This is false. I had mild dysplacia and my doctor wanted to do a colposcopy and biopsy immediatly. When I refused, she sent me a certified letter demanding I get this procedure even though she admitted this would “probably clear on its own”. This test is over-sold. Doctors are too biopsy-happy. Had I known the overall risk of this cancer, I never would have put myself through this in the first place.

I find it interesting that you described negative Pap smears on more than one occasion prior to the Pap smear which led to your diagnosis. In your remarks you refer to others whose diagnosis also followed negative Pap smears and who were less fortunate, and that their disease was advanced at the time diagnosis was made.

Though Pap smears have dramatically reduced deaths from cervical cancer, interpretive errors with respect to the reading of the Pap smears has on occasion resulted in needless delay in diagnosis.

I have represented numerous women who after investigation were proven to have had an avoidable delay in diagnosis. It is my experience in these cases that makes me so sensitive to your remarks.

Thank you again for commenting.

For further information please read the articles appearing at my web site.

Where did you get these numbers? Colposcopy should only be performed when a high grade lesion or atypical cells suggesting a high grade lesion is found. This is an in frequent event. Further, colposcopy does not result in any biopsy unless evidence of a precancerous lesion is confirmed. 90% of these precancerous lesions will progress to invasive cancer if not treated.
The reason that relatively few cases of cancer are diagnosed each year in America (15,000) each year is because of the success of treating precancerous lesions found by pap smears.

This cancer is uncommon, always was – look at the figures. Don’t talk in terms of “75% reduction” or “deaths halved”, talk about absolute risk.
This is an unreliable test that with annual testing sends almost all women for biopsies in her lifetime, with only a very small number having any sign of malignancy. Two yearly testing sends 77% of women for biopsies, three yearly – 65% and even 5 yearly is 55%.
Your chance of unnecessary and potentially harmful biopsies is FAR greater than the low risk of cancer. (near zero for a low risk woman)
Some of those women will be left with continuing health problems.
Overscreening and screening women under 25 causes lots of damage for very little benefit. Young women produce VERY high numbers of false positives simply because their bodies are changing and these changes are interpreted as abnormal – these young women don’t need medical intervention. it is to protect these young women from harm that countries like the UK don’t screen before 25 and the Netherlands and Finland, not before 30.
Finland has the lowest rates of cervical cancer in the world and sends the smallest number of women for biopsies – they offer screening from age 30 and then 5 yearly to 60. My low risk Finnish friend does not have screening at all.
Angela Raffle, UK cancer screening expert released some figures that puts the risk into perspective – 1000 women need regular screening for 35 years to save ONE woman from cervical cancer.
When the risk of this cancer in an unscreened population is about 1.58% and a low risk woman has a near zero chance of getting this cancer AND this test so often leads to over-treatment…only one person can make the decision to accept those odds – the woman herself.
Of course, the benefits of screening have always been exaggerated as well as the risk of this cancer & the risks have been concealed…
There is no respect for a woman’s right to choose – whether she wants testing. Informed consent is totally disregarded and more than that, women are pressured and coerced into testing. Coerced by the unethical tying of birth control with cancer screening. They have nothing to do with each other – this is a tactic to FORCE screening. Even the medical associations, WHO and the USF&DA all say this test is not needed for the initiation and continuing use of the Pill. Can you imagine compulsory rectal exams for all men wanting Viagra or antibiotics? No say in whether they want testing. Yet that is accepted in women’s health – screening is demanded with no risk or unbiased information, it is never offered…
We need a major change in women’s health – it’s time for honesty and some respect.