I am writing regarding the Oct. 13 article, “Study Questions Value of Mammograms.” I respectfully dispute the author’s interpretation of the data. The comparison data that they used to show that breast cancer incidence is not increasing was a short, exceptionally flat area of the curve, and not representative of the trend when the data is viewed over a longer period.
The true picture of breast cancer incidence is based on four decades of data from a national database. The authors instead “cherry picked” a few years of the flattened part of the breast cancer incidence curve from the mid-’70s to make their calculations. This is like projecting performance of the stock market from the years of the Depression. When the correct breast cancer incidence is used, the paper actually confirms the benefits of mammography screening in decreasing deaths from breast cancer.
Annual screening mammography beginning at age 40 is proven to decrease the chances of dying from cancer and decrease the chances of suffering physical, financial and psychological impacts of the disease. New Hampshire has the second-highest rate of breast cancer in the nation. The only ones to benefit from this misleading data manipulation are insurers and health systems — not the individuals they serve.
Rebecca A. Zuurbier, M.D. Lebanon
A reader recently wrote that Trump is the person to vote for, because Clinton can’t be trusted. I thought seriously about whom I would vote for. I knew it wasn’t Trump. It would be insanity to have someone who has declared bankruptcy four times (either his companies or him personally), who has no Foreign Service experience, probably didn’t pay any tax for many years, does not pay people who did work for him, and likes our mortal enemy Putin.
Regardless, I thought about a protest vote for an independent, but I don’t think this is the answer. I think Clinton is the way to go. Some would argue “it would be another four years of the same, but this country is so troubled we need a person who can rise up and make things happen. Trump couldn’t do this; he is too enamored with himself.
Charly Rauscher Windsor
The Better Vermont Candidate
With the pending Vermont gubernatorial election, we are fortunate to have two good candidates. The differences are small. However, Vermont has several major issues: cost of education with a declining student enrollment, cost of health care as a growing burden on the state, budget challenges and child neglect due to drug use. On these issues, Sue Minter advocates programs that will make matters worse. She wants to continue Gov. Peter Shumlin’s health care initiatives, does not advocate a state budget Vermonters can afford and has little to offer to influence drug problems. Clearly, Minter is strongly supported by the Vermont NEA (we get frequent calls to vote for her) and she will owe them.
Phil Scott will provide Vermont with a state budget we can afford, will work to size our schools to the declining school population, will place Vermont’s health exchange under the federal one, and has a strong drug prevention program. He has a track record of supporting Vermont families in need and will continue his family-focused efforts.
Harvey Bazarian Hartford
Year of Bad Choices
I’m certain that historians will look back on 2016 elections as “the year of terrible choices.” Not just the presidential picks, but for U.S. Senator in New Hampshire. On one hand you have Maggie Hassan, with not much on her resume except for being very slow to get anything accomplished. She also had trouble, it seems, in answering a reporter’s question regarding Hillary Clinton’s trustworthiness.
Then you have Sen. Kelly Ayotte. She likes to tout her “ability to work with Democrats,” but when Sen. Mitch McConnell decides not to even give Obama’s Supreme Court nominee a fair hearing, Ayotte is right on board. Ayotte is part of the most obstructionist Congress I’ve ever witnessed. The same Republican- dominated crew who refuse help for veterans unless it’s tied to a cut to Planned Parenthood. It’s a motley crew of do-nothings who refuse to fund any help with the Zika crisis unless funds are withheld from something else. As much as I dislike Hassan, I feel she would be better for America than another four to six years of Republican stagnation.
Daniel Moore Grafton