, but I don't think women should be put off from having tests until there is CLEAR evidence that the screening programme is not necessary. Is one study, however extensive, enough?

Firstly, it's not my study.

Secondly, I don't think one study is sufficient - my personal opinion only - to put me off (you're preaching to the converted here).

I made the point in the first place because some women (again, not me) do think that study is enough to decline mammogram appointments.

Here is the thread I mentioned.
https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/5493272

Some people didn't have the mammogram because of false positives and/or exposure to radiation and unnecessary treatment.

Here is one of my comments on that thread about 'my' study:

Pollycat wrote: »

I've read the article and nothing in it has convinced me to turn down my next appointment.

So while you say this:

Amber_Sunshine wrote: »

I think this points out how it's always worth having the checks done - most times there's nothing wrong, and if there is you hopefully pick it up early enough to deal with. Better to find out you've no need to worry, than avoid the checks and worry unnecessarily!

my point is that there are some people who don't agree with you after doing their own research. and that's entirely their prerogative.