Rapid responses are electronic letters to the editor. They enable our users to debate issues raised in articles published on thebmj.com. Although a selection of rapid responses will be included online and in print as readers' letters, their first appearance online means that they are published articles. If you need the url (web address) of an individual response, perhaps for citation purposes, simply click on the response headline and copy the url from the browser window. Letters are indexed in PubMed.
While I do not wish to take away from the value of early detection,
this reeks a bit of replacing one profit model with another.
For too long, stool test for occult blood was considered the gold
standard after the digital undignifying check came into disuse. Most with
negative results were assured they were fine just like those with bright
red blood passed rectally were once assured that that was usually
Widespread screening as a routine procedure based on nothing more
than the risk factor age is unlikely to save any money or to reduce the
need for the search for new chemotherapy drugs to fight the cancer with.
I suggest that screening be limited to those who report symptoms or
who are in very high risk populations with several risk factors present.
The drive for further development of chemotherapy drugs for
colorectal cancers is probably going to prove that one can spend money in
the hope that repeating the same foolish step again and again that
eventually a different result will emerge.
The cost of mass screening is proof that scaremongering is one tool that
will create untold profits for some.
In the words of Dr. Seymour Handler, pathologist emeritus of Edina
Minnesota, "money is not the cure", an excellent book for Democrats and
Ref.: (1) Handler Seymour, M.D. Money Is Not The Cure,