This article does a particularly good job of presenting both sides of the issue. I've read a printed article on the same study by another publication (local newspaper via a wire service), and this showed must more context, fairness and balance in offering opposing point of view (the point of view of those that feel the study is of limited usefulness. The story is about mammogram's limited usefulness).
I worry about excessive exposure to radiation. Standards for everyone, even those with no prior history or family history, require yearly screenings starting at age 40 and every year thereafter through the age of 60, continuing up to age 70 on a less frequent basis. The old standard was one at age 40, then another at age 45 continuing yearly, I don't recall for how long.
Of course, the protocol should be different for those with family or prior history of breast cancer, or other predisposing factors.