To Screen or Not to Screen?

The new guidelines pushing the age of routine mammography testing in women to age 50 (instead of age 40) has resulted in a massive public outcry. Many media outlets have done nothing to assuage this negative reaction, and have in fact served to amplify it by printing stories slanting toward the public's disbelief. I don't think people are necessarily wrong to feel anger at the sudden shift in screening guidelines, but I do think both sides of the story should be discussed.

One of the few articles that delved into the reasoning behind the decision the US Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) made is worth a read. The author explains the risks of overdiagnosis--a real problem in this country--as well as false positives and overtreatment. We have been conditioned that more information is always better (thank you, Google), without properly identifying the repercussions of the true value, or lack of value, of that additional information.

Part of the problem is that issues such as overdiagnosis and overtreatment are difficult to study. However, just because we can't easily measure their effects on our quality of life, does not mean we should simply brush them off. This may make our decision on whether or not to get screened more confusing, but we deserve the option to understand the full complexity of our decision.