THERMOGRAPHY AS MAMMOGRAPHY ALTERNATIVE

[Guest guest]

THERMOGRAPHY AS MAMMOGRAPHY ALTERNATIVE

Dr. Frank A. Charles, N.D.

Page 24 Fall/Winter 2001-2002 Carolina Health & Healing magazine

 

There probably isn't a person in America who has not been touched by

a loved one who has battled breast cancer. Medical science has not

yet learned how to prevent breast cancer but improvements in early

detection promise a greater chance of survival. One of the most

exciting and recent developments in the early detection of breast

cancer is in the field of advanced medical Digital Infrared

Thermographic Imaging or DITI.

 

Several new dramatic improvements in DITI technology, coupled with

patient awareness and new medical warnings concerning overuse of

ionizing radiation from x-rays, are pushing DITI into the breast-

screening arena. DITI now offers the advantages of being totally

painless, totally safe, low in cost, and effective at any age. You

may be asking: " If DITI is so great, why haven't I heard much about

it? Why hasn't DITI been utilized more for breast screening if it

offers all these advantages? "

 

PRESENTING DITI

 

Medical DITI has been used extensively in human medicine in the

U.S.A., Europe and Asia for the past 20 years. While the technology

lost favor some time ago because of cumbersome equipment, difficult

protocols and unrefined technology, events are rapidly changing. New

ultra-sensitive, ultra-resolution DITI devices have many doctors and

researchers believing that DITI exams could prove to be a simpler,

less expensive and more effective complement to mammography than

other newer imaging methods.

 

Recent concerns about mammography and the benefits of a new DITI

manufactured by a company from Australia, have resulted in DITI

imaging centers in other parts of the world now being able to offer

this technology to women interested in taking control of their

health.

 

PROBLEMS WITH MAMMOGRAPHY

 

Until recently, mammography was considered to be our only option in

breast screening. That is rapidly changing as experts in the field

of ionizing radiation are questioning the long- term cumulative

effects of these types of procedures. The truth about mammography

is that it may not be as safe or effective as once believed.

 

Many informed experts are now questioning the detrimental effects

from cumulative radiation. The fact is that this area has not been

properly researched, especially considering the multiple-exposures

being absorbed by many individuals and the cumulative effects of

radiation from mammography, dental and other radiation sources.

 

Based on 40 years of research on the effects of low-dose radiation

on humans, John Gofman, M.D., Ph.D., a renowned authority on the

health effects of ionizing radiation, estimates that 75 percent of

breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or minimizing exposure

from mammography and X-rays.

 

Dr. Gofman believes strongly that there is no " safe threshold " for

exposure to low level-level ionizing radiation.

 

Another potential concern about the mammogram is that it may, on

occasion, even help spread an existing mass of cancer cells. During

the procedure, considerable pressure is placed on the woman's

breast by the mammography technologist as the breast is firmly

squeezed between two flat plastic surfaces. Dr. Lorraine Day, a

pathologist and breast cancer survivor, and other researchers have

raised concerns about the negative effects of breast compression.

 

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) and the National Academy of

Sciences admit that mammography promotes cancer. Their justification

for continuing to endorse mammography is that the incidence of

cancer is small in relation to the number of early detection cases.

 

However, Dr. Charles B. Simone, founder of the Simone Protective

Cancer Center and a former clinical associate in immunology and

pharmacology at the NCI, says that earlier detection has not

resulted in longer life when the data is really analyzed.

 

Here are some other comments on mammography:

 

" By the time a tumor is large enough to be seen by a mammogram, it

is usually 8 years old, has approximately 500 million cells, and is

approximately an inch long. " Lancet, Oct. 10, 1992.

 

" If all American women between forty and fifty were screened yearly

by mammogram, 40 out of every 100 cancers would be missed. " New

England Journal of Medicine, 328:176 1993.

 

" Half of all breast cancers in women under 45 are invisible on a

mammogram. " American Health, 1994

 

MORE ABOUT DITI

 

DITI has been recognized as a viable diagnostic tool since 1987 by

the AMA Council on Scientific Affairs, by the ACA Council on

Diagnostic Imaging, by the Congress of Neurosurgeons in 1988 and by

the American Academy of Physical Medicine and Rehabili-tation in

1990.

 

DITI works differently than tests such as x-ray, ultrasound or MRI.

Those technologies can detect changes in tissue structure only,

because they are anatomical tests. Tumors must be formed, dense and

of a certain size to be detected by mammography or ultrasound.

 

DITI is unique in its ability to show physiological change and

metabolic processes that are strongly indicative of breast

abnormality. DITI can detect subtle changes in breast temperature

that indicate a variety of breast diseases and abnormalities. Once

abnormal heat patterns are detected in the breast, follow up

procedures are recommended to rule out or properly diagnose cancer

and a host of other diseases such as fibrocystic syndrome

and Paget1s disease.

 

Breast tumors always involve increased vascularization and blood

flow as part of the body1s immune response prior to tumor

formation. Identifying this increased vascularization and abnormal

hypothermic patterning is what gives DITI earlier detection

advantages over mammography and other tests.

 

Many of the so-called false positives of DITI breast screening are

often true positive findings of angiogenesis (increased blood

supply) preceding actual tumor development. Detection in these

early stages is unreliable by conventional means, often due to the

fact that the tumor has not yet developed any mass or sufficient

density.

 

For younger women in particular, DITI offers a major advantage. In

women under fifty, where tumor-doubling time is significantly

increased, mammography is not nearly as effective. The faster a

malignant tumor grows, the more infrared radiation it generates.

This makes detection by DITI in young women highly probable and

accurate at an earlier stage than other types of screening.

 

Non-cancerous masses show different patterns than cancerous masses

under DITI screening. DITI therefore has advantages in screening for

cancerous versus non-cancerous growths. It is possible and highly

probable that with increased use of DITI, many women could be spared

unnecessary invasive testing and radiation exposure.

 

While other more traditional methods such as MRI and ultrasound are

being developed and touted as new advancements in screening, they

are much more expensive and are still limited to structural changes

even though they may deliver an improvement in sensitivity to

smaller tumors.

 

 

WHO SHOULD HAVE A DITI EXAM?

 

DITI is for any woman who would rather not undergo the discomfort of

mammogram radiation if not necessary. DITI is especially appropriate

for younger women between 20 and 50 whose denser breast tissue

makes it more difficult for mammography to pick up suspicious

lesions. It is appropriate for women who are outside of the

mammogram screening guidelines due to surgical procedures, breast

implants or other contraindications. The DITI session can provide a

clinical marker to the doctor or thermographer indicating that a

specific area of the breast needs particularly close examination.

 

A DITI exam takes 15 minutes, is pain-free and establishes a

baseline from which other exams can be compared in the future. If an

abnormality is found, your doctor can then plan accordingly and lay

out a program to further diagnose and /or monitor you until other

standard testing is positive. This allows for the earliest possible

treatment.

 

DITI's role in breast cancer and other breast disorders is to help

in three ways: early detection, the monitoring of abnormal

physiology, and the establishment of risk factors for other

developments of cancer. When used with other procedures, the best

possible evaluation of breast health is made.

 

It is in this role that thermography provides its most practical

benefit to the general public and to the medical profession. It is

certainly an adjunct, and not a competitor, to the appropriate use

of mammography. In fact, thermography has the ability to identify

patients at the highest risk and actually increase the effective

use of mammography imaging procedures.

 

For more information on DITI, or breast screening centers utilizing

the latest DITI technology, please contact the author.

 

Dr. Frank A. Charles, N.D. is President of the Vision Medical Group

/VMG, Inc. a medical equipment supplier and consultant to the health

care industry for DITI and other biological medicine technologies.

He can be reached at 1-888-352-8570.

 

><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><

 

A Consideration: X-Rays and Your Health

 

In 1965, the British Journal of Cancer published the first study

indicating that medical x-rays are a cause of breast cancer.

In 1969, I entered the nursing profession. In the past thirty-two

years, the " cure for cancer " is still " just around the corner " , and

little has changed, except that more women, and younger women are

diagnosed with breast cancer.

 

In 1997, I was introduced to John Gofman, MD, PhD, while

researching an article I was writing for Women´s Health Month.

 

According to Gofman´s study, seventy-five percent of all recent,

current, and incubating breast cancer cases are caused by radiation.

Gofman´s research, published in his book, Preventing Breast Cancer,

gives us much to look at and consider.

 

Gofman contends that the resistance to new ideas is one of the

major obstacles that keep the public, and women especially, poorly

informed about prevention.

 

While we know that good wholesome, organic food is health

promoting, we also need to consider the impact of drinking pure

water, reducing stress, and getting good exercise. We have to

consider the impact of environmental poisons, poisons in food, and

the increasing amount of EMF exposure. Specifically these factors co-

act with x-rays to make things worse.

 

Much of this research is addressed in the work of Samuel Epstein,

MD, of the University of Illinois at Chicago.

 

This is where education and prevention step in. Radiation doses and

disease risk can be reduced significantly without reducing the

quality of the diagnostic process. This is important because

breast tissue is very sensitive to ionizing radiation. Ultrasound

and thermography are screening methods that reduce exposure to

ionizing radiation.

 

According to Gofman, " if we care about preventing breast cancer, we

will establish a relentlessly positive program of measuring and

recording x-ray doses, so that physicians and patients will know if

the United States is succeeding, or not, in the one known action

guaranteed to reduce breast cancer rates. "

 

Dr. John Gofman is Professor Emeritus of Molecular and Cell Biology

at the Univ. of California, Berkeley, former director of Biomedical

Research at Livermore National Lab, author of three scientific

monographs on x-ray health effects, and chair of Citizens for

Nuclear Responsibility.

 

The X-rays and Health Project web site is www.X-raysandhealth.org

<http://www.x-raysandhealth.org/>

 

Sandy Mintz

http://www.vaccinationnews.com

http://www.vaccinationnews.com/Scandals/past_scandals.htm

 

" Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. " - Wendell Phillips

(1811-1884), paraphrasing John Philpot Curran (1808)

 

http://www.909shot.com

http://www.redflagsweekly.com

 

ALL INFORMATION, DATA, AND MATERIAL CONTAINED, PRESENTED, OR

PROVIDED HERE IS FOR GENERAL INFORMATION PURPOSES ONLY AND IS NOT TO

BE CONSTRUED AS REFLECTING THE KNOWLEDGE OR OPINIONS OF THE

PUBLISHER, AND IS NOT TO BE CONSTRUED OR INTENDED AS PROVIDING

MEDICAL OR LEGAL ADVICE. THE DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO VACCINATE

IS AN IMPORTANT AND COMPLEX ISSUE AND SHOULD BE MADE BY YOU, AND YOU

ALONE, IN CONSULTATION WITH YOUR HEALTH CARE PROVIDER.

 

IN ADDITION, THE FACT THAT THIS EMAIL HAS BEEN FORWARDED IN NO WAY

NECESSARILY IMPLIES ENDORSEMENT OF THE POINT OF VIEW OF THE AUTHOR OR

AUTHORS OF THE ARTICLE OR EMAIL.