What do you think?
Rate this book
Conspiracy of Hope: The Truth About Breast Cancer Screening
For decades, women have been told that mammograms save lives. Yet many scientists say that this is in fact not true. Conspiracy of Hope reveals how breast cancer screening was introduced in the US before there was any good evidence it made any difference, and an unfounded belief in early detection caught on quickly in Canada and other developed countries. Today the evidence is starkly clear. Screening does more harm than good. Still women, and their doctors, continue to buy into a myth perpetuated by greed, fear, and wishful thinking.
Conspiracy of Hope illustrates how a vortex of interests came together to make breast screening standard medical practice and why it's so hard to persuade them they are wrong. The radiologists, the imaging machinery manufacturers, and the pink ribbon charities are all part of that story. It is a tale of back-stabbing and intrigue, of exploiting fear and hope, while distorting and misrepresenting the evidence. Or simply ignoring it.
Conspiracy of Hope illustrates how a vortex of interests came together to make breast screening standard medical practice and why it's so hard to persuade them they are wrong. The radiologists, the imaging machinery manufacturers, and the pink ribbon charities are all part of that story. It is a tale of back-stabbing and intrigue, of exploiting fear and hope, while distorting and misrepresenting the evidence. Or simply ignoring it.
- GenresHealth
288 pages, Paperback
Published October 2, 2018
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
November 22, 2018
This was a tough, and oh so important read.
Pellerin takes a hard, emotional topic and gives you all you need to understand it logically.
Mammography began in an effort to incite early screening of breast cancer in women, because as we all know, early detection can save lives. However, other interests - radiologists, pink ribbon organizations, doctors encouraged by pay for performance programs, and other organizations - fought back against any review of the process, even to the point where results showed that over diagnosis easily happened and women often went home wracked over false positive test results which continued to present for the next 3 years.
This book is a reminder that medicine and procedures can still be new, and that the biggest advocate for your health is yourself. Read up, research, and really delve into what is taken as the status quo in medicine today.
This is a dense read with every step carefully researched and presented in a way that makes comprehension easier, however I would still suggest breaks. The material can get easily overwhelming emotionally as well as comprehensively.
I would also be interested to see research done in regards to men who have been diagnosed with breast cancer and whether or not mammography was done for them or in general how procedures differed.
Maybe a followup book?
Pellerin takes a hard, emotional topic and gives you all you need to understand it logically.
Mammography began in an effort to incite early screening of breast cancer in women, because as we all know, early detection can save lives. However, other interests - radiologists, pink ribbon organizations, doctors encouraged by pay for performance programs, and other organizations - fought back against any review of the process, even to the point where results showed that over diagnosis easily happened and women often went home wracked over false positive test results which continued to present for the next 3 years.
This book is a reminder that medicine and procedures can still be new, and that the biggest advocate for your health is yourself. Read up, research, and really delve into what is taken as the status quo in medicine today.
This is a dense read with every step carefully researched and presented in a way that makes comprehension easier, however I would still suggest breaks. The material can get easily overwhelming emotionally as well as comprehensively.
I would also be interested to see research done in regards to men who have been diagnosed with breast cancer and whether or not mammography was done for them or in general how procedures differed.
Maybe a followup book?
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
January 6, 2019
It’s a bit slow in parts, as she goes into great discussion of all the reviews into breast screening. There’s a lot of stats figures and manipulations if these figures. There are many players and it can get confusing to keep people straight.
I wanted to dislike this book, but It opened my eyes to the years-old conflict in the breast screening community, which I had no idea existed. Screening is recommended for women in high risk categories, but the benefits are much less clear for others.
The author talked at length about the harms caused by false positives, but in my opinion ignored the harms caused by false negatives, which are mainly caused by dense breasts. These harms can be even greater as they result in cancers being discovered at much more advanced and harder to treat stages. There are a lot of flaws that women should be informed about wen making a decision of whether to screen or not.
The discussions about mortality rates being the same regardless of screening or not leaves out any information of whether earlier detection of cancers led to a longer and potentially healthier span of life before succumbing to breast cancer. It’s one thing to say mortality rates are unchanged, but if a woman can get extra years of life if the cancer is found early, then it seems like a benefit to screening. Also, even though “only” one extra life might be saved, if you were that woman it would be pretty damned important to you. But I get what she is saying.
I found it very interesting, as well as disturbing because it makes it sound like it makes no difference when a cancer is found. I want to do more research into the subjects, and I have a better appreciation for the information the Canadian Task Force on Prevention of Disease just released. It put the Onus on a woman and her health care practitioner to decide how to proceed - which is fine if they have the correct information to use when making the decision. I’m concerned women in high risk categories might be missed, and also that women who choose not to be screened will suffer from remorse and self blaming if they are later diagnosed with breast cancer.
All in all it was an interesting and worthwhile read.
I wanted to dislike this book, but It opened my eyes to the years-old conflict in the breast screening community, which I had no idea existed. Screening is recommended for women in high risk categories, but the benefits are much less clear for others.
The author talked at length about the harms caused by false positives, but in my opinion ignored the harms caused by false negatives, which are mainly caused by dense breasts. These harms can be even greater as they result in cancers being discovered at much more advanced and harder to treat stages. There are a lot of flaws that women should be informed about wen making a decision of whether to screen or not.
The discussions about mortality rates being the same regardless of screening or not leaves out any information of whether earlier detection of cancers led to a longer and potentially healthier span of life before succumbing to breast cancer. It’s one thing to say mortality rates are unchanged, but if a woman can get extra years of life if the cancer is found early, then it seems like a benefit to screening. Also, even though “only” one extra life might be saved, if you were that woman it would be pretty damned important to you. But I get what she is saying.
I found it very interesting, as well as disturbing because it makes it sound like it makes no difference when a cancer is found. I want to do more research into the subjects, and I have a better appreciation for the information the Canadian Task Force on Prevention of Disease just released. It put the Onus on a woman and her health care practitioner to decide how to proceed - which is fine if they have the correct information to use when making the decision. I’m concerned women in high risk categories might be missed, and also that women who choose not to be screened will suffer from remorse and self blaming if they are later diagnosed with breast cancer.
All in all it was an interesting and worthwhile read.
July 26, 2026
I’ve never met a woman who doesn’t hate having her biennial mammogram. And why would any woman not hate it? It feels like the technician is trying to pull your breast right out of your chest and squash it as flat as a pancake between two very cold metal slabs.
Regardless, every two years, I receive a reminder letter that I’m due for my mammogram and I dutifully make my next appointment and get it done. It’s become such a regular part of women’s health care regimes once they’re past 40 that almost no one questions it.
Enter Reneé Pellerin (class of 2016), who questions it deeply in Conspiracy of Hope: The Truth about Breast Cancer Screening (Goose Lane Editions, 2018). Pellerin points out that, at best, research doesn’t clearly support screening programs, and at worst, it suggests they may cause harm.
In a cover blurb written by Dr. Brian Goldman, host of CBC’s White Coat, Black Art, the veteran ER physician writes, “Pellerin knows the science better than many of the doctors in whose hands women have placed their trust.” On that note, I’ll let Pellerin speak for herself. The following passages are taken from the beginning and the end of the introduction:
"Based on the knowledge of the day and her own decade of experience, [Maureen] Roberts [the clinical director of the Edinburgh Breast Screening Project] expressed serious misgivings about the nationwide breast screening program launched in the United Kingdom the year before she died. She acknowledged … research that showed mammography screening reduced deaths from breast cancer by 30 percent. But she urged her readers to also consider other research that did not find benefit….
"Then she asked, 'If screening does little or no good could it possibly be doing any harm? We are all reluctant to face this…. There is also an air of evangelism, few people questioning what is actually being done,” she wrote. “Are we brainwashing ourselves into thinking that we are making a dramatic impact on a serious disease before we brainwash the public?' …
This is an excellent and very well-researched book. To read the rest of the review, go to https://lynnemelcombe.com/2025/10/27/....
Regardless, every two years, I receive a reminder letter that I’m due for my mammogram and I dutifully make my next appointment and get it done. It’s become such a regular part of women’s health care regimes once they’re past 40 that almost no one questions it.
Enter Reneé Pellerin (class of 2016), who questions it deeply in Conspiracy of Hope: The Truth about Breast Cancer Screening (Goose Lane Editions, 2018). Pellerin points out that, at best, research doesn’t clearly support screening programs, and at worst, it suggests they may cause harm.
In a cover blurb written by Dr. Brian Goldman, host of CBC’s White Coat, Black Art, the veteran ER physician writes, “Pellerin knows the science better than many of the doctors in whose hands women have placed their trust.” On that note, I’ll let Pellerin speak for herself. The following passages are taken from the beginning and the end of the introduction:
"Based on the knowledge of the day and her own decade of experience, [Maureen] Roberts [the clinical director of the Edinburgh Breast Screening Project] expressed serious misgivings about the nationwide breast screening program launched in the United Kingdom the year before she died. She acknowledged … research that showed mammography screening reduced deaths from breast cancer by 30 percent. But she urged her readers to also consider other research that did not find benefit….
"Then she asked, 'If screening does little or no good could it possibly be doing any harm? We are all reluctant to face this…. There is also an air of evangelism, few people questioning what is actually being done,” she wrote. “Are we brainwashing ourselves into thinking that we are making a dramatic impact on a serious disease before we brainwash the public?' …
This is an excellent and very well-researched book. To read the rest of the review, go to https://lynnemelcombe.com/2025/10/27/....
May 25, 2023
Very well written and sourced book, it was easy for me to follow the timeline. A pocket calculator also helps to understand the numbers.
Women’s health research has experienced a huge deficit through the years and we are still affected by this. The paternalistic “be a good girl and do X” without detailed explanations is an outdated model and we need more pros and cons information like this book provides.
Women’s health research has experienced a huge deficit through the years and we are still affected by this. The paternalistic “be a good girl and do X” without detailed explanations is an outdated model and we need more pros and cons information like this book provides.
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews