It's probably 'off topic' for this particular thread but maybe one of our moderators can move it to somewhere more appropriate.
Further to jw1137 exchange about preventative medicine I'd just like to clear up the slight misconception that here in the UK breasts are not examined proactively.
Whilst it is true that GPs do not routinely perform breast examinations the function is carried out (at least in my area of the UK) either at local clinics or at trailer based mobile units and women are invited, by post, to attend.
I understand most women hate the common technique of compressing the breast for the x-ray image to be taken and that it is sufficiently uncomfortable for many to forego this life saving check.
Furthermore, current practice for assessing the images is positively archaic, consisting of a person sat in front of an x-ray illuminator with, would you believe, a huge handheld magnifier. This silly technique which must be soul destroying and fatiguing to the operator has resulted in many false positives but, of more concern, many false negatives.
At least there is now, apparently, a new imaging system needing less (maybe nil) compression of the breast. The images are (hurrah) digital and can be enlarged at the touch of a button.
With regard to another preventative technique, cervical cytology, this is also usually by postal reminder but seems to be mainly carried out at local GP medical Centres with the Practice Nurse carrying out the PAP smears. These are sent off to local hospital laboratories for reading.
Regrettably this procedure is also subject to 'operator fatigue' or boredom again generating false results. I'm not sure what the answer to this is. It's clearly reliant on the dedication of the operator (in the case of both mammography and cytology) but also on their sheer physical and mental ability to maintain vigilance. Maybe its time for some automation, not as a prime sorter but to supplement, or recheck, the human.
Regrettably, this and other preventative medicine techniques is taking second place to governmental monetary concerns with the emphasis shifted from prevention to cure. Only this morning I read reports concerning the British Asociation of Dermatologists who are holding a conference in Scotland's capital, Glasgow.
The association were planning to offer free skin cancer checks to citizens. They have been told not to, by the local health authority. Apparently, the health authority think they would not be able to cope with the number of referrals which are anticipated. They say that referrals should be made by GP's.
Well, surely if they anticipate a large number of referrals it means that GP's are either missing tell tale signs or patients are not going to them with concerns. Either way they are missing an opportunity to catch up with this, another, killer disease. Cause of death on a death certificate is obviously cheaper than prevention.
Finally, but still 'off topic', in a PM to jw1137 I did acknowledge that we had a large number of non English speakers on the boards and that I appreciated their contributions. However there are very many who are simply to lazy to use the (admittedly limited) spell checker provided. I cannot spare the time to interpret some of the horrific howlers. If there are many like me then those contributions are valueless by default.