All the U.S. magazines and media tell women constantly how important it is to go and have their breasts crushed between metal plates and X-rayed so that cancer can be detected early. As usual it is what they don't say that is rather important.

There is even a ‘humorous’ set of instructions going around the Web telling women how to practice getting used to the pain. It suggests for example, the use of refrigerator doors or careful positioning under the rear wheel of a car. We won’t go into that, except to marvel at the courage of women who continually put up with this kind of treatment, and can make jokes about it.

But why are women treated this way? As Dr. Christine Northrup said at an interview in the spring of 97, “...testicular cancer occurs in men but no one has invented a machine that squashes the testicles of men so you can see them better under x-rays.” There's a quote for your OB Gyn to know about.

The idea that the early detection of breast cancer that a mammogram makes possible will spare a woman's breast (or breasts) is simply not true. The statement that the kind of advanced warning that a mammogram gives will lead to a cure for the disease is false, untrue, and inaccurate, however you want to say it. I would use the word ‘lie’ considering the source of the statements.

But the constant propaganda in magazines and the media have led to a situation where a huge percentage of at-risk women do believe this. And that is really unfortunate since the only tumors that mammograms can actually detect are those in a relatively advanced stage of metastasized cancer.

In one respect it's a matter of surprise to me that this procedure is so continuously emphasized as necessary, in a country that has the best research facilities in the world. Much better ways are available, without pain or discomfort, to the women in other countries. But then, in those countries, medical expenses are not the single greatest cause of personal bankruptcies.

Medicine here is a business that doesn't seem to pay much attention to anything going on elsewhere in the world, and the already myopic eye becomes totally blind if that foreign research might affect medical income over here. A similar thing happens if a treatment would not make a lot of profit for the drug companies; physicians just don’t hear about it from their main source of information, the salesmen and literature of the drug companies.

My own suspicion and it is an unashamed bias, based however on a great deal of evidence, is that there is a tradition here, in the U.S., of preferring inhumane or painful medical treatment of women. It has been going on so long that is now largely taken taken as a matter of course. And this situation is based on the fact that it is the women who have the babies. The women are the really important factor in the human equation.

The history of the human race doesn't have a place in in the oh-so-technical, left brained, medical syllabuses here. Graduates of prestigious medical schools don't seem to understand that women were successfully having babies milennia before America was invaded by the Europeans. And without the interfering presence of men, I must add. Birthing was one of the Female Mysteries. I think it should still be so.

In the US, the AMA has deliberately and maliciously persecuted midwives either out of existence, or as barely tolerated nuisances. Because of this, a perfectly natural occurrence like pregnancy is treated as a disease that only doctors can cure. The painless, harmless and technology-free natural methods of childbirth used elsewhere are considered primitive, just because they are non-technical. And this reason alone has actually been cause for termination of a physician’s employment here, for the crime of not being up-to-date.

One elderly, female MD had never lost a baby in some 800 births, but wasn't ordering all the tests and scans that the hospital needed to pay for their expensive, and largely unnecessary equipment. She was laid off for not being up-to-date.

The inventor of the method of scanning a fetus with sound waves has said that he is horrified that what he invented as an emergency measure is now a routine, and that otherwise completely healthy babies endure the shock that this kind of treatment gives the fetus. Medically unnecessary procedures, now taken for granted, are used to pay for the expensive machinery involved so that the hospital can boast about how modern it is.

We all know of, or have experienced the scenario of a group of medical people round a woman about to give birth. They are all looking at a set of monitors, not at the woman.

I suspect a patriarchal bias in medicine, based on well grounded, though subconscious, fears that women working together with Mother Nature and women Elders can do a much better job if left alone. And so we come to the absurdity, cruelty and inefficiency of mammograms.

The photos of concerned people in white coats with their stethoscope ID, or nurse's hats, peer from dozens of sources, imploring women to have their breasts squashed to help prevent cancer. Constant repetition of only one option makes people think it is the only option.

The same magazines never report what health newsletters have reported for years, that Japanese women have 75% fewer breast tumors than American women, UNTIL they come here and eat the American diet. Then they catch up, just like the Israeli women who have a very, very small incidence of clitoral cancer when they eat like Israelis, but fit into the dismal American statistics when they eat like Americans.

It’s because of the low incidence of clitoral cancer among Israeli women that thousands of boy babies are needlessly mutilated here. The only reason the medical geniuses could come up with to explain the low incidence of this cancer among Israeli women was the fact that Jewish men are all circumcised. The thought of dietary causes never entered their heads. Cut, drug, and burn were the only options available to those minds; not entirely their fault. That’s what their medical school syllabuses are based on.

Diet as a preventative measure has only recently come into public view, though health writers have been plugging it for decades, through a chorus of jeers from ignorant physicians who saw no connection between health and diet. When I began writing on health matters there was not a single instance of any of the 120 or so medical schools here that had even one obligatory course in nutrition. And the ignorant physicians were the ones with the legal clout to back up their ignorance, and make the knowledgeable ones suffer. And they did.

The sad and insane thing about so many of the inefficient procedures that women endure, is their history, also not taught in medical schools. An obvious example is the absurdity of lying on the back to give birth.

Louis XIV of France was a voyeur, and demanded that his women gave birth in this position instead of the natural squatting position on a birthing stool, used everywhere outside the palace. The natural squatting position is better for the woman and the child in every possible way. The voyeur king's will is still being done. And men, not women are largely responsible for keeping it so.

The long arm of another European king still holds sway today. Castillian Spanish lisps some of the letters because Phillip of Spain had a lisp, and any courtier who didn't speak like the king was likely to be beheaded. But the lisp stayed on right up to the present day.

Women should not have to endure nonsensical, and inefficient medical procedures because of obsolete historical precedent, particularly a totally male historical precedent, when there are far superior alternatives known to any who are looking for them without the prejudice of financial involvement. Since the late 70's for example, cancer spots as small as the period at the end of this sentence have been efficiently, and painlessly discovered in Europe by thermography. But not here.

When cancer cells metabolize they produce heat. This heat can be registered on a thermograph without any radiation, and with very little expense. These are probably two reasons why it is not medically popular here; no radiation, little money.

As early as 5 years before a lump can be spotted on a mammogram, a thermogram registers the increase in local heat due to a carcinoma. Such extra warning seems a good idea, if prior knowledge is as important as the mammogram propagandists say.

In the thermographic procedure a cool draft is directed across the breast. The body automatically withdraws surface blood as a thermal balancing act. The cancer cells are not affected by the autonomic nervous system of the healthy body and their difference in temperature and blood supply stands out to sensitive instruments.

There is no pain involved, and there is none of the additive, low-grade radiation, that world experts outside the U.S. believe is a contributing factor to the cancer that the technique of x-raying is supposed to prevent. The no pain thing may be a factor too, according to my theory..

And there is another factor. Thermography finds the cancer VERY EARLY. Most physicians in this country have no idea how to deal with that. They would have to suggest dietary changes and exercise and non invasive methods that the alternative therapists use, perhaps even iodine therapy.. Doctors are stuck in the drug, cut, burn system they were taught, and the cancer needs to be fairly advanced before they can know what to do. By then it's too late for prevention.

Medical research published outside this country demonstrates that the very act of getting a mammogram itself may actually cause the spread of diseased cells, and the development of cancerous tumors within an otherwise healthy breast.

In what some “alternative” physicians call the "compression syndrome," the act of squeezing and compressing the breast in order to get good images during mammography may activate and spread an otherwise isolated, localized assembly of cancerous cells.

In 1992 for example, the Lancet, the most prestigious medical journal in English in Europe, published the results of a Canadian survey of 90,000 women. Those among them who were between 40 and 50 years of age AND had annual mammograms showed a 36%-52% INCREASE in breast cancer mortality. That certainly wasn’t reported as important news here in the family magazines with the concerned nurse pictures.

Last time I checked, in this, the richest country in the world at the time, there were only about 1000 thermographs. Those centers that do have them are also likely to be staffed by people who understand the importance of the immune system, and how to enhance it nutritionally to help recovery, even if surgery is eventually a final necessity, which does happen, rather than a first option, which is often the only option mentioned to the women concerned.

Check Thermography for Breast Cancer on Google for centers near you that will perform the tests.

Thermography apart, there is even a third method that conventional medicine in America knows about but seems to be ignoring. There is a perfectly safe, non-invasive, cancer test called the AMAS (Anti-Malignan Antibody Screen).

AMAS is a blood test capable of detecting cancer cells of any type originating anywhere in the body. It works by checking on blood levels of an antibody in the blood. This binds specifically to protein found in a wide range of cancers. This protein has a molecular weight in the 10,000 range. So the test is actually measuring the response of the immune system to the cancer and doesn’t rely on finding cancer cells in the bloodstream. Because of this it is especially accurate in monitoring the very first beginnings of the cancer. Moreover it is simple and has an accuracy rating of 95%. False positives from this test are less than 1% compared with, pardon the capitals, OVER 70% FALSE POSITIVES FOR MAMMOGRAMS AND PHYSICAL EXAMINATION!!!!

This number is based on the Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project. It was a 5-year study of over 250,000 women between 35 and 74. It showed that only 16% or one sixth of the biopsies performed on the basis of a positive mammogram (or physical exam) revealed cancer. Look at that. Think about it. The women concerned are so relieved that there isn’t any cancer, that they totally miss the fact that the mammogram didn’t work well as a predictive method, as per the propaganda.

Millions of women rush, or are rushed into lumpectomies and mastectomies based on these results. If mainstream medicine would just precede these operations with the an annual AMAS or Thermography, they'd be saving a lot of women the physical and psychological damage that goes hand-in-hand with these procedures.

It is not likely however that many women will be told about either of the other options.. The reason is because of the fear and the money that mammograms can generate. There is an enormous amount of money connected with lumpectomies and mastectomies.

Check AMAS on Google too. There is no excuse now for going to see your doctor in a state of ignorance if you have access to the Web and are reading this on a screen.

How to summarize the situation...mammograms often lead to risky, extreme, and expensive TREATMENTS for breast cancer - but not necessarily to cures, or even an increased lifespan. And in an enormous percentage of cases, those treatments are completely unnecessary.

So if you’ve received a positive mammogram report ask for an AMAS test or Thermography before considering any other options. Chances are statistically very high that your mammogram result is a false positive. Don’t be stampeded. It’s your body not theirs, though you might be forgiven for not noticing that in some facilities..

Bear in mind also that even if there is a cancer, not all cases require surgery, or even treatment of any kind. The numbers say that about 25% of current breast cancer diagnoses are of the very slow-to-develop ductal or lobular carcinomas "in situ." These become malignant only about 2% of the time.

Yet thousands of women are often panicked into an unnecessary mastectomy in cases that may only need to be carefully monitored over time. If you were given the choice of losing a breast on 2-in-100 odds would you do it? It isn’t likely, is it? But that may be the situation. Ask questions. Those odds aren’t going to stop the surgeons from suggesting the knife. That’s their tool and their bank account.

And think about this fact. President Kennedy’s personal physician developed colon cancer. He cured himself completely with an herbal formula called Essiac. His comment was this, “Essiac is a cure for cancer. Period.”

When Nurse Caisse ( Essiac is her name backwards) died in her nineties after thousands of terminally ill cancer patients sent to her by physicians who could do no more had completely recovered because of the Essiac treatment taught her by an Ojibway medicine man, what happened? The Health authorities collected all her papers and records and burned them in 55 gallon drums. Nobody is to be allowed to interfere with the money making business of cancer.

The Sloan Kettering cancer research facility here actually suggested to the Canadian Government that some of the herbs in the mixture were outlawed, about as sensible a suggestion as outlawing dandelions, but they were afraid of their income. They had researched Essiac and were afraid of it. Since, like Laetrile it was a totally natural product it could not be patented.

A Chicago researcher, Dr. Manning, demonstrated that in his experimental animals over 90% of metastases were totally cured if the animals were treated with Laetrile, enzymes and vitamin A. That percentage of total cures would destroy the cancer industry.

The spokesman for Sloan Kettering, our major cancer research establishment said
in public that Laetrile is useless in cancer treatment. Their chief researcher was surprised to hear that, since he had actually discovered, and reported to the spokesman that Laetrile, even by itself was more effective than any of the dozen or so major drugs used at the time.

It wasn’t until the xerox records from his laboratory were made public by a Californian Laetrile group that the Sloan Kettering authorities admitted that they had lied to the public that regards them as the guardian. It wasn't major headlines anywhere of course. But orthodox medicine still doesn't use Laetrile for cancer, by itself, or in conjunction as Manning did, and neither do they use Essiac. There are billions of dollars involved in NOT finding a cancer cure.

And finally and not totally incidentally, the authorization of the first officially recognized syllabuses for medical schools in this country was organized by General Motors executives like Sloan and Kettering, and the financier Douglas, who owned a uranium mine and wrote radiation treatment into the contracts. Sloan and Kettering weren’t prestigious physicians as most people assume, they were business executives from the auto industry who financed only those schools that pushed the holy trinity of drug, cut and burn..

Standard Oil also provided funds because of the drugs made from their petroleum products. Schools that did not agree to use the syllabuses of these pirates did not get corporate funding.

That's how big business got to rule American medical practice, and still does, via the pharmaceutical industry that charges thousands of percent of cost for its often dangerous products. Remember Louis XIV and Phillip of Spain. It's the same thing all over again. Look for your options. Become informed and ask questions. If you don’t take care of your body, who will?