Thermograms: Safer, More Accurate than Mammograms

image

Mammograms today are considered the standard tool to detect breast cancer.  Women are normally encouraged to get mammogram testing every one or two years as they enter later adulthood, as a measure to detect breast cancer as early as possible.

But mammogram testing is not harmless.  In fact, mammograms are considered by some in the medical community to be so dangerous as to even promote the development of cancer, due to the heavy amounts of ionizing radiation mammograms use.  A single test can expose you to the same amount of radiation as 1,000 chest X-rays—that’s nearly the equivalent of three chest X-rays per day for a year, an amount if seen from that perspective certainly gives one pause.

Indeed, according to top cancer expert Dr. Samuel Epstein, “The premenopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade’s screening.”

More importantly, mammograms an almost negligible ability to prevent cancer deaths, according to the New England Journal of Medicine.  A September 2010 study found that mammograms only reduced cancer death rates by .4 deaths for every 1,000 women who received annual testing for 10 years, which means that only 1 breast cancer death was averted per 2,500 women.

What most doctors won’t tell you, however, is there’s a safer, far more accurate alternative.  The technology, called thermography, does not rely on radiation, but instead scans for heat levels in the body to detect inflammation.  It’s so safe in fact that it poses no risks even to pregnant and nursing women.  Cancerous and pre-cancerous cells are normally characterized with inflammation first before any growth visible on by mammography, and so thermograms are able to detect cancer years earlier than any other method.

A study conducted on women who received regular thermogram screenings over a ten year period found that an abnormal thermogram scan was ten times more reliable as a risk measure for breast cancer than family medical history.  In addition, it also found that thermography was the first detector of potential cancer for 60% of the women who developed it.

According to Dr. Phlip Getson, who has used medical thermography since 1982, “Since thermal imaging detects changes at the cellular level, studies suggest that this test can detect activity 8 to 10 years before any other test.  This makes it unique in that it affords us the opportunity to view changes before the actual formation of the tumor.  Studies have shown that by the time a tumor has grown to sufficient size to be detectable by physical examination or mammography, it has in fact been growing for about seven years achieving more than 25 doublings of the malignant cell colony.  At 90 days there are two cells, at one year there are 16 cells, and at five years there are 1,048,576 cells—an amount that is still undetectable by a mammogram.”

Not only are thermograms better early predictors, they are far less likely to produce false positives, which mammograms are somewhat known for.  The false positive rate for mammograms is 6%, which means it’s a fairly regular occurrence, and is probable to occur at least once for the majority of women who undergo annual or biannual screenings.  The result can be additional mammograms, meaning even more heavy radiation exposure, and worse, needless operations.

Thermography is safe, accurate, and non-invasive.  You can usually find one thermography testing center in most major cities, and while it’s not typically covered by insurance, it’s relatively inexpensive—the average screening costs only $250.  For any woman, or man, at any age, an annual thermography screening is the ultimate check-up tool.

 

 

 

Sources:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christiane-northrup/the-best-breast-test-the-_b_752503.html

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2012/03/03/experts-say-avoid-mammograms.aspx

Jonathan Cho

  • Toshio

    well written article.. thanks

  • mmesnape

    I'm not understanding one thing about this kind of testing. If it's been available since 1982 (stated in the piece)…how come we don't see them in regular hospital settings? And why is this not covered by my insurance? I'm not a big fan of the mammography machine since my own breast cancer diagnosis…but I'm a bit leery. I saw another article that stated that this imagery had been created by an Israeli doctor, whose currently peddling his machine. As for it's accuracy in detecting cancer (or pre-cancerous conditions) …where are the studies to back it up. I've seen many articles with good intentions, selling cures and how to change our 'lifestyle' to avoid cancer…. but frankly, after going through chemo, radiation and mastectomy…i don't want to be shown rose colored dreams of a better life…and better detection. You don't fool around with cancer and somebody else's health. my 2 cents…

    • Justme

      The simple answer – there's no money in preventing or curing cancer. Hundreds of thousands are employed and BILLIONS are spent on cancer research and patented pharmaceuticals used to treat (not cure) cancer. Curing cancer would be the equivalent of bankrupting an entire industry that has unprecedented profits. Those whose bank account benefits from spreading fear and perpetuating cancer can't afford to let that happen. Follow the money trail.

  • Carolan

    I had a thermogram and brought the report in to my MD, who scoffed at it and would not take it seriously at all. She is no longer my MD, however it is very difficult to ride that canyon between conventional medicine and proven safer methods because MDs usually refuse to support them.

  • kurleelocks

    I think it is important to know that thermography is not a substitute for mammography: http://arizonaadvancedmedicine.com/mammography-vs

  • Viviane Paolini

    I have had thermograpgy for many years now. It is so accurate and not painful. If you have scists, you should have it.

  • Becky

    My experience was not good with thermography. I was told I had inflammation in my R breast & had to repeat it in 3 months, which showed the same. I was not given any info as to how to reduce the inflammation. Now I am worried that I will get breast cancer one day, but do not know how to prevent it…

  • Donna

    I'm curious, do they hurt less than a mammo? THAT is what stops me from ever getting another one!

  • Sergio

    Oftentimes, like here, the shortcomings of thermography are not mentioned by its promoters: http://www.greenmedinfo.com/blog/mammogram-altern

  • Camille

    Here in canada they deemed it useless and ineffective…. That there is no evidence that it works. Makes me angry. Hard to find a place that offers this.

  • tkle

    grossly inaccurate dose comparisons… 2 view mammo is 7x higher than a cxr @ about 70 mrems. ( the approximate equivalent to a year of radiation we are all exposed to every year due to the earth and cosmic radiation) But a chest CT is over 700 mrem. Those are ordered more frequently than mammos and no one thinks twice about it when they go to MD or ER. ( this is a subject we need an article on) While thermal imaging is a strong contender for the future of breast health, it is still not a place to put all your eggs, so to speak. MRI currently is the gold standard for non radiation breast imaging, though is often used in conjunction with mammography. Your best bet…self examinations monthly.

  • MArie

    The amount of radiation exposure is less than dental X-rays..

  • Sylvia

    I went through 3 years of going through multiple tests mammograms ultrasouds etc etc three years of my life wasted thinking I had tumor in my body bcs thats what my doctor though i went to a health fair and had a free theraml image done and it was so accurate it blew me away I am a believer this is wayyyyy more accurate then any mammogram and it is safe. One thing I never understood about mammograms how can something that is used to detect cancer actually cause it at the same time make no sense to me.

  • sherman8r

    Until we have a definite answer as to which is the safest and most accurate test, the mammogram or thermogram, we can change the perspective. Why rely on a machine at all? Natural News has many postings on natural ways to bring cancer into remission. There are also many that teach us how to avoid any cancer cells going ballistic and causing problems. Here are some thoughts to research.
    1. We all have cancer cells in our bodies at one time or another. If immunity is strong, these cells are destroyed before we even are aware of them. The best cure is prevention.
    2. Get rid of all fears of illness. Don't let anyone tell you that you're prone to cancer because it's hereditary etc. Read my article at http://www.naturalnews.com/023656_body_cancer_str… especially the part about Dr. Bruce Lipton. He's done amazing work on the power of fear to bring on cancer, and the power of the mind to prevent cancer.
    3. Adopt the anti-cancer nutritional advice that's available as much as possible. Avoid carcinogenic foods and activities as much as possible. But most importantly, learn to deal healthily with stress. Prevention is the best approach.

  • Anneboss

    Mammograms are also same as thermography. It have great role in medical field. It detects breast cancer. Mammograms is latest version of Thermography. It is harmless.