Thermography 90, Mammogram 50

A great boost for the benefits of thermography over breast-cancer-causing mammogram.  It is more effective and better for women under 50.

Yes!  Thermography's accuracy rate is 90% versus mammogram's 50%.

It is well past time the ensconced ACS wakes up to newer, better, and safer screening for breast cancer.

Big Insurance needs to wake up as well!

Scan that spots breast cancer like a heat seeking missile

By Jerome Burne
Last updated at 10:30 AM on 18th May 2010

A technology originally developed by the U.S. military for night vision could soon help young women cut their risk of developing breast cancer.

A study due to be published on Wednesday found that this technology - used in medical scanning - vastly improved the chances of spotting early signs of a tumour in women under the age of 50.

The breast tissue of younger women tends to be denser, which makes conventional mammogram scans less reliable.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-1279215/Scan-spots-breast-cancer-like-heat-seeking-missile.html#ixzz0oZuR7YuR

The web site mentioned in this article promotes MRI and ultrasound, also less cancer promoting than mammogram and doing a better diagnostic job as well.

Dense breast increases cancer risk

Published: May 21, 2010 at 1:04 AM

ROCHESTER, N.Y., May 21 (UPI) -- Seventy-four percent of U.S. woman say they have had a mammogram, while 66 percent say they get mammograms on a regular basis, a survey indicates.
However, the national poll by Harris Interactive of 599 adult women age 40 and older, conducted April 28 to 30, indicates 95 percent of women age 40 and older do not know their breast density and nearly 90 percent do not know denser breast increases the risk of breast cancer.
Nancy M. Cappello, founder of Are You Dense, a non-profit organization dedicated to informing the public about dense breast tissue, says the survey indicates 9 percent of doctors discuss breast density with women.
"Prior to finding out I had advanced breast cancer, I had annual mammograms, I ate healthy and exercised and didn't have a first-degree relative with breast cancer. But I didn't have all the information I needed," Cappello says in a statement. "What I didn't know was that I have dense breast tissue and like two-thirds of pre-menopausal women and one quarter of post-menopausal women, I have a much lower chance of having breast cancer detected by a mammogram."
However, Dr. Rachel Brem of George Washington University Medical Faculty Associates in Washington says although ultrasound is a proven tool in the diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer, it has not typically been used for screening.
"Several studies have shown that for women with dense breast tissue, supplementing mammograms with ultrasound can increase detection from 48 percent to 97 percent."
More information is at: areyoudense.org.

http://leaflady.org/women.htm
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/10/better-to-screen-you-with-thermography.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/10/ultrasound-in-cancer-detection.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/02/women-kept-in-dark-when-it-comes-to.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/01/dangers-of-screening-mammography.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2008/09/radiation-of-any-kind-iincreases-cancer.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2009/11/better-to-rethink-mammogram.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2010/03/halo-breast-test.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2005/10/breast-health-awareness-day.html
http://naturalhealthnews.blogspot.com/2007/10/think-before-you-pink.html
and there are over 30 more posts found here at Natural Health News

A Best Breast Cancer Site

Taking a prevention perspective allows group to point out the problems with the current model in the breast cancer industry

A cancer-industry view of its future
Authors of a report predicting a continuing rise in cancer rates expect cancer will increasingly be managed with lifelong drug treatment and lifelong monitoring, as in diabetes and asthma. The direct cost for managing the medical care of one cancer patient was approximately £20,000 in 2004. If we are heading into a 'positive chemotherapy future' then, 'by 2025 this figure could easily rise to £100,000 per patient per year – a total of perhaps £1 million over a lifetime. We are starting to spend vast amounts of UK tax on the National Health Service (NHS) taking the total healthcare budget up to £80 billion per year. We could consume a lot more than this in the future just on treating cancer. The explosion of new therapies in cancer care is going to continue and pricing of these drugs will remain high. If effective drugs emerge from the research and development pipeline, the cancer drug market will be worth US$300 billion globally by 2025.'
(Sikora 'Cancer 2025: the future of cancer care' 2004)

A thriving enterprise with a guaranteed future, 'cancer' is a growth industry in every sense of the word. It would be extremely unlikely that this particular industry would champion a case which has the potential to undermine its very existence.