This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

John N. Wolfe, MD

JAMA. 1977;237(20):2223-2224.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Mammography has had a very difficult time gaining general acceptance. Rival groups have engaged in an emotional interchange as to how it should be done, with what, and by whom.

First, surgeons had to be convinced of its worth. They were dubious, often stating, "If there is a cancer in the breast, I can feel it." Only time and accumulation of cases of occult carcinoma have convinced them of its worth.

Next, the opponents of mammography argued that the discovery of the small, nonpalpable breast cancer was an exercise in futility. They postulated that breast cancer developed over a long span of time and that radiologists finding the disease a little earlier really did not affect the course of the disease. However, the Health Insurance Plan (HIP) study has shown that early diagnosis does indeed lead to prolonged survival.¹

The argument continues, but under a slightly different heading. The . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Hutzel Hospital Detroit

Footnotes
Address editorial communications to the Editor, 535 N Dearborn St, Chicago 60610

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?