A Brief History
The scientific community has long been suspicious of the risks posed by the ionizing radiation of the mammogram—and for
good reason. In 1904, soon after Thomas Edison made the first X-ray machine, his assistant, Clarence Dally, died from radiation induced cancer. He has been referred to as a “martyr for science.” Radiation became the longest standing and most documented cause of cancer. Even Thomas Edison refused ever to have an X-Ray. Viewing inside the human body, however, was so compelling that the risks have been virtually ignored, down-played, and thought of as “worth the benefit.” You might ask, “To whom is this worth the risks?” Although mammography was quickly accepted in the 1970s as the answer to the breast cancer problem, no known research was carried out on the effects of radiation on the breast at that time.

What the Studies Reveal
Because of rising concerns in the scientific community, recent studies reveal some troubling results. For your education, we
will briefly review those studies, which point out that mammograms do not reduce mortality, and radiation raises the risks of causing cancer on two fronts: it damages DNA and surrounding tissues—a deadly combination.

January, 2000
A 1999 study revealed that there had been no decrease
in breast cancer mortality in Sweden, where screening
had been recommended since 1985. The decision to
screen was based on eight internationally controlled
mammogram trials, including about 500,000 women.
Due to unsatisfactory results in Sweden, a review of the
studies was conducted and found that the results of the
original eight studies were misinterpreted and, therefore,
misrepresented. The analysis concluded that for every
1,000 women screened biennially for 12 years, one breast
cancer was avoided, whereas the total number of deaths
was increased by six. There is no reliable evidence to
date, which says that mammography screening decreases
breast cancer mortality (Lancet 2000; 129-34).

2002 Radiation Research
The Low-Dose Radiation Research Program was funded
by a grant supported by the US Department of Education
and the National Institute of Health. Conclusions
showed that low energy X-rays of mammograms
produce an increased biological risk, as opposed to
higher energy photons of other types of X-rays.
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, University
of California cell biologist Mary Helen Barcellos-Hoff
shows that exposure to ionizing radiation creates a
wound that promotes a microenvironment in the tissue
surrounding breast cells that can cause cells to become
cancerous. “Our studies demonstrate that radiation elicits
rapid and persistent global alterations in the mammary
gland microenvironment. Radiation exposure can causebreast cancer by pathways other than genetic mutations
(DNA damage).” Ionizing radiation is a well-established
carcinogen, but previous studies of its cancer-causing
effects have largely focused on damage to the breast cells’
DNA. Barcellos-Hoff has pursued a different tactic. “It takes
a tissue to make a tumor,” she says. “Cells don’t become
tumors without cooperation from the surrounding tissue.”

2002 Saarland University, Hamburg, Germany
It is generally accepted that ionizing radiation causes
double and multiple strand breaks in DNA, which is an
accepted cause of cancer. Research reveals that exposure
to low-dose radiation causes damage so extensive to
the DNA that it is unable to repair itself, resulting in a
permanent genetic mutation of the DNA.

2004 Radiation Research
The Neoplastic Transformation Potential of
Mammography X-Rays
To help resolve the controversy regarding the risk of
mammography breast screening, a study was carried
out with a grant to the University of Birmingham, UK.
A comparison was made using an actual low-dose
mammogram X-ray machine and a standard high-dose
X-ray (chest X-ray). Results suggested that the risks (of
developing cancer) associated with mammogram screening
may be approximately five times higher than previously
assumed (which was 1%), making the estimated increased
risk of 5% for each exposure. The authors suggested that
the risk-benefit relationship of mammography exposure
clearly needs to be re-evaluated.

Prevention is always the best policy
Ionizing radiation damage is cumulative, which means each exposure multiplies the risk. The fact that the risk exists at all justifies the necessity to use a safe, noninvasive method of screening to avoid causing the disease that mammograms are designed to detect. Clearly, one way to prevent breast cancer is to avoid unnecessary radiation exposure. In spite of its risks, ionizing radiation is widely supported by those who benefit in various ways from its use, as well as results of mammography's on otherwise healthy women. It is an elective procedure, not a requirement. You have a choice. When a mammogram is recommended, consider whose interest it serves to recommend exposing you to a known risk. Take responsibility for your best interest.

Thermal Imaging is a safe, affordable and reliable option. It can prevent breast disease by helping you to monitor your breast health and to avoid ionizing radiation. In addition, it can detect previously undetected signs of microscopic development in time to make choices that can change the outcome.
Even if you have had only one mammogram, then you are at risk. Early detection is vital. Remember, the best way to manage a disaster is to prevent it!

Here’s to your good health!

TV Interview with Carol Chandler 

Click on "Watch Video" at top of Article

For a listing of Thermal Imaging Centers visit  

www.iamtonline.org