For nine years now, once each winter, I've willingly placed my breasts -- one at a time, thank you -- in a high-tech wringer.

I've even paid out of pocket for the pleasure.

Now comes big news on the breast cancer prevention front.

Mammograms? Forget about them until you're 50.

Oh, and by the way, don't do that monthly breast exam, period.

"Breast self-exams do no good," a panel of experts said Tuesday, "and women shouldn't be taught to do them ... and the value of breast exams by doctors is unknown."

So this is how we're going to save the ta-tas?

How might the average woman translate these findings by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force: Ignorance is bliss? Or by the time you find that pesky lump, it's too late?

Perhaps it's a bit of both.

Tuesday's news was unclear and unreassuring.

Backing off on the mammogram -- that's been under debate for years.

But don't check for lumps, either?

If you're pushing 50, you've lived through countless "This (fill in the blank with food product, vitamin, procedure) is Bad For You, No Wait, This is Good For You, No Wait..." research cycles.

Had your prostate out when doctors fell overly in love with the PSA? Sorry. The side effects often outweigh the benefits, researchers now say.

Estrogen therapy will make you live longer and give you more satisfaction in the sack, too. Never mind.

So now what: Prop your mammaries up with the latest miracle on Victoria's Secret shelves and call it good?

Two camps of experts emerged in the aftermath of this week's recommendations.

The it's-about-time-folks say the mammograms women undergo before menopause aren't saving very many lives.

They might find a few slow-growing cancers, but they miss the aggressive varieties -- and that's what kills younger women.

They argue the test also comes with the risk of both false positive and false negative results, causing either unneeded anxiety or lulling women into a dangerous sense of security.

The second, this-is-terrible-news camp, say that the mammogram has proven its worth as a testing tool.

Mammograms are not perfect but they are effective, the American Cancer Society's chief medical officer told the New York Times just two weeks ago, reiterating its support of the annual screening beginning at 40.

"This is one screening test I would recommend unequivocally," Dr. Otis Brawley said again this week.

I'm in the third camp. A woman who is not a doctor or a cancer researcher, a scientist or a statistician. Just someone who eats right, exercises regularly, reads the newspaper and is interested in staying alive for a bit longer.

I'd like to keep my breasts, if I can, but I'd be willing to let them go if I had to.

The thing is, right now, I'm not sure the best way to do that.

Since most lumps are benign, I shouldn't bother trying to find one? Since none of my female relatives died of breast cancer, the risk from the radiation from all those mammograms outweighs its benefit?

Since most tumors are slow-growing does that mean mine would be, too? If I had one.

And if mammograms are falling out of favor, does that mean my insurance company won't cover one?

I studied the breast cancer news story carefully. I circled and highlighted.

I read about mathematical modeling and study comparisons that made a Rube Goldberg mousetrap sound simple.

Next September I hit the mid-century mark. If I were a piece of furniture, I'd be hot. As it is I'm just middle-aged. The new magic number for a painful medical procedure.

And I imagine my doctor will recommend one.

Again.

Reach Cindy Lange-Kubick at 473-7218 or clangekubick@journalstar.com.