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.
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.
This is part one in a two part series of articles on mammograms. The complete article can be found at www.anthonynunes.net/monthly_article/mammograms.html.
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.
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.
This is part one in a two part series of articles on mammograms. The complete article can be found at www.anthonynunes.net/monthly_article/mammograms.html.
About the Author:
At the age of 35, Anthony Nunes experienced extreme joint pain. It was that experience that led him to find natural cures and devote a web site on that subject. Furthermore, he offers low cost cheap seo services for web sites in need of search engine optimization.
No comments:
Post a Comment