nuclear-news

Non radiation methods are safer than mammograms

Mammogram  controversy and using safer alternatives for breast exams, Creative loafing November 24, 2009  by Carol Roberts
So what’s this about mammograms? The iconic breast screening exam has been called into question by a stellar panel from Harvard, Stanford and other such institutions who were tasked by the federal government to determine the efficacy and safety of the test.

So for decades now, the ladies have been lining up to have “the girls” squished, pinched, squeezed and radiated, in the hope that such treatment will result in early detection and improved survival. Instead, this new information is asserting that mammograms do not improve survival and are contributing to rising costs of healthcare by identifying many lumps that aren’t cancer or will never become cancer.
So younger women, in the 40-49 year age group, are told they no longer need to have any mammos at all, and are even exhorted to not examine their own breasts for fear of finding something. Suddenly the fear and expense generated by “false positives” are outweighing the fear and expense of the real thing. Confusion reigns!
It is indeed true that 10-15% of mammograms yield false positives, another 10-15% yield false negatives, that is, a cancer that is present is not detected. Most cancers are found by the patient herself.

But the news has not mentioned the possible damage done by mammograms to the DNA of breast tissue. Radiation exposure results in cumulative damage, that is, repeated exposure to x-rays cause tiny mutations in genetic information. How much damage does it take to create a cancer cell? No one really knows, but it probably varies from one person to another. Is it possible that some women are getting cancer from the mammograms?

So what’s a woman to do? Now she’s told not to examine herself and not to get a mammogram, but what should she do to find out if she might have breast cancer in the early stages, when it is most curable?

Ultrasound is a non-invasive diagnostic technique that has been used for decades as a back-up test to the mammogram. If a lump is found, the architecture of it (solid, cystic, fibrous, mixed) can be determined with an ultrasound. This might be a good test to do more often.

Another answer has been around for a number of years. It has been largely ignored in this country. It’s a non-invasive test called digital thermographic imaging, or thermography, for short.

Mammogram controversy and using safer alternatives for breast exams | Daily Loaf

November 25, 2009 - Posted by Christina Macpherson | 1, 2 WORLD, health | antinuclear, nuclear, nuclear wastes, radiation, radioactive