Log In

Reset Password
BERMUDA | RSS PODCAST

Why science and emotion don’t mix

Hundreds of bras were left at the Cabinet building on Thursday night as part of a protest against proposed cuts to mammography screening (Photo by Nicola Muirhead)

No one wants medical decisions made through legislation. I think we all agree on that. What is missing from the local airwaves and blogs right now is clarity on what the new mammography guidelines mean for Bermuda.

I want to stress that the guideline supports that individual decisions about medical care be made between a woman and her doctor.

I understand the unrest. We are all deeply conscious of the importance of prevention and we completely support early detection and healthy lifestyles.

Since the 1980s we’ve championed and promoted more screening, and this was the right thing to do. Ever since then, the world went on a screening frenzy and scientists have had a chance to collect volumes of population data to see if screening did what it was meant to: reduce premature deaths.

Three decades on, the studies are in and the jury is out. The developed world now understands that our screening regime caused more harm than good to far too many women.

Unfortunately, explaining to folks that the scientific knowledge about the effectiveness of aggressive screening has moved on is not easy. It’s made worse by the deep divides on the matter within the US, which we have fallen prey to. But we must remember that we needn’t be limited by US debates.

The bottom line is that the science has proven the main reasons cancer deaths went down in most developed countries over the past decades is that treatments improved and more women had access to them.

Early detection helped also, but there is no scientific evidence to support the belief that premature population screening has the results we’d hoped for. The latest scientific evidence shows that starting at 50 has the greater impact on reducing deaths.

Accepting the scientific conclusion doesn’t mean that we don’t believe in prevention, early detection and healthy lifestyles. On the contrary. We believe in it so much, we want to make sure the health system’s efforts are invested in doing the things that really do make a difference. Which is why we need to put aside our emotions and take a look at the facts.

What is the single biggest cause of death in Bermuda? Heart disease. What preventive measures can we take to reduce mortality and improve population health? Healthy eating and more physical activity. Let us see the wood for the trees.

My ask: read the studies yourself. See the evidence and you’ll be convinced. Women with no risk factors needn’t be screened at 40.

The guideline accepted in Canada, Europe and Australia protects women from unnecessary exposure to radiation. However, Bermudian women are most likely to neglect screening in their late 50s, when they most need it.

If you might indulge me, I would have a second request: Let’s unite to improve poor lifestyles, poor diet, inactivity and obesity.More than 30 per cent of Bermuda’s women are obese. More die of associated risk factors.

As a population we are far more likely to die of diseases associated with poor lifestyle choices than from a missed opportunity to radiate our bodies. To all with a passion to protect women’s health, let’s unite on improving lifestyle choices.

• Jennifer Attride-Stirling is the chief executive officer of the Bermuda Health Council