mammograms designed to cause cancer?

do you know how they induce cancer in cells in lab tests - they give the cells radiation and put them under compression stresses. this was found to be the most effective way of inducing cancer in previously healthy cells.

one doctor noted that that is pretty much what happens during a mammogram. you get a dose of radiation, while your mammary cells are being put under fairly extreme compression stress.

a coincidence? Or something more sinister?

going to have an ultrasound instead next time anyone?

reply to post by rapunzel222


I won't have another mammo.

Actually do not have anything invasive.

Cancer risk

The risk of getting cancer from x-rays is very small. Government studies state that receiving 5000 millirem (50 mSv) of radiation in a year will increase the rate of cancer deaths by 0.3%, which is insignificant. That means that if you got 300 medical x-rays in a year, it would increase your chances of getting cancer by only 1%.

from
www.school-for-champions.com...



en.wikipedia.org...

simply put, its not enough radiation, and i would assume its not enough pressure.

reply to post by ELECTRICkoolaidZOMBIEtest


And we all know our government would never lie to us, right? Not like they have a history of doing this or anything. Don't believe everything the gov. says. They can make things look any way they want them to and they do not hesitate to do so!

reply to post by sandyg


YEAH!
and i bet women who get mammograms DONT get beaten with socks full of batteries and get threatened with death if they tell anyone! NICE TRY GOVERNMENT! you wont get away with clubbing women senseless for any longer!

way to assume something is a lie just for the sake of calling it a lie.
if you dont have any thing to back up what youre saying its completely worthless.

sorry if information from people in the medical field isnt enough for you.

reply to post by rapunzel222


What is your source? The reason I ask is, radiation was one of my treatments for breast cancer. After six months of chemotherapy, I went through five weeks of radiation treatments (five days a week) and that was over 15 years ago. I have had yearly mamograms since.

My first mamogram was to determin what the lump was on my breast. I was only 41 at the time and baseline mamograms were not suggested until age 45. There is no history of breast cancer in my family. My oncologist suggested that my breast cancer was a result of over 10 years on conjugated estrogens.

I have no doubt that some medical proceedures cause more problems than they cure, I'm just curious as to where you got your information.

reply to post by darkelf


source: good health in the 21st century: dr Carole hungerford

p. 47: "at a seminar a molecular biologist described the way in which gene breakage is induced when studying DNA damage in cultured cells. the cells are irradiated while being subjected to shearing forces. Instinctively i remarked that it sounded like having a mammogram. few women who have undergone the procedure would argue with the words 'shearing forces'. he explained that to induce maximal damage, you need to compress the cell and irradiate it, both at the same time. teh damage induced by mammography may not be simiply measured in rads. the fact that the cells are under compression stress at the time of irradiation affects their vulnerability".


ps... on a personal note, i had breast cancer and was clamped to a mammogram for at least 15 minutes while a wire was inserted into me (cuz they were having trouble locating where to put it). i can promise anyone who wants to try this procedure that it really does amount to torture. i actually could not stand the pain, and the nurse who was watching was crying watching me cry. i think its a bit strange they spend billions on cancer research but they cant find a more comfortable way to do the mammogram procedure. i also wonder whether men would put up with such a painful procedure - sorry if that sounds sexist; but i cant think off the top of my head of any similarly painful regular check procedure that men have to have.

Interesting hypothesis. I haven't yet had a mammogram, but I'll definitely do a bit of research before I have that procedure done.

I'm sorry to hear about your experiences with breast cancer. I have a couple questions, if you don't mind. For any members who've had breast cancer: did you have children? And if so, did you breastfeed?

The reason I ask is just because I've read that breastfeeding might reduce a woman's risk of getting breast cancer and I wonder how accurate that is, according to personal experiences.

I know it's a little off-topic and maybe requires its own thread, but I'm curious.

reply to post by rapunzel222


I don't know if there is anything that painful for a guy.. I don't want go into detail but I've been putting up with a pain for 3 years now that feels like I've been kicked in the nuts and all I get given is ciprofloxacin cos apparently it's a virus that won't go away.

Although I will say I'm not looking forward to my first prostate exam.. not that painful just extremely uncomfortable from what I've been told!

Hello! I wish some compassionate engineers (women?) would
get together and invent a new way of doing mammograms. I had my first one this spring. I thought it was barbaric and rediculous!!! Come on all these educated women could get together and do something important for woman kind. Don't we already suffer monthly? Obviously a man designed the machine. I don't know if I would want to go back annually, it was stressful, humiliating, and painful. They should make this a project at universities. The breast cancer group can sponsor the grants. Young women today don't know about this until you are 40, and my mother never taked about how the procedure goes. It's something that needs improved.

I have a mammogram booked this month so was interested in this thread.
I found the following link quite interesting and it looks like a new procedure might be in the offing soon.

www.thehealthierlife.co.uk...

reply to post by ItsallCrazy


I've had a prostrate exam. It is really uncomfortable, but it is over in a few seconds. Way better than catching prostrate cancer late right?

P.S. If it wasn't for a mammogram I would have lost someone very dear to me. It caught her cancer not caused it. Unless the cancer developed in a split second.

reply to post by eMachine


I had two children (4 and 1/2 years apart), the first was bottle fed and the second was breast fed. I had an IUD (InterUterine Device) installed about six years later and after a few years I began having problems. I developed endometriosis so badly that my left ovary was attached to the back of my uterus. At this point the doctor removed my uterus, cervix, both ovaries and both tubes. He also removed my appendix. I was on conjugated estrogens (strongest dose every day) for ten years when I developed breast cancer.

reply to post by darkelf


Wow, your post makes me want to cry for what you've gone through. I'm so sorry, but glad that you are here to tell your story!

I'm reluctant to use any form of birth control that messes with my natural processes, because I accepted a Depo Provera shot after my first child was born (before I even left the hospital) and (without going into the disgusting details) my cycle didn't return to normal for almost 3 years.

When I consulted medical professionals about it, they suggested I start taking "the pill" to help get my cycle back to normal. I decided not to take their advice! (I got pregnant with my second child shortly after my cycle returned to normal.)

There are so very many factors that can contribute to all sorts of health conditions, we can't accurately point to any 'blanket cause'. Sadly, I think in general our science is still pretty primitive.

I wish you well. May your experiences and the similar experiences of others help us to progress in some way for the betterment of womankind.