Laszlo Tabar MD

@ToulaSdestounis @DrPaulaGordon @CARadiologists @BCCancer @JeanSeely The basic argument supporting screening from age 40 is that the randomized screening trials showed a significant decrease in mortality in women aged 40-74 years. Any breakdown to age subgroups is unjustified and lacks scientific support.

@BreastAdvocate @MonicaSheth dropbox.com/s/0pdq1mhwxk53…

@MdTabar Could you share a link to your study? Thank you. @MonicaSheth #BreastCancer #mammogram

John Bailar told the same thing in 1976 in his flawed Lancet article. He was as wrong as you are Allen. Fortunately, our randomized study with 29-yr follow-up and many service screenings refute your unscientific argument. People should watch out with fake news that are "shocking.

@ESchattner The NEJM should withdraw Dr Welch's articles which we criticized very professionally but the Deputy editor Dr Longo, who refused to publish our letter 2013 still protects a fraudulent person. He should retire from his post.

@GideonGil @NEJM @statnews @RetractionWatch His articles are not only research misconduct but also "nonsense and nonscience" as Prof Dan Kopans from Harvard Univ correctly described it.

Exclusive: Prominent health policy researcher Gil Welch used colleagues’ work in @NEJM paper “without giving them appropriate credit,” Dartmouth investigation finds statnews.com/2018/08/20/dar… via @statnews @RetractionWatch

Breast Cancer is not always a palpable lump. Mother battling cancer shares warning photo to show unusual symptoms dailym.ai/2OqSDjK via @MailOnline Also #Densebreast tissue may obscure #cancer on your Mammogram. #Breastdensity Know it ~ Understand it

@phxbizjournal Lufthansa used to have a direct flight, I was on the last one when the pilot asked for permission to fly low over the Grand Canyon. I took nice photographs.

Condor starts Phoenix flights to Frankfurt bit.ly/2KVLrJM

@Vilavaite @pmgrad Maria, please look at the next Twitter which has the correction. Sorry about the typo.

The correct URL of our letter to the editor of the British Medical Journal is: Bmj.com/content/359/bm…

Together with my friend, Peter B. Dean we pointed out in a letter to the editor of British Medical Journal how incorrect and unscientific P. Autier's article published in the BMJ was. bm.com/content/359/BM…

@DrPaulaGordon @CARadiologists @BCCancer @JeanSeely True, so true Paula. One should keep in mind that there are two reliable risk factors: to be a woman who is ageing. This supports fully what Paula Gordon is saying: all women aged 40-74 should go through regular, organized screening and also those older than 74 who are interested

Love you Daniel. Your Dad

Correct terminology of the different breast cancer subtypes is based on the site of origin. 75% of all breast cancers originate from the TDLUs, but erroneously termed "ductal" cancer in situ or invasive "ductal" cancer. The 3D histopathology images show the true site of origin.

The structure of a breast lobe on a galactogram and on a thick section, subgross, 3D histopathology image.

Normal terminal ductal lobular units (TDLUs) compared to adenosis (hypertrophy and hyperplasia of the TDLUs) (compare the flowers). The difference is seen well on the mammograms.

Thank you Karen, appreciate your comment. I am going to post more of this kind of entertaining learning. Laszlo

@OWeaverMD Appreciate your comment Olena. Hope you can experience the learning process at one of our teaching courses: mammographyed.com

Here we go again: the anti-screening pseudoskeptics repeat their flawed arguments again and again, pushing their own ideology, thus harming women. Please read the following: auntminnieeurope.com/index.aspx?sec…

We are in the middle of a four day long, intensive hands-on mammography screening teaching course in Suffers Paradise, Gold Coast, Australia. Hard working, attentive audience doing screening.