Mammograms

Mammograms are a real sore spot for many of us. We don't want them, because of the harm they cause, yet conventional doctors insist upon them. When we object to mammograms, we are often told that we are exaggerating the risks and the benefits far outweigh the potential harm. The following excerpt from an article written by Dr. Mark Sircus, AC., OMD, DM (P) confirms we are correct to refuse these scans.

"Doctors themselves are often the cause of their patient’s cancer

A woman’s breasts are one of her most sensitive areas when it comes to cancers caused by radiation exposure. Dr. David Brownstein says, “Unfortunately, screening mammograms, used for nearly 30 years, have never been shown to alter breast cancer mortality. Moreover, to make matters worse, mammography exposes sensitive tissue to ionizing radiation, which actually causes cancer. A Norwegian study found that mammogram screening may reduce the risk of death from breast cancer by only 10 percent. Mette Kalager, M.D. and colleagues followed 40,075 women, screened and unscreened from 1996 through 2005.”

Dr. Russell Blaylock says studies show mammograms actually increase a woman’s risk of developing breast cancer from 1-3% per year, depending on the technique used. If women religiously undergo a mammogram every year for 10 years, they increase their risk from 10-30%. “By the age of 50, a full 45% of women will have cancer cells in their breasts. This does not mean that all these women will develop breast cancer, because in most women these cancer cells remain dormant. What it does mean is that, if you are one of these 45% of women, you are at high risk of spurring these cancer cells to full activity (when exposing their breasts to radiation).”

I was not familiar with Dr. David Brownstein and so I decided to take a look at what else he had to say and I found the following article which addressses mammograms failure to support the idea that early detection by mammograms save lives. He writes:

"A recent Canadian study looked at breast cancer incidence and mortality up to 25 years in 89,835 women ages 40 to 59 who did or did not undergo mammography screening.

The women were randomly assigned to a treatment group receiving five annual screens or a control group who received no screening. The main outcome studied breast cancer death.

In the 25-year follow-up period, 3,250 women in the mammography part of the study and 3,133 women in the control part were diagnosed with breast cancer; 500 and 505, respectively, died of breast cancer.

There was no difference in the findings between women ages 40 to 49 versus women ages 50 to 59.

Writing in the January 7, 2014 issue of Ca: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, the authors concluded, “Annual mammography in women aged 40 to 59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer . . . ”

There is no doubt that mammography can detect a breast lesion that is too small to be palpated.

However, it has never been shown to lower mortality from breast cancer. In fact, if you look at the age-adjusted mortality rate from breast cancer from 1930 to the present time, we have made little if any progress on reducing mortality from breast cancer.

What little progress we have made may be due to diagnosing nonaggressive breast cancers — particularly DCIS breast cancer.

However, early diagnosis of nonaggressive breast cancer may result in overtreatment and adverse effects from treating lesions that would normally not metastasize.

In fact, in this study the authors reported that 22 percent of screen-detected invasive breast cancers were overdiagnosed.

We have a big mess with breast cancer. We spend too much money on mammograms that are not saving lives. We spend too little money on figuring out why one in seven U.S. women is suffering from breast cancer. "

You may wish to provide this information to your doctor the next time they insist you must have a mammogram!

This article can be found at https://www.newsmax.com/Health/Dr-Brownstein/breast-cancer-diagnosis-mammograms/2015/11/25/id/703583/