Cervical Check...No Scandal..

noodler · 07-12-2019 3:58pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

She literally explains why in the post you quoted.

Well, I missed it too so.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 07-12-2019 4:03pm

noodler wrote: »

Well, I missed it too so.

That’s unfortunate.

People thinking long waiting times won’t cause cancer to run rampant - bless.

Mrs OBumble · 07-12-2019 4:24pm

LirW wrote: »

The waiting times for results are long and the program only covers one smear every 3 years. Other countries test annually as part of a routine gynaecological exam that includes a pelvic scan.
The smears are read in labs in the country and you're called back in person once you gyn doctor receives the result, this takes 1-2 weeks. If it's positive the same doctor does a colposcopy because gyn doctors have their own equipment to do this. If a biopsy is required, they can do this too.
It takes a lot of pressure off the gynaecological hospital services and is a lot faster and cheaper.
It allows women to be very proactive about their health because they have direct access to a specialised doctor without detouring to a GP and then having to wait 2 or 3 months for a colposcopy if a cell change is detected.

Sounds like vast over treatment.

Does this country involve doctors in all births too, turning a natural even into an illness?

Miike · 07-12-2019 4:25pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Sounds like vast over treatment.

Does this country involve doctors in all births too, turning a natural even into an illness?

Do you know the infant mortality rate prior to medical interventions being commonplace at birth, by chance?

beer enigma · 07-12-2019 4:34pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

That’s unfortunate.

People thinking long waiting times won’t cause cancer to run rampant - bless.

I think that's reflected in the fact this thread was started at all to be honest.

Cancer is aggressive

Three weeks to Christmas and the mother of your three kids has gone, last scan all clear, repeat (eventually) oh we're in trouble, month later too late.

Cop on

mvl · 07-12-2019 4:35pm

Mules wrote: »

However, as a result of media speculation the general public still seems to believe it.

So possibly the HPV vaccine uptake would skyrocket after THIS media scandal ?

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 07-12-2019 4:36pm

beer enigma wrote: »

I think that's reflected in the fact this thread was started at all to be honest.

Cancer is aggressive

Three weeks to Christmas and the mother of your three kids has gone, last scan all clear, repeat (eventually) oh we're in trouble, month later too late.

Cop on

Yup. It’s very easy for people to be blasé about hypotheticals when it’s not their life on the line. Some of us are living it.

LirW · 07-12-2019 4:38pm

Caledonia wrote: »

But sure they don’t even disclose audits!! So your point is rubbish.
There are no payouts for inherent false negatives there as no one gets told. So in ur country Vicky Phelan would have got ZERO €
As for detour to the GP that doesn’t show much medical understanding. A perception by you that it’s better somewhere else isn’t a fact TIL we look at survival rates.
ðŸ˜႒

Other countries don't have campaigns like the Cervical smear tests because they are included in annual routine exams. The smear slides get sent to medical laboratories that don't only do smear tests but all sorts of lab diagnoses. These labs have regular external audits to see if the data, methods and diagnosis matches up.
You are right that there is no centralised smear auditing in countries without a national campaign, it's only individual lab audits, which would be enough to find a lab liable of a wrong result if an auditor can prove fault on their side.

Germany at the moment is transitioning the Cervical smears into a national program and the smears in this program will of course be audited, to secure a program-wide standard in quality control rather than auditing individual labs.

Also since you go on about who audited the smears of the affected women, do you know who did it? The very same company on Texas that misread the slides in the first place. CervicalCheck agreed to have the parent company of the first lab that read Phelan's smear on 2012, perform the audit in 2014.
In 2018 they suddenly stopped the audit with no statement, the suspicion arose it was because the number of slides read wrong was at over 200 and they have a reputation to lose. This is a huge conflict of interest.

beer enigma · 07-12-2019 4:41pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Yup. It’s very easy for people to be blasé about hypotheticals when it’s not their life on the line. Some of us are living it.

I am

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 07-12-2019 4:43pm

beer enigma wrote: »

I am

Crap. Me too. Urgh, I’m sorry, beer enigma. I hate to hear about anyone else going through this shit. Lemme guess - you were fobbed off because you’re “too young” or “too healthy”?

LirW · 07-12-2019 4:50pm

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

Sounds like vast over treatment.

Does this country involve doctors in all births too, turning a natural even into an illness?

The reasoning behind annual screening is the nature of the cancer. Cervical cancer is in many cases asymptomatic until hitting an advanced stage. The earlier intervention happens, the better the outcome. Even simple LLETZ treatments increase a woman's chance of pregnancy complications because the cervix is permanently weakened and premature birth is more likely.
When I had mine I had a pretty long brief on what to do if I get pregnant because I'm in child bearing age.
I have a long history of cervical cell changes and am currently checked every year on the CervicalCheck program.

Also afaik in every country in the EU you're free to give birth wherever you want and in hospitals a doctor would be on the ward to check in quickly at the end to stitch you up properly.

LirW · 07-12-2019 4:56pm

beer enigma wrote: »

I am

I'm sorry to hear that, all the best.

Martina1991 · 07-12-2019 5:13pm

LirW wrote:

The waiting times for results are long and the program only covers one smear every 3 years. Other countries test annually as part of a routine gynaecological exam that includes a pelvic scan. The smears are read in labs in the country and you're called back in person once you gyn doctor receives the result, this takes 1-2 weeks.

LirW wrote:

Other countries don't have campaigns like the Cervical smear tests because they are included in annual routine exams. The smear slides get sent to medical laboratories that don't only do smear tests but all sorts of lab diagnoses. These labs have regular external audits to see if the data, methods and diagnosis matches up

Smears used to be analysed in many hospitals around the country but Ireland doesn't have enough medical scientists or consultants to provide the service you are describing in your country.

Instead of addressing staff shortages, the samples were sent abroad.

Mules · 07-12-2019 6:48pm

mvl wrote: »

So possibly the HPV vaccine uptake would skyrocket after THIS media scandal ?

Well unfortunately there's a fear about vaccines these days. It's such a shame. It's pretty amazing that we actually have a vaccine that can prevent an infection that can cancer.

beer enigma · 07-12-2019 11:51pm

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Crap. Me too. Urgh, I’m sorry, beer enigma. I hate to hear about anyone else going through this shit. Lemme guess - you were fobbed off because you’re “too young” or “too healthy”?

It was actually my wife, misdiagnosed and by the time they realised it was too late. First Christmas for myself and our kids and I'm dreading it.

The OP's statement of "Just seems for something that was portrayed as being a massive thing there’s very little in it" makes my blood boil....

ONE is too many.

Mrs OBumble · 08-12-2019 2:00am

beer enigma wrote: »

The OP's statement of "Just seems for something that was portrayed as being a massive thing there’s very little in it" makes my blood boil....

ONE is too many.

One is too many but on a population level some are unavoidable. There will always be some false negatives, and some treatment failures.

As long as preventative behaviour is socially unacceptable, there will be lots of cases of STDs and consequences.

All of which is no comfort to you on an individual, I know. Sorry for your loss.

noodler · 08-12-2019 2:02am

I'm still not sure if everyone realises that a screening process is not scientific.

beer enigma · 08-12-2019 3:02am

Mrs OBumble wrote: »

One is too many but on a population level some are unavoidable. There will always be some false negatives, and some treatment failures.

As long as preventative behaviour is socially unacceptable, there will be lots of cases of STDs and consequences.

All of which is no comfort to you on an individual, I know. Sorry for your loss.

Yes I accept they're always a risk of a wrong result but this wasn't one case, this was screening farmed out to the cheapest tender and many many cases.

And wholly agree on prevention side

beer enigma · 08-12-2019 3:03am

noodler wrote: »

I'm still not sure if everyone realises that a screening process is not scientific.

Nothing is perfect but if you buy cheap tyres there's a risk you will crash.

They cut costs and we pay the price

Jinglejangle69 · 08-12-2019 3:05am

beer enigma wrote: »

It was actually my wife, misdiagnosed and by the time they realised it was too late. First Christmas for myself and our kids and I'm dreading it.

The OP's statement of "Just seems for something that was portrayed as being a massive thing there’s very little in it" makes my blood boil....

ONE is too many.

Who do you blame?

beer enigma · 08-12-2019 3:08am

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

Who do you blame?

I blame whoever took the decision that screening was so insignificant that it could be farmed out thus increasing the risk of misdiagnosis

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts · 08-12-2019 3:16am

beer enigma wrote: »

It was actually my wife, misdiagnosed and by the time they realised it was too late. First Christmas for myself and our kids and I'm dreading it.

The OP's statement of "Just seems for something that was portrayed as being a massive thing there’s very little in it" makes my blood boil....

ONE is too many.

Yes. YES. How can people be so blasé? Your wife was somebody with thoughts and hopes and dreams, not a statistic.

cj maxx · 08-12-2019 5:11am

beer enigma wrote: »

I think that's reflected in the fact this thread was started at all to be honest.

Cancer is aggressive

Three weeks to Christmas and the mother of your three kids has gone, last scan all clear, repeat (eventually) oh we're in trouble, month later too late.

Cop on

I'm sorry for your loss, beer

Kirby · 08-12-2019 7:06am

beer enigma wrote: »

I blame whoever took the decision that screening was so insignificant that it could be farmed out thus increasing the risk of misdiagnosis

Farming it out is a necessity, not a choice. There aren't enough trained Irish professionals in this field to cover all the tests. I'm sure that's scant comfort to a person who has lost someone to cancer but it's the unfair reality of the situation.

LirW · 08-12-2019 10:06am

Ah yeah, what a new low: telling a grieving man who lost his wife that she took one for the team and might just be a statistic. Jesus, show some compassion, this is a really tough time of the year for bereaved.

Anyways, people seem to have a poor understanding on how HPV works. It's not spread in fluids, the barrier method does not protect from HPV because it's transmitted via skin on skin contact.
In most people it's asymptomatic and clears itself, in other it can linger in the body for years. It's estimated that around 80% of the population have it during their lives, with the majority not knowing about it. So if you have sex or had different partners it's very likely you had or have it.
Nobody who's sexually active can protect themselves from HPV whether they want it or not. Safe sex does not protect you (doesn't mean that you shouldn't practice it, it's always important to stay safe).

And HPV is the most common cause of cervical cell changes but not the only one.

08-12-2019 10:51am

beer enigma wrote: »

It was actually my wife, misdiagnosed and by the time they realised it was too late. First Christmas for myself and our kids and I'm dreading it.

The OP's statement of "Just seems for something that was portrayed as being a massive thing there’s very little in it" makes my blood boil....

ONE is too many.

I'm so, so sorry for your loss, BE. I hope you and the kids get through the next few weeks okay. Mind yourself and each other.

jackboy · 08-12-2019 11:01am

beer enigma wrote: »

I blame whoever took the decision that screening was so insignificant that it could be farmed out thus increasing the risk of misdiagnosis

Did the labs which carried out the testing perform to a poor standard? I have not seen evidence of that. The reports seem to indicate that the labs performed as expected.

neonsofa · 08-12-2019 11:28am

jackboy wrote: »

Did the labs which carried out the testing perform to a poor standard? I have not seen evidence of that. The reports seem to indicate that the labs performed as expected.

I got a letter stating that they didn't test within the correct time frame and therefore I woud have to get tested again because they tested the sample outside of the optimal time frame for testing for hpv. I think for other cell changes it didnt matter about the time frame. I was told this two years after the test.

Apparently hundreds of women received this letter at the same time I did, so the labs weren't performing as expected. I dont have the letter to hand atm so can't outline what the correct time frame was or how far out they were (if it even gave that info).

jackboy · 08-12-2019 11:39am

neonsofa wrote: »

I got a letter stating that they didn't test within the correct time frame and therefore I woud have to get tested again because they tested the sample outside of the optimal time frame for testing for hpv. I think for other cell changes it didnt matter about the time frame. I was told this two years after the test.

Apparently hundreds of women received this letter at the same time I did, so the labs weren't performing as expected. I dont have the letter to hand atm so can't outline what the correct time frame was or how far out they were (if it even gave that info).

Fair enough. I don’t remember any of the reports detailing that. Were the labs given the deadlines for each test? or was the HSE keeping track of that. That would be a very basic error for a lab.

neonsofa · 08-12-2019 1:16pm

jackboy wrote: »

Fair enough. I don’t remember any of the reports detailing that. Were the labs given the deadlines for each test? or was the HSE keeping track of that. That would be a very basic error for a lab.

It was in januray this year, i heard something on the radio around that time, thats how i know there were a hundred or so other people who received a similar letter, but i dont remember reading much about it beyond that either tbh.

I found the letter, says "it is recommended that hpv testing is carried out within 30 days of the smear test being taken. One of our labs has told us that your hpv test was one of a number of samples that were tested after the recommended date i.e. after the recommended 30 day timeframe". Very vague on details.
An insert with the letter says "Quest diagnostics has advised us of an issue... testing was done outside of manufacturer's guidelines"

Cervical Check...No Scandal..

Comments