specializing in breast thermography
In the presence of so much uncertainty around medical imaging stands the ease of an efficient and non-invasive screening technique, called thermography. Thermography provides a safe screening for indications of disease throughout the body and the earliest screening for breast disease.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
September 2011
Full Body Thermography: A Body Road Map Towards Optimal Health
Full body thermal imaging can provide a "body road map" which effectively points to indications of disease or areas in the body that need special attention before serious disease develops. This is a great preventative measure to take and a tool which can lead you onto the path of restorative options.
Jackie Kane, Exec. Dir. of the Thermography Centers, recently stated, “I am always surprised at the vast amount of information a full body scan can provide for my clients. For instance, a recent full body thermography for one of my clients revealed concerns around the carotid artery pointing to indications of Occlusive Disease which relates to the arteries & the heart. Although this person had received recent physicals, EKG's and other medical testing, it was only the thermography which brought this serious concern to their doctor's attention.
Ms Kane went on to state, “Just like with breast thermography, I believe we are at the tipping for full body thermal imaging as well. As a Certified Clinical Thermographer I often hear from my clients about their desire to have safe and effective options for monitoring and caring for their health without exposure to radiation and in the case of mammograms - compression of their breasts - which they fear can cause cells to spread. I think it is important to let the public know that there are choices available to them.”
As a result of recently published research, such as the Cornell University report and The Norway Study, (published by The New England Journal of Medicine) which shed an unattractive light on radiation from medical imaging, the public is beginning to consider safe alternatives such as medical thermography.
Thermography offers a 100% safe and sensible choice with State of the Art digital thermal imaging. Thermal imaging screens for abnormal heat generated by new blood vessel growth in the area of tumors as well as heat generated from other abnormalities that need not be cancer such as lymph congestion, fibrocystic symptoms and inflammation.
A full body thermography, also known as digital infrared thermal imaging (DITI) Can screen for indications of inflammation throughout the body, thyroid issues, melanoma, squamous cell skin cancer, basal cell skin cancer, arteriosclerosis, breast disease, internal carotid insufficiency, infectious disease (Shingles, Leprosy), ligament Tear, diabetes, Raynaud’s Disease, TMJ dysfunction, and superficial vascular disease, just to name a few.
Although not considered a replacement for certain tests such as a colonoscopy, a full body thermogram can provide intelligent information in the right direction and in many situations assist health practitioners with identifying the true nature of their patient’s health.
“I have found that true peace of mind comes at the moment we understand that we have the power to heal ourselves,” states Kane adding, “It is my goal to make breast thermography and full body thermography as common and vital as your annual physical, as well as affordable. We encourage everyone to educate themselves about the option of thermography and to make wise decisions after considering all the information available.”
Jackie Kane is the Executive Director of the Thermography Centers, (ThermographyCenterSB.com & BreastThermographyCenter.com), located throughout Central and Southern California including San Luis Obispo, Santa Barbara, Ventura, Westlake Village, Topanga Canyon, & Los Angeles. Ms. Kane can be heard regularly, on national radio interviews and at public forums, educating the public about thermography, breast health and cancer prevention. She is a Certified Clinical Thermographer (CCT) and a Breast health Consultant living in Santa Barbara, CA.
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: September 27, 2010, Santa Barbara
The Thermography Tipping Point: In the light of so much confusion around mammograms and women’s breast health stands the simplicity of an efficient and non-invasive screening technique, called breast thermography. Thermography provides safe and early screening for breast disease.
READ MORE ~
BREAKING NEWS! JUNE 16, 2010
It's official: Mammograms cause breast cancer by inundating tissues with ionizing radiation that causes DNA mutations. Posted by Naturalnews.com
Read about the Cornell University Report
The Cancer Test that’s a Death Trap…Posted By Dr. Mercola | September 02 2010 |
Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, warns that the American Cancer Society has close financial ties to the makers of mammography equipment. Five radiologists have served as presidents of the American Cancer Society (ACS).
In its every move, the ACS promotes the interests of the major manufacturers of mammogram machines and films, including Siemens, DuPont, General Electric, Eastman Kodak, and Piker.
This bias hypes mammography, which Dr. Epstein and Dr. Rosalie Bertell emphasize is an avoidable cause of breast cancer itself.
According to World Wire:
“Routine mammography delivers an unrecognized high dose of radiation, warn Drs. Epstein and Bertell. If a woman follows the current guidelines for premenopausal screening, over a 10 year period she would receive a total dosage of about 5 rads. This approximates the level of exposure to radiation of a Japanese woman one mile from the epicenter of atom bombs dropped on Hiroshima or Nagasaki.”
Thermography: A Safer Option for Breast Cancer Screening
by Mary Laredo, citizen journalist
(NaturalNews.com) 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 woman’s best option for early detection. In fact, for more than 30 years it’s been the unquestioned, standard screening device used by the medical community. While mammography may be useful in certain situations, it has many disturbing drawbacks.
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.(1) 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. Considering these drawbacks, breast thermography should be given closer consideration.
Thermography (also called thermology) is a little-known technique for breast cancer detection that’s been available since the 1960s. It’s non-invasive and non-toxic, using an infrared camera to measure thermal emissions from the entire chest and auxiliary regions. Cancerous tissue develops a blood supply to feed a growing tumor, and the abnormal blood vessel formations generate significantly more heat than the surrounding healthy tissue. The infrared camera detects the differences in heat emitted from abnormal tissue (including malignancies, benign tumors and fibrocystic disease), as compared to normal tissue. There is no physical contact with the patient, who stands several feet away from the camera while a technician takes a series of images.
Thermography can detect abnormalities before the onset of a malignancy, and as early as ten years before being recognized by other procedures such as manual breast exam, mammography, ultrasound or MRI. This makes it potentially life-saving for women who are unknowingly developing abnormalities, as it can take several years for a cancerous tumor to develop and be detected by mammogram. Its accuracy is also impressive, with false negative and false positive rates at 9% for each.(2) Thermography is also an effective way to establish a baseline for comparison with future scans; therefore, women should begin screening by the age of 25.
Although widely embraced by alternative health care practitioners, thermography’s obscurity in the mainstream means that too many women rely on mammograms as their only option. There are several reasons for thermography’s lack of support by the conventional medical community. Early thermal scanners were not very sensitive, nor were they well-tested before being used in clinical practice. This resulted in many misdiagnosed cases and its utter dismissal by the medical community. Since then the technology has advanced dramatically and thermography now uses highly sensitive state-of-the-art infrared cameras and sophisticated computers. A wealth of clinical research attests to its high degree of sensitivity and accuracy. In 1982, the FDA approved thermography for breast cancer screening, yet most of the medical establishment is either unaware of it or still associates it with its early false start. Since most women are also uninformed of the technology there is no pressure on the medical community to support it.
This author - who knows from first-hand experience the physical and emotional trauma of mammography as well as the passive and comforting accuracy of thermal scanning – would have been spared from years of radiation exposure with an earlier knowledge of thermography. The importance of education and awareness of this technology cannot be overstated.
When a thermographic report is negative, annual monitoring is essential to note any changes as early as possible. A positive report should be discussed with a health care practitioner as it may be necessary to follow-up with another detection method such as mammography or ultrasound to identify the exact location of the abnormality and to determine whether tissue biopsy is needed. If mammography is used to complement the thermal scan, it’s important to offset the affects of radiation prior to and following the procedure. Wheat grass juice, green super foods, or brown seaweed such as Modifilan are powerful detoxifiers.
Breast abnormalities and tumors are merely symptoms of imbalances within the body’s internal terrain that need to be identified and corrected. A thoughtful and careful look at diet, exposure to toxins, and lifestyle should be the first line of defense against any disease. This, and regular thermal screenings provide an effective arsenal against breast cancer.
1.
report” CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, Vol 32, 194-225, Copyright © 1982 by American Cancer Society.
2. http://healthybreasts.info/ Summary from “Value and Interest of Dynamic Telethermography in Detection of Breast Cancer”, ACTA Thermographica,
Vol. 1, Num. 2, 89-96, 1976.
Mammograms Don't Help, They Harm Women
by Jo Hartley, citizen journalist
Courtesy of Naturalnews.com
(NaturalNews) Breast cancer kills women. In fact, breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Lung cancer is number one.
It is estimated that 211,240 women were diagnosed with breast cancer in 2005. 40,410 have since died from the disease. These deaths should not have occurred. There is a potentially fatal flaw in our medical profession’s diagnostic procedure.
Could mammograms cause cancer?
The standard method for early cancer detection is mammography. A mammogram is a procedure during which an X-ray picture of the breast is taken that can reveal tumor growths that may be otherwise undetectable. Like all x-rays, mammograms utilize doses of ionizing radiation to create this image. The image is then analyzed for any abnormal growths. Mammography is now receiving sizable opposition because of high error rates and high radiation levels involved in the procedure.
The rate of false positives and false negatives is alarming. 70 to 80 percent of all positive mammograms do not show any presence of cancer upon biopsy. Additionally, mammograms have a high rate of missed tumors (false negatives). In the book The Politics of Cancer, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein claims that in women ages 40 to 49, 25% have their cancer missed by mammography.
Many women depend on an annual mammogram to diagnose breast cancer. Recent studies show, however, that an annual mammogram may actually increase your risk of developing breast cancer from 1 to 3 percent. This is because the breast is one of the parts of the body most sensitive to radiation exposure. It is second only to fetal tissue.
In addition, by the age of 50 approximately 45 percent of women will have cancer cells present in their breasts. These cells remain dormant in most women. However, if you are in this group of women, you are at an increased risk of these cells becoming active.
Research has uncovered a gene, called oncogene AC that is highly sensitive to even small doses of radiation. A significant percentage of women have this gene and this could increase their risk of mammography-induced cancer.
Since mammograms were introduced, the occurrence of a form of breast cancer called ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased by over 300 percent. Two hundred percent of this increase is thought to be due to mammography.
Mammography may also contribute to the spread of existing cancer cells due to the enormous pressure placed on the woman's breast during the procedure. According to some physicians, this compression may even cause existing cancer cells to metastasize from the affected breast tissue.
Russell L. Blaylock, MD, estimates that annual radiological breast exams increase the risk of breast cancer by two percent a year. Over a 10 year period the risk will have increased by 20 percent.
Another estimation is that one rad increases the breast cancer risk by one percent and is the equivalent of one year's natural aging. Hence, if a woman has yearly mammograms from age 55 to age 75, she will receive at least 20 rads of radiation.
The mainstream medical establishment is largely ignoring safe and effective alternatives to mammography.
Mammography will extend at the most 2 lives for every 10,000 women put at risk. All to the benefit of physicians, the American Cancer Society, various bureaucrats, and other parties who continue to profit off the huge, highly efficient mammography deceit – while safe alternatives exist!
Additional Articles:
http://www.naturalnews.com/027742_mammography_radiation.htmlStudy verifies mammography screenings cause cancer
(NaturalNews) A new study presented on December 1 at the annual meeting of the Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) verified that annual mammography screenings may be responsible for causing breast cancer in women who are predisposed to the disease. Epidemiologist Marijke C. Jansen-van der Weide from the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands suggests that doctors should be very cautious when screening younger women, especially those under age 30.
There are many conflicting reports about the benefits of mammography screenings, particularly among younger women below the age of 40. Because there is a high risk among women with genetic or familial predispositions to breast cancer when getting mammograms, Dr. Jansen-van der Weide and her research team are suggesting that these women get an alternative screening. Ultrasounds, MRIs, and heat thermography screenings are some alternatives that do not expose patients to radiation.
The study evaluated women in the high-risk group and determined that low-dose mammography radiation increased these women's risk of developing breast cancer by 150 percent. Women under 20 who have had at least five mammograms are 2.5 times more likely to develop breast cancer than high-risk women who have never undergone low-dose mammography screenings.
Study authors emphasized the fact that doctors should be cautious in administering mammograms to younger women, especially those with a family history of breast cancer. Moderate- to low-risk women were not evaluated in the study. Alternative screening methods were encouraged in order to reduce the risk of women in high-risk groups from being harmed by radioactive exposure.
Comments by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
What this study really reveals is that there is no reason for any women to ever receive a mammogram ever again. Ultrasound and thermography should now be the new standard for breast cancer detection screenings, as they do not subject women to excess radiation.This study also reveals that mammograms are really "repeat business machines" for the cancer industry. When enough women are subjected to mammography, a windfall of future cancer patients is absolutely assured, and this translates into billions of dollars in profits for the businesses invested in cancer: Big Pharma, mammogram machine manufacturers, and so on.
In fact, mammograms represent the slickest marketing gimmick we've ever seen in modern medicine. It's a technology that recruits new patients by actually causing the disease is claims to "detect." No wonder all the cancer industry non-profit groups donate so much money to breast cancer screening -- it's the best way to keep their sponsors in business!
Just take a look at the Susan Komen for the Cure non-profit, and you'll see that a huge percentage of all the money they raise for "finding a cure" is really redirected to funding "free breast cancer screenings" that target poor women. The purpose of this whole scheme is to herd more women into extremely profitable (and extremely dangerous) cancer treatment cancers that generate billions for the cancer industry.
CT scans deliver far more radiation than has been believed, and may contribute to 29,000 new cancers each year, along with 14,500 deaths.
One study found that people may be exposed to up to four times as much radiation as estimated by earlier studies. While previous studies relied on dummies equipped with sensors, authors of the new paper studied more than 1,000 patients at four hospitals.
Based on their measurements, a patient could get as much radiation from one CT scan as 74 mammograms or 442 chest X-rays.
Young people are at highest risk from excess radiation, partly because they have many years ahead of them in which cancers could develop. Among 20-year-old women who get one coronary angiogram, a CT scan of the heart, one in 150 will develop cancer related to the procedure.
Sources:
|
|
I’ve been warning about the extreme dangers of CT scans for nearly a decade now.It’s incredible to me that even with long-standing, irrefutable proof of the connection between CT scans and a high incidence of cancer, so many of these tests are still being ordered on unsuspecting patients. Estimates are that only seven percent of patients are informed of the risks of their CT scans.
This is another example of why you must be your own advocate when you visit your doctor or other health care provider.Arm yourself with information about the risks that accompany medical tests, treatments and prescription drugs. Become a smart consumer of your health care options, rather than an unfortunate victim of dangerous and unnecessary procedures and medications.
Why So Many Scans?
The number of CT scans doubled between 1997 and 2006, according to a study by the University of California, San Francisco.
Even more startling: According to a report in the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), in 1980, three million CT scans were performed in the U.S. By 2006, the number had exceeded 62 million, including four million on children.
One reason for the increase is many doctors have purchased their own imaging equipment for their practices. This adds a financial incentive into the mix and sets the stage for overuse of the technology.
Another reason for the increase is a trend toward commercially advertised full-body CT scans to “find everything wrong with you.” Consumers with extra cash laying around (in excess of $1,000 in most cases) are being encouraged to undergo a full-body scan as a preventive measure.
Three Million Excess Cancers!!
The truth is these scans are performed by commercial enterprises, and the quality of the tests is so poor as to render the results virtually useless.
This would be less troubling if the CT scan was a harmless imaging technique. But with radiation levels 100 times what you receive from a conventional chest x-ray, this is not a test to undergo for screening purposes or “just because.”
There are circumstances in which a CT scan is truly your best option due to your condition, but whenever possible, another less dangerous scanning technology, like an MRI which does not use ionizing radiation, should be used. MRI's do not involve the use of x-rays, but the powerful magnetic field of the scanner may present another set of health risks.
The NEJM study estimated that overuse of CT scans may cause up to three million excess cancers in the next two or three decades. David Brenner of Columbia University, lead author of the study, estimates that a third of all CT scans are medically unnecessary.Brenner told USA Today, “Virtually anyone who presents in the emergency room with pain in the belly or a chronic headache will automatically get a CT scan. Is that justified?"
Riskier Still for Kids and Brain Scan Patients
If your child undergoes a CT scan, chances are the equipment will be calibrated for an adult. This means your child could absorb two to six times more radiation than needed to produce a clear image. This is unconscionable, and could result in radiation-induced cancer later in life.
Over 200 unsuspecting patients who underwent a specific type of CT brain scan at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles received eight to 10 times the normal dose of radiation due to an incorrectly programmed machine.
The overdose wasn’t discovered for 18 months and only came to light after a patient reported losing patches of hair following a CT scan.
On the whole, diagnostic imaging tests have increased Americans' average radiation exposure seven times since 1980. Increased exposure leads to increased cancer risk.
The Simple Truth: Radiation Damages Your Body
X-rays and other classes of ionizing radiation, like CT scans, are a proven cause of virtually all types of mutations -- especially structural chromosomal mutations. Radiation also causes genomic instability, often a characteristic of the most aggressive cancers.
Further, cells cannot correctly repair every type of complex genetic damage induced by ionizing radiation, and sometimes cells cannot repair such damage at all.
Unlike some other mutagens, ionizing radiation has access to the genetic molecules of every internal organ, if the organ is within the x-ray beam. Within such organs, even a single high-speed high-energy electron, set into motion by an x-ray photon, has a chance of inducing the types of damage that defy repair. That is why there is no risk-free dose-level when it comes to ionizing radiation.
And when such mutations are not cell-lethal, they endure and accumulate with each additional exposure to x-rays or other ionizing radiation.
Evidence strongly indicates that over half the deaths from cancer and heart disease may be x-ray-induced.Mammography is another example of overused, risky imaging technology.
A mammogram exposes your body to radiation that can be 1,000 times greater than that from a chest x-ray. Mammography compresses your breasts tightly, which is not only painful for most women but can actually spread dangerous cancer cells, should they exist.
Updated guidelines now call for women under 50 to forego routine screening mammography. This is a small step in the right direction, however, there is a far better option.
A 100% Safe Imaging Technology
I highly recommend thermography for breast screening in particular, as well as other types of imaging.
Thermographic screening is entirely safe, non-invasive, and brilliantly simple. This technology measures the radiation of infrared heat from your body and translates the information into anatomical images.
There is no pressure or compression of your breasts, and no radiation. This imaging system can detect signs of breast cancer up to 10 years before either a mammogram or a physical exam.
If your doctor or other health care provider recommends a CT scan, mammogram or other imaging technique as either a screening tool or to diagnose a physical complaint, I strongly encourage you to explore all your options before agreeing to be radiated.
Don’t trade your good health or a minor complaint for an increased risk of x-ray-induced cancer in the future.
Related Links:
