Discrimination for Cervical Cancer Screening

Discussion in 'Professionally Qualified, RAMC and QARANC' started by leprecon, Jun 24, 2009.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. It's all over the news - if you live in England, you get treated differently to the rest of the UK!

    In Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, women are screened at 20, however in England its 25. 8O

    Why? :?

    The experts say that it's difficult to detect cancer in women under 25, yet the Dept of Health is only enforcing the 25 rule in England! :x

    What is the real reason? The official one given or a matter of cost?

    I know that in North America women are screened for Cervical cancer from 18, and they have annual tests.

    Anyone with experience screening women for cervical cancer or looking after cancer sufferers got a view on this?
     
  2. As a 35 year old bloke I've never, ever been invited for cervical screening!

    This is discrimination! sexist bastards!

    I'm going to complain to the Court of Human Rights - I demand a right to cervical screening!
     
  3. Right on brother! We will fight for your right to have a cervical smear, even though you don't have a cervix, which is no one's fault (not even the Romans).

    It's symbolic of our fight against oppression! :twisted:
     
  4. Question is does it make a difference, a five year gap on how many cases are found
     
  5. CountryGal

    CountryGal LE Book Reviewer

    If a women under 25 is worried about cervical cancer, she can always go along to her local Genito-Urinary Medicine (GUM) clinic and request a test.

    The main reason not to screen under 25years old seems to be a cost reason, the NHS says that an abrasion/leasion that needs to be looked at is still treatable at 25 as much as it was at 20 and bases the decision not to screen on the stats that say cancer in the under 25's is very low.

    Right or wrong? Not a scooby ;o)
     
  6. As someone who is a smear taker I support the current 25 yr start date.

    Its nothing to do with cost. I've seen far too many younger women go through the unnecessary stress of a false positive smear due to immature cells, add to this the treatment which in turn could lead to problems in conceiving I would say England has got it right & the others wrong.

    As for going to a GUM clinic & requesting it, as of April 09 you will find very few GUM clinics that will do it as they are not part of the national recall register so any one that moves area changes GP, practice or anything else may risk being missed from recall hence it's better to go to your GP.
     
  7. Here here, glad to see some sense being talked. Why is it everyone automatically thinks that because the DH/NHS won't do something its soley down to cost. Its not, its down to effectiveness.

    Leprecon you said:-
    "The experts say that it's difficult to detect cancer in women under 25, yet the Dept of Health is only enforcing the 25 rule in England!"
    Wise up mate, the DH only operate in England, they have no authority in Scotland since devolution.
     
  8. Then - and I swear I'm actually asking the good doctor a sincere if slightly O/T question - how do you think American "health care providers" (scum-sucking wallet thieves all) actually justify doing the smear at 18? It seems as if it wasn't at least somewhat preventative the insurance companies would charge hundreds of bucks outside of plan for every lousy stick.
     
  9. This almost makes it sound as though the government is quite happy for 20yr old Scottish girls to run the risk of getting cervical cancer, but not the English. Hmmmm...
     
  10. Simple answer is I don't know. Well documented research demonstrates the problems of early smears, they have chosen to ignore it as has Scotland etc.

    I would guess the reason is that a very very small minority have a abnormal smear & with the ligation in the States being far higher than in the UK they would rather pay for unnecessary treatment than miss a case & pay out mega bucks.
     
  11. Difficult to justify smears at the age of 18, not only because of Pox Dr's reasons outlined above but also because 99% of cervical cancer is caused by HPV, it can take up to 10 years for infection with HPV to lead cancerous changes in the cervix. Acquistion of HPV is most likely to occur during late teens and early 20s i.e. as sexual activity starts.
     
  12. Don't you mean the other way around?

    Besides.... If you want to know the answer to this.

    http://www.birminghammail.net/news/birmingham-news/2009/03/10/grieving-birmingham-mum-s-call-to-lower-cervical-cancer-screening-age-97319-23101616/

    http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/woman/real_life/2265878/Cervical-cancer-Family-of-young-cancer-victim-Claire-Walker-Everett-believe-early-smear-tests-would-mean-shed-be-alive-today.html

    I am under the impression tht women who have sex under 18, and/or with multiple sexual partners and strangely enough smoking seems to have added problems.

    Vaginal douching and those who handle chemicals apprantly at risk also.

    Surely, if smears aren't available then education in the above should be.... with the ability to individually smear should the lass meet some of the above.
     

  13. Doesn't that just make logical sense?

    Shouldn't you be testing for things that are detectable rather than looking for four-leaf clovers or plaid paint?
     
  14. No I don't, if you consider that (according to some expert who I can't be arsed to look up) cervical cancer is easier to detect in women over 25.