Thermography The Best weapon Against Breast Cancer
Has your doctor ever talked to you about “breast Thermography”? This is a simple, non-invasive way of accessing your risk for breast cancer. Unfortunately, most medical doctors have no idea about its benefits.
Breast Thermography is the only breast cancer preventive test in existence and registered with the FDA since 1982. Let me emphasize this it is not an early “detection test” this is a true prevention test. You may think “Why should this matter”? Because prevention means you never get the disease and early detection means you already have it. Although we have been told that early detection is your best chance for survival, we know that not having cancer at all is a much better plan.
Early detection means you need treatment, most treatments include either burning, cutting or poisoning the cancer. We all know that Preventing is better than reversing. So yes I am telling you that there is a diagnostic test that can literally save your life by letting you know if you are going to get breast cancer 10 yrs before any other diagnostic test.
Breast Thermography is based on night vision technology where heat is detected in order to find objects. We all know that a fever is the first sign that something is wrong. Our bodies create heat at the first sign of inflammation or pathology. It is this heat that the Thermography can detect. Thermography can detect the first signs of any changes occurring in your breast. Including neo-angiogenesis. These are blood vessels that are being creating up to 10 yrs before a tumor appears. Thermography can detect inflammation, cysts, fibroids and tumors. It does not know the difference between a malignant or benign tumor, neither does a mammogram. Only a biopsy can give you this information.
A Thermography screening takes only 5 minutes to perform. The patient stands in front of the camera and we take a series of 6 pictures. The camera does not touch you in any way, nor does it emit any radiation whatsoever. The images are then sent to the radiologist who will read them and submit a written report to the patient and or the doctor. Thermography is not an anatomical test, it is a function and physiology test. Women of all ages and health status’ are candidates; specifically, women with implants, and breast cancer survivors.
Facts on Breast Thermography
- Breast Thermography has undergone extensive research since the late 1950’s.
- Over 800 peer-reviewed studies on breast Thermography exist in the index-medicus literature.
- In this database, well over 300,000 women have been included as study participants.
- The number of participants in many studies are very large — 10K, 37K, 60K, 85K …..
- Some of these studies have followed patients up to 12 years.
- Strict standardized interpretation protocols have been established for over 15 years.
- An abnormal thermogram is 10 times more significant as a future risk indicator for breast cancer than a first order family history of the disease.
- A persistent abnormal thermogram carries with it a 22x higher risk of future breast cancer.
- Extensive clinical trials have shown that breast Thermography significantly augments the long-term survival rates of its recipients by as much as 61%. ( www.breast thermography.info)
Can you imagine how much pain and suffering you could prevent if you only knew you were going to get cancer 10 years before you got it? Can you imagine how many lives we could actually save? Could you imagine how much money you could save? So why have you not heard of it? Let’s take a look at some alarming facts that may help you understand why you have never heard of Thermography.
First, let’s take a look at why we even have breast cancer screenings in the first place. It was first lady Betty Ford, who started the breast cancer screening campaigns after being diagnosed with breast cancer in 1974. In 1971 Richard Nixon signed the National Cancer act and declared war on cancer. The National Cancer institute ( NCI ) was established in 1971 as was the national cancer advisory board (NCAB) with the promise they would have a cure within the following 10 yrs. And the race was on. As we all know, they failed. It is now 46 years later and cancer in general remains the second leading cause of death in this country. Then in 2003 Andrew Von Eschenbach, director of the National Cancer institute (NCI) issued a challenge supported by the American Association for Cancer Research to eliminate Cancer by 2015. They also failed and today more than 13 million people are diagnosed yearly with cancer.
There has been such a lack of progress on cancer that in 2008 the US senate committee on health, education, and pension convened a panel discussion titled Cancer Challenges and Opportunities In The 21st Century. It is projected that by 2030 there will be 27 million yearly diagnosis of cancer with 17 million deaths in the US. It looks like we are losing this war. The fund raisers to create cancer awareness abound. The pink ribbon marches are everywhere. It is not for lack of cancer awareness or not enough money being poured into new drugs and research (billions). There is no doubt that research has made better treatment for childhood leukemias and Lymphomas, but generally speaking, we have made very little progress if any since 1971.
According to a study published in Pub Med in 2004 by Morgan, Ward, and Barton, survival rates for chemo are 2.3% in Australia, 2.1% in the USA. Today 13 million people will be diagnosed with cancer Compared to 3 million people in 1971. We have also seen a rise in what is considered “rare cancers” which mean less than 6 cases per 100,000 people. In 2017 rare cancers were 13% of all cancers diagnosed. According to the American Cancer Society, small intestine cancer has more than doubled since 1971.
One of the most important game changer recommendations came in 2009 from the United States task force on preventive services. The USTFPS is a 15 member panel appointed by the CDC in 1996 to guide us on choosing the right screening tools for our population. Since 2009 the US task force on preventive services no longer recommends mammograms as a screening tool. On their website they have the following recommendations: “While screening mammography in women aged 40 to 49 years may reduce the risk for breast cancer death, the number of deaths averted is smaller than that in older women and the number of false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies is larger […] In addition to false-positive results and unnecessary biopsies, all women undergoing regular screening mammography are at risk for the diagnosis and treatment of non-invasive and invasive breast cancer that would otherwise not have become a threat to their health, or even apparent, during their lifetime” […] They concluded, “The decision to start regular, biennial screening mammography before the age of 50 years should be an individual one and should take patient context into account, including the patient’s values regarding specific benefits and harms”.
If early detection is the best chance for survival then, why are survival rates so low? Because although diagnosis is occurring earlier in most patients the prognosis have not changed. Early detection does not equal a better outcome. Let’s all remember the definition of insanity “doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different outcome”. Let’s stop the insanity! Clearly, we are losing this war because we are fighting with the wrong weapon. We are using the wrong diagnostic tests and the wrong treatments. The weapons we are using to prevent and treat cancer are the same ones that as a side effect, cause cancer. We are still looking for the “magic pill”, the “one size fits all” while treating and diagnosing with modalities that can actually give you cancer.
Researchers and Doctors all know that cancer is a multifactorial disease. Although we are all unique, we still insist on treating every cancer patient with the same therapy. Patients are living longer with the diagnosis of cancer (cancer survivors) but they are not living longer lives. Cancer is a symptom/sign that your immune system has failed you. Not only by not recognizing the threat, but also stopping apoptosis (figuring out when a cell should live or die). Treatments need to be focused on restoring balance to the entire system so that the patient can fight. We should not focus treatments on indiscriminately “killing” cancer and not think that there will be collateral damage (YOU).
It is a well established fact that cancer survivors can be affected by a number of health problems, but often a major concern is facing cancer again. Cancer that comes back after treatment is called a recurrence (www.aboutcanvcer.com). On the other hand, some cancer survivors develop a new, unrelated cancer later. This is called a second cancer (www.cancer.gov) A survey of 128 US cancer doctors found that if they contracted cancer, more than 80 % would not have chemo as the “risk and side effects far outweigh the likely benefits” (cancerresearchinformation.com)
The Susan G. Kolmen Foundation is one of the most recognized breast cancer advocates, yet right on their website they state that “Mammograms miss 30% of breast cancers, […] accuracy is only 84% […] and that the more mammograms a woman has the more she is at risk for a false positive” (Susan G. Kolmen foundation).
- What we need are personalized treatments that address the entire human being not just the affected area with cancer.
- What we need are treatments that attack the malignant cells and spare the healthy ones. (today we have many of those treatments).
- What we need are compassionate medical personnel that remember that a cancer patient is more than his/her cancer.
- What we need is a truly preventive diagnostic test. One that can tell me if I’m at risk for developing the disease. One that can give me enough time to make changes that will allow me to reverse it.
- We don’t need an early diagnostic test. We need a preventive test. And that is breast Thermography.
There is only one reason why we have not made Thermography the standard diagnostic test for breast cancer or found “the cure”; It is called GREED.
According to the IMS institute for health care and schematics, In 2015 the world spent $107 billion on conventional cancer treatments. By the year 2020 the projections are $150 Billion. These are on treatments alone, let’s add to that $7.8 billion for mammograms according to National institute of health. Are you starting to get the picture? It is public record that the Susan G. Kolmen foundation owns stocks in General electric (they make mammogram machines) and stocks in Astrazeneca which makes Tamoxifen. I’ll just let you think about that one.
It wasn’t always like this. When breast cancer screenings were started in the 1970’s the intentions were good. The idea was that we would save lives. Today we know how to prevent, reverse and detect cancer early.
I look forward to the day when I no longer hear a woman say “why haven’t I ever heard of breast Thermography”? Stand up for your health; demand to know your options.
Thrive Healthcare & Dr. Maggie Ruiz-Paedae DOM.
2221 Lee Rd. Suite 16 Winter Park, Fl. Ph: (407) 345-5622
1250 S. Tamiami Trail Suite 403 Sarasota, Fl. 34239 (941) 877-1305