Is it possible that not all breast cancer is bad news?
Yes, it’s true.
Many women are overdiagnosed and treated for breast cancer that would never cause a problem for them throughout their entire lives if left alone according to a recent article published in the Medical Journal of Australia.
Associate Professor Robin Bell of Monash University in Australia, says:
“Overdiagnosis amounts to women having a small, slow-growing cancer being diagnosed and treated, where in her lifetime that cancer may not have required treatment.”
Professor Bell is calling for a more balanced approach to breast cancer screening which fully informs women of the harm of breast cancer screening/treatment versus the very small or negligible benefits of treatment for such slow growing, nonlifethreatening breast cancers.
A 2010 study found that for every 2000 women screened over a 10 year period, only one woman would have her life prolonged as a result of the screenings yet 10 women would be treated unnecessarily.
The results of this study certainly put in the spotlight whether mammography has any benefit whatsoever particularly given that the radiation exposing screening method causes breast cancer itself!
They certainly don’t seem like very appealing odds to me!
As a middle aged woman who has never had a mammogram nor plans to ever have one (following in the footsteps of my 86 year old mother who has refused them all her life), this study adds further evidence of the wisdom of such an out of the box decision.
It would behoove women given the dire diagnosis of breast cancer to delve into whether their breast cancer really and truly requires treatment or would in fact be better left alone. At the very least, a second or even a third opinion would seem warranted.
Sometimes bad news might not really be bad news after all.
UPDATE: A far better way to screen safely for breast cancer and avoid the misdiagnosis potential of mammograms is to get annual breast ultrasound screening. How to do this without a prescription and the 7 benefits to health in doing so are provided in the linked article. Breast thermography is another safe, effective, no radiation tool for cancer screening that does not result in overtreatment or misdiagnosis.
Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist
Sources and More Information
Benefits of Cancer Screening Exaggerated
Women Overdiagnosed with Breast Cancer
170 Scientific Studies Confirm the Dangers of Soy
The Dangers of Estrogenic Foods, Herbs and Supplements to Breast Health
Komen (Not) for the Cure: The Complete and Utter Pinkwashing of America
Thermography: A Perfect Alternative to Cancer Causing Mammograms?
Why Even Organic Soy Formula is so Dangerous for Babies
How the Birth Control Pill Can Harm Your Future Child’s Health
It’s easy to be flippant about not having mammograms when you haven’t had to deal with breast cancer. I was diagnosed six years ago at age 43 – not by mammogram, I found the lump. Perhaps if I had followed the medical protocol and had a mammogram at age 40 a lumpectomy would have been enough. As it was I had to have a completion mastectomy after the lumpectomy didn’t work. By the way, I had a great diet (I thought) and was extremely “healthy” before being diagnosed. My Mom died from metastatic breast cancer so I do have family history. I now use thermography for follow-up screening which is kind of gusty for a bc survivor and cost me my relationship with my oncologist. I believe that had I had a thermogram early on, say when my Mom was diagnosed and I was 30, I could have prevented the cancer in the first place.
Gyata, I’m sorry for your condition. What would you have done differently to prevent the cancer?
Awesome post, Sarah! I definitely agree that mammograms, etc. cause way more problems than they do help anything. I know an older lady who has been treated, again and again, for breast cancer. Every time they think they’ve got it all, it comes back and she goes back in for more radiation and chemo.
One of my older relatives (who refuses to hear ANY talk of traditional eating) is upset that she can’t afford to go get her mammogram done every year — but I am secretly very glad!
I was given a hysterectomy before finding my way to the kind of diet written about in this blog. Interestingly, on one of my visits to a doctor to discuss my many post-hyst issues, the doctor said “You look find – have you had a mammogram?” My response, why? – don’t I look fine? Anyway, after enduring the consequences of this gold standard treatment, mammorgrams or its alternative are not of interest for me.
No bras or mammograms for me.
LOL, tina! Me, either!
I’m 59 and have never had a mammogram and never intend to have one either. Why would I want my boobs smashed and then blasted with cancer causing radiation! No thank you!
Besides radiation, breast cancer is caused by TRAUMA. How much trauma is forced on breast tissue when it is squished as thin as a pancake by mammograms?
No machine is going to be squishing my breasts anytime soon, that’s for sure! What a stupid test mammograms are. Not to mention the fact that many GYNs get a kickback for every one that one of their patients endure. It’s a money making scam for many doctors who have ownership interest in mammography centers. ASK YOUR DOC point blank whether he/she gets money for the mammogram that was just written for you. Watch them squirm.
Yes, trauma is a definite cause of breast cancer. Cheeseslave blog had a post on bras are a cause of breast cancer recently.
Thank you for saying what needs to be said about mammograms. PSA testing has done the same harm for men. More and more are being treated for cancer that is not aggressive and best left to “wait and watch”. I read (dont’ remember where) that the body fights cancer many times in our lifetime. Cancer cells are present, the body is able to heal, cancer, heal, cancer, heal, etc. We can jump in too soon with invasive therapy instead of letting the body repair itself.
Lots of doctors do take the wait and watch. My dad’s PSA levels started going wonky six years ago. For five years they waited and watched his levels. Finally last Christmas they did a biopsy and it was positive. He had his prostate removed, and thankfully the cancer had not spread. It had, however, reached the limits of the prostate, and had they waited any longer it would have spread. All to say that sometimes those tests are used effectively. PSA tests are not the be all and end all, but they can be useful.
I’m turning 40 this year and I just got the paperwork from my doctor to have a mammogram done. I’m just now transforming my and my families way of eating from SAD to a WAPF way of life. Can you point me to where I can learn more about why not getting a mammogram is the right thing to do. Thanks!
For starters, mammography exposes you to quite a bit of radiation that is cancer causing in and of itself. Doing this test every single year is sheer madness. There is a link in the post above that gives more information on the subject.
I’m closing in on 50, and I have had 3 mammograms since I turned 40. I would do thermography if it was available within a reasonable driving distance and if it was covered by insurance. Alas neither is true. I figure I am taking a moderate approach. In my mind the fact is that the medical establishment does not know everything and are motivated by profit, but why put my eggs (or boobs) all in one basket.
My MIL was diagnosed via mammogram many years ago. She had a mastectomy. Who am I to say that her malignancy would not have been terminal?
So, I’m taking a middle-of-the-road approach. I’ll have mammagrams every 3-4 years. Not every year. And once I have passed the age where most malignancies are detected, I may stop them all together.
When Breast Cancer Isn’t Bad News http://t.co/n4qAkQRB