Mamograms ARE dangerous, New AlternaTive uses H20 /no radiation

deansanders · September 2008

deansanders · September 2008

I am posting a new technolog using water as an alternative to dangerous mamograms

I will not state the dangers of mamograms here, just google "mamogram dangers" and u will find thousands of stories, here is one quote however showing how mamograms cause or increase your cancer risks.

"Contrary to misleading assurances that radiation exposure from mammography is trivial and similar to that from a chest X ray, about 1/1,000 of a rad (radiation-absorbed dose), the routine practice of taking four films for each breast results in some 1,000-fold greater exposure. The premenopausal breast is also highly sensitive to radiation with each rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by 1 percent, resulting in a cumulative 10 percent increased risk over ten years of screening; risks are still greater for "baseline" screening at younger ages, for which there is no evidence of future relevance. Furthermore, cancer risks are up to fourfold greater for the 2 percent of women who are unknowing carriers of the A-T gene, and thus highly sensitive to radiation; estimatedly, this accounts for 20 percent of breast cancers annually", (Samuel Epstien, MD)

OKAY, YOU CAN GOOGLE mamogram dangers.

BUT MANY OF YOU HAVE HEARD OF THE ALTERNATIVE USE OF THERMOGRAMS, WHICH ARE GOOD.

BUT WHAT I AM POSTING IS an ABC NEWS STORY that TALKED ABOUT NEW TECHNOLOGY USING WATER , NO RADIATION.

I HOPE THIS HELPS YOU. I DONT THINK IT IS READILY AVAILABLE THOUGH.

GOD BLESS, AND IF YOU HAVEN'T READ MY OTHER POST, GO READ IT, IT IS HERE
http://community.breastcancer.org/forum/79/topic/720720?page=2

(BTW, you are all in my prayers)

STORY FOLLOWS

http://abclocal.go.com/kabc/story?section=news/health&id=6308727

By Denise Dador-LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- Physicists and radiologists have developed new technology to detect breast cancer using water instead of radiation.

Judy Ballard is no stranger to breast cancer.

"I was just re-diagnosed in December and this time I had a mastectomy, and it was a little bit rougher ride for me," said Judy Ballard, a breast cancer patient and survivor.

And Judy's still at risk for it to return. So she's getting a follow-up screening with a new technology that uses water.

"It feels like a little sauna on your breast. The water temperature is warm, it's very relaxing, it's comforting," said Ballard.

"So far it's been able to see almost all the cancers that are above five millimeters," said Dr. Peter Littrup, Karmanos Cancer Institute.

Developed by physicists and radiologists, the new technology, called Computed Ultrasound Risk Evaluation Device -- or CURE -- does not use radiation, lasts one minute and is completely pain-free.

"We can get images with a lot more information than we've currently been able to. So I don't think we'll have as many false positive situations. In fact we're trying to also use this to reduce unnecessary biopsies," said Dr. Littrup.

While the woman's breast is suspended in water, ultrasound sensors transmit sound waves through the water. The device measures how the sound waves travel through the breast tissue. Computer images help doctors better pinpoint cancerous tissue.

"Based on the more limited trails that we've done so far, it does in fact to appear to be more accurate than mammography," said physicist Dr. Neb Duric.

Judy's clinical trial scan results are being studied. Other tests show her cancer has not come back.

"I'm a strong person, my attitude was it's not going to get me," said Ballard. Because she knows she's doing all she can to catch it early.

In clinical trials, the CURE, found 90 percent of cancers and identified 90 percent of benign masses, as well.

GOOD LUCK, REMEMBER , DO YOUR OWN HOMEWORK, DON'T DEPEND ON OTHERS,

GOD BLESS YOU

danix5 · September 2008

Thank you for posting this! I had hundreds of mammos and no surprise I have BC. My onco and surgeon think the mammos may have played the cancer card for me. I had loads of fibroadenomas and they tried to keep track of them for years, saw a breast surgeon every 6 mths inbetween mammos and ultasounds started MRI in 2003. Now I have cancer and I do believe I could have avoided this by avoiding mammos.

Dani

straykat · September 2008

Hundreds of mammos? Give me a break!

SchoolBoardLady · December 2009

StrayKat: Do the math. If she has been monitoring her breasts for 10 to 15 years starting at age 40, she could have 150 "shots" of radiation. Min 4 often 6 (if breast is dense) shots per "mamogram" two times per year for 15 years--150-180 "shots" of radiation. It's not absurd. Sometimes I think that is why plenty of docs recommend bilateral mastectomies, rather than pursue the repetitive mamogram radiation course. In addition, mamos before menopause are universally recognized as having risk that does not outweigh the risk of cancer.

baywatcher · December 2009

Danix-

I think I got my cancer from the mammos too. I started at 40 and have had at least 50 (or more) mammograms over the years. They just took as many films as they wanted.

I recently picked up my films to save. They are in an very large manila envelope and they are heavy. How could I have NOT known that this was bad for me?? I thought I was practicing wellness. Now I feel like an idiot for never really thinking about it and letting myself be led like a sheep. All that radiation that I let them do just makes me sick to my stomach.

Nan56143 · December 2009

Dear baywatcher,

I have always believed that mammos and all other forms of radiation are dangerous. We have been brainwashed to think that diagnostic testings using radiation are harmless. Those promoting them have a heavily vested interest in the mammography/diagnostic industry, so it is to their financial advantage to continue to tell women "they are safe, and they detect cancer at an early stage", so have one or 2 every year. They sure keep the cancer "industry" booming don't they?

I had my last one 2 1/2 years ago and I will never have another one. When I tell other women they should really think long and hard before going for their "yearly" mammo, they look at me like I have 3 heads! I truy believe that the radiation given for bc is also causing more cancer. My daughter had 28 rads....and I can only hope that this did not do more harm.

All that squishing and mashing of the breasts with a mammo is so ludicrous! From what I have read when doctors are in med school, they are taught to palpate very lightly, never squeezing the breasts.Then we women are told to stand there while they smash our breasts as hard as they can without bursting the skin.....and that is good for the breasts? My sister had a mammo a few months ago, and she was bruised...black and blue from the shoulder...to include the breast and even around her back! Now someone explain to me how the he$$ that cannot be harmful. If there is a tumor, it will be smashed for sure!!

palpation - The act of feeling with the hand; the application of the fingers with light pressure to the surface of the body for the purpose of determining the ... (sorry the web site for this would not come up).

Oh and then when a woman is dx, they ask the question...have you had any trauma to the breast? Well now....let me see....yes everytime I had a mammogram Yell For you baywatcher...that was at least 50 times. For danix5...hundreds. Oh and after you are dx ...most...not all...doctors recommend a mammo every 6 months. Some women demand to have one every 6 months due to the fear of recurrence. Oh well....down from my soapbox.

CrunchyPoodleMama · December 2009

it is to their financial advantage to continue to tell women "they are safe

Yep, to the point that they even have the mammo techs brainwashed. I've had to have mammograms four times just in the last two months (and each of them was at least 4 different shots -- so 16-20 blasts of radiation in all). I didn't like doing that (before my diagnosis, I had planned NEVER to have a mammogram) but I sucked it up and did it, figuring I already have cancer so what more harm could it cause.

Each time, I asked the tech about the radiation it emits. They ALL cheerfully said, "Oh, you get more radiation walking around out in the sunshine."

Pardon my French, but BULL...CRAP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! They should at LEAST come up with a lie that's believable!!!!!!!! Yell

NativeMainer · December 2009

If you get more radiation walking in the sunshine why does the tech have to hide behind a lead lined shield?

MsBliss · December 2009

They don't ask us about our history of radiation exposure either. I have a very high total rad exposure from work environment to diagnostic xrays. But of course, each time I had an xray, it was, "oh, don't worry, it is less radiation than flying to New York". What a load. NEVER DID ANYONE ASK ME ABOUT CUMULATIVE LIFETIME EXPOSURE HISTORY. Never. I will not have another mammogram. I will do thermography, or sonocine ultrasound, even though it costs me hundreds of dollars each. Then, as soon as I can find a water diagnostic center, I am there.

sam52 · December 2009

I so totally agree.....we don't get onto the (3 yearly) screening programme here in the UK until age 50, which I think is sound. Pre-menopausal breast tissue is usually quite dense and hard to read, so pointless to mammogram.

I found some 'dimpling' in my right breast aged about 42; I had mammo and U/S and it was found to be due to breast trauma, from having tripped while going upstairs and bashing my breast on the bannister.However, it was decided to give me regular monitoring with a yearly mammogram; this continued for about 6 years.Then guess what? Age 50 I found a lump in my right breast.The tumor was not in the same location as the trauma site, but I believe that the radiation from those unnecessary mammos was to blame.

This year, for the first time since dx, I decided not to have my yearly mammo. I have not yet decided whether to have one next year, or to wait for the year after.I am very concerned about the excessive radiation.

PiscesMoon · January 2010

i don't think this applies to me: my very first mammo at age 43 found my bc. Frown

also, the question of insurance comes up: most will not pay for testing that is considered 'experimental' or still in a testing phase. consider our having to battle to use MRI's for screening (huge debate there as well)... Yell

Nan56143 · April 2010

I was reading Suzanne Somer's blog and found this writing by Dr. Russell Blaylock on mammograms. Sorry it is such a long thread. You will have to scroll all the way down to the bottom to read what he wrote. When are women going to stand up and say no? It is time for the insurance companies to stop dictating what pain we have to endure just for a test.

http://www.suzannesomers.com/Blog/

Mamograms ARE dangerous, New AlternaTive uses H20 /no radiation

Comments

Categories