However, in my opinion, there has been a systemic resistance to screening because of statistics like this, and that is misguided. This is not the right number to use for determining whether or not screening is useful.
A 3D mammogram will have false positives, yes. And some women will need to either get an uneccesary ultrasound (annoying, but not harmful) or worse, an uneccessary tissue sample (biopsy). This type of biopsy is done with a needle and is certainly uncomfortable, but carries little to no risk. This is all true. But it needs to be balanced against the fact that catching cancer early gives you an immensely better chance of surviving.
The right numbers to look at are more like: How much does a screening program reduce overall mortality rates? How much does the screening program reduce breast cancer mortality rate? What are the impacts of this in terms of QALY (quality adjusted life years)? What are the impacts of the false positives in quality adjusted life years?
I believe on balance the answer to these questions is that screening for breast cancer is on the whole beneficial. Here is one example study https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31098856/
Now the question is, how will 3D affect these questions? That is as of yet unanswered as far as I know but we shouldn't let numbers like this influence the conversation prematurely.