Bitchute odysee Telegram Feed

Thermography vs. Mammography for Early Breast Cancer Detection: Who Benefits Most?

There is a turf war between those who favor thermography and those who favor mammography for early breast cancer detection. The mammogram party is supported by federal health agencies and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) as well as the mammogram industry. For the most part, the under-supported thermography advocates are outgunned and outnumbered by the mammogram crowd, which has declared a soft, at least for now, war on thermography to restrict or deny its independent breast cancer screening use. Breast cancer cells take around five to eight years to develop enough for mammogram tumor detection. Just in time for costly, profitable treatments. But because of thermography's extreme sensitivity to infrared emissions from slight temperature variations, its images render the earliest signs of breast cancer and/or a pre-cancerous state of the breast.

Read More

Mammography: Another Failed Screening Test

As reported in a September, 2015 study in JAMA Internal Medicine article, researchers studied 16,120,349 women over the age of 40 who resided in 547 counties across the U.S. during a one-year period. The researchers correlated their findings with breast cancer incidence and mortality data during the ensuing 10 years. There was no significant change in mortality in those screened with mammography. The authors noted, “Although it has been hoped that screening would allow breast-conserving surgical procedures to replace more extensive mastectomies, we saw no evidence supporting this change.” Clearly we need a better path. What should be happening is that the Powers-That-Be, such as the American Cancer Society and the Komen Foundation, should be promoting research that would identify why one in seven U.S. women have breast cancer instead of promoting a screening test—mammography–that has never been proven to decrease the mortality rate from breast cancer.

Read More

Swiss Medical Board Against Systematic Mammograms

The Swiss Medical Board has recommended that no new systematic mammography screening programs be introduced, and a time limit should be placed on existing programs. Their review of mammography screening found the recommendations are based on outdated studies and the benefits do not outweigh the risks to women. One of the largest and longest studies of mammography to date found that mammograms have absolutely no positive impact on breast cancer mortality while 22 percent of women screened will be exposed to false positives and unnecessary treatment.

Read More

Mammograms: Where’s the Wisdom in Using a Cancer Screen That Causes Cancer?

One of the largest and longest studies of mammography to date, involving 90,000 women followed for 25 years, found that mammograms have absolutely NO impact on breast cancer mortality. Several studies over the past few years have concluded that mammograms do not save lives, and may actually harm more women than they help, courtesy of false positives, overtreatment, and radiation-induced cancers. Besides the harm caused by overtreatment, the wisdom of radiating your breasts year after year, for decades, is questionable at best, considering the fact that ionizing radiation can cause cancer. Beware of the “new and improved” type of mammogram called 3D tomosynthesis, as it exposes you to even HIGHER doses of radiation than a standard mammogram.

Read More