Women failing to attend smear tests

[guardianfree]

Women generally but young women in particular - 1 in 3 not attending.

www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/jos-cervical-cancer-trust-charity-smear-tests-terminal-illness-health-wellbeing-hospitals-a8171011.html

I know they're unpleasant (and often feel humiliating) but what can we do to reassure women that they can be life savers?

Snowdrop18

As are lots of things, the flu jab for example but they still push it. I'm simply alluding to the facts, which are that many of us don't have an issue with smears....once every 3 years.......I have already accepted and understood that some do have issues, why not acknowledge my opinion and experience?

@Walkingdead11 no one is denying your experience.

I never realised the rates for cervical cancer were so low. Makes me wonder about the hereditary risk as on the non BRCA side of my family there has been quite a bit of cervical cancer. If the rate is so low it seems incredible that it is so high in my family. Is it really only 1%? I can't find anything on google.

I'm ashamed to admit that I don't attend my smear tests . I have had four kids and have worked In gynae for ten years + yet I'm so embarrassed to have a smear ? It's ridiculous I know

I am merely pointing out that many other things some women do are just as painful, waxing, waist training, lip fillers, botox, tattoo eyebrows, stillettos, not to mention childbirth but they still do it. So it's okay in the name of beauty norms but not health ones??

It's ok in any name for any person. Again it's none of your business. Your lack of understanding is creepy and rapey.

Walkingdead11 aren't we at the point where we stop covering up bad practise and make things better for our daughters? I've never met anyone who says they've enjoyed a smear test but I've certainly met women who have said it's painful, they've bled/cried and their never going back.

My gynae told me HPV can remain dormant so you can test negative but it can flair up at anytime if you have contracted it.

www.foundationforwomenscancer.org/questions-from-readers-hpv-duration/

*they're

@Grannytomine:

You can find cervical cancer stats on the cancer research site

www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/statistics-by-cancer-type/cervical-cancer

Under 'cervical cancer incidence'

1 in 135 women will be diagnosed with cervical cancer during their lifetime.

So it's actually less than 1% now.

It's also pretty silly not to recognise that people might feel differently about internal and non-internal procedures. I don't wax, personally, but nonetheless it still isn't beyond me to understand that a woman might feel fine with pain in a procedure on the outside of her body but not on the inside.

Oh dear too many year with the police and black humour then. It is odd that on here it is all how terrible that women are treated so much worse than men but you don't really like to know that men are treated just the same. Spoils the woe is me thread doesn't it.

Or maybe people think the research posted is a bit more important and persuasive than your anecdotes.

From cancerresearchuk.org

"Cervical cancer mortality is related to age, with the highest mortality rates being in older females. In the UK in 2012-2014, on average each year almost half (47%) of deaths were in females aged 65 and over. However, this is a lower proportion of deaths in older age compared with most cancers."

Anyone got a recent list of incidence and mortality by cancer type? (I've googled quickly and most recent I could find was from 2014)

Carcinoma of the breast (along with lung and prostate) is usually towards the top of that rather grin league table; cervical cancer takes enough lives to get an entry of its own (rather than being lumped in with 'other malignancies) and is usually about 20th position.

I'm about 6 months overdue but since having my son my cycle has gone from 40+ days to 15 so with a 2 week waiting time at the GP I'm stuck in a cycle of cancelling appointments because by period has arrived. I just want to get it over with. Maybe drop in clinics would encourage more women to go. Must admit I put my first one off for a couple of years as I was anxious about it.

Stuff like more drop in clinics is such low hanging fruit. I don't understand why the time and resources invested in haranguing women isn't redirected towards that type of thing instead.

These stats are particularly interesting in terms of the claims made about screening.

"Since the early 1990s, cervical cancer incidence rates in females have decreased by almost a quarter (23%) in the UK.
Over the last decade, cervical cancer incidence rates in females have increased by less than a tenth (4%) in the UK."

The screening programme was introduced in 1988. If we assume about 70% of women are screened regularly and that the decrease is only in screened women. (that's an assumption that's not necessarily warranted, but bear with me, this is just rough maths).

The actual percentage decrease in screen women is 23/70 x100. About 33%. Nothing like the 75% decrease in incidence Jo's trust are claiming.

However there are other factors that could cause a decline in incidence. For example smoking is a risk factor. So is having children (the more children the greater the risk), having a weakened immune system and taking the pill for more than five years. The incidence of all these risk factors could have changed at a general population level since the early 90's.

@Farahilda - cancer research again - it's really very good for stats.

www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/incidence/common-cancers-compared#heading-Zero

Cervical doesn't appear in the top female cancers.

Because of the time taken to produce stats, they're not usually bang up to date. ONS also has stats but they only go up to 2015.

www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/healthandsocialcare/conditionsanddiseases/bulletins/cancerregistrationstatisticsengland/previousReleases

Cancer mortality in females

www.cancerresearchuk.org/health-professional/cancer-statistics/mortality/common-cancers-compared#heading-Zero

The only cancer with less deaths in females than cervix is mesethioloma. Not surprising since not many women worked in industries were they were exposed to asbestos.

Thanks!

Thinking around less invasive alternatives, why can't mini cameras be used to perform the visual bit of the test, and a probe/swab thing for the sample? Why does it have to be a speculum that should have been consigned to the medical museum decades ago?

I'd also be interested to hear about ways we can maintain our cervical health. I vaguely remember something about "rough sex" being a risk factor at a Well Woman clinic years ago - we never hear about that now.

Sorry that this is The Sun, but has there been any further news on bringing this device into use?

www.thesun.co.uk/living/3697283/cervical-cancer-risk-check-without-speculum/

@walkingdead11

"why not acknowledge my opinion and experience?"

I forgot it while being stunned at the waxing comparison and patronising remarks directed at "young" women.

@walkingdead11

Also do they hassle people about flu jabs? I don't know but I do know I have been really hassled about smear tests and even when I was very young and dudnt know how to look at risks and data myself.

I've been at the doctors for other things and they have been quite angry and say things like "aren't you worried about dying of cancer then". Do they do this to people about flu jabs?

Interesting. I bet at risk groups who get the flu jab are more likely to die of flu than women are of cervical cancer. Anyone got any stats on that?

Walking many people have taken the time to explain to you why they don't have this screening test. Some have explained it was painful, others have said they've been sexually assaulted. Others have posted scientific evidence and others have described the horror and pain of having treatment they really didn't need.

And all you have done is mock and sneer at them. I'll maintain I think your comments are creepy. I also think your a man. Because no fucking woman would say the sort of things that you've said.

Can we not recognise that women are entitled to make an informed decision about cervical screening? If women are happy with their choices, why should they be criticised?