Guest guest Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 I paid $185 for the first time, $130 for the baseline follow-up, and $160 for the annual scan. This is in Texas. It is all out of pocket for me, and that does not include my airline ticket to get there! I'm glad to be doing the thermography and not getting the radiation of the mammogram. K > > > Let us know what the costs are for thermography that you find. > > > Best to you, > Grizz > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 I love to hear from everyone if they do the 'cold challenge' test with their thermography exam or not! Sent from my iPadOn Feb 25, 2012, at 7:06 PM, "tapmom5113" <mkoontz@...> wrote: I paid $185 for the first time, $130 for the baseline follow-up, and $160 for the annual scan. This is in Texas. It is all out of pocket for me, and that does not include my airline ticket to get there! I'm glad to be doing the thermography and not getting the radiation of the mammogram. K > > > Let us know what the costs are for thermography that you find. > > > Best to you, > Grizz > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 25, 2012 Report Share Posted February 25, 2012 Even though I breastfed my daughter my breasts had no droop until the mammograms. Fibres in my breast actually ripped during. They dropped two inches.OMG! That's horrible!Mammograms were initially meant to identify lumps not discernable by normal examinations - which is why you subject the breasts to enough pressure to reduce them to a fraction of their usual depth between two flat plates - and then subject them to radiationI went to the "breast center" with a 9.5 cm tumor that was very easily felt and was bulging out against my skin. It took up 3 quadrants of my breast for goodness sake! But they tried to coerce me into a mammogram. The tumor was already painful...I can't imagine how much the mammogram would have hurt! I stood my ground and insisted on an ultrasound, which was enough to determine that I needed a biopsy.len From: Marsh <hmarsh@...> IodineOT ; iodine Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 4:24 PM Subject: Re: Re: More iodine questions Personally, Mammograms were extremely painful - but I did have more than thirty cysts. AFTER my mammogram I sighted a pamphlet which stated that if you had a possibly cancerous lump or very firm breast tissue it was not advisable to have a mammogram - I guess the preferred option would have been an ultrascan. Unfortunately I have not been able to find this pamphlet since, but it does make sense. Popping a tumour would be a seriously bad thing to do. I do note that it is now not recommended to have mammograms until your late fourties or the menopause - probably to do with tissue density. Mammograms were initially meant to identify lumps not discernable by normal examinations - which is why you subject the breasts to enough pressure to reduce them to a fraction of their usual depth between two flat plates - and then subject them to radiation. This approach can actually cause precancerous breast lumps in those who have none. AFTER my first mammogram the tech suggested that persons with very dense breast tissue should use ultrascan instead as it is difficult to get enough compression for an 'effective' mammogram picture. Even though I breastfed my daughter my breasts had no droop until the mammograms. Fibres in my breast actually ripped during. They dropped two inches. There are only one or two places in Australia using Thermography. Most doctors recall Thermography was a very inadequate tool, but that was many years ago. If development had kept apace with those of - say - computers, there would be no need to even consider Mammograms. It is likely that a Mammogram would not be as painful for me now - the damage has been done and since starting on iodine my cysts have softened and some have disappeared. But it is not logical to subject yourself to repeated doses of radiation without a very strong reason, especially if there is an effective alternative diagnostic tool. RE: Re: More iodine questions You gave me a chuckle. I did not expect that size would affect whether there would be pain or not, since from everything I have seen and heard it is an adjustable apparatus. But for the record, from age 19 to 30 I was a 32-DD, then 34-DD, then had 3 kids and it went 36, 38, 40, and always DD. I am basing the idea of pain mostly on jokes I have heard, not from real people who have told me they had pain. But, I must agree that it seems to me if there were a cyst in a breast and it was snugged up in the machine, it could burst. Sounds logical, right? Ah well. I'm holding out for the thermography. Dody Colorado From: iodine [mailto:iodine ] On Behalf Of gin2cSent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 7:32 AMiodine Subject: Re: More iodine questions I have never had any pain doing a mammogram on "C" size boobs.sent from my generic PC.G> > > **> >> >> > I have never had a mammogram and never will. I have told several docs> > that I am aware of the thermogra phy and would prefer that, but they never> > want me to do that! Of course, I also tell them that when I leave this> > world I am taking all of me, I am not leaving pieces on a surgical table.> > ****> >> > ** **> >> > There is simply no reason to put women thru that kind of pain or expose> > them to radiation … again.****> >> > ** **> >> > Dody****> >> > Colorado****> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 I paid $300 plus the $65 phone consult reading, in Washington. Maybe I should fly to Texas Jill On 2/25/2012 5:06 PM, tapmom5113 wrote: > > I paid $185 for the first time, $130 for the baseline follow-up, and > $160 for the annual scan. This is in Texas. It is all out of pocket > for me, and that does not include my airline ticket to get there! I'm > glad to be doing the thermography and not getting the radiation of the > mammogram. > > K > > > > > > > > Let us know what the costs are for thermography that you find. > > > > > > Best to you, > > Grizz > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Thermography is very effective, completely noninvasive and private, and completely safe. I prefer the type that has a panel of experts read and interpret the results, not the type that is done in a single office and interpreted by a single physician. It's very inexpensive compared to mammography, the equipment is low cost. Mine cost $150 per session in 2007. You want a baseline and then they will tell you how soon to come back for the next image. After my first mammogram came back with something they " didn't like " , the oncologist wanted to cut me open but I resisted and ultimately had thermography, which showed me conclusively that there was nothing to worry about. ALL cancer grow blood vessels to feed the tissue that is growing abnormally. ALL. The extra blood vessels create extra heat that can be seen using infrared photography. People have individual normal patterns, which is why a baseline is important. But if there is anything abnormal in the first picture, that will be reported in the analysis. I did not get cut open. I already knew that my body tends to create these little accretions of lymph and skin cells. I have 3 on my skin, one of which has been definitively diagnosed in situ, plus some removed and analyzed. Knowing that, and seeing the pictures and getting the initial report of " nothing of concern but return in 3 months for another image " , put my mind at ease. -- On 25 Feb 2012 at 22:31, len Ramsey wrote: > > > > Even though I breastfed my daughter my breasts had no droop until the > mammograms. Fibres in my breast actually ripped during. They dropped > two inches. > > OMG! That's horrible! > > Mammograms were initially meant to identify lumps not discernable by > normal examinations - which is why you subject the breaststo enough > pressure to reduce them to a fraction of their usual depth between two > flat plates - and then subject them to radiation > > I went to the " breast center " with a 9.5 cm tumor that was very easily > felt and was bulging out against my skin. It took up 3 quadrants of my > breast for goodness sake! But they tried to coerce me into a > mammogram. The tumor was already painful...I can't imagine how much > the mammogram would have hurt! I stood my ground and insisted on an > ultrasound, which was enough to determine that I needed a biopsy. > > len > > > > From: Marsh <hmarsh@...> > IodineOT ; iodine > Sent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 4:24 PM > Subject: Re: Re: More iodine questions > > > > Personally, Mammograms were extremely painful - but I did have more > than thirty cysts. > > AFTER my mammogram I sighted a pamphlet which stated that if you had a > possibly cancerous lump or very firm breast tissue it was not > advisable to have a mammogram - I guess the preferred option would > have been an ultrascan. Unfortunately I have not been able to find > this pamphlet since, but it does make sense. Popping a tumour would be > a seriously bad thing to do. > > I do note that it is now not recommended to have mammograms until your > late fourties or the menopause - probably to do with tissue density. > > Mammograms were initially meant to identify lumps not discernable by > normal examinations - which is why you subject the breaststo enough > pressure to reduce them to a fraction of their usual depth between two > flat plates - and then subject them to radiation. This approach can > actually cause precancerous breast lumps in those who have none. > > AFTER my first mammogram the tech suggested that persons with very > dense breast tissue should use ultrascan instead as it is difficult to > get enough compression for an 'effective' mammogram picture. > > > Even though I breastfed my daughter my breasts had no droop until the > mammograms. Fibres in my breast actually ripped during. They dropped > two inches. > > There are only one or two places in Australia using Thermography. Most > doctors recall Thermography was a very inadequate tool, but that was > many years ago. If development had kept apace with those of - say - > computers, there would be no need to even consider Mammograms. > > It is likely that a Mammogram would not be as painful for me now - the > damage has been done and since starting on iodine my cysts have > softened and some have disappeared. But it is not logical to subject > yourself to repeated doses of radiation without a very strong reason, > especially if there is an effective alternative diagnostic tool. > > > > > > > Re: More iodine questions > > > > I have never had any pain doing a mammogram on " C " size boobs. > > sent from my generic PC. > > G > > > > > ** > > > > > > > I have never had a mammogram and never will. I have told > several docs > > that I am aware of the thermogra phy and would prefer > that, but they never > > want me to do that! Of course, I also tell > them that when I leave this > > world I am taking all of me, I am not > leaving pieces on a surgical table. > > **** > > > > ** ** > > > > > There is simply no reason to put women thru that kind of pain or > expose > > them to radiation ... again.**** > > > > ** ** > > > > > Dody**** > > > > Colorado**** > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012  OMG right back! SO GLAD you resisted the pressure to have a mammogram, len - if it had been cancer the chances are it would have spread itself throughout your body with the assistance of modern medicine RE: Re: More iodine questions You gave me a chuckle. I did not expect that size would affect whether there would be pain or not, since from everything I have seen and heard it is an adjustable apparatus. But for the record, from age 19 to 30 I was a 32-DD, then 34-DD, then had 3 kids and it went 36, 38, 40, and always DD. I am basing the idea of pain mostly on jokes I have heard, not from real people who have told me they had pain. But, I must agree that it seems to me if there were a cyst in a breast and it was snugged up in the machine, it could burst. Sounds logical, right? Ah well. I'm holding out for the thermography. Dody Colorado From: iodine [mailto:iodine ] On Behalf Of gin2cSent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 7:32 AMiodine Subject: Re: More iodine questions I have never had any pain doing a mammogram on "C" size boobs.sent from my generic PC.G> > > **> >> >> > I have never had a mammogram and never will. I have told several docs> > that I am aware of the thermogra phy and would prefer that, but they never> > want me to do that! Of course, I also tell them that when I leave this> > world I am taking all of me, I am not leaving pieces on a surgical table.> > ****> >> > ** **> >> > There is simply no reason to put women thru that kind of pain or expose> > them to radiation … again.****> >> > ** **> >> > Dody****> >> > Colorado****> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 It WAS cancer. It was stage 3.len From: Marsh <hmarsh@...> iodine Sent: Sunday, February 26, 2012 1:09 AM Subject: Re: Re: More iodine questions  OMG right back! SO GLAD you resisted the pressure to have a mammogram, len - if it had been cancer the chances are it would have spread itself throughout your body with the assistance of modern medicine RE: Re: More iodine questions You gave me a chuckle. I did not expect that size would affect whether there would be pain or not, since from everything I have seen and heard it is an adjustable apparatus. But for the record, from age 19 to 30 I was a 32-DD, then 34-DD, then had 3 kids and it went 36, 38, 40, and always DD. I am basing the idea of pain mostly on jokes I have heard, not from real people who have told me they had pain. But, I must agree that it seems to me if there were a cyst in a breast and it was snugged up in the machine, it could burst. Sounds logical, right? Ah well. I'm holding out for the thermography. Dody Colorado From: iodine [mailto:iodine ] On Behalf Of gin2cSent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 7:32 AMiodine Subject: Re: More iodine questions I have never had any pain doing a mammogram on "C" size boobs.sent from my generic PC.G> > > **> >> >> > I have never had a mammogram and never will. I have told several docs> > that I am aware of the thermogra phy and would prefer that, but they never> > want me to do that! Of course, I also tell them that when I leave this> > world I am taking all of me, I am not leaving pieces on a surgical table.> > ****> >> > ** **> >> > There is simply no reason to put women thru that kind of pain or expose> > them to radiation … again.****> >> > ** **> >> > Dody****> >> > Colorado****> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012 Thermography costs around $300 in Nashville, I think. So I haven't had any scans of any kind since I learned about mammograms. The high cost of thermography here could be due to lack of purveyors. The Nashville area has only one place I know of to get a thermogram, & the clinic is run by someone from 200 miles south & across the state line. Clients here used to drive to them (in Georgia) so they opened a 2-day-a-week office in Nashville. - Mc > > > >> ** > >> > >> > >> Let us know what the costs are for thermography that you find. > >> > > Best to you, > >> Grizz > >> > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 26, 2012 Report Share Posted February 26, 2012  len, then I am even more glad that you resisted! RE: Re: More iodine questions You gave me a chuckle. I did not expect that size would affect whether there would be pain or not, since from everything I have seen and heard it is an adjustable apparatus. But for the record, from age 19 to 30 I was a 32-DD, then 34-DD, then had 3 kids and it went 36, 38, 40, and always DD. I am basing the idea of pain mostly on jokes I have heard, not from real people who have told me they had pain. But, I must agree that it seems to me if there were a cyst in a breast and it was snugged up in the machine, it could burst. Sounds logical, right? Ah well. I'm holding out for the thermography. Dody Colorado From: iodine [mailto:iodine ] On Behalf Of gin2cSent: Saturday, February 25, 2012 7:32 AMiodine Subject: Re: More iodine questions I have never had any pain doing a mammogram on "C" size boobs.sent from my generic PC.G> > > **> >> >> > I have never had a mammogram and never will. I have told several docs> > that I am aware of the thermogra phy and would prefer that, but they never> > want me to do that! Of course, I also tell them that when I leave this> > world I am taking all of me, I am not leaving pieces on a surgical table.> > ****> >> > ** **> >> > There is simply no reason to put women thru that kind of pain or expose> > them to radiation … again.****> >> > ** **> >> > Dody****> >> > Colorado****> >> >> >> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 5, 2012 Report Share Posted March 5, 2012 $225 here and not covered by any insurance. in NS, Canada At 06:12 PM 25/02/12, you wrote: Wow! I pay $100 for mine but I am required to have a physical exam with it and that charge is $65 office visit so mine is $165. My $65 is covered by insurance since it is a physical but the $100 is not. Buist, ND HC Re: Re: More iodine questions I pay between $185 and $210 for my thermograms. in Alaska On Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:31 AM, grizz003 <grizz8562@...> wrote: Let us know what the costs are for thermography that you find. Best to you, Grizz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted March 6, 2012 Report Share Posted March 6, 2012 I did find a Thermography place in NYC thanks to you all. It's $299 for upper body with breasts. Not bad considering, its ny.Sent from my HTC smartphone on the Now Network from Sprint!----- Reply message -----From: " " <jennifer.lists2009@...><iodine >Subject: Re: More iodine questionsDate: Tue, Mar 6, 2012 12:15 am $225 here and not covered by any insurance. in NS, CanadaAt 06:12 PM 25/02/12, you wrote:Wow! I pay $100 for mine but I am required to have a physical exam with it andthat charge is $65 office visit so mine is $165. My $65 is coveredby insurance since it is a physical but the $100 is not. Buist, ND HC Re: Re: More iodine questions I pay between $185 and $210 for my thermograms. in AlaskaOn Sat, Feb 25, 2012 at 2:31 AM, grizz003 <grizz8562@...> wrote: Let us know what the costs are for thermography that you find.Best to you,Grizz Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.