Thermography vs. Mammography for Early Breast Cancer Detection: Who Benefits Most?

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

Screen Shot 2018-12-05 at 11.25.37 AM

The Dangers, Discomforts, and Lack of Appropriate Detection from Mammogram Screening

Breast cancer is the most common cancer in women regardless of race or ethnicity. It is the most common cause of death from cancer among Hispanic women and the second most common cause of death from cancer among white, black, Asian/Pacific Islander, and American Indian/Alaska Native women. (Source)

So the fear motive of protecting against breast cancer with early detection is easy to understand. And it is used constantly by all government and non-government cancer groups to promote frequent mammograms for women from age 40 and up. It’s considered a standard of care.

Many insurance plans will pay for mammograms fully or with very low co-payments. But there has been growing evidence of harm from mammograms that includes increased over-diagnosis resulting in a significant amount of treatments that were never necessary.

Until 2002, the cancer industry’s standard of care for detecting or “screening” for breast cancer required annual mammograms. All the cancer foundations, organizations, and fundraising groups became cheerleaders for annual mammograms for women aged 40 or 45 and up. 

Some were reported to have benefited from mammogram industry financial contributions.

 

Thermography – Safer and More Effective with Early Cancer Detection

Thermography offers the ability to detect inflammation and suspicious blood vessel activities that point to disease and dysfunction without radiation. It does so by producing 3D color imaging produced from the body’s internal variations of heat in the body.

In other words, instead of sending radio waves into the body to get a picture of what’s going on inside the body, a special extremely sensitive infrared ray camera that does not come into contact with the body “takes a picture” of the infrared energies emanating from the body’s temperature variations. 

The thermal radiation’s computer takes the slight thermal variations and creates visual color representations that appear on the machinery’s screen. Those images are then copied for further scrutiny.

And it is able to detect abnormalities that can lead to a disease before the first signs of cancer tumors show up. This allows women to take advantage of lifestyle and dietary changes before cancer tumors appear and avoid chemotherapy, radiation therapies, and mastectomies.

The focus of the mammogram vs thermogram turf war centers on breast cancer. But techniques with thermograms are able to spot markers that are precursors to other cancers and allow natural preventative measures that mainstream oncologists are not trained for and/or don’t want to be.

But not all medical insurance providers will shell out the $200 or less for a breast thermogram. Mammograms cost only slightly less and are uniformly covered by both private and government medical insurers.

Avoiding mainstream oncology’s highly profitable options for treatment may be a major reason why mainstream oncologists constantly assert that thermography cannot detect tumors and is not a bonafide early detection device. It hampers radiologists’ revenue as well. 

Although the FDA has approved mammogram machinery and technology, even as an adjunct to mammograms, both the CDC and FDA agree with the same assertions as oncologists that thermograms are not valid substitutes for mammograms with breast cancer screening. 

Thermography doesn’t always create a tumor picture the way mammograms appear. But mammograms don’t always detect some types of tumors and often mistake non- cancerous lesions as tumors. (Source)

Instead of undergoing chemotherapy or surgery unnecessarily, better diet and supplement choices could easily keep those lesions from becoming cancerous. 

Breast cancer cells take around five to eight years to develop enough for mammogram tumor detection. Just in time for costly, profitable treatments.

But because of thermography’s extreme sensitivity to infrared emissions from slight temperature variations, its images render the earliest signs of breast cancer and/or a pre-cancerous state of the breast. 

Screen Shot 2018-12-05 at 11.22.15 AM

This allows plenty of time to adjust one’s diet and lifestyle to strengthen the immune system and not be subjected to the coercion and intimidation used by mainstream oncology to force women into chemo or radiation or surgery or mastectomy without a second opinion on treatments.

Thermography’s Future for Those Who Aren’t Bound by Mainstream Medicine is Expansive

The myopic perspective of the breast cancer screening technology turf war inhibits the bigger picture of what thermograms provide for other precancerous conditions throughout the body as well as determining gastrointestinal imbalances or inflammatory conditions.

There is even a future for thermograms in dentistry. Thermography is predicted to re-emerge in the near future as a unique research tool in dentistry. (Source) 

Thermography imaging eliminates X-rays, so the brain is spared from radiation while allowing better early detection of inflammatory dental conditions before infections occur or for analyzing pathways for dental surgeries.

Homeopathic doctor and Canadian board-certified clinical thermographer Alexander Mostovoy explains:

Over the years at our clinic, we have imaged thousands of women using infrared thermography. In many cases, we have clearly seen cases of inflammation in the dental area using this heat-sensing technology. Many of these cases are caused by a low- grade infection and inflammation and have, through further testing, been attributed to dental or oral issues, such as issues related to root-canal-treated teeth.

Thermography and Dental Pathology

Thermography is also highly useful for detecting various dysfunctions and precancerous conditions of the head and neck region, including early thyroid cancer detection while avoiding radiation hazards to the brain.

The unique significance of thermography is it is both a qualitative and quantitative assessment, which can result in pre-emptive early preventative measures as well as monitoring progression or regression of underlying causes of several diseases in a systematic manner. 


See the full article here.


The Breast Kept Secret Movie Preview

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

Well-known medical practitioners discuss mammography and thermography. Have a look to hear what they have to say.


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.


1 2 3 4 5 ... 14 15   Next »