Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
CMAJ
  • CMAJ JOURNALS
    • CMAJ Open
    • CJS
    • JAMC
    • JPN
CMAJ

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • COVID-19
    • Articles & podcasts
    • Blog posts
    • Collection
    • News
  • Content
    • Current issue
    • Past issues
    • Early releases
    • Collections
    • Sections
    • Blog
    • Infographics & illustrations
    • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Overview for authors
    • Submission guidelines
    • Submit a manuscript
    • Forms
    • Editorial process
    • Editorial policies
    • Peer review process
    • Publication fees
    • Reprint requests
  • CMA Members
    • Overview for members
    • Earn CPD Credits
    • Print copies of CMAJ
    • Career Ad Discount
  • Subscribers
    • General information
    • View prices
  • Alerts
    • Email alerts
    • RSS
  • JAMC
    • À propos
    • Numéro en cours
    • Archives
    • Sections
    • Abonnement
    • Alertes
    • Trousse média 2021
  • Visit CMAJ on Facebook
  • Follow CMAJ on Twitter
  • Follow CMAJ on Pinterest
  • Follow CMAJ on Youtube
  • Follow CMAJ on Instagram
In the Literature

Does mammography save lives?

John Hoey
CMAJ April 30, 2002 166 (9) 1187-1188;
John Hoey
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF
Loading
Submit a Response to This Article
Compose Response

More information about text formats

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
References
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g. higgs-boson@gmail.com
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'. Minimum 7 characters.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'. Minimum 12 characters.
Your organization, institution's or residential address.
Statement of Competing Interests

Vertical Tabs

Jump to comment:

  • Oncological Terrain and Breast Cancer Primary Prevention
    Sergio Stagnaro
    Posted on: 30 July 2002
  • Meta-analysis of mammography
    J.V. Frei
    Posted on: 12 July 2002
  • Posted on: (30 July 2002)
    Oncological Terrain and Breast Cancer Primary Prevention
    • Sergio Stagnaro, Specialist in Blood , Gastroenterological and Metabolic Diseases. Researcher in Biophysical Semeiot.

    Sirs, I think that because congenital functional mitochondrial cytopathology is overlooked--a "conditio sine qua non" of the most frequent and dangerous human disorders, including malignancies--all current clinical research is fundamentally biased. In other words, it does not consider the existence or assess the seriousness as well as the location of Congenital Acidosic Enzyme-Metabolic Histangiopathy (1, 2), conditio s...

    Show More

    Sirs, I think that because congenital functional mitochondrial cytopathology is overlooked--a "conditio sine qua non" of the most frequent and dangerous human disorders, including malignancies--all current clinical research is fundamentally biased. In other words, it does not consider the existence or assess the seriousness as well as the location of Congenital Acidosic Enzyme-Metabolic Histangiopathy (1, 2), conditio sine qua non of Oncological Terrain. In fact, both environmental risk factors and every drug, including oestrogens, suggested as a risk factor for breast cancer, "could" influence some human biological functions and/or bring about different disorders, such as cancers, exclusively in relation to both the presence and intensity of CAEMH in a well-defined biological system. I recently discussed("Oncological Terrain",See http://digilander.iol.it/semeioticabiofisica) this overlooked functional mitochondrial cytopathology. I have called it Congenital Acidosic Enzyme- Metabolic Histangiopathy in previous papers (1-4); it is the genetic factor of common human disorders (1, 2). For instance, despite the well- known negative influence of oral contraceptive use on breast oncogenesis (4) and/or arterial disorders we have to consider the importance of the genetic predisposition , as far as the onset of a lot of disorders is concerned, including solid as well as liquid malignancies. At this point, I would emphasise the well-known pathological powerful influence of smoking,e.g., on tissue oxygen supply to all biological systems (3, 4). This effect varies notoriously in prevalence and intensity among individuals in relation to a congenital mitochondrial cytopathology, i.e. Congenital Acidosic Enzyme-Metabolic Histangiopathy (2). This both "silent" and dangerous action is easy to evaluate at the bed-side with the aid of a stethoscope. I suggest first (i.e., before whatever research)to investigate the presence and intensity of CAEMH in the "tested" population, and soon thereafter assessing prevalence and intensity of the "Oncological Terrain", which always develops on the basis of the above- mentioned congenital cytopathology (1-4). In fact, without this alteration of psycho-neuro-endocrine-immunological system, oncogenesis is not possible. The importance of the above-mentioned congenital factor should not be overlooked, particularly when we assess a "possible" risk factor for cancer or for cancer screening.

    Stagnaro Sergio MD, Member NYAS .

    Specialist in Blood, Metabolic and Gastrointestinal Diseases, Riva Trigoso (Genoa), Italy. 1) Stagnaro S., Stagnaro-Neri M.Istangiopatia Congenita Acidosica Enzimo Metabolica. Gazz. Med. It.- Arch. Sci. Med. 144, 423, 1985.

    2) Stagnaro S., Stagnaro-Neri M. Una patologia mitocondriale ignorata: la Istangiopatia Congenita Acidosica Enzimo-Metabolica. Gazz. Med. It. - Arch. Sci. Med. 149, 67 1990.

    3)Stagnaro-Neri M., Stagnaro S. Deterministic Chaos, Preconditioning and Myocardial Oxygenation evaluated clinically with the aid of Biophysical Semeiotics in the Diagnosis of ischaemic Heart Disease even silent. Acta Med. Medit. 13, 109 1997. 4) Stagnaro-Neri M., Stagnaro S., Cancro della mammella: prevenzione primaria e diagnosi precoce con la percussione ascoltata. Gazz. Med. It. – Arch. Sc. Med. 152, 447 1993

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
  • Posted on: (12 July 2002)
    Meta-analysis of mammography
    • J.V. Frei, Emeritus Professor of Pathology

    I am very bothered by your review of the meta-analysis of mammography screening by Miettinen, et al. (CMAJ v. 16, .p. 1187-1188). Using Fig. 1, you appear to argue that the last four points on it -years 6 and later from the beginning of the trial - which show decreased mortality, favour doing mammorgraphy, but you do not evaluate the earlier points 2 - 4, which show higher mortality of nearly the same degreee. Without kno...

    Show More

    I am very bothered by your review of the meta-analysis of mammography screening by Miettinen, et al. (CMAJ v. 16, .p. 1187-1188). Using Fig. 1, you appear to argue that the last four points on it -years 6 and later from the beginning of the trial - which show decreased mortality, favour doing mammorgraphy, but you do not evaluate the earlier points 2 - 4, which show higher mortality of nearly the same degreee. Without knowing anything else about the study, that alone means to me that the scatter of the data is such that the study cannot be evaluated, as the title of the original article seems to say. Is the coffin of meta-analysis in particular and of screening for cancer in general beginning to close?

    Show Less
    Competing Interests: None declared.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

CMAJ
Vol. 166, Issue 9
30 Apr 2002
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author

Article tools

Print
Download PDF
Article Alerts
To sign up for email alerts or to access your current email alerts, enter your email address below:
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on CMAJ.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Does mammography save lives?
(Your Name) has sent you a message from CMAJ
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the CMAJ web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Does mammography save lives?
John Hoey
CMAJ Apr 2002, 166 (9) 1187-1188;

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
‍ Request Permissions
Share
Does mammography save lives?
John Hoey
CMAJ Apr 2002, 166 (9) 1187-1188;
Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • References
  • Figures & Tables
  • Responses
  • Metrics
  • PDF

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Does the choice of β-blocker affect outcome in chronic heart failure?
  • Bisphosphonates and skeletal morbidity in patients with metastatic cancer
  • ACE inhibition in stable coronary artery disease
Show more In the Literature

Similar Articles

Collections

  • Topics
    • Screening & diagnostic tests
    • Cancer: breast

Content

  • Current issue
  • Past issues
  • Collections
  • Sections
  • Blog
  • Podcasts
  • Alerts
  • RSS
  • Early releases

Information for

  • Advertisers
  • Authors
  • Reviewers
  • CMA Members
  • Media
  • Reprint requests
  • Subscribers

About

  • General Information
  • Journal staff
  • Editorial Board
  • Governance Council
  • Journal Oversight
  • Careers
  • Contact
  • Copyright and Permissions

Copyright 2021, Joule Inc. or its licensors. All rights reserved. ISSN 1488-2329 (e) 0820-3946 (p)

All editorial matter in CMAJ represents the opinions of the authors and not necessarily those of the Canadian Medical Association or its subsidiaries.

To receive any of the resources on this site in an accessible format, please contact us at cmajgroup@cmaj.ca.

Powered by HighWire