PeachyPants: "Rates of cervical cancer in young women may be low but that may be due in large part to effective screening programmes. I don't think the DM story is designed to generate hysteria unless you think there is some sinister conspiracy and the daily mail are in the employ of the companies that sell testing equipment, I think it's just a 'good' human interest story."
Let's take the first part of that first. Rates of cervical cancer in young women are not low as the result of effective screening programmes - women under 25 are not screened for cervical cancer in England. The low rates are simply because younger women are less at risk.
Is the DM story designed to generate hysteria? Well, of course it is. The DM loves stories that frighten people and make them anxious - that's a large part of their raison d'être. They also love stories that make the NHS look bad. (In this case, the young woman was eligible for screening but chose not to attend, but that doesn't stop them giving prominence to the family's misplaced call for younger women to be screened.)
Let's be clear: there is no reason at all for the DM to feature this story. All over the country young women and men are dying of terrible illnesses. Why single out this one death over all the others?