Guest guest Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 www.Medicine-No.com says " NO! " to Mammograms: Of couse the president of Dana Farber Cancer Instiute with annual salary of One-Million-Dollars is inclined to disagree. So is the president of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (Annual salary $500,000). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 Do you ever wonder if these (female) die-hard, well paid promoters of mammograms actually get mammograms themselves? The lunacy of exposing breast tissue to so much radiation and such brutal compression was strongly criticized by some (sane) medical researchers before mammograms were even approved for use. Their very earnest pleas to put a stop to the introduction of this procedure were futile.BetsyBob <robertecatalano Sent: Fri, November 20, 2009 2:19:39 PM Note on Mammograms www.Medicine- No.com says "NO!" to Mammograms: Of couse the president of Dana Farber Cancer Instiute with annual salary of One-Million- Dollars is inclined to disagree. So is the president of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (Annual salary $500,000). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 20, 2009 Report Share Posted November 20, 2009 You have a good question, but what's on my mind at ths time is FORCED VACCINATIONS NOW!-WHAT'S NEXT? The mouth of the medical industry is watering for what they are contemplating for the future of the American People. Forced mammograms, and Forced chemotherapy. www.Medicine-No.com says " NO! " to Mammograms: and emphatically " NO! " to chemotherapy. Of couse the president of Dana Farber Cancer Instiute with annual salary of One-Million-Dollars is inclined to disagree. So is the president of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (Annual salary $500,000). Bob Catalano www.Medicine-no.com Author: The Great White Hoax , Betsy Sinkey <westoo wrote: > > Do you ever wonder if these (female) die-hard, well paid promoters of mammograms actually get mammograms themselves? The lunacy of exposing breast tissue to so much radiation and such brutal compression was strongly criticized by some (sane) medical researchers before mammograms were even approved for use. Their very earnest pleas to put a stop to the introduction of this procedure were futile. > Betsy > > > > > > ________________________________ > Bob <robertecatalano > > Fri, November 20, 2009 2:19:39 PM > Note on Mammograms > > > www.Medicine- No.com says " NO! " to Mammograms: Of couse the president of Dana Farber Cancer Instiute with annual salary of One-Million- Dollars is inclined to disagree. So is the president of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (Annual salary $500,000). > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Thermography is a much better and safer way to go for a breast exam. On Nov 20, 2009, at 3:39 PM, Betsy Sinkey wrote:Do you ever wonder if these (female) die-hard, well paid promoters of mammograms actually get mammograms themselves? The lunacy of exposing breast tissue to so much radiation and such brutal compression was strongly criticized by some (sane) medical researchers before mammograms were even approved for use. Their very earnest pleas to put a stop to the introduction of this procedure were futile.BetsyBob <robertecatalano Fri, November 20, 2009 2:19:39 PM Note on Mammogramswww.Medicine- No.com says "NO!" to Mammograms: Of couse the president of Dana Farber Cancer Instiute with annual salary of One-Million- Dollars is inclined to disagree. So is the president of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (Annual salary $500,000). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 21, 2009 Report Share Posted November 21, 2009 Right on. From the time a cancer is seen via thermography a cell must go thru 40 replications (multiply trrillions of times) before it may be noted in a mammogram. Plus there is no compression, fondling, or radiation in a thermogram.--- On Fri, 11/20/09, Susan Siegel <ssiegel5 wrote: Susan Siegel <ssiegel5Re: Note on Mammograms Date: Friday, November 20, 2009, 8:08 PM Thermography is a much better and safer way to go for a breast exam. On Nov 20, 2009, at 3:39 PM, Betsy Sinkey wrote: Do you ever wonder if these (female) die-hard, well paid promoters of mammograms actually get mammograms themselves? The lunacy of exposing breast tissue to so much radiation and such brutal compression was strongly criticized by some (sane) medical researchers before mammograms were even approved for use. Their very earnest pleas to put a stop to the introduction of this procedure were futile.Betsy Bob <robertecatalano Fri, November 20, 2009 2:19:39 PM Note on Mammograms www.Medicine- No.com says "NO!" to Mammograms: Of couse the president of Dana Farber Cancer Instiute with annual salary of One-Million- Dollars is inclined to disagree. So is the president of the Breast Cancer Research Foundation. (Annual salary $500,000). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.