Medical Malpractice

Breast cancer is second to lung cancer as the leading cause of cancer deaths amongst women. In 2008, it is estimated that 182,460 women will be diagnosed with breast cancer with an estimated death toll being close to 40,480. It seems as if a good percentage of these deaths should not be occurring. Why? Because many of them seem to be caused by the very thing that is suppose to protect them, mammograms. With billions of dollars being donated towards prevention and research, we can't help but scratch our heads and wonder why organizations such as The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and The American Cancer Society (ACS) continue to assure the public of the safety of mammography when there are so many studies that clearly show not only how dangerous they are, but also how unreliable their results are. Isn't it time that these organizations and the overall industry take a step back and look at what is going on? Shouldn't alternative methods be given a chance, or at least more money for their research? Or is it that government connections and pharmaceutical corporate profits are more important than making sure a safe and reliable product is provided to consumers that will not harm them or cause them to catch the very disease they are trying to avoid.

What Is A Mammogram

The industry standard for the early detection of breast cancer is mammography. A mammogram is a type of imaging system that entails using a low dose ionizing x-ray to take a picture of the breast. That image is then analyzed to see if there is any unusual tumor growth. This procedure is beginning to receive lots of opposition because it has been shown to be inaccurate with high false negative rates; dangerous because with each test done, the chances of creating breast cancer are increased due to the radiation from the x-ray; and it has lead women to undertake unnecessary and extremely dangerous biopsies and surgeries.

Radiation From Mammograms Lead To Cancer

The bottom line is that mammograms help cause cancer. Every year, millions of women are advised to get a mammogram without any warning whatsoever of the hazards of being exposed to its cancer causing x-rays. What's even worse is that woman are being brainwashed into believing that a yearly mammography is necessary. However, studies have shown that taking a mammogram on an annual basis may in fact increase your risk of developing cancer. Much like fetal tissue, the breast is an area of the body extremely sensitive to radiation exposure. Here are just a few studies that have alerted us to the dangers of mammograms.

For almost 100 years, doctors have been warned that a cancerous breast must be handled with care for fear of accidentally spreading or metastasizing a growth that is already present. Mammography basically ignores that warning. A mammogram includes the process of painfully and tightly compressing the breast in order to attain a "better" image. That pressure upon the breast has the potential to rupture blood vessels in or near an unknown breast cancer growth thus causing the spread of cells that are malignant.

Radiation expert and nuclear physicist, Dr. John Gofman, concluded in his book that medical radiation was not only responsible for 60% of all general cases of cancer but that it was the cause for 83% of all breast cancer cases.

For a percentage of women who are silent carriers of the ataxia-telangiectasia gene, their risk of developing cancer from a mammogram test is increased by 4 times. Because of this A-T gene, these women are extremely sensitive to the negative effects of carcinogenic radiation. It is estimated that this is responsible for at least ten thousand breast cancer cases per year. Also, research has shown that another gene named oncogene AC is extremely sensitive to even minimal radiation doses. Women with this gene are at a higher risk of developing cancer when receiving a mammogram.

According to a leading medical journal, The Lancet, since the start of mammograms, the occurrence of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ breast cancer has realized a 328% increase, and in women under the age of 40, that increase was more that 3000%. This accounts for approximately 40,000 breast cancer cases per year.

Russell L. Blaylock, MD, estimates that receiving a mammogram on an annual basis will result in an increased risk of breast cancer by 2%. Over a 5 year period that equates to a 10% risk and after 10 years you would be at risk by 20%.

With negative results such as these, and these are just a few of many other studies, is there any reason why this industry should continue at this pace? The industry would like us to believe that the risks far outweigh the dangers, but why would anyone consider taking those risks when there are other safer alternatives. Yes, on "occasion" there are cases when a medical x-ray must be used, but to do so on a regular basis makes no sense at all and should be considered malpractice.

False Readings And The Unreliability Of A Mammogram

The rate of inaccurate false readings from a mammogram is phenomenal. A study of 60,000 women in Sweden had shown that 70% of tumors detected by a mammogram were in fact not a tumor and thus a false positive. Upon going through a biopsy, up to 80% of all mammograms that indicate a positive result do not demonstrate the presence of any cancer. These unreliable and incorrect positive readings not only create emotional and financial disruption, they also lead to many useless, invasive and painful biopsies.

Not only does mammography in many cases lead to unnecessary biopsies, according to a study in the Archives of Internal Medicine, 20% of the time, false negative readings occur when an existing cancer is completely missed by the doctor. Missed cancers are more likely to occur amongst premenopausal women because their breast tissue is denser thus causing their mammograms to be more difficult to read. The same issue applies to post-menopausal women that are on estrogen replacement therapy.

In his book, The Politics Of Cancer, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein writes that women between the ages of 40 and 49 have a 25% chance that their cancer will be overlooked by mammography. And a spokesperson for the National Institutes of Health also admitted that mammography tests will miss 10% of malignant tumors in women over the age of 50.

In 1992, The National Mammography Standards Quality Assurance Act was passed by Congress. It required the FDA to ensure that screening centers review their results by collecting biopsy data and matching them with the original diagnosis of the films. Unfortunately, this Act did not require the centers to release that data so none of them really do so. It would be beneficial to see this data as it would be immensely helpful in the evaluation of the effectiveness and reliability of mammography. Such action is long overdue by the FDA and why The American Cancer Society or The Cancer Institute do not fight and push to have this policy enacted is beyond comprehension.

Safer and Better Alternatives To Mammograms

First and foremost, we must avoid all forms of medical radiation. They are damaging to our health. Prevention is also very important and must be thought of. Research has found that something as simple as supplementing with Vitamin D can slash the risk of cancers by 77%. Vitamin D can be attained by natural exposure to sunshine (don't use sunscreens) as well as cod liver oil. Another product that helps in the fight against developing breast cancer is flax oil, flax lignans and flax meal. Your lifestyle must be closely monitored. If you are diagnosed with cancer, a change in lifestyle is the only factor that has been scientifically proven to extend the average lifespan of women with breast cancer. That positive change in lifestyle helps to boost the immune system and stops feeding cancer cells. You must stop feeding those cancer cells what they thrive on, including all dairy products (even fat-free), beef, pork, lamb, veal, all sugars, all processed foods, flour, alcohol and tobacco. Of course, it's best to avoid these foods prior to being diagnosed with the disease. This subject of prevention maintenance alone consists of enough information for another article.

In regards to methods of testing for early detection, there are several alternative options to mammography. Unfortunately, our medical institutions and the large organizations dedicated to fighting breast cancer are not doing their part to educate the general public on these safer, more effective alternatives.

Aside from self-examination techniques and physical exams by a doctor, one such excellent alternative is breast thermography. Thermography is a noninvasive method that does not require radiation, any painful compression, or intravenous injection. Thermography uses digital infrared imaging to measure the temperature differences within the breast. Not only is thermography safer, but it appears to be much more accurate than mammograms. Although thermograpy has been around since the 60's, it wasn't until 1982 when the FDA had approved them and they became more reliable. For more information about thermogrophy, visit Breastthermography.com or iact-org.org.

Another better alternative to mammograms are MRI's (Magnetic resonance imaging). This method is far more superior to mammograms in the early detection of breast cancer. But I find it rather strange that something so superior and safer is considered to be useful only after undergoing a dangerous mammogram or biopsy. Even The American Cancer Society admits that MRI's are superior yet they choose to reserve if for higher risk scenarios. They claim that it's more expensive thus not as readily covered by most insurance plans. Hmm, with all that money being raised for research and free mammograms, wouldn't you think that a big chunk of that would be better spent on safer alternatives such as MRI's and Thermography?

Always remember that information is power and that you must do all that you can to seek out that information so that you can be intelligently informed before making a decision that may negatively affect your health. We should never accept that one person or a major organization has the final say in how we should be diagnosed or treated. Settling on the status quo and accepting procedures and medicines that are doing more harm than good is unacceptable and we must do what we can to encourage the healthcare industry to research better methods and accept the safer alternatives that currently exist!