Health Highlights: Oct. 21, 2009

• Cancer Society Rethinks Breast, Prostate Tumor Screenings: Report
• CDC Panel Recommends HPV Vaccine Cervarix
• FDA Cracks Down on Misleading Food Labels
• Sperm Donor Passed Heart Defect to Children
• U.S. Med School Enrollment Up Again: Report
• White Wine Erodes Tooth Enamel: Study

Here are some of the latest health and medical news developments, compiled by editors of HealthDay:

Cancer Society Rethinks Breast, Prostate Tumor Screenings: Report

The American Cancer Society is reconsidering its message to the public about the risks and benefits of screening for breast, prostate and certain other kinds of cancers. It plans to caution that screening may lead to overtreatment of many small cancers while missing deadly cancers, The New York Times reported.

"We don't want people to panic," Dr. Otis Brawley, the society's chief medical officer, told the newspaper. "But I'm admitting that American medicine has overpromised when it comes to screening. The advantages to screening have been exaggerated."

Brawley cited a new paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association that questions the effectiveness of screening for breast and prostate cancer. While breast cancer diagnoses have increased 40 percent and early stage breast cancer diagnoses have nearly doubled, there's been only a 10 percent decrease in cancers that have spread from the breast to the lymph nodes or elsewhere in the body. The situation is similar for prostate cancer, the Times reported.

If breast and prostate cancer screenings were truly effective, late-stage cancers would now be found early when they could be cured, said the authors of the study, adding this is what happened with screening for colon and cervical cancer.

While the American Cancer Society plans to reconsider its information on the risks and benefits of screening for breast and prostate cancer, some experts worry that increased discussion about the risks may confuse people and cause many to forego screening.

"I am concerned that the complex view of a changing landscape will be distilled by the public into yet another 'screening does not work' headline," Dr. Colin Begg, a biostatistician at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center in New York City, told the Times. "The fact that population screening is no panacea does not mean that it is useless."

-----

CDC Panel Recommends HPV Vaccine Cervarix

An advisory panel to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Wednesday recommended the cervical cancer vaccine Cervarix for use in girls and women.

If approved for widespread use, the vaccine, made by GlaxoSmithKline PLC, would join Merck & Co.'s Gardasil, which gained approval in 2006, Dow Jones Newswires reported. The CDC currently recommends that Gardasil be offered to girls 11 and 12 years old, since the vaccine is most effective before the onset of sexual activity.

Cervarix gained approval last week from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, which recommended the shot for females ages 10 to 26. Both Cervarix and Gardasil protect against strains 16 and 18 of the human papilloma virus (HPV), thought to be the cause of nearly 70 percent of all cervical cancers.

-----

FDA Cracks Down on Misleading Food Labels

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced Tuesday that it plans to put an end to food labeling it believes makes consumers think foods have more nutritional value than they do.

The agency will target the front panels of packages bearing logos or language suggesting that the product is healthier than the actual ingredients indicate, FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg said in a news conference Tuesday afternoon, the Chicago Tribune reported.

"There's a growing proliferation" of symbols that suggest healthfulness and "some nutritionists have questioned whether this information is more marketing-oriented than health-oriented. Judging from some of the labels we've seen, this is a valid concern," Hamburg said.

The front of packages often catch consumers' eyes, while shoppers are less likely to read the nutritional information boxes on the side or back of packages, Hamburg explained.