1. Ken O Ken O United States says:

    This is biased product advertisement, disguised as "educational" information, of corporate medicine for one of their highly lucrative yet highly toxic interventions, digital mammography.

    Because the big business of allopathic medicine has indoctrinated the public with the deceptive notion that "improved breast cancer screening" equals more deaths from breast cancer are averted, very few people understand that with "improved breast cancer screening" come increased overdiagnosis which means more healthy women will get mutilated and killed by the scientific cancer treatments of this business cartel.

    It is also incorrect that tomography/tomosynthesis reduces radiation exposure, it's actually slightly higher over standard mammography but, like above, what this business industry doesn't tell the public is that the lowest dose of an xrays is carcinogenic and that the use of low dose xrays is a prime cause of cancer, especially breast cancer (see 'The Mammogram Myth' by Rolf Hefti.

    There is no reliable evidence that tomography reduces mortality from breast cancer, just like there is marginal, if any, good evidence that standard mammogaphy does anything of great significance in terms of breast cancer mortality reduction but (practically only medical industry-sponsored biased "studies" claim that), but plenty of sound data shows the test does more serious harm than serious good (read Hefti's 'The Mammogram Myth' and 'Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy' by Peter Gotzsche).

    Also because of the relentless medical propaganda, few realize that almost all people and interest groups who support mammography are profiteers of it, like oncologists, radiologists, surgeon, medical trade groups, mammogram machine makers (eg Hologic), cancer charities, etc. This cancer cartel has been misguiding and lying to the public for countless years. They do it here again...

    Do you start to get how the game works?

The opinions expressed here are the views of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views and opinions of News-Medical.Net.
Post a new comment