FDA Reports Injuries in Ongoing Mammography Center of Monterey Quality Case
The agency has received reports of injuries or illnesses tied to the center's image quality problems, though it has not determined any cancer was missed.
3 reports on this incident · first at Sep 1, 2026, 7:15 a.m. ET
Earlier reports
Sep 1, 2026, 7:22 a.m. ET
FDA Closes Action on Monterey Mammography Center Over Image Quality
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has closed its action against the Mammography Center of Monterey, meaning the agency considers the recall carried out, according to Medical Daily.
The action stemmed from a safety notification over severe image quality problems that could cause a mammogram to miss a finding that a properly performed exam would have caught. The FDA has not said any cancer was missed, and no such determination has been published.
The FDA notice does not provide any identifying codes, such as model numbers or lot numbers, so patients who had mammograms at the Monterey center should not assume they are not affected. The agency had advised patients to request their images and reports from the Monterey center and have them reviewed at another certified facility to decide whether a repeat mammogram or further follow-up is needed. The status of the action is ongoing, according to Medical Daily.
Sep 1, 2026, 7:15 a.m. ETFirst report
FDA Warns of Image Quality Problems at Monterey Mammography Center
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a safety notification regarding the Mammography Center of Monterey in Monterey Peninsula, according to a report by Medical Daily. The notification, published on September 1, 2026, warns that a mammogram with severe image quality problems can miss a finding that a properly performed exam would have caught.
The FDA is advising patients who had mammograms at the center to request their images and reports and have them reviewed at another certified facility to decide whether a repeat mammogram or further follow-up is needed. The agency has not said any cancer was missed, and no such determination has been published.
The status of the notification is ongoing, according to Medical Daily.
Was this report accurate and useful?
Sources
Revision history
- Version 11 Sept 2026, 11:15current
First published.
- Version 11 Sept 2026, 11:52current
First published.
- Version 11 Sept 2026, 11:22current
First published.
How we work
This site models an investigative reporter rather than a wire desk. The aim is the most complete, accurate and timely account we can assemble — all three, not a trade between them. Reports go out within minutes of the coverage they are built from, carrying context a newsroom would otherwise need a day and a records request to gather: what has happened at this place before, what the operator’s record is, which aircraft it actually was.
Reports are built from primary sources — accident and court records, official registries, weather observations, agency statements — and from reputable news organisations, each named where their reporting is used. Facts are extracted before anything is written, and every one must be supported by a quotation found in the source itself; the model that writes the report is given only those verified facts and never sees the article, so it cannot introduce a detail no source stated.
Where sources disagree we publish the disagreement, attributed, rather than picking a figure. Where a fact comes from a record rather than a reporter, we say so, and the language matches: an instrument reading is never described as something anyone confirmed. Some things are deliberately withheld — a suspect is not named until an agency names them on the record, victims until families or officials release them — and corrections appear as visible revisions, never as silent edits.
None of that makes a report true. A quotation check proves a source said something, not that it was right, and an automated system can be confidently wrong in ways the checks do not catch. If something here is wrong, the feedback above is how it gets found. The full methodology, including what we refuse to publish.