Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorReynolds, Handelen_US
dc.date.accessioned2017-12-26T02:55:35Z
dc.date.available2017-12-26T02:55:35Z
dc.date.issued2012en_US
dc.identifier.otherHPU4161834en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://lib.hpu.edu.vn/handle/123456789/28597
dc.description.abstractIn 2009, an influential panel of medical experts ignited a controversy when they recommended that most women should not begin routine mammograms to screen for breast cancer until the age of fifty, reversing guidelines they had issued just seven years before when they recommended forty as the optimal age to start getting mammograms. While some praised the new recommendation as sensible given the smaller benefit women under fifty derive from mammography, many women's groups, health care advocates, and individual women saw the guidelines as privileging financial considerations over women's health and a setback to decades-long efforts to reduce the mortality rate of breast cancer._x000B__x000B_ In The Big Squeeze, Dr. Handel Reynolds, a practicing radiologist, notes that this episode was only the most recent controversy in the turbulent history of mammography since its introduction in the early 1970s. In a book written for the millions of women who face the decision about whether to get a mammogram, health professionals interested in cancer screening, and public health policymakers, Reynolds shows how pivotal decisions made during mammography’s initial launch made it all but inevitable that the test would be contentious. He describes how, at several key points in its history, the emphasis on mammography screening as a fundamental aspect of women’s preventive health care coincided with social and political developments, from the women’s movement in the early 1970s to breast cancer activism in the 1980s and ’90s. At the same time, aggressive promotion of mammography made the screening tool the cornerstone of a huge new industry. _x000B__x000B_Taking a balanced approach to this much-disputed issue, Reynolds addresses both the benefits and risks of mammography, charting debates, for example, that have weighed the early detection of aggressively malignant tumors against unnecessary treatments resulting from the identification of slow-growing and non-life-threatening cancers. The Big Squeeze, ultimately, helps to evaluate the ongoing public health controversies surrounding mammography and provides a clear understanding of how mammography achieved its current primacy in cancer screening.en_US
dc.format.extent132 p.en_US
dc.format.mimetypeapplication/pdfen_US
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherCornell University Pressen_US
dc.subjectSqueezeen_US
dc.subjectControversial Mammogramen_US
dc.subjectPolitical Historyen_US
dc.subjectSocialen_US
dc.titleThe Big Squeeze: A Social and Political History of the Controversial Mammogramen_US
dc.typeBooken_US
dc.size615Kben_US
dc.departmentSociologyen_US


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record