Top Health Tools
Top Health Tools

Top Reports
Top Reports
Top Articles
Top Articles

Top Reviews
Top Reviews
Biased Authors Whip Up New Dangerous Breast Cancer Guidelines For Women

New malicious recommendations from the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI) and the American College of Radiology (ACR) on breast cancer screening are now suggesting that breast cancer screening should begin at age 40 and earlier in high-risk patients. The recommendations also suggest further utilization of lethal medical imaging tools such as mammography which has itself been found to cause cancer.

Published in the January issue of the Journal of the American College of Radiology (JACR), the recommendations released by the SBI and ACR state that the average patient should begin annual breast cancer screening at age 40. They also target women in their 30s if they are considered "high risk" as they stated.

No evidence has ever supported any recommendations made for regular periodic screening and mammography at ANY AGE. Exposure to mammograms today can lead to cancer much later in life. As ABC News reported, Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, the deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, says, "Radiation exposure from these scans is not inconsequential and can lead to later cancers."

The occurrence of breast cancer has dramatically increased in the past 50 years and the medical establishment encourages the use of annual mammogram screenings as a woman’s best option for early detection. In fact, for more than 30 years it’s been the unquestioned, standard screening device used by the medical community.

Susun S. Weed, author of Breast Cancer? Breast Health! The Wise Woman Way said "Screening mammograms are unsafe other ways, too: they expose sensitive breast tissues to radiation, and they increase your chances of having a biopsy and being overtreated for carcinoma in situ. Scientists agree that there is no safe dose of radiation. Cellular DNA in the breast is more easily damaged by very small doses of radiation than thyroid tissue or bone marrow; in fact, breast cells are second only to fetal tissues in sensitivity to radiation. And the younger the breast cells, the more easily their DNA is damaged by radiation."

The more radiation a woman receives in her lifetime, whether it is during a dental exam, at an airport, or during her yearly mammogram, the more likely it is that she will develop breast cancer. In fact, the spiraling rates of breast cancer seen in the last 25 years may be directly tied to the increased use of mammography.

With toxic radiation, mammogram testing compresses sensitive breast tissue causing pain and possible tissue damage. To make matters worse, the false negative and false positive rates of mammography are a troubling 30% and 89% respectively. Another concern is that many breast cancers occur below the armpits; however, mammography completely misses this auxiliary region, viewing only the breast tissue compressed between two plates of glass.

Despite the overwhelming evidence establishing the risks of mammograms far outweighing the benefits, the organizations the public holds responsible for protecting women's health continue promoting the myths of mammography.

Carol H. Lee, MD was the primary author of the publication in JACR. Despite no evidence to support her statement, Lee stated "the significant decrease in breast cancer mortality, which amounts to nearly 30 percent since 1990, is a major medical success and is due largely to earlier detection of breast cancer through mammography screening." No study has ever successfully and scientifically correlated any reduction in breast cancer mortality to mammography.

Lee then stated, "It should be remembered that mammography is the only imaging modality that has been proven to decrease mortality from breast cancer." Once again, Lee is strictly misinformed. Mammography has never been proven to decrease breast cancer mortality, EVER!

As usual, once you follow the trail of who these authors are supported by, including their funding sources, the path always leads to pharmaceutical and imaging equipment conglomerates who do not have a vested interest in the welfare of breast cancer patients. The more cancer patients, the more imaging equipment is sold to hospitals and imaging centers.

It's kind of like the big bad wolf designing an escape route for the three little pigs who have been cornered with no way out.

In this study, all 15 contributing authors are medical doctors and most are also consultants, investigators, speakers or on the scientific advistory boards of major medical imaging and mammography equipment manufacturers, including Hologic Inc., Siemens Medical Systems, Toshiba Ultrasound, Supersonic Imaging, Bracco Imaging, Medipattern Inc, Naviscan Inc., GE Healthcare and Koning Corp.

Interestingly enough, Dr. Carol H. Lee is the chair of the ACR's Breast Imaging Commission who receives large grants from the National Cancer Insitute/NIH who have strong ties to both Big Pharma and Wallstreet. It always interesting how everything is linked to Wallstreet.

Isn't it time for the three little pigs to start thinking for themselves and coordinating their own escape route?

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy.

January 5, 2010


This site is owned and operated by 1999-2016. All Rights Reserved. All content on this site may be copied, without permission, whether reproduced digitally or in print, provided copyright, reference and source information are intact and use is strictly for not-for-profit purposes. Please review our copyright policy for full details.
volunteerDonateWrite For Us
Stay Connected With Our Newsletter