L.A TV Station doing a story on Thermography

But many doc's ARE impressed by MRI (the only reason they are not used is because of cost - so there is already a better way of approaching breast imaging...I think you need to be approved to approach  the moderators before you can solicit here...

Idaho:  Thermography will never be able to take the place of other diagnostic tools because it can only show areas which are hotter than usual (the theory being that before a tumour has developed, there is increased blood flow to the area.)  But that heat could be from other causes.

Followup mammos or u/s or MRI would be needed to show a clearer picture, and if the tumour had not yet developed, these dx's would show nothing.  So what would be the next step?  I guess one would have to have many, many thermo scans to check if the area shows to be hotter or more extensive, over several years, to see if a tumour has developed after all. And then you'd still need to have the other dx tests to confirm.

Thermography went through extensive testing at bc centres in North America during the 70's and 80's to determine its effectiveness.  Most of those centres stop using it.

I think the real reason docs don't like it is because it provides no definitive answers, and not because bc centres have already invested in mammo machines -- but JMHO!

Cheers, Linda

Juat a thought -- if it were a case of thermography being more cost-effective than, and equally as effective as, mammography, wouldn't your U.S. insurance companies be insisting on it?  I would suggest that in countries with universal health care such as Canada and the U.K., this would indeed be the case.  But it isn't.

I think there are many uses for thermography.  Just doesn't seem as though it's especially good (at least not yet), for diagnosing breast cancer.  Flalady, I'm interested to know if thermography was the only method used for your diagnosis.

This is how I found my bc but the doctor's were not happy until they smashed my bc three for four times in the mammo machine. I had a 10cm lump they could not see with the mammo.  After my mammo it took me three weeks to get into chemo and my tumor grow very aggressive in this time because of the damage to the smashing.

Actual it is being used at my local research hospital to evaluate lumps found with ultra sound/mammo too see if they have blood supply without having to do unnecessary biopsies. Something like 60% of all biopsies do not find cancer but a fluid cystic.

As for the cost...doctor will not change out a $500,000+ piece of machine (digital mammo) until it has been paid off and earned it's keep.  Than you move to the next cheapest technology.

Flalady

ANYTHING, that helps and brings attention to breast cancer treatment, in my mind, is wonderful, so I personally thank you for doing what you are doing.