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 womans best option
for early detection. In fact, for more than 30 years its
been the unquestioned, standard screening device used by the medical
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
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
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
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