A report on breast cancer screening aroused controversy last week by attempting to set clear guidelines based on potential risks and benefits. The task force report was quickly caught up in the politics now swirling around health care, but women and doctors should consider this guidance despite the uproar against it.

The report advised that most women should wait until their 50s  before getting mammograms. This opinion brought disagreement from the American Cancer Society as well as all points on the political spectrum.

For many, it simply seemed illogical to urge any lessening of vigilance against cancer. Women who successfully fought aggressive cancers were quick to testify that mammograms and self-testing can provide life-saving warnings.

But supporters of the recommendation pointed out that screening for breast cancer can itself cause problems. For women facing a potential diagnosis of breast cancer, the difficulties include worry and depression, biopsies and their potential complications, and the possibility of unnecessary surgeries. CT scans used to screen for cancer provide a dose of radiation that is itself a cancer risk.

After weighing such risks, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended against routine mammograms for women in their 40s. It did not consider the financial costs, which amount to billions of dollars per year.

 The task force said 1,900 women in their 40s would have to be  screened to save  a single life. The rate for women in their 50s is 1,300 to 1. Both the administration and Republicans in Congress found this information unpalatable. “This is how rationing starts,” warned Republican Sen. Jon Kyl of Arizona. Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius quickly pledged that the administration would take no official notice of the findings.

Since the task force’s recommendations seem to contradict the health care gospel of vigilance and prevention, these are understandable responses. But policymakers should not stifle efforts by experts to come up with a clear-eyed analysis of health care risks and benefits. Such efforts are part of the ongoing effort to make medicine more effective.

The panel’s recommendations had  nothing to do with the costs of health care, but the reaction helps illustrate why U.S. medical costs  are so high. Although many pay lip service to the idea that the U.S. spends far too much on unnecessary tests and treatments, there is great reluctance to consider where it might make sense to cut back.

— Questions? Comments? Contact Managing Editor Nick Cowenhoven at nickc@journaltribune.com or City Editor Kristen Schulze Muszynski at kristenm@journaltribune.com.