I think you're missing the point. I'm not arguing against mammograms. From what I've seen here I'm still agnostic. The point of my original post was primarily to note the discrepancy between the apparent confidence you have in the wrongness of the report's conclusion and my impression that you failed to make your case at all convincingly.

I'm not aware of having any particular prior opinion on this issue. I was aware that it had come up in the back and forth debate over health care but I had not consciously formed a strong opinion on it. My (probably biased) belief was that I was relatively impartial on this issue. To me there are numerous obvious logical flaws in your argument that rather undermine it's use as an example on which to build a general theory of an action/inaction bias. The argument for such a bias appears to be premised on there being a watertight and unarguable case for mammograms, a case which it seems to me you failed to make. I don't appear to be the only one who wasn't convinced based on the other comments.