IS THERE EVIDENCE FOR LONG-TERM CLIMATIC CHANGE IN SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA KELP FORESTS?

Abstract

Navarro and Kaplan's article on the cost-effectiveness of mammography screening for women under 50 offers a limited perspective on a complex and rapidly evolving issue. They suggest that eliminating mammography benefits for younger women will result in the delivery of other important women's health services, but they provide no data on the cost-effectiveness of these programs compared to mammography. Four other areas of omission significantly limit this article's scope and potential impact. Navarro and Kaplan do not discuss: 1) increasing breast cancer incidence in women under 50, particularly in African-American women; 2) the importance of breast cancer risk in relation to mammography screening; 3) the relevance of meta-analyses of randomized clinical trials done by other investigators; and 4) the heterogeneity of mammography screening recommendations in clinical practice.