Reduce the Breast Screening Age to 40 – Sign the Petition!

[philaldo]

Hi everyone,

Did you know that breast cancer doesn’t wait until you’re 50? Yet, the current NHS screening program only invites women for mammograms from the age of 50. This delay means younger women—and even men—are often diagnosed later, leading to more aggressive treatments and worse outcomes.

We’re calling for the government to lower the breast screening age to 40 to save lives. Early detection:

✅ Improves survival rates.
✅ Reduces the need for invasive treatments.
✅ Empowers us all to take control of our health.

This change, combined with better awareness campaigns to normalise self-checking and self-referral, could be a game-changer for breast cancer survival in the UK.

Please join us by signing this petition: petition.parliament.uk/petitions/700062

Every signature counts in making this life-saving change happen. 💖

Let’s make a difference together!

#BreastScreeningMatters #CheckYourBreasts #EarlyDetectionSavesLives #40not50

Mammograms are less reliable diagnostically pre menopause, the tissue is often too dense. Ultrasound is a better method but more time consuming and needs a specialist breast cancer radiologist to carry it out. A mammogram investigation of both breasts takes less than 10 mins. An ultrasound could take 30 mins or more. Also an ultrasound is difficult to compare easily with previous ultrasound.
CT scans are quick but are a much larger dose of radiation. MRIs take 40 mins.

Diagnosis at a younger age, even in the early stages still may require aggressive treatment. Like many cancers, at a younger age, they are often more aggressive and harder to treat.

As a breast cancer survivor I’ve noticed the thing that surprises people is the huge number of variations in the types of breast cancer. Survival rates are often higher post menopausally because breast cancer is more likely to be lower grade, slower growing and hormone positive so there are more treatment options available.

There has been a breakthrough in diagnosis via a blood test, however as yet no way of detecting a tumour until it becomes visible on imaging. So although we can now detect it at a cellular level we have yet to find a suitable treatment and surgery is not possible if you don’t know where it is.
Chemo is not suitable for around 30% of tumour types. A combination of surgery, radiotherapy and hormone blocking, for hormone positive tumours, is used .

I would support full screening for those with a family history or who carry the BRCA gene but this happens anyway. After my DSis was diagnosed at 34 I had annual mammograms for 5 years then every 3 yrs until I was 50 and went onto the national screening programme. After 20yrs I was diagnosed age 57. We don’t have the BRCA gene but having a sibling diagnose increases the risk.

I believe the breast tissue is too dense for screening before 50, so won't be signing the petition.

My mother died young of breast cancer and my maternal and paternal grandmothers had it as well my paternal aunt and maternal cousins.

So I agree there should be more done but not mammograms at an earlier age.

There are already screening programmes available for high risk women. My mum had breast cancer in her 40s and overall 2/3 of women in my family have had breast cancer. I've been on a screening programme since my early 40s.

Mammograms involve radiation. For me, the risks are worth it. For low risk women the analysis changes. Plus, as has been said, ultrasound is the screening method of choice in younger women.

• Around 3 in 4 (75.9%) women diagnosed with breast cancer in England survive their disease for ten years or more, it is predicted (2013-2017).
• Around 8 in 10 (80.6%) women in England diagnosed with breast cancer between ages 15-44 survive their disease for ten years or more, compared with almost 6 in 10 (57.1%) women diagnosed aged 75-99 (2013-2017); ten-year survival is highest in women aged 55-64 (87.2%) (2013-2017).
• Breast cancer survival has doubled in the last 50 years in the UK.
• In the 1970s, 4 in 10 (40.0%) women diagnosed with breast cancer survived their disease beyond ten years, by the 2010s it was almost 8 in 10 (78.4%).

https://www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/breast-cancer#heading-Three

The info above from Cancer UK shows that women under 44 have higher survival rates than all ages of women. On average, there are 1000 deaths in women under 50 from breast cancer annually compared with a total of 11,500 deaths across all ages. The cost of screening all women from, say, aged 30 instead of 50 would be vastly disproportionate to the risk for those same women. Screening is there to identify those most at risk within the general population.

8% of breast cancers are caused by overweight / obesity. Do you recommend that all women are screened for obesity in order to identify their risk?
Personally, I would like to see far more funding put into research of prevention of all cancers.

Re: dense breast tissue — it’s an important consideration, especially for younger women. Dense breast tissue can make traditional mammograms less effective, but that’s exactly why our petition is also advocating for alternative screening options to be made available.

Technologies like breast MRIs, ultrasounds, and advanced digital mammography are better suited for those with dense tissue and can significantly improve early detection. The petition aims to fund these alternatives alongside lowering the screening age to 40, ensuring that all individuals — regardless of age or breast density — have access to effective, personalised screening methods.

This is about giving people a fighting chance through earlier detection, tailored approaches, and better awareness of breast health. Together, these measures could save thousands of lives.

.

Mortality from breast cancer is highest in women over 75. Screening also stops at 71 so maybe there is a case for continuing screening up to 80.
The under 50s only make up 18% of the women diagnosed each year but are part of a much larger cohort. I do think money would be better spent on education and screening women “at risk” ie those with family or genetic predisposition. Or pursuing the blood test which will be ultimately more cost effective and more accurate. In the same way that prostate is screened.
I agree that we should extend screening but although early treatment will save lives it will not necessarily prevent breast cancer. Testing for genes that increase your risk is controversial but with the introduction of the use of aromatase inhibitors to help prevent breast cancer from developing in the small number of patients with BRCA gene prevention may be possible for this very small number of women and men. However, it is a bloody awful drug to take with unpleasant side effects.

I don't understand the assertion that ultrasound takes a long time - 30 mins? I get regular ultrasounds as I have a lot of cysts and previous BC. They've never taken longer than 5 minutes.

Having said that, my BC wasn't picked up by mammogram or ultrasound - only a biopsy and MRI showed it.

I'd focus on increasing breastfeeding rates to reduce the levels of cancer seen in younger women.

Screening also stops at 71
You are still entitled to a mamagram over that age but have to request one you just do not receive a reminder letter.

I support this as the biggest “myth” is that we all get mammograms at 50. I wasn’t called for my first routine mammogram until 18 months after my 50th birthday. At the time I was going through chemo for Stage 3 breast cancer having found the lump myself.

Signed. I’m high risk - at 40 I begged my gp to bring my screening forward on the recommendation from my mother’s oncologist. I was told to come back and ask again at 50 but to just “check myself regularly”.

Good thing my DH was transferred out of the U.K. when I was 45 - put straight onto an enhanced screening programme here. Drs appalled I wasn’t screened already or had a baseline as a minimum. I was <predictably> diagnosed with a non-palpable, mammographically occult tumour at 48.

Proper enhanced screening caught it early and treatment has been minimal.

If I was living in the U.K., I would have been fucked.

It might be best to wait until they have managed to get until they’ve got it down to 50 first before widening the goalposts I’m 51 and never had one yet

How was it diagnosed?

I was an idiot. I thought breastfeeding was going to protect me from breast cancer. It didn't. I'm sure I looked it up after diagnosis and it's only a few percentage difference?

Ultrasound

I breastfed two children until 18 months and still got BC at a young age. No dodgy genes. Healthy lifestyle. Slim. Never smoked. Most of the time it's just bad luck.

@AnotherVice I breastfed all 3 of ours and was diagnosed metastatic breast cancer de novo aged 42.

And you want me to tell my 3 DDs to breastfeed

I'm very sorry for you both and obviously breastfeeding doesn't entirely preclude an individual from developing breast cancer but at a population level it is certainly a factor.

Where is your evidence for what you claim?

This has not been thought through. The values of screening at any age are very debatable. If people want this under 50 they need to pay. The NHS isn't here to fund the "worried well".

I’m not 100% sure this is true but someone told me once with breast scans there is a small risk from the actual scan, having the scan slightly increases the risk of breast cancer. When you get to age 50 the risk from the scan is outweighed by the increased risk of breast cancer from other sources and detecting it early but prior to that the risk to scanning healthy younger women with no other risk factors isn’t worth the risk v benefit so it’s not just a cost issue

I also breastfed both dcs for a couple of years each. I was diagnosed aged 57. No family history, slim, non smoking vegetarian.

I don’t honestly know what the answer is re earlier screening but my knowledge wasn’t accurate re the risks of me having bc so there needs to be improvements on public messaging.

It is, but with fertility rates amongst the under 30s plummeting that's going to increase BC rates more than increasing BF rates would. And it's hardly worth giving birth at age 25 and raising a child to adulthood to reduce your BC rate by 20%.

I agree. Even as an HCP I was unaware of the absolute risk (1 in 7/8 chance in your lifetime) and that although breast feeding offers some protection it is only in women who have their children at a younger age.

Prolonged exposure to oestrogen is a major factor so starting your periods under the age of 12 and a late menopause significantly increases your risk. There are studies that suggest that taking the pill for a long time may be a factor. The pill has only been available to all women since 1974 so the first group of women who took the pill from their teens are only just reaching their seventies when natural risk increases.

Breast cancer cases are increasing, we need to know how longterm use of the pill is impacting older women who used it in their teens and twenties.

In addition, the use of plastics that contain BPA, an oestrogen mimicker, may also have added to our risk.

As a generation the current 50-70 age group need more information about their relative risk that has probably increased due to both environmental and social changes. The pill allowed us to put off having children thereby reducing both pregnancy (multiple) and breastfeeding in our 20s when they would have produced the most benefits and protected against breast and gynaecological cancers.

I was diagnosed at 57. I took the pill for a couple of years but it didn’t suit me. I do have an endocine problem which now, after 30 yrs of research, it turns out increases my risk. However I was screened for breast cancer from my late thirties because my younger sister was diagnosed with bc at 34. We don’t carry any of the genes for breast cancer and have had genetic screening. I had a clear mammogram at 53 but developed a lump at 57. Covid delayed my routine mammogram at 56 so diagnosis was probably delayed. Fortunately I had the most common bc which also has the best outcome. The lump was large (39mm) but had not spread, also reassuring because it was also a tumour less likely to spread, confirmed by the testing done on the tumour genes.

I have done a lot of research (Google Scholar) both specifically for my cancer type, treatment outcomes and the current statistical risks associated with breast cancer. The overwhelming evidence is that being a woman is our biggest risk, the combination of hormone supplements, environmental exposure to hormones and our ability to control the number of pregnancies and of course breastfeeding being unpopular all add to the risk. We cannot forget that with longer life the risk of all cancers increases.

But it is the increase in breast cancer in younger women that is the most concerning statistic and we definitely need more research into why this is increasing. Screening is a useful tool to facilitate early detection but focusing on why there is an increase is going to save more lives in the future.