The Truth About Mammograms & The Best Alternatives

21/1/17

Mammograms Again Proven Harmful to Women and Actually May Increase Cancer Risk

&

Learn About A Safer Options

Waking Times

Mammograms Send Women To Their Deathbeds Faster And Increase Their Risk of Breast Cancer As Much As 30 Percent

Even with the established evidence which supports the long-term health risks and danger of mammograms, the medical community still pushes them like pancakes. Besides overdiagnosis and the unnecessary treatment of insignificant cancers, mammograms cause radiation-induced breast cancer themselves, increasing several risk factors for the disease.

Increases Breast Cancer Mortality

Mammography is the most widely used screening modality for breast cancer and with good reason for the medical community. It gives them more patients. Breast cancer screenings result in an increase in breast cancer mortality and fail to address prevention.

Diagnosis of cancers that would otherwise never have caused symptoms or death in a woman’s lifetime can expose a woman to the immediate risks of therapy (surgical deformity or toxicities from radiation therapy, hormone therapy, or chemotherapy), late sequelae (lymphedema), and late effects of therapeutic radiation (new cancers, scarring, or cardiac toxicity). Although the specific plan of oncologists is usually to recommend tailored treatments according to tumor characteristics, there is still no reliable way to distinguish which cancer would never progress in an individual patient; and consequently treatments are lumped into the “treat all just in case” just in case category.

Breast cancer screening does not play a direct role in the reductions of deaths due to breast cancer in almost every region in the world. Part of the failure correlates to more than 70 percent of mammographically detected tumors being false positives leading to unnecessary and invasive biopsies and subsequent cancer treatment such as radiation which itself causes cancer.

More Than Half Result In Overdiagnosis

Out of all breast cancers detected by screening mammograms, up to 54% are estimated to be results of overdiagnosis. The best estimations of overdiagnosis come from either long-term follow-up of RCTs of screening or the calculation of excess incidence in large screening programs.

Despite no evidence ever having supported any recommendations made for regular periodic screening and mammography at any age, malicious recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) and the American College of Radiology (ACR) on breast cancer screening are now promoting that breast cancer screening should begin at age 40 and earlier in high-risk patients. Published in the Journal of the American College of Radiology (JACR), the recommendations released by the SBI and ACR state that the average patient should begin annual breast cancer screening at age 40. They also target women in their 30s if they are considered “high risk” as they stated.

On average, 10% of women will be recalled from each screening examination for further testing, and only 5 of the 100 women recalled will have cancer. Approximately 50% of women screened annually for 10 years in the United States will experience a false positive, of whom 7% to 17% will have biopsies. The risk of cancer increases as much as 30% in a given 10 year period of women being exposed to yearly mammograms.

Inaccurate Even When Cancer Is Present

6% to 46% of women with invasive cancer will have negative mammograms, especially if they are young, have dense breasts, or have mucinous, lobular, or rapidly growing cancers.

Radiation-induced mutations can cause breast cancer, especially if exposure occurs before age 30 years and is at high doses, such as from mantle radiation therapy for Hodgkin disease. The breast dose associated with a typical two-view mammogram is approximately 4 mSv and extremely unlikely to cause cancer. One Sv is equivalent to 200 mammograms. Latency is at least 8 years, and the increased risk is lifelong.

The rate of advanced breast cancer for U.S. women 25 to 39 years old nearly doubled from 1976 to 2009, a difference too great to be a matter of chance.

In 1976, 1.53 out of every 100,000 American women 25 to 39 years old was diagnosed with advanced breast cancer, a study in the American Medical Association found. By 2009, the rate had almost doubled to 2.9 per 100,000 women in that age group — a difference too large to be a chance result.

Cause Far More Harm Than Good

A disturbing study published in the New England Journal of Medicine is bringing mainstream attention to the fact that mammography has caused far more harm than good in the millions of women who have employed it over the past 30 years as their primary strategy in the fight against breast cancer

Titled “Effect of Three Decades of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Incidence,” researchers estimated that among women younger than 40 years of age, breast cancer was overdiagnosed, i.e. “tumors were detected on screening that would never have led to clinical symptoms,” in 1.3 million U.S. women over the past 30 years. In 2008, alone, “breast cancer was overdiagnosed in more than 70,000 women; this accounted for 31% of all breast cancers diagnosed.

Most mammography-detected breast cancer presents without symptoms in the majority of women within which it is detected, and if left untreated will not progress to cause harm to women. Indeed, without x-ray diagnostic technologies, many if not most of the women diagnosed with it would never have known they had it in the first place. The journal Lancet Oncology, in fact, published a cohort study last year finding that even clinically verified “invasive” cancers appear to regress with time if left untreated:

“[We] believe many invasive breast cancers detected by repeated mammography screening do not persist to be detected by screening at the end of 6 years, suggesting that the natural course of many of the screen-detected invasive breast cancers is to spontaneously regress.”

The study authors point out “The introduction of screening mammography in the United States has been associated with a doubling in the number of cases of early-stage breast cancer that are detected each year.” And yet, they noted, only 6.5% of these early-stage breast cancer cases were expected to progress to advanced disease. Mammography-detected breast cancer and related ‘abnormal breast findings,’ in other words, may represent natural, benign variations in breast morphology. Preemptive treatment strategies, however, are still employed today as the standard of care, with mastectomy rates actually increasing since 2004.

It is also questionable whether screening mammograms can even provide genuine ‘early diagnosis’ as is frequently claimed. A new blood test being developed in America and Nottingham, England will pick up on proteins developed by the very earliest ‘rogue’ cells almost before a cancer has formed. In the press release the scientists claim that this is a good 4 years before a mammogram can show up a tumour. Apparently, a cancer makes about 40 divisions during its life, and mammograms cannot pick up a breast tumour until it is of a sufficient size, usually around 20 such divisions. So much for early diagnosis!

These concerns are part of a growing trend. Perhaps one of the most damning reports was a large scale study by Johns Hopkins published in 2008 in the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association’s Archives of Internal Medicine (Arch Intern Med. 2008;168[21:2302-2303). In the Background to the research it was pointed out that breast cancer diagnosis rates increased significantly in four Scandanavian counties after women there began receiving mammograms every two years.

The Dangers of Routine Mammography

The recent Komen controversy has the media buzzing about a reversal of policy over its decision to cut funding to PP and mammogram screening procedures. The real issue for women’s health is not about funding but about the deadly effects from radiation spewing from mammogram screening devices.

Routine mammograms are far less effective at preventing breast cancer deaths and far more expected to cause unnecessary procedures, over-treatment and ultimately accelerate death more than any other screening method on women.

  1. A routine mammogram screening typically involves four x-rays, two per breast. This amounts to more than 150 times the amount of radiation that is used for a single chest x-ray. Bottom line: screening mammograms send a strong dose of ionizing radiation through your tissues. Any dose of ionizing radiation is capable of contributing to cancer and heart disease.
  2. Screening mammograms increase the risk of developing cancer in premenopausal women.
  3. Screening mammograms require breast tissue to be squeezed firmly between two plates. This compressive force can damage small blood vessels which can result in existing cancerous cells spreading to other areas of the body.
  4. Cancers that exist in pre-menopausal women with dense breast tissue and in postmenopausal women on estrogen replacement therapy are commonly undetected by screening mammograms.
  5. For women who have a family history of breast cancer and early onset of menstruation, the risk of being diagnosed with breast cancer with screening mammograms when no cancer actually exists can be as high as 100 percent.

A Better Solution: Thermography

Thermography (also called thermology) is a little-known technique for breast cancer detection that’s been available since the 1960s. It’s non-invasive and non-toxic, using an infrared camera to measure thermal emissions from the entire chest and auxiliary regions. Cancerous tissue develops a blood supply to feed a growing tumor, and the abnormal blood vessel formations generate significantly more heat than the surrounding healthy tissue. The infrared camera detects the differences in heat emitted from abnormal tissue (including malignancies, benign tumors and fibrocystic disease), as compared to normal tissue. There is no physical contact with the patient, who stands several feet away from the camera while a technician takes a series of images.

A second set of images is taken following a “cold challenge”. The patient places her hands in ice cold water for one minute causing healthy tissue to constrict while the abnormal tumor tissue remains hot. The infrared scanner easily distinguishes the difference, and these images are compared with the first set for confirmation.

Thermography can detect abnormalities before the onset of a malignancy, and as early as ten years before being recognized by other procedures such as manual breast exam, mammography, ultrasound or MRI. This makes it potentially life-saving for women who are unknowingly developing abnormalities, as it can take several years for a cancerous tumor to develop and be detected by mammogram. Its accuracy is also impressive, with false negative and false positive rates at 9% for each. Thermography is also an effective way to establish a baseline for comparison with future scans; therefore, women should begin screening by the age of 25.

Although widely embraced by alternative health care practitioners, thermography’s obscurity in the mainstream means that too many women rely on mammograms as their only option. There are several reasons for thermography’s lack of support by the conventional medical community. Early thermal scanners were not very sensitive, nor were they well-tested before being used in clinical practice. This resulted in many misdiagnosed cases and its utter dismissal by the medical community. Since then the technology has advanced dramatically and thermography now uses highly sensitive state-of-the-art infrared cameras and sophisticated computers. A wealth of clinical research attests to its high degree of sensitivity and accuracy. In 1982, the FDA approved thermography for breast cancer screening, yet most of the medical establishment is either unaware of it or still associates it with its early false start. Since most women are also uninformed of the technology there is no pressure on the medical community to support it.

Modern-day breast thermography boasts vastly improved technology and more extensive scientific clinical research.

In fact, the article references data from major peer review journals and research on more than 300,000 women who have been tested using the technology. Combined with the successes in detecting breast cancer with greater accuracy than other methods, the technology is slowly gaining ground among more progressive practitioners.


About the Author:
Dave Mihalovic is a Naturopathic Doctor who specializes in vaccine research, cancer prevention and a natural approach to treatment.

Sources: nlm.nih.gov / cancer.gov / jamanetwork.com / ncbi.nlm.nih.gov / senkyo.co.jp / nejm.org / nap.edu / books.google

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2015/12/07/mammograms-proven-harmful-wome-increase-cancer-risk/

 

The Best Breast Cancer Screening Options for Women

No doubt, the emphasis this October for Breast Cancer Awareness Month will be on prevention, and rightly so. Recent statistics show that approximately 12% of all women in the United States will develop the disease in their lifetime.

In 2016, this means about 246,660 new breast cancer cases. Unfortunately, what also comes like clockwork every October is the onslaught of campaigns from organizations like Susan G. Komen which encourage mammograms as the only option for prevention.

Striking changes in official mammography recommendations were finalized in the beginning of this year. However, this is leaving consumers with a lot of questions - and wanting answers - about other breast cancer screening options.

American Cancer Society Says: Cut Back on Mammograms Now

A report created in 2015 by the U.S. Preventative Task Force (USPTF) rattled the conventional oncology community when it first came out. The report, which was finalized this past January, recommended that women cut their exposure to mammograms by half:

“The evidence reviewed by the USPSTF indicates that a large proportion of the benefit of screening mammography is maintained by biennial screening, and changing from annual to biennial screening is likely to reduce the harms of mammography screening by nearly half.”

It did not take long for the American Cancer Society (ACS) to respond with a change in their own policies. Before the ink was dry on the preliminary USPFT report, the ACS issued their recommendations, which took effect in July 2015.

The American Cancer Society now recommends that women with “average risk” of breast cancer begin annual exams at 45 years of age, not at 40. In addition, the ACS now recommend that women over 55 cut back to biennial screenings instead of getting them once a year.

This change in policy begs the question of why. Just what are the risks that the USPTF talks about in their report?

Reporting by the Media Minimized Mammography Dangers

Unfortunately, when the ACS’s new recommendations came out, the focus was on the risk of “false positives.” False diagnoses of breast cancer after mammogram should be of concern since they can account for up to 20% of all detections. They can sometimes lead to risky biopsy and, in the most extreme cases, they can also lead to chemo, radiation, and mastectomy. In addition, the emotional strain of a breast cancer diagnosis causes needless suffering in all cases.

But false positives are just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to the dangers of mammography:

  1. A 2006 study published in the British Journal of Radiology found that low-level radiation used in a typical mammogram could be four to six times more damaging to cells than higher level x-Rays (breast tissue is very sensitive and susceptible to radiation, which can accumulate in the body with each exam);
  2. If you have been diagnosed with Dense Breasts (Dense Breast Syndrome), your doctor may be required by law to encourage you to get additional mammograms as well as MRIs, PET scans, ultrasound, and even biopsy. These requirements continue in 22 U.S. states despite this National Cancer Institute’s stance on Dense Breast Syndrome. The NCI states that “breast density alone should not dictate whether women should receive additional screening for breast cancer after a normal result on a screening mammogram.”
  3. A Canadian study of women ages 40 to 59 that lasted more than two decades came to the conclusion that annual mammograms do not reduce mortality rates any more than breast self-exams do.
  4. Mammography can actually cause cancer. Some experts believe that a woman’s breast cancer risk rises 2% with each mammogram performed (Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD). This is because of all the compressing, poking, and prodding as well as the radiation exposure that usually accompanies a typical exam.

5 Tests You Can Take NOW for Early Breast Cancer Detection

By the time a tumor shows up with mammography, it has already been growing for five to eight years. For this reason and more, the word is getting out to women who wish to be proactive with breast cancer prevention that they do have alternatives to mammography:

Thermography

Thermography is considered the “gold standard” of alternative testing options since it is non-invasive, safe, and can detect possible tumor activity years before a mammogram can. In fact, a 2008 study published in the American Journal of Surgery concluded that breast thermography has a 97% “sensitivity rating” for finding malignancies before a visible tumor has been formed. Contact the American College of Clinical Thermography for more information.

Iodine

Iodine is absolutely vital for breast health because iodine acts as “food” for many functions connected to the reproductive and endocrine system… including the all-important thyroid. Consider a 24 hour loading test, available online. If possible, test to check if you have fluoride and bromide in your system as well. (Some of the iodine kits test for bromide as well.) Too much of these toxic environmental substances can block iodine absorption.

Vitamin D

Because of sedentary, indoor lifestyles and bad eating habits, most Americans are deficient in Vitamin D. This is a sad fact since there is a direct and research-verified connection between vitamin D deficiency and breast cancer. A test for your vitamin levels can usually be easily administered by your doctor.

Hormone Tests

Getting your overall hormone levels checked is a good choice especially during your perimenopausal and menopausal years. Saliva tests that take a look at your “Estrogen Quotient” can check the balance of the three estrogens that affect breast health: estriol, estrone, and especially estradiol. Other hormone-related tests can check progesterone, testosterone, DHEA, cortisol, and other stress-related hormones that play a part in overall breast health. Another important test is one that will check for estrogen methylation, which is basically the way that the body metabolizes estrogen. Slow or non-existent methylation of hormones can be a sign of cancer risk since cancer cells tend to have improper methylation overall.

ONCOblot

Finally, if you suspect that you may be at high risk of cancer, then ONCOblot may be for you. This is a unique and one-of-a-kind test that was created by Purdue University researchers Drs. Dorothy and James Morré. ONCOblot will check for the universal cancer cell marker ENOX2 and Mammograms-breast-cancer-screeningcan also identify the specific origin of cancer cells in the bloodstream. ONCOblot is said to have a 99% accuracy rate for discovering tumors when they are tinier than a pinhead. Go to the Oncoblot website to find a professional who can administer the test.

This October and in the months to come, the choice to get a mammogram will be a deeply personal yet important one, and only you can decide if it is right for you. At the same time, it is important to know the dangers and also that you have options other than mammography for breast cancer screening. Safe and extremely effective alternative testing methods do exist and more women are using them every year.

https://thetruthaboutcancer.com/breast-cancer-screening/

 

Are Mammograms the Best Breast Cancer Test?

By Dr. David Jockers DC, MS, CSCS

Women in America and other industrialized countries are convinced that regular mammograms are crucial to detecting breast cancer. Enormous funding and research has swayed the public into believing this to be true. Yet despite this, mammography has a very strong opposition in many quadrants of the medical and natural health communities. The question remains: are mammograms the best test for breast cancer?

Mammograms provide an X-ray image of breasts in which doctors will look for evidence of growing tumors that may go unnoticed during a routine physical exam. Needed to produce the image, X-rays expose the patient to ionizing radiation.

Risks and dangers come with mammography use including the exposure to radiation, financial burden, and the rate of inaccuracies. Until 2001, women over the age of 50 were urged to receive annual mammograms. This is when American health officials changed their recommendations to include all women over 40 years of age. Yet back in July of 1995, the British medical journal, The Lancet, published that “the benefit (of mammograms) is marginal, the harm caused is substantial, and the costs incurred are enormous…”

Risk of “False Positive” Diagnosis of Breast Cancer

A “false positive” on a breast cancer test triggers an enormous amount of emotional stress on both patients and their family members. One research team analyzed mammogram diagnostics from 60,000 women. False positives were detected in 70% of the detected areas of concern.

The tremendously high rate of false positive diagnosis has many doctors skeptical of the efficacy of mammography. Furthermore, false detection results in invasive and avoidable biopsies. Upon further testing from these biopsies, 70-80% of detected “tumors” on mammograms revealed no presence of cancer.

Effects of a False Positive Diagnosis

The emotional trauma that comes with believing you have cancer is enough to trigger and accelerate illness in the body. False positive diagnoses are often followed up with unnecessary mastectomies, chemotherapy, and radiation treatment. These treatments further damage an individual’s health by creating physical, emotional, and economic burdens.

Unnecessary Radiation Exposure

Annual mammograms expose a woman to a significantly high amount of ionizing radiation. We are all exposed to ionizing radiation produced from the natural world around us. Our bodies can manage this small amount of radiation, but when high doses of exposure occurs annually there are health risks involved.

If you have ever had a spinal or chest X-ray performed, the radiation that you were exposed to was 1,000 times less than the radiation that is required to complete one series of mammograms to two breasts. Many experts agree that this quantity of radiation actually increases an individual’s risks of breast cancer. Dr. Russell Blaylock, MD, proposes that the likelihood of breast cancer raises 2% each year a mammogram is performed.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has stated that for every 15 cases of breast cancer mammography identifies, it may actually cause 75 breast cancer diagnoses. For this reason younger women are especially at risk for the dangers involving mammography testing. In fact, studies have shown that young women tested annually have up to a 52% increase in breast cancer related deaths.

Mammograms Stimulate Cancer Growth

Since the onset of mammography, the rate of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has elevated by 328%. DCIS is a type of early stage breast cancer. Researchers have discovered the oncogene AC which is extremely sensitive to radiation. Women with the oncogene AC are at an even higher risk when they undergo mammography testing. It is estimated that 10,000 individuals whom carry the gene will die of breast cancer annually as a consequence of mammography.

Another way mammograms induce cancer growth is by compressing the patient’s breasts. This action releases cancerous cells into circulation thereby increasing the risk that the malignancy will spread systemically.

A former clinical associate at the NCI in immunology and pharmacology, Dr. Charles Simone, has strongly advocated against mammography for breast cancer screening. Dr. Simone said, “Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth.”

Thermography: A Better Breast Cancer Test

I firmly believe that an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure. Somehow our society has missed the fact that we should strive every day to live an anti-cancer lifestyle. Rather, we are told that we should only screen our health each year while simultaneously we are led to believe it is okay to live a lifestyle destructive to our health.

When the inevitable results with a positive cancer diagnosis, we are treated like a victim. Instead we should be taught how years of abuse has led to the problem.

It has been my choice to live an anti-cancer lifestyle and avoid the dangers involved with “testing for disease.” If you have not followed this same healthy lifestyle, I recommend thermography testing for a safe and effective way to screen for cancer.

The Gold Standard for Detecting Breast Cancer

Thermography is a new technology that measures inflammation in the body. This makes it especially well equipped to detect the growth of cancer cells. This tool is far less invasive than mammography and is also more effective.

Degenerative disease is characterized by inflammatory pathways in the body, and cancer is not excluded. Unfortunately, disease must typically have already developed in the body for it to be detected by much of today’s medical procedures. Instead of looking for the originating cause, the medical community focuses on the effect of a problem in the body - the cancer. Advanced health care practitioners use diagnostic testing and methodology that searches for the cause of physiological abnormalities in the body.

How Does Thermography Screen for Cancer?

Thermography scans the body, measuring surface temperature and presenting this information as a digital image. This digital map illustrates heat patterns in the body and is tremendously accurate. Patterns can detect infection and abnormal tissue conditions.

Unlike mammograms which only analyze anatomical changes such as a lump, thermograms provide detailed information on vascular function in the breast. When blood flow increases to specific areas of the body, the temperature of that region also raises. Cancerous cell growth is represented by increased circulation resulting from infection and inflammation. Thermographs can screen for subtle physiological abnormalities that accompany disease before a large mass or lump will reveal its presence on a mammogram.

Thermal Asymmetry Indicates Abnormalities

Ideally, the body should be in a state of thermal symmetry. Areas of asymmetry can indicate problems and are analyzed specifically for underlying pathology. Cancerous growth thrives with elevated blood flow and requires a high demand for nutrient supply. The body cannot identify the metabolic difference between cancer cells and healthy cells, resulting in the increased supply of blood cells around the active cancer cells.

Thermography can identify this abnormal blood flow long before cancer growth becomes a mass detectable during a routine breast exam. Thermography is estimated to identify cancer growth 10 years before a mammogram shows a tumor.

Breasts Typically Appear Purple

Normally the breasts do not generate much heat. Healthy breasts appear purple on a thermographic image indicating low heat levels. Spots appearing red, orange, or yellow should be looked at further as these colors may indicate the presence of cancer.

More than 250,000 women participated in studies detailing thermography screening over the last 30 years. These large, long-durational studies have demonstrated a sensitivity and specificity of 90%. From these research groups it has been shown that a woman is 22 times more likely to develop breast cancer when she has consistently abnormal thermograms.

Reliability and Safety of Thermograms as a Breast Cancer Test

Information provided by thermograms is reliably accurate and provides objective data. The devices are painless, non-invasive, and provide quick results.

The high concentrations of ionizing radiation produced from mammograms make it one of the most dangerous medical devices used. Thermograms emit zero ionizing radiation and instead use safe infrared technology.

What to Expect With a Thermography Test for Breast Cancer

During your first thermography session you will provide a baseline reading referred to by practitioners as the “thermal signature.” Typically it will be recommended that you receive a second screening three months later to detect changes. The vascularity and blood flow pattern is then analyzed between the two readings. Going forward it’s recommended the patient receive annual thermography tests.

The results are given in a professionally written report by a radiologist who is trained in thermographic studies. Thermography testing is not approved for diagnostic interpretation, so you will not get a definitive diagnosis from the test.

Instead, you will see that abnormal readings will be noted as “at some or at strong risk,” whereas normal findings are listed as “at low risk.”

Many natural or integrative health care clinics are beginning to offer thermography testing. You can do a Google search for thermography offerings in your local area.

https://thetruthaboutcancer.com/mammograms-breast-cancer-test/

From Dusk 'til Dawn
An Insider's View of the Growth of the Animal Liberation Movement

© Keith Mann
puppypincher@yahoo.co.uk