Stephen Donnelly (Wicklow, Fianna Fail) | Oireachtas source

Now, I believe there is potentially a causal issue. It relates to what I regard as misleading information given to the women. The briefing note states:

As with all screening tests, cervical screening is not 100% accurate. Screening cannot give a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ answer and a negative screening result does not mean that the disease will not develop in future.

That is what people were told. Will the medics before the committee indicate whether they believe giving that information made sense? In reality we now know is that had the disease been present or had abnormalities been present there was only a 70% chance that the screening would actually pick them up. Do the medics before the committee believe stating that screening is not 100% accurate was appropriate? Many people, including me, would be led to believe that the accuracy percentage is perhaps in the high 90s. Could that have led women to being less vigilant with regard to becoming symptomatic, given that they were told screening is not 100% accurate? I would have taken it that I was meant to believe it was 99% accurate but that I had the all-clear. Is it possible that there is a causal link between clinical outcomes for women and information that suggested the screening was more accurate than it actually was?