Health Secretary Blames IT for Deaths

[original PM]

Whilst I understand the need for screening, the last thing we need is for people who do not even feel ill clogging up the system because they feel they might possibly be dieing of something and need screening.

[northernladyuk]

Whilst I understand the need for screening, the last thing we need is for people who do not even feel ill clogging up the system because they feel they might possibly be dieing of something and need screening.

That is the beauty of screening. It uses evidence to bring people in at defined intervals for early detection.

[Lockhouse]

I was part of a regular screening programme after having a bit of a medical problem. I thought I hadn't been seen for a couple of years. Rang the doctor to be told somehow I'd dropped off the list. I'm not surprised in the slightest at this latest NHS cock-up.

[CoolCat]

Whilst I understand the need for screening, the last thing we need is for people who do not even feel ill clogging up the system because they feel they might possibly be dieing of something and need screening.

The UK does far less screening than other developed countries, moles are checked annually by a dermatologist in Germany and Australia to pick up on skin cancer early, here never happens

Prostate cancer screening happens much earlier elsewhere, and again consultant led not GP/nurse like here

[northernladyuk]

The UK does far less screening than other developed countries, moles are checked annually by a dermatologist in Germany and Australia to pick up on skin cancer early, here never happens

Prostate cancer screening happens much earlier elsewhere, and again consultant led not GP/nurse like here

So is every citizen called annually to see a dermatologist for mole screening?

The evidence around the efficacy of prostate screening is fairly shaky. Screening for prostate cancer - Ilic - 2013 - The Cochrane Library - Wiley Online Library

Our meta-analysis of the five included studies indicated no statistically significant difference in prostate cancer-specific mortality between men randomised to the screening and control groups

If there is a consultant involved, that would suggest they're doing the finger up the bum method rather than a blood test. That would make it more expensive, I expect, but not necessarily more effective at reducing mortality.

[CoolCat]

So is every citizen called annually to see a dermatologist for mole screening?

The evidence around the efficacy of prostate screening is fairly shaky. Screening for prostate cancer - Ilic - 2013 - The Cochrane Library - Wiley Online Library



If there is a consultant involved, that would suggest they're doing the finger up the bum method rather than a blood test. That would make it more expensive, I expect, but not necessarily more effective at reducing mortality.

Re "So is every citizen called annually to see a dermatologist for mole screening?" all those with significant moles obviously not those without

There is more than one way of Prostate cancer screening, PSA test is not the full story, and PSA levels go up and down which is part of the reason single tests dont have a fantastic track record, other countries compensate for that by taking multiple tests weeks apart so that they can see trends

[northernladyuk]

Re "So is every citizen called annually to see a dermatologist for mole screening?" all those with significant moles obviously not those without

That's not really a screening programme. Sounds like open access to a dermatologist, which sounds sensible but I have no idea what the efficacy is.

Re "So is every citizen called annually to see a dermatologist for mole screening?" all those with significant moles obviously not those without

There is more than one way of Prostate cancer screening, PSA test is not the full story, and PSA levels go up and down which is part of the reason single tests dont have a fantastic track record, other countries compensate for that by taking multiple tests weeks apart so that they can see trends

Still no convincing evidence that it reduces mortality. It's important not to be carried away with what looks like a Rolls Royce service, if there is no evidence that it is effective.

[CoolCat]

That's not really a screening programme. Sounds like open access to a dermatologist, which sounds sensible but I have no idea what the efficacy is.



Still no convincing evidence that it reduces mortality. It's important not to be carried away with what looks like a Rolls Royce service, if there is no evidence that it is effective.

the stats are pretty convincing, death from skin cancer drops significantly if moles are regularly checked by a dermatologist, early screening for prostate cancer leads to many people living decades longer than they would in the NHS regime

dont be clouded by the BS the NHS pumps out, read more widely

[northernladyuk]

the stats are pretty convincing, death from skin cancer drops significantly if moles are regularly checked by a dermatologist, early screening for prostate cancer leads to many people living decades longer than they would in the NHS regime

dont be clouded by the BS the NHS pumps out, read more widely

As I said, I don't have much of an opinion one way or another around the dermatologist. Sounds sensible but I don't know what the evidence is for the intervention you describe.


You seem to have got yourself worked up around 'NHS BS'. I was quoting a Cochrane systematic review. Do you understand the significance of this?

[darmstadt]

So is every citizen called annually to see a dermatologist for mole screening?

No. Here you should go once a year to your GP who will take a load of samples, stick things in you, prod and poke and then you go home. You come back a week later and they give you the results and then they'll check all over your body for things which might be malignant but they don't call you. However, if they do see something you'll be in the scanner within a day or 2

For women, they're expected to go to the Frauenarzt (gynecologist) regularly where they will be checked.