Mammograms cause breast cancer (and other cancer facts you probably never knew)

[Guest guest]

Mammograms cause breast cancer (and other cancer facts you probably never knew)

 

Monday, August 15, 2005 by: Dawn PrateBreast cancer is the leading cause of death among American women between the ages of 44 and 55. Dr. Gofinan, in his book, Preventing Breast Cancer,

cites this startling statistic along with an in-depth look at

mammographic screening, an early-detection practice that agencies like

the American Cancer Society recommend to women of all age groups.

According to most health experts, catching a tumor in its early stages

increases a woman's chances of survival by at least 17 percent.

The most common method for early detection

is mammography. A mammogram is an X-ray picture of your breast that can

reveal tumor growths otherwise undetectable in a physical exam. Like

all x-rays, mammograms

use doses of ionizing radiation to create this image. Radiologists then

analyze the image for any abnormal growths. Despite continuous

improvements and innovations, mammography

has garnered a sizable opposition in the medical community because of

an error rate that is still high and the amount of harmful radiation

used in the procedure.

 

Effectiveness of MammographyIs mammography an effective

tool for detecting tumors? Some critics say no. In a Swedish study of

60,000 women, 70 percent of the mammographically detected tumors

weren't tumors at all. These "false positives" aren't just financial and emotional strains, they may also lead to many unnecessary and invasive biopsies. In fact, 70 to 80 percent of all positive mammograms do not, upon biopsy, show any presence of cancer.

 

At the same time, mammograms also have a high rate of missed tumors, or "false negatives." Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, in his book, The Politics Of Cancer, claims that in women ages 40 to 49, one in four instances of cancer is missed at each mammography. The National Cancer Institute (NCI) puts the false negative rate even higher at 40 percent among women ages 40-49. National Institutes of Health spokespeople also admit that mammograms miss 10 percent of malignant tumors in women over 50. Researchers have found that breast tissue

is denser among younger women, making it difficult to detect tumors.

For this reason, false negatives are twice as likely to occur in

premenopausal mammograms.

 

Radiation RisksMany critics of mammography cite the

hazardous health effects of radiation. In 1976, the controversy over

radiation and mammography reached a saturation point. At that time

mammographic technology delivered five to 10 rads (radiation-absorbed

doses) per screening, as compared to 1 rad in current screening

methods. In women between the ages of 35 and 50, each rad of exposure

increased the risk of breast cancer by one percent, according to Dr. Frank Rauscher, then-director of the NCI.

 

According to Russell L. Blaylock, MD, one estimate is that annual

radiological breast exams increase the risk of breast cancer by two

percent a year. So over 10 years the risk will have increased 20

percent. In the 1960s and 70s, women, even those who received 10

screenings a year, were never told the risk they faced from exposure.

In the midst of the 1976 radiation debate, Kodak, a major manufacturer of mammography film, took out full-page ads in scientific journals entitled About breast cancer and X-rays: A hopeful message from industry on a sober topic.

 

Despite better technology and decreased doses of radiation, scientists

still claim mammography is a substantial risk. Dr. John W. Gofman, an

authority on the health effects of ionizing radiation, estimates that

75 percent of breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or

minimizing exposure to the ionizing radiation. This includes

mammography, x-rays and other medical and dental sources.

Since mammographic screening was introduced, the incidence of a

form of breast cancer called ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has

increased by 328 percent. Two hundred percent of this increase is

allegedly due to mammography. In addition to harmful radiation,

mammography may also help spread existing cancer cells

due to the considerable pressure placed on the woman's breast during

the procedure. According to some health practitioners, this compression

could cause existing cancer cells to metastasize from the breast

tissue.

Cancer research has also found a gene, called oncogene AC, that

is extremely sensitive to even small doses of radiation. A significant

percentage of women in the United States

have this gene, which could increase their risk of mammography-induced

cancer. They estimate that 10,000 A-T carriers will die of breast

cancer this year due to mammography.

The risk of radiation is apparently higher among younger women. The NCI released evidence that, among women under 35, mammography could cause 75 cases of breast cancer for every 15 it identifies. Another Canadian study found a 52 percent increase in breast cancer mortality

in young women given annual mammograms. Dr. Samuel Epstein also claims

that pregnant women exposed to radiation could endanger their fetus. He

advises against mammography during pregnancy because "the future risks

of leukemia to your unborn child, not to mention birth defects,

are just not worth it." Similarly, studies reveal that children exposed

to radiation are more likely to develop breast cancer as adults.

 

Navigating the Statistics

While the number of deaths caused by breast cancer has decreased, the incidence

of breast cancer is still rising. Since 1940, the incidence of breast

cancer has risen by one to two percent every year. Between 1973 and

1991, the incidence of breast cancer in females over 65 rose nearly 40

percent in the United States.

Some researchers attribute this increase to better detection

technologies; i.e., as the number of women screened for breast cancer

rises, so does the number of reported cases. Other analysts say the

correlation between mammographic screening and increases in breast

cancer is much more ominous, suggesting radiation exposure is

responsible for the growing number of cases. While the matter is still

being debated, Professor Sandra Steingraber offers ways to navigate

these statistics. According to Steingraber, the rise in breast cancer

predates the introduction of mammograms as a common diagnostic tool. In

addition, the groups of women in whom breast cancer incidence is

ascending most swiftly – blacks and the elderly – are also least likely

to get regular mammograms.

The majority of health experts

agree that the risk of breast cancer for women under 35 is not high

enough to warrant the risk of radiation exposure. Similarly, the risk

of breast cancer to women over 55 justifies the risk of mammograms. The

statistics about mammography and women between the ages of 40 and 55

are the most contentious. A 1992 Canadian National Breast Cancer Study

showed that mammography had no positive effect on mortality for women

between the ages of 40 and 50. In fact, the study seemed to suggest

that women in that age group are more likely to die of breast cancer

when screened regularly.

 

Burton Goldberg, in his book, Alternative Medicine, recommends that women under 50 avoid screening mammograms, although the American Cancer Society

encourages mammograms every two years for women ages 40 to 49. Trying

to settle this debate, a 1997 consensus panel appointed by the NIH

ruled that there was no evidence that mammograms for this age group

save lives; they may even do more harm than good. The panel advises

women to weigh the risks with their doctors and decide for themselves.

New Screening Technologies

While screening is an important step in fighting breast cancer, many

researchers are looking for alternatives to mammography. Burton

Goldberg totes the safety and accuracy of new thermography

technologies. Able to detect cancers

at a minute physical stage of development, thermography does not use

x-rays, nor is there any compression of the breast. Also important, new

thermography technologies do not lose effectiveness with dense breast

tissue, decreasing the chances of false-negative results.

Some doctors are now offering digital mammograms. Digital

mammography is a mammography system in which x-ray film is replaced by

solid-state detectors that convert x-rays into electric signals. Though

radiation is still used, digital mammography requires a much smaller

dose. The electrical signals are used to produce images that can be

electronically manipulated; a physician can zoom in, magnify and

optimize different parts of breast tissue without having to take an

additional image.

 

The experts speak on mammograms and breast cancer:Regular

mammography of younger women increases their cancer risks. Analysis of

controlled trials over the last decade has shown consistent increases

in breast cancer mortality within a few years of commencing screening.

This confirms evidence of the high sensitivity of the premenopausal

breast, and on cumulative carcinogenic effects of radiation.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 539

In his book, "Preventing Breast Cancer," Dr. Gofinan says that breast cancer is the leading cause of death

among American women between the ages of forty-four and fifty-five.

Because breast tissue is highly radiation-sensitive, mammograms can

cause cancer. The danger can be heightened by a woman's genetic makeup,

preexisting benign breast disease, artificial menopause, obesity, and

hormonal imbalance.

Death By Medicine by Gary Null PhD, page 23

"The risk of radiation-induced breast cancer has long been a

concern to mammographers and has driven the efforts to minimize

radiation dose per examination," the panel explained. "Radiation can

cause breast cancer in women, and the risk is proportional to dose. The

younger the woman at the time of exposure, the greater her lifetime

risk for breast cancer.

Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 122

Furthermore, there is clear evidence that the breast,

particularly in premenopausal women, is highly sensitive to radiation,

with estimates of increased risk of breast cancer of up to 1% for every

rad (radiation absorbed dose) unit of X-ray exposure. This projects up

to a 20% increased cancer risk

for a woman who, in the 1970s, received 10 annual mammograms of an

average two rads each. In spite of this, up to 40% of women over 40

have had mammograms since the mid-1960s, some annually and some with

exposures of 5 to 10 rads in a single screening from older, high-dose

equipment.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 537

No less questionable—or controversial—has been the use of X rays

to detect breast cancer: mammography. The American Cancer Society

initially promoted the procedure as a safe and simple way to detect

breast tumors early and thus allow women to undergo mastectomies before

their cancers had metastasized.

The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 23

The American Cancer Society, together with the American College

of Radiologists, has insisted on pursuing largescale mammography

screening programs for breast cancer, including its use in younger

women, even though the NCI and other experts are now agreed that these

are likely to cause more cancers than could possibly be detected. The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 291

 

A number of "cancer societies" argued, saying the tests — which cost

between $50-200 each - - are a necessity for all women over 40, despite

the fact that radiation from yearly mammograms during ages 40-49 has

been estimated to cause one additional breast cancer death per 10,000

women.

Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 21

Mammograms Add to Cancer Risk—mammography exposes the breast to

damaging ionizing radiation. John W. Gofman, M.D., Ph.D., an authority

on the health effects of ionizing radiation, spent 30 years studying

the effects of low-dose radiation on humans. He estimates that 75% of

breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or minimizing exposure to

the ionizing radiation from mammography, X rays, and other medical

sources. Other research has shown that, since mammographic screening

was introduced in 1983, the incidence of a form of breast cancer called

ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which represents 12% of all breast

cancer cases, has increased by 328%, and 200% of this increase is due

to the use of mammography.69 In addition to exposing a woman to harmful

radiation, the mammography procedure may help spread an existing mass

of cancer cells. During a mammogram, considerable pressure must be

placed on the woman's breast, as the breast is squeezed between two

flat plastic surfaces. According to some health practitioners, this

compression could cause existing cancer cells to metastasize from the

breast tissue.

Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 588

In fact the benefits of annual screening to women age 40 to 50,

who are now being aggressively recruited, are at best controversial. In

this age group, one in four cancers is missed at each mammography. Over

a decade of pre-menopausal screening, as many as three in 10 women will

be mistakenly diagnosed with breast cancer. Moreover, international

studies have shown that routine premenopausal mammography is associated

with increased breast cancer death rates at older ages. Factors

involved include: the high sensitivity of the premenopausal breast to

the cumulative carcinogenic effects of mammographic X-radiation; the

still higher sensitivity to radiation of women who carry the A-T gene;

and the danger that forceful and often painful compression of the

breast during mammography may rupture small blood vessels and encourage

distant spread of undetected cancers.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 540

Since a mammogram is basically an x-ray (radiation) of the

breast, I do not recommend mammograms to my patients for two reasons:

1) Few radiologists

are able to read mammogams correctly, therefore limiting their

effectiveness. Even the man who developed this technique stated on

national television that only about six radiologists in the United

States could read them correctly. 2) In addition, each time the breasts

are exposed to an x-ray, the risk of breast cancer increases by 2

percent.

The Hope of Living Cancer Free by Francisco Contreras MD, page 104

Mammography itself is radiation: an X-ray picture of the breast

to detect a potential tumor. Each woman must weigh for herself the

risks and benefits of mammography. As with most carcinogens, there is a

latency period or delay between the time of irradiation and the

occurrence of breast cancer. This delay can vary up to decades for

different people. Response to radiation is especially dramatic in

children. Women who received X-rays of the breast area as children have

shown increased rates of breast cancer as adults. The first increase is

reflected in women younger than thirty-five, who have early onset

breast cancer. But for this exposed group, flourishing breast cancer

rates continue for another forty years or longer.

Eat To Beat Cancer by J Robert Hatherill, page 132

The use of women as guinea pigs is familiar. There is revealing

consistency between the tamoxifen trial and the 1970s trial by the NCI

and American Cancer Society involving high-dose mammography of some

300,000 women. Not only is there little evidence of effectiveness of

mammography in premeno-pausal women, despite NCI's assurances no

warnings were given of the known high risks of breast cancer from the

excessive X-ray doses then used. There has been no investigation of the

incidence of breast cancer in these high-risk women. Of related concern

is the NCI's continuing insistence on premeno-pausal mammography, in

spite of contrary warnings by the American College of Physicians and

the Canadian Breast Cancer Task Force and in spite of persisting

questions about hazards even at current low-dose exposures. These

problems are compounded by the NCI's failure to explore safe

alternatives, especially transillumination with infrared light

scanning.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 544

High Rate of False Positives—mammography's high rate of

false-positive test results wastes money and creates unnecessary

emotional trauma. A Swedish study of 60,000 women, aged 40-64, who were

screened for breast cancer revealed that of the 726 actually referred

to oncologists for treatment, 70% were found to be cancer free.

According to The Lancet, of the 5% of mammograms that suggest further

testing, up to 93% are false positives. The Lancet report further noted

that because the great majority of positive screenings are false

positives, these inaccurate results lead to many unnecessary biopsies

and other invasive surgical procedures. In fact, 70% to 80% of all

positive mammograms do not, on biopsy, show any presence of cancer.71

According to some estimates, 90% of these "callbacks" result from

unclear readings due to dense overlying breast tissue.72

Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 588

"Radiation-related breast cancers occur at least 10 years after

exposure," continued the panel. "Radiation from yearly mammograms

during ages 40-49 has been estimated to cause one additional breast

cancer death per 10,000 women."

Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 122

According to the National Cancer Institute, there is a high rate

of missed tumors in women ages 40-49 which results in 40% false

negative test results. Breast tissue in younger women is denser, which

makes it more difficult to detect tumours, so tumours grow more quickly

in younger women, and tumours may develop between screenings. Because

there is no reduction in mortality from breast cancer as a direct

result of early mammogram, it is recommended that women under fifty

avoid screening mammograms although the American Cancer Society still

recommends a mammogram every two years for women age 40-49. Dr. Love

states, "We know that mammography works and will be a lifesaving tool

for at least 30%."

Treating Cancer With Herbs by Michael Tierra ND, page 467

Equivocal mammogram results lead to unnecessary surgery, and the

accuracy rate of mammograms is poor. According to the National Cancer

Institute (NCI), in women ages 40-49, there is a high rate of "missed

tumors," resulting in 40% false-negative mammogram results. Breast

tissue in younger women is denser, which makes it more difficult to

detect tumors, and tumors grow more quickly in younger women, so cancer

may develop between screenings.

Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 973

Even worse, spokespeople for the National Institutes of Health

(NIH) admit that mammograms miss 25 percent of malignant tumors in

women in their 40s (and 10 percent in older women). In fact, one

Australian study found that more than half of the breast cancers in

younger women are not detectable by mammograms.

Underground Cures by Health Sciences Institute, page 42

Whatever you may be told, refuse routine mammograms to detect

early breast cancer, especially if you are premenopausal. The X-rays

may actually increase your chances of getting cancer. If you are older,

and there are strong reasons to suspect that you may have breast

cancer, the risks may be worthwhile. Very few circumstances, if any,

should persuade you to have X-rays taken if you are pregnant. The

future risks of leukaemia to your unborn child, not to mention birth defects, are just not worth it.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 305

Other medical research has shown that the incidence of a form of

breast cancer known as ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which accounts

for 12% of all breast cancer cases, increased by 328% — and 200% of

this increase is due to the use of mammography!

Under The Influence Modern Medicine by Terry A Rondberg DC, page 123

As the controversy heated up in 1976, it was revealed that the

hundreds of thousands of women enrolled in the program were never told

the risk they faced from the procedure (ibid.). Young women faced the

greatest danger. In the thirty-five- to fifty-year-old age group, each

mammogram increased the subject's chance of contracting breast cancer

by 1 percent, according to Dr. Frank Rauscher, then director of the

National Cancer Institute (New York Times, August 23, 1976).

The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 24

Because there is no reduction in mortality from breast cancer as

a direct result of early mammograms, it is recommended that women under

50 avoid screening mammograms, although the American Cancer Society is

still recommending a mammogram every two years for women ages 40-49.

The NCI recommends that, after age 35, women perform monthly breast

self-exams. For women over 50, many doctors still advocate mammograms.

However, breast self-exams and safer, more accurate technologies such

as thermography should be strongly considered as options to

mammography. Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 973

In the midst of the debate, Kodak took out full-page ads in

scientific journals entitled "About breast cancer and X-rays: A hopeful

message from industry on a sober topic" (see Science, July 2, 1976).

Kodak is a major manufacturer of mammography film.

The Cancer Industry by Ralph W Moss, page 24

The largest and most credible study ever done to evaluate the

impact of routine mammography on survival has concluded that routine

mammograms do significantly reduce deaths from breast cancer.

Scientists in the United States, Sweden, Britain, and Taiwan compared

the number of deaths from breast cancer diagnosed in the 20 years

before mammogram screening became available with the number in the 20

years after its introduction. The research was based on the histories

and treatment of 210,000 Swedish women ages 20 to 69. The researchers

found that death from breast cancer dropped 44 percent in women who had

routine mammography. Among those who refused mammograms during this

time period there was only a 16 percent reduction in death from this

disease (presumably the decrease was due to better treatment of the

malignancy).

Dr Isadore Rosenfeld's Breakthrough Health By Isadore Rosenfeld MD, page 47

In 1993—seventeen years after the first pilot study—the

biochemist Mary Wolff and her colleagues conducted the first carefully

designed, major study on this issue. They analyzed DDE and PCB levels

in the stored blood specimens of 14,290 New York City women who had

attended a mammography screening clinic. Within six months, fifty-eight

of these women were diagnosed with breast cancer. Wolff matched each of

these fifty-eight women to control subjects—women without cancer but of

the same age, same menstrual status, and so on—who had also visited the

clinic. The blood samples of the women with breast cancer were then

compared to their cancer-free counterparts.

Living Downstream by Sandra Steingraber PhD, page 12

One reason may be that mammograms actually increase mortality.

In fact numerous studies to date have shown that among the under-50s,

more women die from breast cancer among screened groups than among

those not given mammograms. The results of the Canadian National Breast

Cancer Screening Trial published in 1993, after a screen of 50,000

women between 40-49, showed that more tumors were detected in the

screened group, but not only were no lives saved but 36 percent more

women died from

The Cancer Handbook by Lynne McTaggart, page 57

One Canadian study found a 52 percent increase in breast cancer

mortality in young women given annual mammograms, a procedure whose

stated purpose is to prevent cancer. Despite evidence of the link

between cancer and radiation exposure to women from mammography, the

American Cancer Society has promoted the practice without reservation.

Five radiologists have served as ACS presidents.53

When Healing Becomes A Crime by Kenny Ausubel, page 233

Premenopausal women carrying the A-T gene, about 1.5 percent of

women, are more radiation sensitive and at higher cancer risk from

mammography. It has been estimated that up to 10,000 breast cancer

cases each year are due to mammography of A-T carriers.

The Politics Of Cancer by Samuel S Epstein MD, page 539

A study reported that mammography combined with physical exams

found 3,500 cancers, 42 percent of which could not be detected by

physical exam. However, 31 percent of the tumors were noninfiltrating

cancer. Since the course of breast cancer is long, the time difference

in cancer detected through mammography may not be a benefit in terms of

survival.

Woman's Encyclopedia Of Natural Healing by Dr Gary Null, page 86 The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists also has

called for more mammograms among women over 50. However, constant

screening still can miss breast cancer. mammograms are at their poorest

in detecting breast cancer when the woman is under 50.

The Cancer Handbook by Lynne McTaggart, page 53

Despite its shortcomings, every woman between the ages of fifty

and sixty-nine should have one every year. I also recommend them

annually for women over seventy, even though early detection isn't as

important for the slow-growing form of breast cancer they tend to get.

One mammogram should probably be taken at age forty to establish a

baseline, but how often women should have them after that is debatable.

Some authorities favor annual screening. Others feel there's not enough

evidence to support screening at all before fifty. Still others believe

that every two years is sufficient. I lean toward having individual

women and their doctors go over the pros and cons and make their own

decisions. Finally, a mammogram is appropriate at any age if a lump has

been detected.

The Longevity Code By Zorba Paster MD, page 234 For

breast cancer, thermography offers a very early warning system, often

able to pinpoint a cancer process five years before it would be

detectable by mammography. Most breast tumors have been growing slowly

for up to 20 years before they are found by typical diagnostic

techniques. Thermography can detect cancers when they are at a minute

physical stage of development, when it is still relatively easy to halt

and reverse the progression of the cancer. No rays of any kind enter

the patient's body; there is no pain or compressing of the breasts as

in a mammogram. While mammography tends to lose effectiveness with

dense breast tissue, thermography is not dependent upon tissue

densities.

Alternative Medicine by Burton Goldberg, page 587

http://www.naturalnews.com/010886.html