| Home | Bookmark | Tell | Active petitions in over 75 countries | Follow GoPetition |
Petition Tag - screening
1. Straight Talk about Screening 
For years independent experts have requested transparency with the client population for breast cancer screening on the issue of overtreatment, but the National Health Service Breast Screening Programme have prevaricated. Everyone wants people with breast cancer to get prompt appropriate treatment; equally, nobody wants people who do not have cancer to be treated as if they do.
If the treatment for breast cancer were a pill with no side effects, it would matter less. But approximately 7000 women per year in the UK receive some or all of surgery, radiotherapy, chemotherapy and adjuvant drug therapy they do not need. They pay a high price for nothing: their life is not saved because it is not threatened.
It seems reasonable that if cancers can be found early, lives can be saved. But women are not told before screening what practitioners know, that
- they may find themselves having to accept life-changing treatment for lesions which may never harm them
- cancerous cell changes are not uncommon and many don’t progress
- screening identifies many minor lesions over and above those that would go on to endanger life but pathologists do not yet know enough about cancer to tell whose abnormalities will progress
- hence all are treated just in case
- this applies both to noninvasive (in situ) and invasive cancers. Some invasive tumours remain static or regress. Not all cancers will kill. This is recognized with cervical and prostate cancers
- screening predominantly identifies slow-growing tumours, treatable even if found later, artificially inflating survival statistics
- sometimes surgery is done to look for cancer not detected by other tests.
The numbers involved in overtreatment are significant. Some would wish to avoid it; it is too late after receiving an equivocal diagnosis to find out.
Independent experts dispute the NHSBSP’s statistics. The NHSBSP quote their own study that for every overtreated person, two other lives are saved. Some people may prefer to avoid even this risk for the sake of a very small chance of benefit; it is their right. Many independent estimates say 10 are overtreated for 1 death prevented in 2000 women screened over 10 years. The difference is huge, significant and material to the decision whether to be screened. Women have a right to know.
Evidence that screening saves lives is lacking. Many screen-diagnosed women are encouraged to believe and allowed to go on believing what is not true, that screening saved their lives.
The NHSBSP has said that they do not want to explain overtreatment for fear of deterring women from screening. That is paternalism. It is wrong to withhold truth about risk of harm in order to secure uptake of a preventive health programme. Women may still want screening when they know the risks, but it is every woman’s right to decide for herself on correct information whether she wants to take the significant risk of overtreatment for the small chance of benefit. My request is simply for accurate relevant information.
2. Stop Illegal Pre-Employment Drug Testing
Federal Law
The drug-testing movement began in 1986, when former President Ronald Reagan signed Executive Order 12564, requiring all federal employees to refrain from using illegal drugs, on or off-duty, as a condition of federal employment. Two years later, Congress passed the Drug-Free Workplace Act of 1988. That, in turn, spawned the creation of federal Mandatory Guidelines for Federal Workplace Drug Testing Programs (Section 503 of PUBLIC LAW 100-71).
The mandatory guidelines apply to executive agencies of the federal government, the uniformed services (excepting certain members of the armed forces), and contractors or service providers under contract with the federal government (excepting the postal service and employing units in the judicial and legislative branches).
Although the Act only applies to federal employees, many state and local governments followed suit and adopted similar programs under state laws and drug-free workplace programs.
Ricerca sul Cancro: Cure e Tecnologie, basate su solide basi scientifiche, attendono da anni di essere prese in considerazione e finanziate. Non vogliamo più che avvengano sprechi di denaro a danno dei pazienti com’è accaduto al CERN a febbr 2010.
Negli ultimi 50 anni non si sono registrati risultati significativi nella riduzione della mortalita’ prematura da cancro, nonostante gli ingenti costi sostenuti: 741 miliardi di dollari all’anno nei 38 paesi piu’ industrializzati del mondo di cui l’ Italia fa parte, equivalenti ad un costo che incide nelle tasche di ognuno di noi per 500 euro all’anno.
Cure e Tecnologie basate su solide argomentazioni scientifiche che hanno grande potenziale di ridurre la mortalità prematura da cancro, attendono, da molti anni, di essere prese in considerazione e finanziate.
Vorremmo poter essere certi che chi gestisce la ricerca adotti procedure scientifiche per scegliere i progetti che offrono maggiori potenzialita’ per la riduzione della mortalità prematura da cancro, invece risulta che il CERN, che dovrebbe garantire la massima serietà e rigore scientifico a tutela della nostra salute, recentemente, in occasione del Workshop sulla “Fisica per la Salute” per la ricerca sul cancro, il 3 febbraio 2010, abbia premiato il progetto Axial-PET che non e’ un progetto sul cancro, come ha dichiarato il giorno prima dell’assegnazione del premio lo stesso responsabile del progetto vincitore. (Vedi il video a: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h1AUpfN7cFU).
Da un semplice calcolo geometrico comprensibile a tutti risulta che l’efficienza del progetto Axial-PET e’ notevolmente inferiore rispetto alla gia’ scarsa efficienza delle apparecchiature PET attualmente in uso essendo ridotta fino all’8,7%, a fronte di un notevole aumento dei costi, nonche’ della necessita’ di somministrare maggiori dosi radioattive al paziente. Il peggioramento in efficienza dell’Axial-PET rispetto alla PET attuale lo rende ancor meno adatto alla diagnosi precoce. Ha ragione quindi il responsabile del progetto vincitore ad affermare che il suo non e’ un progetto per la ricerca sul cancro.
Avendo pero’ ricevuto il primo premio presso il CERN, da tutti riconosciuto come l’istituto piu’ prestigioso nella fisica delle particelle, l’associazione Madame Curie ed altri donatori l’hanno considerato come il progetto migliore per la ricerca sul cancro e gli hanno assegnato i fondi, sottraendoli ad altri progetti che invece hanno molte piu’ potenzialita’ di ridurre la mortalità prematura da cancro, per esempio il progetto 3D-CBS, che ha un’efficienza del 40.000% rispetto alla PET attuale ed e’ percio’ in grado di permettere la diagnosi precoce riducendo la dose radioattiva somministrata al paziente. (Il 3D-CBS, oltre che alla diagnosi precoce su pazienti asintomatici, e’ di estrema utilita’ per il malato di cancro che ha la necessità di essere monitorato, con grande precisione, per rilevare tempestivamente il minimo risveglio del metabolismo anomalo e per ottimizzare la cura, con la minor dose possibile di radiazione).
La ragione per cui il costo del cancro continua ad aumentare senza risultati significativi nella riduzione della mortalita’ e’ dovuta soprattutto al fatto che i centri di ricerca piu’ prestigiosi, come il CERN, non adottano procedure scientifiche nell’identificare e premiare i progetti che offrono maggiori potenzialità di fornire risultati in termini di riduzione della mortalita’ da cancro.
4. Cervical Smear Campaign to test under 25 women if requested
Cervical smear test is used to look for changes in cervical cells and to identify whether further investigation is required. Depending on the degree of abnormality identified, women are asked to have a repeat smear after six or 12 months, or may be referred for a further test to identify the cause of the abnormality identified by screening.
Under the NHS Cervical Screening Program, all women between the ages of 25 and 49 are eligible for a free cervical smear test every three years, and women between the ages of 50 and 64 are eligible for a free test every five years.
The smear test is not routinely available to women aged under 25. Cervical cancer is rare in women under the age of 20; teenagers’ bodies, particularly the cervix, are still developing, which means young women may get an abnormal smear result when there is nothing wrong. This could lead to unnecessary treatment, so screening young women might do more harm than good.
Between the ages of 20 and 25, invasive cancer is still rare but changes in the cervix are common. Although treating lesions in very young women may prevent cancers from developing many years later, the evidence suggests that screening is best started at the age of 25. Lesions that are destined to progress will still be screen-detectable and those that would regress will no longer be a source of anxiety. This means that younger women will not have to undergo unnecessary investigations and treatments.
Any woman under 25 who is concerned about her risk of developing cervical cancer, or her sexual health generally, should contact her GP or Genito-Urinary
5. Manditory Drug/Alcohol Screening for Welfare Recipients
As an American Citizen I have to undergo random drug alcohol screening so I can keep the job I love. It is humiliating, but a necessary evil.
I understand that by me working, a portion of my check is taken out to provide for the needy. I believe this it is a good thing that is being abused.
I see people everyday that I know are drug users cashing Welfare checks, and are perfectly able to work.
If the people receiving the aid had to go through the same kind of screening that I do to provide the aid, the Government would not be in the red.
6. Foxtel bring UK soaps up to date
September 05, 2004
UK soaps Coronation Street and Eastenders are shown on Foxtels UKTV channel. Episodes currently screening are 2 years behind episodes screening in the UK. Originally these soaps were shown only 2-3 times a week in UK but now Eastenders is shown 4 times a week and Coronation Street 5 times a week.
For the last couple of years UKTV has started showing double episodes of Eastenders over the Summer to help catch up but never has it shown double eps of Coronation Street. This means it will never catch up unless extra episodes are shown.
I have started this petition as I love watching both shows and although I appreciate the double helping of Eastenders watching 1.5 hours of soap a night is a big commitment and can be overkill. It seems only logical to me to screen some episodes of both on weekends instead until both are up to date.
One idea could be to move Eastenders 4 eps to Sat & Sun 6.30pm-7.30pm whilst showing double Coronation St weekdays and when Coronation St catches up move Eastenders back to weekdays but leave Eastenders on weekends until it also catches up.
Please sign my petition below if you want to see Coronation Street and/or Eastenders brought up to date.
