In the National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Conference Statement: Breast Cancer Screening for Women Ages 40-49, January 21-23, 1997, the National Institutes of Health Consensus Development Panel stated,
Radiation has been shown to cause breast cancer in women, and the risk is proportional to dose.
Not quite what I would call an accurate statement [and no citations were forthcoming], but let's accept it at face value for sake of argument.
The Panel went on to state,
Radiation from yearly mammograms during ages 40-49 has been estimated as possibly causing 1 additional breast cancer death per 10,000 women. However, this estimate is based on statistical models from epidemiological studies of high dose exposures, and the actual risk could range from much higher than one to nonexistent.
If the "actual risk" could be "nonexistent," then how could the Panel state that "Radiation has been shown to cause breast cancer...?" If the risk could be zero, then radiation has not been proven to cause breast cancer.
And isn't it easy to dismiss the possibility of a "much higher" risk given that yearly mammograms aren't quite the same as the "high dose exposures" on which the risk extrapolation is based?
The only thing that's worse than the Panel's mish-mosh of the science is the Panel ignoring the very real possibility that low-to-moderate levels of radiation could act hormetically to reduce breast cancer risk.
If I were a woman concerned about mammography, I'd think twice about taking this Panel's advice at face value.
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of the author.
Copyright © 1997 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved. Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.