Mammograms and Ultrasounds

[Guest guest]

http://blogs.healthfreedomalliance.org/blog/2009/12/04/mammogate-and-ultrasounds\

/

" Mammogate " And Ultrasounds

Filed Under Big Government, Cancer, Future of Medicine, Health Care Reform,

Women's Health

With the new government guidelines on mammograms confusing many women on their

options especially those concerned about radiation risks we published an article

on Thermography. There is another tried and true method, ultrasounds. Breast

ultrasounds found 100 percent of suspicious cancers in women under 40 who found

lumps or other suspicious areas of the breast, offering a cheaper, less-invasive

alternative to surgery or biopsies, U.S. researchers said on Wednesday.

They said targeted ultrasound — which examines just the area of the breast where

a lump is identified — should become the standard of care for women under 40.The

findings may address some of the concerns raised by a federal advisory panel

about breast exams done by women or doctors to investigate lumps or hot spots in

the breast, which most often turn out to be harmless. In a controversial set of

recommendations issued last month, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force

recommended that women not be taught to perform self breast exams because they

often result in worry and expense for tests, biopsies and unnecessary surgery.

" That concerns us because while breast cancer in young women is rare, it

absolutely does occur. Often, those cancers are only diagnosed because the woman

noticed the lump in her breast or her doctor noticed a lump in her breast, " said

Dr. Constance Lehman of the University of Washington and director of imaging at

the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance, who presented her findings at the Radiological

Society of America meeting in Chicago.

" There are harms that follow after a woman does a self breast exam — unnecessary

surgeries, unnecessary biopsies. To that point, what we're saying is if you use

imaging appropriately you can avoid those harms, " Lehman said in a telephone

interview.

Lehman did two studies testing the effectiveness of ultrasound to distinguish

between potentially cancerous lumps and harmless masses in younger women.

In one, they studied more than 1,100 ultrasound exams of women under age 30. In

the second, they studied 1,500 exams in women aged 30 to 39.

In both studies, ultrasound correctly identified the cancers and all of the

benign breast changes. The only cancer not found was in a region of the breast

that was not identified as an area of concern. Instead, it was identified by a

full breast mammogram " Less than 3 percent of the patients that presented in

this way had cancer. But it's important for us to find those patients that did

have cancer, " Lehman said.

" We had 26 women whose cancers were diagnosed because they brought the lump to

the attention of their doctor, or their doctor brought the lump to the attention

of the breast imaging specialist, " she said.

Lehman said in the United States there is no standard way of treating women

under age 40 who find a lump in their breast.

" Some of them go to the operating room to have the lump removed. Others have it

followed. Others have a needle biopsy and we wanted to bring some clarity to

this treatment, " she said.

She said ultrasound is a quick and easy test that uses sound waves to create an

image of the breast. It typically costs $100 to $200 per exam.

Lehman said using ultrasound could help balance some of the harms of

overtreatment with the benefits of self breast exams in women under age 40, who

are too young for routine mammogram screening even under the American Cancer

Society guidelines.

The task force also recommended against routine mammogram screening for women in

their 40s for many of the same reasons, a change the American Cancer Society and

many other breast cancer experts reject.

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wirestory?id=9227656 & page=1

Comments

2 Responses to " " Mammogate " And Ultrasounds "

1. Carmi Hazen on December 6th, 2009 3:16 pm

Mammograms are quite dangerous as the X-ray damages the DNA within the

cells. The effects of radiation are cumulative at about 2% per exposure. Over

time the effects of the previous X-rays will often induce cancer. According to

Dr. W. Gofman, a pioneer in radiation and its effects upon living tissue,

that there is no safe level of X-ray exposure.

" Preventing Breast Cancer: The Story of a major, proven, preventable Cause

of this Disease " - Gofman 1995

Also the mechanical stress upon the breast tissue can release otherwise

harmless dormant DCIS tumors that seldom become active until disturbed.

Ultrasound and thermography are far better and safer.

Breast cancer isn't a big deal anyway in most cases and can be left alone

without future trouble. When tinkered with, however, like taking biposys, they

become deadly.

The tumor is not the cancer, its is the end result of it having formed due

to impaired lymphatic flow which can take many years to manifest itself.

Thermography will detect pending lymph stasis many years before a tumor will

form and this is by far the best way to deal with impending cancers of most

types.

[Reply]

2. on December 11th, 2009 2:57 pm

When discussing the benefits of ultrasound vs. mammogram, what is being

missed here is that they are both late stage detectors of a lump that is already

present, and has been for up to 10 years. Neither is early detection. Early

detection is early enough to leave a woman intact. Most breast cancer is slow

growing, taking years to develop into a tumor sizeable enough to be detected by

ultrasound or mammogram. Thermography detects the tissue malfunction that causes

the tumor at its earliest stages. When detected then, a woman has many treatment

options for restoring her health. When a mammogram or ultrasound detects a tumor

that biopsies positive for cancer cells, ther are very few treatment options.

A better approach to breast and all cancers is prevention. Why wait until

surgical mutilation and chemical poisoning become necessary to save ones life?

Why not proactively approach health with preventive services? Could it be that

our health system profits from disease?

Thermography is designed to assist prevention. Prevention is better than

cure!

[Reply]