**1. Introduction**

The deaths from the COVID pandemic that could have been avoided have emphasized the tragic consequences resulting from the promulgation of inaccurate information and ignoring science. Unfortunately, "alternative facts" have been generated about breast cancer screening that go back decades. Confusion has resulted from the misinformation that has been published due to poor peer review in some of the most prestigious journals [1–4]. These erroneous analyses are then reported to the public by the media, which is unable to understand some of the complexities of the claims being made, resulting in confusing messages. The following reviews just a few of the many false issues that have been raised over the years that are not supported by science. These have been used in an effort to reduce access to screening and to distract from the scientific evidence that supports the fact that annual screening starting at the age of 40 saves the most lives.

Early detection has secondary benefits such as a reduced need for mastectomies, less need for axillary dissection with the attendant reduced risk of lymphedema, and less toxic systemic therapy [5–7], but the following discussion will concentrate on the main benefit, which is mortality reduction and the fact that randomized controlled trials have proven that early detection saves lives for women aged 40–74.

#### **2. The Decades-Long Effort to Reduce Access to Breast Cancer Screening**

I suspect that most are unaware of the fact that there has been an almost continuous effort, dating back to the 1950s, to limit access to breast cancer screening. This is probably, and primarily, an effort to save money, but opponents know that if they told women they did not want to pay to save their lives, there would be "a discussion" that they would lose. Consequently, numerous scientifically unsupportable claims have been made to limit access.
