Quote: Much of what the test detects as cancer isn't cancer yet the medical business treats these non-cancers at an astronomical cost for really healthy women (maiming, death).
Contrary to the official narrative (which is based on medical business-fabricated pro-mammogram "scientific" data), there is marginal, if any, reliable evidence that mammography, both conventional and digital (3D), reduces mortality from breast cancer in a significant way in any age bracket but a lot of solid evidence shows the procedure does provide more serious harm than serious benefit (read the books: '
Mammography Screening: Truth, Lies and Controversy' by Peter Gotzsche and '
The Mammogram Myth' by Rolf Hefti (author's summary at
The Actual Truth about Mammograms).
IF........ women (and men) at large were to examine the mammogram data above and beyond the information of the mammogram business cartel (eg American Cancer Society, National Cancer Institute, Komen), they'd also find that it is almost exclusively the big profiteers of the test, ie. the "experts," (eg radiologists, oncologists, medical trade associations, breast cancer "charities" etc) who promote the mass use of the test and that most pro-mammogram "research" is conducted by people with massive vested interests tied to the mammogram industry.
Most women are fooled by the misleading medical mantra that early detection by mammography saves lives simply because the public has been fed ("educated" or rather brainwashed) with a very one-sided biased pro-mammogram set of information circulated by the big business of mainstream medicine. The above mentioned two independent investigative works show that early detection does not mean that there is less breast cancer mortality.
Because of this one-sided promotion and marketing of the test by the medical business, women have been obstructed from making an "informed choice" about its benefits and risks which have been inaccurately depicted by the medical industry, favoring their business interests.
Operating and reasoning based on this false body of information is the reason why very few women understand, for example, that a lot of breast cancer survivors are victims of harm instead of receivers of benefit. Therefore, almost all breast cancer "survivors" and the general public blindly repeat the official medical hype and nonsense.
But that's too much truthful reality for most people to handle. So they go into denial mode (as if that changes anything about the truth)...
I have also questioned the use of mammograms anyway. I mean, we know that radiation causes cancer, so, obviously, we should shoot concentrated radiation through tissue on a yearly basis and then "Wow! We found the cancer right when it started!" hummm...
Also, I don't know how much of this is true, but my mom always told me that you're not supposed to pull hair out of moles because they worry that it could cause the mole to turn cancerous. Her reasoning is that a mole is already abnormal tissue growth and that irritating it constantly could possibly make it change the way that it is abnormal and make it become cancer. She has a lot of nutty ideas, but she was also an army medic, so she has some medical training.
So, I wonder if smashing breasts between plates and irritating the smushed tissue plus while the tissue is irritated anyway, giving it a quick shot of cancer causing radiation is really the best way to go when trying to avoid cancer.
