|
[ Breast Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |
I looked up on a search this site as I have to get a second Mamogram taken because they said I have fibrois the next word I'm not sure if she said tissue or tumors . I just know they didn't see what was necessary and I hate it when they say go again it makes you nervous. This is my second time I've had to go twice. I was reading on this on here and someone mentioned that smashing sensitive tissue is bad. Oh I'm sure it's not perfectly Great but guess they haven't found another way to see what is needed better. Just I recall my first one and how the girl was so business like till I reminded her I was not comfortable she changed to more warm personality. I went for my first at age 35 . After that was age 40 and every year after I have gone. In this most sound like they go every 2 years. Another thought is the rough way a baby suckles off a mothers breast as they get over 6 months ruining breast tissue? If so many women have problems from something very natural. Won't go into sex with husbands and them handling us. I'd rather be ahead of the cancer game rather than to late to turn back.
In Reply to: mamograms posted by Patti on September 26, 2002 at 11:55:05:
Patti:
Have your breasts been caught up in the breast cancer industry's machinery?
Have you done what "they" have told you to do and had your breasts smashed and radiated in those mammogram machines?
What was the point of the whole thing?
They are focused on disease, trying to find a tumor, cyst or calcifications so that they can sell more surgeries, chemo, radiation and reconstructions!
If you want to have diagnostics, why not have a thermogram?
And while you are at it, why not go to a CAM or Naturopathic doctor who is focused on health and wellness?
For more information about the dangers of mammograms, please read the article below from Shirley's Wellness Cafe.
Thanks,
Pam
http://www.shirleys-wellness-cafe.com/women_pms_breast.htm
"Misconceptions and illusions prevail in the management of breast cancer.
Historical review reminds us that medical practice is commonly rooted in tradition rather than proof:
The Halsted mastectomy inadvertently served the burgeoning profession of surgery in the early 20th century more than it has benefited women with breast cancer, yet 100 years later the operation continues to thrive.
Despite evidence that mastectomy, radiation following lumpectomy, axillary node dissection, or intensive follow-up surveillance have little impact on survival, these practices are adhered to tenaciously.
The extent to which current treatment for breast cancer succeeds in prolonging life remains open to question.
Many accepted ideas and interventions are perilously disconnected from their true merit.
The imperative for doctors to do something sometimes contradicts their pledge to do no harm."
[Revisiting Accepted Wisdom in the Management of Breast Cancer]
"Of the women in menopause today, about half start synthetic hormone replacement, but only half of those stick with it because of the side effects or fear of cancer risk.
The threat of breast and uterine cancer is dramatically increased with HRT"
[Linda Page, N.D. Ph.D]
Dr. Mercola on mammography:
"Screening mammography poses significant and cumulative risks of breast cancer for premenopausal women.
The routine practice of taking four films of each breast annually results in approximately 1 rad (radiation absorbed dose) exposure, about 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray.
The premenopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade's screening.
These risks are even greater for younger women subject to "baseline screening."
"Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth," says Dr. Charles B. Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology at the National Cancer Institute."
In addition, mammography provides false tumor reports between 5 and 15 percent of the time.
False positive results cause women to be re-exposed to additional X rays and create an environment of further stress, even possibly leading to unneeded surgery.
In Reply to: mamograms posted by Patti on September 26, 2002 at 11:55:05:
Hi, Patti.
Listen to Pam.
Walt
|
[ Breast Archive ] [ Main Archives Page ] [ Glossary/Index ] [ FAQ ] [ Recommended Books ] [ Bulletin Board ] |
Search this site! | |