Breast implants: the ticking time bomb in millions of women’s bodies

superadmin , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Each year in the United States approximately 300,000 women and teenagers undergo breast augmentation. It’s thought that the total number of implants carried out each year worldwide is anywhere between 5 to 10 million.

Before the operations women are often told by their surgeons that it is a safe procedure with “very little” risk. The FDA also says breast implants are relatively safe.

Yet most of these women don’t know that this is simply not the case.

There is in fact a growing body of evidence, in conjunction with thousands of horror stories from women all over the world who have had implants which have ended up in disaster, to prove that they are not safe and are actually causing debilitating autoimmune disorders and other physical problems in many women.

If you have breast implants, or are considering them, I urge you to take this article very seriously. And if any of your friends or family members already have implants, please show them this article. Their health and life (as well as your own) may depend on this knowledge.

We’ve known from fairly recent history that breast implants have caused serious health problems, but for most of the public, that problem is assumed to be an historic one, and that because those implants were removed from the market, the current implants on the market must be very safe.

Silicone Breast Implant Scandal

We’ve known from fairly recent history that breast implants have caused serious health problems, but for most of the public, that problem is assumed to be an historic one, and that because those implants were removed from the market, the current implants on the market must be very safe.

While the FDA now openly mentions problems that often occur in many women with breast implants, such as leaking and rupturing, they fail to warn the public about the more dangerous connection to auto-immune disorders.

The FDA actually allowed implants to be put onto the market for over 40 years without formally approving them, so it’s not always wise to trust what they say. (1)

You may remember hearing in the media about the huge lawsuit in the late 90’s involving 450,000 US women who took to court Dow Corning, one of the world’s main manufacturers of silicone implants.

While Dow Corning never admitted that their implants were dangerous, they paid out enormous amounts to the victims. Their implants of the 1970’s had a very thin outer shell, were “greasy,” and had a high leakage rate. Many women even lost their lives from illness caused by these implants, whilst waiting for the court to fine Dow.

It was also found that, according to a whistleblower, staff at Dow Corning knew for a very long time that their implants were toxic, yet covered it up for as long as they could.

In their own animal studies, researchers found that silicone could easily leak into the body, and caused tumours in up to 80% of the rats that were being tested on. The numbers were so alarming that the FDA, instead of being concerned, called these studies “erroneous,” which basically means they ‘must’ have been incorrect. The FDA then approved the Dow Corning implants, despite protests from some staff members that there were troubling warning signs.

We’ve also heard about the now infamous French PIP implant scandal which hit worldwide news recently. These implants (which were found to contain toxic chemicals used in mattresses and not approved for human use) are now banned, and women in the UK were offered free treatment to have them removed.

Shocking Ingredients Found In Dow Silicone Implants

When women are told that their implants contain silicone or saline, they often don’t tend to ask if anything else is being used alongside it. They certainly aren’t told this by the surgeons, who more than likely don’t even know themselves.

Check out the long list of alarming ingredients used in Dow’s silicone implants which came out during their court case when they were forced to disclose what was in their dangerous implants:

  • Methyl ethyl ketone (neurotoxin)
  • Cyclohexanone (neurotoxin)
  • Isopropyl Alcohol
  • Denatured Alcohol
  • Acetone (used in nail polish remover and is a neurotoxin)
  • Urethane
  • Polyvinyl chloride (neurotoxin)
  • Dicholormethane (carcinogen)
  • Chloromethane
  • Ethyl acetate (neurotoxin)
  • Sodium fluoride
  • Lead Based Solder
  • Formaldehyde
  • Talcum powder
  • Oakite (cleaning solvent)
  • Methyl 2- Cynanoacrylates
  • Ethylene Oxide (Carcinogen)
  • Xylene (neurotoxin)
  • Naptha (rubber solvent)
  • Phenol (neurotoxin)
  • Benzene (carcinogen/neurotoxin)
  • Lacquer thinner
  • Epoxy resin
  • Epoxy hardener
  • Metal cleaning acid
  • heavy metals such as aluminium (neurotoxin linked to Alzheimer’s and auto immune disorders)

 

For further information and to read the full article click here.


Surgeons Admit That Mammography Is Outdated and Harmful to Women

superadmin , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Every year, millions of women flock to their doctors to get their annual mammograms, a breast cancer screening procedure that involves pressing a woman’s breasts between two metal platforms to scope out tumors. But surgeons everywhere are starting to question the controversial practice, which studies show isn’t even an effective screening tool, and is actually harmful to the bodies of women who receive it.

The public is told that mammograms are the only way to catch breast cancer early, but a review of eight scientific trials evaluating the procedure, found that mammography is neither effective nor safe. After looking at data on more than 600,000 women between the ages of 39 and 74 who underwent the procedure on a routine basis, researchers found that many women are misdiagnosed. Many of these same women are consequently mistreated with chemotherapy, resulting in their rapid demise.

As published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, the review concluded that mammography causes more harm than good, because many more women end up being misdiagnosed and mistreated than those actually avoiding the development of terminal breast cancer. Thus, the procedure known as mammography is an outdated scourge that belongs in the history books of failed medical treatments, and not at the forefront of women’s medicine.

“If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30%, it means that for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily,” the authors concluded.

Group of top medical experts admits mammography does more harm than good

One year after this review was published, a second one published in The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) came to a similar conclusion. A team of medical professionals that included a medical ethicist, a clinical epidemiologist, a pharmacologist, an oncologic surgeon, a nurse scientist, a lawyer and a health economist, decided that the medical industry’s claims about the benefits of mammography are essentially bunk.

They found that for every 1,000 women screened in the U.S. over a 10-year annual screening period beginning at age 50, one breast cancer death would be prevented, while a shocking 490 to 670 women would have a false positive, while 70 to 100 would undergo an unnecessary biopsy. Between three and 14 of these women, the study found, would also be over-diagnosed for a non-malignant form of cancer that never even would have become “clinically apparent.”

This study out of Switzerland corroborates another out of Canada – the 2014 Canadian National Breast Screening Study – which concluded in lockstep with the others that mammography screenings do not reduce mortality rates from breast cancer any better than a simple physical examination. In other words, the procedure is completely unnecessary, and in many cases exceptionally harmful.

And on and on the list goes, with data out of Norway and elsewhere confirming that mammography isn’t all that it’s cracked up to be. U.S. data spanning the course of nearly 40 years shows that more women are over- or misdiagnosed with breast cancer because of mammograms than are successfully early-diagnosed with breast cancer in such a way as to protect against metastasization. This represents an exceptionally poor track record that calls into question why mammography continues to be used when it clearly doesn’t work.

“I believe that if you did have a tumor, the last thing you would want to do is crush that tumor between two plates, because that would spread it,” says general practitioner Dr. Sarah Mybill, as quoted in the documentary film The Promise.

 

To see the original article, click here.


Can These Common Medical Tests & Treatments Give You Cancer?

superadmin , , , , , , , , , , ,

Ty Bollinger: So you hear all month this month, it’s breast cancer awareness month, about early detection. You’re saying they should be using thermography instead of mammography. It’s a better early detection technique. Why, in your opinion, are they not using it if it works so much better?

Dr. Ben Johnson: You know there are things that you just want to shoot yourself over that the medical—standard medicine does not do. I’m not much of a conspiracy theory type person. But I’ve come to believe that American medicine is not about helping people get well. It’s about managing disease, and selling drugs and, creating money through the paradigm of patient treatment.

So you can’t talk about cure. You can’t look at getting people well from cancer. They just want to treat them, and then watch them die. It’s really a pretty pathetic state of affairs. So, we are not interested in standard medicine and getting people well; just managing their disease until they die.

For instance, all of the drugs that you see, if you pick up the label, all of the chemo drugs says “causes cancer.” Think about it.

Ty Bollinger: Yeah.

Dr. Ben Johnson: We’re using a drug to treat cancer that causes cancer, a known carcinogen. How crazy is that! But that’s what we do every day in every institution across America. We use radiation. What do x-rays cause? Hello… cancer. And we are using that supposedly to treat it. So you know Stage 4 cancer in America, survival rate is about two percent. You know, that is horrific.

It can’t get any worse than two percent. So two percent success rate for Stage 4 cancers is beyond comprehension. Patients would live much longer and healthier if they did nothing. If they didn’t take the drugs. Because the drugs are hastening their death.

Ty Bollinger: Wow! And I’ve read studies…

Dr. Ben Johnson: Don’t get me started.

Ty Bollinger: I think you’re already started. I think you’re already going, which I’m enjoying because it’s good information. I’ve read studies, people saying the same thing. Doctors and scientists saying that you would live longer by doing nothing, than by doing the treatment. And, I can’t remember the medical doctor that I was just talking to recently said, that in all his years of treating cancer patients, that he’s never actually seen one that died from the cancer. That they always die from the treatment.

Dr. Ben Johnson: Primary tumors almost never kill anyone unless they’re in the brain. The primary tumor can kill you there. But if you give it long enough the metastases can eventually get you. But almost no one in America today dies of their cancer. They die of the side effects of the chemo. And I shouldn’t call those side effects − the direct effects of chemo. Because we call them side effects because they are unwanted. But they are direct effects of the chemo agent.

 

This article is sourced from The Truth About Cancer. The original article is located here.


1 2 3 4 5 ... 14 15   Next »