"Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth," says Dr. Charles B. Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology at the National Cancer Institute." In addition, mammography provides false tumor reports between 5 and 15 percent of the time. False positive results cause women to be re-exposed to additional X rays and create an environment of further stress, even possibly leading to unneeded surgery.
Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D. - "Conventional cancer therapy is so toxic and dehumanizing that I fear it far more than I fear death from cancer. We know that conventional therapy doesn't work--if it did, you would not fear cancer any more than you fear pneumonia. It is the utter lack of certainty as to the outcome of conventional treatment that virtually screams for more freedom of choice in the area of cancer therapy. Yet most alternative therapies regardless of potential or proven benefit, are outlawed, which forces patients to submit to the failures that we know don't work, because there's no other choice."
Linda Page, N.D. Ph.D - "Of the women in menopause today, about half start synthetic hormone replacement, but only half of those stick with it because of the side effects or fear of cancer risk. The threat of breast and uterine cancer is dramatically increased with HRT".
An Australian team from the University of Queensland see little, if any, benefit in screening women under 50 years of age, but they do point out some of the serious negative effects - later ill effects from the radiation they are exposed to during the mammogram, the possibility that an existing tumor may spread due to the pressure exerted on the breast during screening, and the anxiety caused by frequent false- positive results. The Canadian researchers point out that a false-positive result may not only produce great stress, but may also lead to unnecessary biopsies and surgery. They also point out that mammography misses 10-15 per cent of early breast cancers thus providing a false sense of security.
Why Mammography is NOT an Effective Breast Cancer Screen
Dr. Mercola
How Mammography Increases Your Cancer Risk - X-rays and other classes of ionizing radiation have been, for decades, a proven cause of virtually all types of biological mutations. When such mutations are not cell-lethal, they endure and accumulate with each additional
exposure to 
x-rays or other ionizing radiation. X-rays are also an established cause of genomic instability, often a characteristic of the most aggressive cancers. Additionally, radiation risks are about four times greater for the 1 to 2 percent of women who are silent carriers of the A-T (ataxia-telangiectasia) gene, which by some estimates accounts for up to 20 percent of all breast cancers diagnosed annually.
x-rays or other ionizing radiation. X-rays are also an established cause of genomic instability, often a characteristic of the most aggressive cancers. Additionally, radiation risks are about four times greater for the 1 to 2 percent of women who are silent carriers of the A-T (ataxia-telangiectasia) gene, which by some estimates accounts for up to 20 percent of all breast cancers diagnosed annually.When everything is taken into account, reducing exposure to medical radiation such as unnecessary mammograms would actually likely reduce mortality rates. The practice of screening mammography itself poses significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer, especially for premenopausal women. Making matters even worse, false positive diagnoses are very common – as high as 89 percent – leading many women to be unnecessarily and harmfully treated by mastectomy, more radiation, or chemotherapy. There are instances where mammography may be warranted. But the fact remains that there are other technologies that are proven to be more effective, less expensive, and completely harmless, that can save far more lives.
Now, imagine being able to look inside yourself and be able to get as much as 10 years warning that something is about to develop, giving you ample time to PREVENT the cancer from forming in the first place by taking the appropriate lifestyle changes that can radically change your health. That technology already exists, and has been available since the 1960s.
Dr. Len Saputo explores the latest findings on the effectiveness and shortcomings of various detection methods used by the mainstream medical community, including mammography, clinical breast exams, ultrasound, and to a lesser extent, magnetic resonance imaging (MRIs) and PET scans.
Danish researcher Dr. Peter Gotzsche first made this claim in a study published in "The Lancet" in October 2006. Gotzsche had re-analyzed the studies originally done on the benefits of mammograms and found them unconvincing. Since then, other doctors have begun to assert that in addition to failing to offer protection, mammograms — which involve exposing patients to radiation —may actually increase women's risk of cancer. "The latest evidence shifts the balance towards harm and away from benefits," said Dr. Michael Baum of University College in London. Gifford-Jones also points to other risks, from the physical to the psychological. According to some authorities, the squeezing of women's breasts during mammograms may rupture blood vessels, causing cancer to spread to other parts of the body and actually increasing a patient's risk of death. He also pointed to the trauma suffered by women who receive false positives from their mammograms, and to the dangerous sense of security felt by those who receive false negatives. more...
Some years ago a British surgeon blasted American doctors as "immoral" for screening women under 50 for breast cancer. On a visit to the Long Island Jewish Hospital Medical Center Dr. Baum said the screening was "opportunistic" and did more harm than good. "Over 99 percent of premenopausal women will have no benefit from screening. Even for women over 50, there has been only a one percent biopsy rate as a result of screening in the United Kingdom. The density of the breast in younger women make mammography a highly unreliable procedure." (Medical Tribune, 3/26/92)
Dr. Barnes said the danger of early mammograms is not from radiation but from false-positive results that can lead to unnecessary biopsies, resulting in scar tissue that can make subsequent mammograms more difficult to read. more
"Screening mammography poses significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer for premenopausal women. The routine practice of taking four films of each breast annually results in approximately 1 rad (radiation absorbed dose) exposure, about 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray. The premenopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade's screening. These risks are even greater for younger women subject to "baseline screening." Dr. Mercola
The Breast Stays Put: No Chemo-No Radiation-No Lumpectomy-No Thank You
"After running her own successful business in Wellness Alternatives, Pamela Hoeppner faced the unthinkable. She was diagnosed with a malignant, fast-growing breast cancer. Pam declined all conventional treatment and chose an alternative approach with an impressive track record instead, which resulted in her full recovery. Convinced that mutilation and toxic treatments are not always necessary she wanted others to know there ARE options that don't involve devastating a person's body and their quality of life. In her inspiring book, The Breast Stays Put, with a delivery all her own, she shares her courageous story of overcoming a deadly diagnosis, and provides prevention and treatment information through her informative website www.TheBreastStaysPut.com.
A wonderfully written first-hand account of how one woman overcame her life-threatening diagnosis of cancer
using only alternative medicine. A must read for anyone diagnosed with breast cancer, but I highly recommend it to anyone interested in learning more about treating cancer with alternative therapies. David Brownstein, MD, Author of Drugs That Don't Work and Natural Therapies That Do All too often people are frightened into a medical or surgical course of action, when what they really need is encouragement to take control of their own health and path to wellness. Pam's story is a testimony to the benefits of doing just that.
The Breast Stays Put is a beacon of hope that everyone facing serious illness should read. Bridget Houston, ND NHE Hoeppner has achieved something few writers can. She has turned a serious, scary subject into a fun read while presenting important life-saving information at the same time. I particularly enjoyed her unique brand of humor and her gutsy words of wisdom that can't help but infuse the reader with courage." Tanya Harter Pierce, MA, MFCC, Author of Outsmart Your Cancer: Alternative Non-Toxic Treatments That Work
Read the stories of other breast cancer recovery
Fresh food that lasts from eFoods Direct (Ad)
Live Superfoods
Print this page
