Breast Cancer Deception Month: Hiding the Truth beneath a Sea of Pink, Part IV
Tuesday, October 27, 2009 by: Tony Isaacs
(NaturalNews) As we near the end of Breast Cancer Awareness Month
(BCAM) most people are unaware of the dark history of BCAM and of the
players past and present who have misused it to direct people and funds
away from finding a true cure, while covering up their own roles in
causing and profiting from cancer. In this installment of the series we
will examine the role of misdirected research into the real causes for
breast cancer and the safety and wisdom of mammograms and mastectomies.
Misdirected Research into Cancer Prevention and Cures
Thanks
to the control of the boards of government institutions, charities,
foundations and other agencies by members of the pharmaceutical and cancer
treatment industries and by others who either profit from cancer or
else have reasons to hide their products that contribute to cancer,
research into cancer prevention and cures has changed little since Breast Cancer Awareness Month was formed.
Prevention still focuses mainly on early screening and detection, including extensive use of mammograms,
some attention to diet and lifestyle and precious little on toxins and
environmental factors. Likewise, research into cures continues to pour
into surgery, patentable chemo drugsand radiation - the same methods that have been used since the
inception of the War on Cancer. Despite some optimistic juggling of
statistics, the fact remains that more people are acquiring and dying
of cancer each year by relying on such tried and failed methods.
1,500 "scientists" took money
from the CTR. They had to know exactly what was going on because they
knew they had to design a study which pretended to find a relationship,
but in fact totally failed to find a relationship.
Mammograms and the Dangers of Radiation
A
study by researchers from the University of Nebraska and the John H.
Stroger Jr. Hospital of Cook County, Ill cast fresh doubt on the
widespread assumption that regular mammograms save lives, showing that
2,970 women must be screened for breast cancer in order to prevent even one death.
"For a woman in the screening subset of mammography-detectable cancers, there is a less than 5 percent chance that a mammogram will save her life," wrote the researchers.
In
2001, a study known as the Cochrane analysis found that if 2,000 women
underwent regular screening for 10 years, one life would be saved but
another 10 women would undergo unnecessary treatment such as surgery or
radiation. Noting that it was difficult to determine which cancers
would have led to death or even symptoms in the absence of treatment,
the researchers concluded that it is "not clear whether screening does
more harm than good."
Few will debate the value of early
screening and detection, but what most doctors will not tell you, and
many are unaware of, is that there is a much safer and more effective
tool for early screening: thermography. As was reported in Natural News
last December, a breast thermogram has the ability to identify a breast
abnormality five to ten years before the problem can be found on a
mammogram. Furthermore, a thermogram does not use radiation, and can be
done as frequently as anyone thinks is necessary. Thermograms work by
creating infra-red images (heat pictures) that are then analyzed to
find asymmetries anywhere in the chest and underarm area. Breast
thermography detects patterns of heat generated by the increased
circulation produced by abnormal metabolic activity in cancer cells.
This activity occurs long before a cancer starts to invade new tissue.
Mastectomies - Prevention or Unnecessary Mutilation?
As a result of mammograms and MRI`s, many women, with the advice and consent of their doctors, opt to have radical mastectomies,
which involve removal of one or both breasts along with underlying
muscle tissue and lymph nodes under the arm. However, many researchers
say that mastectomies are unnecessary for most women suffering from
breast cancer.
Two studies published in the New England Journal
of Medicine in 2002 showed cutting out just the lumps of diseased
tissue can save as many lives as removing the whole breast. Findings of
the studies showed similar death rates after 20 years for large groups
of women who underwent either mastectomies or breast-saving surgery.
A
study of 1,851 women at the University of Pittsburgh found little
survival differences between two similar groups. A similar study was
done at the European Institute of Oncology in Milan where 701 women
were split into two groups: one received mastectomies and the other had
lumps removed and radiation treatment. About a quarter of each group
died of breast cancer over 20 years.
According to researchers,
survival does not depend on such surgery because breast cancer is
fundamentally a systemic disease, not one that simply spreads from an
initial site. "Many women who could have undergone more narrow
surgery have chosen mastectomies on the theory that you get it out, and
you`re not going to have any trouble," stated Dr. Bernard Fisher, who
led the Pittsburgh study.
In the next installment of this
series we will take a look at the dangers of over-screening for cancer
and the lack of progress in breast cancer prevention and cures.
