CAN STRETCHING REALLY HELP
FALSE POSITIVE: Tests that that show you have a certain disease or health problem, even though you do not have said disease or problem (or the problem is so non-invasive that it would never be an issue in your natural lifetime).
FALSE NEGATIVE: A test that fails to pick up the fact that you actually do have a certain disease or problem.
OVERDIAGNOSIS: Usually based on incorrect presumptions or "False Positive" tests. You are officially diagnosed with a disease or health problem you either do not have or is not aggressive enough to ever progress to overt symptoms.
OVERTREATMENT: Based on "Overdiagnosis". You are now actually treated for a disease or health problem you do not have or will never become a problem in your natural lifetime.
DEATH: The latest studies on this topic as it pertains to Breast Cancer and Mammograms are revealing that women who get regular mammograms have no less chance (some say they increase your chances) of dying of Breast Cancer than women who get no mammograms at all.
"Even with a specificity of 90%, most abnormal mammograms are false-positives. .....most of those cancers would probably not result in illness or death. Treatment of these cancers would constitute overtreatment. The magnitude of overdiagnosis due to mammographic screening is controversial, with estimates ranging from 0% to 54%.... It may be estimated that [due to excessive amounts of radiation] up to one breast cancer may be induced per 1,000 women aged 40 to 80 years undergoing annual mammograms." - From the National Institutes of Health's (National Cancer Institute) guidelines.
"In September 2010, the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most prestigious medical journals, published the first study in years to examine the effectiveness of mammograms. Their findings are a far cry from what most public health officials would have you believe. The bottom line is that mammograms seem to have reduced cancer death rates by only 0.4 deaths per 1,000 women --- an amount so small it might as well be zero. Put another way, 2,500 women would have to be screened over 10 years for a single breast cancer death to be avoided." -Dr. Joseph Mercola
"This latest publication is just a longer-term follow-up of a study that was completed over a decade ago, so the fact that they did not find a benefit from mammograms is not new." - Richard Wender, MD: Professor and Chair of the Department of Family and Community Medicine at Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia.
- OSTEOPOROSIS DRUGS PREVENT FRACTURES: The truth is, Osteoporosis Drugs cause fractures. I have been warning people of this fact for over a decade (HERE). Fortunately, the powers that be are starting to admit this on a small level.
- HIGH CHOLESTEROL IS THE CHIEF CAUSE OF HEART ATTACKS: The underlying culprit in the vast majority of Heart Disease is INFLAMMATION and not CHOLESTEROL. This is one of the reasons why you do not want to be on STATIN DRUGS.
- VACCINES ARE SAFE: Whether we are talking about FLU SHOTS or VACCINES in general, they are anything but safe. Sure they prevent acute diseases. The problem is, here in America we have been trading acute illnesses for chronic, long-term NEURO-DEGENERATIVE DISEASES, AUTISM, AUTOIMMUNITY, CANCER, and ENDOCRINE PROBLEMS, for decades.
- DOCTORS DON'T PERFORM TESTS OR PRESCRIBE DRUGS THAT YOU DON'T ACTUALLY NEED: Really? Although I could show you dozens upon dozens of examples, just look at these two topics and try and convince me otherwise (HERE & HERE).
- ANTIBIOTICS KEEP OUR NATION HEALTHY: Although ANTIBIOTICS undoubtedly have the ability to save lives, their overuse has been a major causal factor in POOR GUT HEALTH (including LEAKY GUT SYNDROME and IBS) as well as a whole host of AUTOIMMUNE DISEASES and DYSBIOSIS.
- AS LONG AS I DON'T HAVE DIABETES, MY BLOOD SUGAR IS FINE: HERE and HERE are solid proof that "Uncontrolled Blood Sugar" (even if your numbers are in the 'normal' range) is one of our nation's foundational health problems.
- ANTI-DEPRESSION DRUGS ARE SAFE AND EFFECTIVE: Because so many of you reading this post are on ANTI-DEPRESSION DRUGS, it would behoove you to click on the link and spend just a little bit of time reading before accusing me of speaking out of turn.
- ANNUAL PHYSICALS ARE A CRITICAL PART OF GOOD HEALTH: This is simply not true. Why not? Because of something you are going to learn a great deal about today ---- way too much over-treatment due to "False Positives". More on this topic to come.
- EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE IS A WONDERFUL WAY TO PRACTICE MEDICINE: EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE is the way doctors are currently forced to practice medicine by our bureaucracy-loving government. If you believe that this is improving your quality of care, you may want to click on the link.
Here's the thing folks; I could have included dozens of other examples of medical myths and sacred cows. If you want to read more about them, they're all over my site. But time is short. We need to get back to our question at hand. Is mammography a life saving diagnostic tool that leads to early detection of BREAST CANCER, and ultimately saves women's lives, or is it not? Let's cut straight to the chase.
- Routine mammograms should begin at age 50 instead of 40. They should also end at age 74.
- Women should receive a mammogram every other year instead of every year.
- Based on the most current peer-reviewed scientific literature, self-examination of the breasts (something that has been heavily promoted for decades) has little or no value.
According to a study published in this month's issue of BMJ (The British Medical Journal), Canadian researchers who started following a group of almost 90,000 women 25 years ago have come to some interesting conclusions concerning mammography and Breast Cancer. The women were divided into two groups ---- those who had annual mammography and those who had no mammography at all. Listen to the author's conclusions at the end of the 25 years. "Annual mammography in women aged 40-59 does not reduce mortality from breast cancer beyond that of physical examination or usual care when adjuvant therapy [chemo / radiation] for breast cancer is freely available. Overall, 22% (106/484) of screen detected invasive breast cancers were over-diagnosed...." The study's lead author, Dr. Anthony B. Miller (M.D.), Professor Emeritus of the University of Toronto's School of Public Health clarified what they meant by going on to say that, "At the end of the screening period, an excess of 142 breast cancers occurred in the mammography arm compared with the control arm.... This implies that 22% (106 of 484) of the screen-detected cancers in the mammography arm were overdiagnosed".
In simple English, this means that 22% of those diagnosed with CANCER did not actually have Cancer. I would assume that most, if not all of these women then fell into the category of "Overtreated" In fact, there were researchers from around the world (Dr. Mette Kalager, MD, of the University of Oslo in Norway was one of the most renowned) who looked at the study and said that since the type of Breast Cancer called "ductal carcinoma in situ" that accounts for 25% of all Breast Cancers was not included in the study, the numbers would actually be worse than Miller's group determined --- significantly worse. Gulp. Dr. Kalager's team published an editorial in the same issue of BMJ titled, "Too Much Mammography". But not everyone agreed with these findings.
Two doctor's groups lost their collective minds over Miller's study --- The American College of Radiology (ACR) and the Society of Breast Imaging (SBI). They issued a joint statement accusing Miller and his colleagues of all sorts of underhanded and dirty tricks, as well as using shoddy research techniques and outdated equipment. In a statement issued by Miller that addressed every issue brought up by these two groups, he said that his team's study was undoubtedly "unwelcome to this highly financially conflicted group, but which will be of substantial interest to policy makers in considering the future of screening for breast cancer." Wow! Financial conflict-of-interest in medicine? You don't say. If you have a couple of minutes sometime, breeze through a few of our numerous articles on EVIDENCE-BASED MEDICINE to get a small taste of what Miller is up against as he takes on this sacred cow. The crazy thing about this research is that like Dr. Wender told us at the very top of the page, it's not really new information.
The November, 2012 issue of the New England Journal of Medicine published a study called, "Effects of Three Decades of Screening Mammography on Breast-Cancer Incidence". What were the conclusions of this thirty year study that looked crunched governmental statistics for the entire United States? Are you sitting down? The authors stated that, "we estimated that breast cancer was overdiagnosed (i.e., tumors were detected on screening that would never have led to clinical symptoms) in 1.3 million U.S. women in the past 30 years. We estimated that in 2008 alone, breast cancer was overdiagnosed in more than 70,000 women; this accounted for 31% of all breast cancers diagnosed. Despite substantial increases in the number of cases of early-stage breast cancer detected, screening mammography has only marginally reduced the rate at which women present with advanced cancer. Although it is not certain which women have been affected, the imbalance suggests that there is substantial overdiagnosis, accounting for nearly a third of all newly diagnosed breast cancers, and that screening is having, at best, only a small effect on the rate of death from breast cancer."
If you get out your calculator and do the math, this study showed a whopping 93% "False Positive" rate. Re-read that and let the magnitude of what it is implying about our current model of diagnosing and treating Breast Cancer sink in for a moment. And the final bite-in-the-butt for those of you keeping score at home is that they did not even include the Breast Cancers that were thought to have been caused by the ongoing HRT (Hormonal Replacement Therapy) fiasco (HERE), which would have made the numbers even worse. But that's not all. This study only dealt with False Positives. What about the "False Negatives"? Listen to what our government's NIH website has to say on this topic. "Assuming an average sensitivity of 80%, mammograms will miss approximately 20% of the breast cancers that are present at the time of screening (false-negatives)". 93% False Positives plus 20% False Negatives adds up to 113% --- an impossibility. Let's just say that the False Positives are over 50% (the government admitted in the quote from the very top of the post that, "most abnormal mammograms are false-positives"). Throw in the False Negatives and the absolute best you could hope for was 30% accuracy. Could be why recent studies are leading some doctors to conclude that women who get regular mammograms have a better chance of dying of Breast Cancer than those who do not get mammograms at all.
Patients who are not aware of this information are sitting ducks to be cajoled into doing things they do not want to do (I spoke of the same thing going on with appendicitis in THIS recent post on CT Scans --- a scenario that happened to our family three years ago). I have included a sample conversation from the average doctor's office to help you understand the situation. PATIENT: But doctor Smith, I really don't want to have that mammogram. I read on the internet that they aren't all they've been cracked up to be. DR. SMITH: I'm sorry Mrs. Jones, but if you don't agree to get the test, you'll have to find another doctor. And really; you should stop putting so much faith in articles you find on the internet. You know you can't trust any of that stuff anyway. Especially if it comes from Dr. Schierling's site. Trust me instead. I'm a doctor. This scenario is playing out all over the United States. The bottom line is that if you are a female who is concerned about Breast Cancer, whether for yourself, your daughters, or grand-daughters, you need to educate yourself. In my humble opinion, the best thing you can do is to stop the process before it starts ---- after all, this is what the word "Prevention" really means.
How do you prevent Breast Cancer? You would prevent it the same way you would try to prevent any Cancer --- or for that matter, practically any disease period (HERE). One of the very first things you need to do is to understand the relationship between Estrogen and Female Cancers. From there you can begin learning about something called "ESTROGEN DOMINANCE". Another important step in this puzzle would be figuring out how to resolve Estrogen Dominance before it begins fueling cellular mutations of the breast (HERE). As always, never take my word for anything. The internet has placed huge amounts of valuable information at your finger tips. Like I stated earlier, knowledge is power. Empower yourself and your family by learning more about Breast Cancer and the ways to stop it dead in its tracks before it ever has a chance to gain a hold in your life.
ESTROGEN ESTROGEN ESTROGEN
"Xenoestrogens are chemicals that imitate estrogen. Synthetic xenoestrogens are widely used industrial compounds, such as PCBs, BPA and phthalates [plastics], which have estrogenic effects on living organisms." Wikipedia
"The burden of environmentally induced cancers has been grossly underestimated." The conclusions of the 240 page President's Cancer Panel Report (2010) titled Reducing Cancer Risks; What We can do Now. One of the worst offenders of the all the chemicals that were looked at? Benzene.
We will get to the reasons that this is such a big health concern in a moment, but I want to first talk for a moment about where this flood of estrogen-like chemicals (Xenohormones / Xenoestrogens) is coming from. A simple way to think of this is by likening the relationship between estrogen and xenoestrogen, to the relationship between Gluten and Gluten Cross-reactors. Over the past several decades, GLUTEN (Wheat Protein) has, for a NUMBER OF DIFFERENT REASONS, been technologically altered until it is a very different product than the Gluten our forefathers consumed. Because of this, many people have Immune System reactions to it, and are considered to be "sensitive" to it.
Because your body recognizes various substances according to their molecular shape (example below), foods that have a close enough molecular structure / shape to Gluten will be recognized by certain people's bodies as Gluten ---- even though it is not Gluten. One of the more common of these is coffee. This phenomenon is known as GLUTEN CROSS-REACTIVITY. It's almost like a skeleton key that fits in any number of different locks. Unfortunately, the very same principle can be seen with certain synthetic or petro-chemicals as well --- particularly a chemical called Benzene.
Estrogen is chemical compound made up of six-sided rings. Benzene is a very simple six sided ring. When you look at the two side by side, you can begin to see how the body could be fooled. This is particularly scary considering that Benzene is known to be one of the most toxic, widely used chemicals on the planet. When you smell glue, paint, gasoline, detergent, automobile exhaust, cigarette smoke (50% of America's exposure comes from cigarette smoke), or almost anything else with a chemical or artifical smell (even a pleasant chemical smell), you are likely inhaling Benzene. Benzene has been associated with a wide array of illnesses and cancers, as well as being a known "ENDOCRINE SYSTEM DISRUPTOR". When you 'disrupt' the ENDOCRINE SYSTEM, there can be hell to pay in practically every different system in your body. Remember this when you look at the list below.
ESTROGEN DOMINANCE: WHAT IS IT?
Estrogen Dominance is a term every woman should be familiar with. PMS, infertility, post menopausal symptoms, and breast cancer often relate to Estrogen Dominance. Estrogen Dominance doesn’t mean that a woman is high in estrogen. Rather, it means that the estrogenic effects are stronger than the (counterbalancing) progesterone effects. If we think of the analogy of the body as a car, the estrogen would be the accelerator (stimulant) and the progesterone (calmer) would be the brakes. We could have too little ‘accelerator’ function and still be crashing into cars because our ‘brakes’ are even weaker. Bruce Rind M.D., National Integrated Health Associates
- Accelerated Aging
- ALLERGIES / CHRONIC SINUSITIS and other INFLAMMATORY CONDITIONS
- AUTOIMMUNITY, including THYROID
- Breast Cancer/ Breast Tenderness
- Cervical Cancer
- Chronic Fatigue / Adrenal Fatigue (FIBROMYALGIA) / Brain Fog / Memory Loss
- DIMINISHED LIBIDO
- DEPRESSION / Anxiety/ Rage / Mood Swings
- Early Onset of Puberty (this is truly out of control in numerous countries around the world)
- Endometriosis / Uterine Cancer/ Fibroids
- HEADACHES / MIGRAINES
- BLOOD SUGAR DYSREGULATION problems, including HYPOGLYCEMIA / SUGAR AND CARB ADDICTION
- INFERTILITY / PCOS
- SYMPATHETIC DOMINANCE
- Weight Gain --- particularly ABDOMINAL OBESITY / Bloating
- Many Others
DEALING WITH ESTROGEN DOMINANCE NATURALLY
- DON'T HEAT PLASTIC SUBSTANCES, RUBBER, OR CELLOPHANE-LIKE WRAPPERS IN YOUR MICROWAVE OVEN:
- BEWARE OF COMMERCIALLY RAISED MEAT OR POULTRY PRODUCTS:
- USE SOMETHING OTHER THAN "THE PILL":
- BEWARE OF PERFUMES, SCENTS, AND VIRTUALLY ALL BEAUTY PRODUCTS:
- BEWARE OF HOUSEHOLD CLEANING PRODUCTS THAT HAVE "NICE" SMELLS:
- AVOID HERBICIDES AND PESTICIDES:
- AVOID PHTHALATES & METHYL PARABEN:
- KNOW YOUR SUNSCREENS: Five specific chemicals to avoid here include benzophenone-3, homosalate, 4-methyl-benzylidene camphor (4-MBC), octyl-methoxycinnamate and octyl-dimethyl-PABA.
- REMEMBER THAT SUGAR TURNS MEN INTO WOMEN AND WOMEN INTO MEN (HERE)
Let me throw you one more 'bone' in your fight against Xenoestrogens. For decades, soy has been promoted as a this fantastic "health food" --- a "super food" if you will. Unfortunately, this is a complete and total myth. Nothing could be farther from the truth. You should never consume soy unless the soy has been fermented. Why? Because soy is a Phyto-Estrogen (plant-based Estrogen). For more information, you can read Dr. Tim O'Shea's paper called The Magic Bean.
Beyond simple avoidance of Estrogen and Xenoestrogens, there are some other things you can do if you believe you are suffering from Estrogen Dominance. Finding a Functional Medicine practitioner can be helpful, but there are some things you can do for yourself in the meantime. The first thing I would suggest is to follow some GENERIC RECOMMENDATIONS that are true for almost anything that ails you. Now let's tackle some of the recommendations specifically for use by the Estrogen Dominant person.
- STUDY THE ISSUE: As I have always said, knowledge is power. Do not blindly listen to any doctor --- including myself. Several hours of studying this issue on the internet, and you will likely know more about this common problem than your doctor. Speaking of your doctor; don't be surprised if you get a deer-in-the-headlights look or eye-roll if you mention 'Estrogen Dominance' in their presence. There are lots and lots of great websites on this topic. Beware of sites whose sole goal is to sell you something. There are many good sites with information concerning specific foods to add to or remove from your diet, or specific chemical products to really watch out for. After you have studied, sit down and create a written outline of how you are going to tackle your Estrogen Dominance. Wouldn't hurt you to have an accountability partner as well. Odds are, you know several women (and probably some men) with this problem.
- MAKE SURE YOU ARE GETTING LOTS OF FIBER: When my family juices, I usually eat the pulp on my lunchtime salad. Fiber is critical for dealing with Estrogen Dominance because it binds to the Estrogen and facilitates your ability to excrete it from the body ---- instead of reabsorbing it over and over again. Word of warning here: DO NOT buy into the myth that Whole Grains are a good source of fiber (I personally prefer ground Flax Seeds, although some will tell you to steer clear). If you are dealing with very many of the symptoms of Estrogen Dominance, you can almost assure yourself that you are GLUTEN SENSITIVE as well. This not only means that you are almost surely dairy-sensitive also, but that you are probably AUTOIMMUNE on top of everything else. Again, the PALEO DIET is the best way to deal with this entire scenario.
- DETOX YOUR LIVER: When it comes to Estrogen Dominance, dealing with your liver is critical. This is because your liver is the organ that essentially filters / removes / breaks down excess Estrogen in your body so that you can get rid of it. One of the best resources for learning about liver detox is Dr. Sandra Cabot (MD) of Australia. You can also read a SHORT ARTICLE I wrote on the subject.
- TAKE THE CORRECT SUPPLEMENTS: The link I left you under "Generic" above is going to give you some of the generic supplements you'll need to take for inflammation (the two biggies are PFGO for INFLAMMATION, and PROBIOTICS for GUT HEALTH). However, there is at least one other supplement that I would highly recommend taking specifically for Estrogen Dominance. Vitex / Chaste Tree is one of the best and most popular supplements for this problem, although there are a slew of others; all different from each other depending on who you read. The truth is, the supplements are not nearly as important as is your diet.
- RELAXATION TECHNIQUES AND DEEP BREATHING: Exercise will get you breathing hard. However, once you read the next section on Breast Cancer, you will see why good breathing habits / PROPER OXYGENATION are absolutely critical for properly dealing with Estrogen Dominance.
TREATING YOUR PROBLEM WITH
NATURAL PROGESTERONE CREAMS?
WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING WARNING
Did you notice the last bullet point on the first list above? It is 'Weight Gain'. Let me tell you why this presents such a dilemma when it comes to Estrogen Dominance. Not only does estrogen cause weight gain via an increase in fatty tissue (this is why beef farmers give "hormones" to their cattle), but the real bite-in-the-hind end that few people talk about is the fact that fat cells, right along with the ovaries, actually manufacture ---- correct again ----- estrogen.
ESTROGEN AND BREAST CANCER
There is an overwhelming amount of information on Breast Cancer online. The truth is, if you want to make yourself an expert on the subject (if you are at risk, you should), there is so much information online that you could never possibly wade through it all. I am going to keep this section brief by spending only two or three paragraphs talking about the Estrogen / Breast Cancer link.
Because the majority (over 3/4) of Breast Cancers in America are fueled by Estrogen), your lifetime exposure to Estrogen, whether natural, synthetic, or pseudo (Xenoestrogens) play a huge part in determining whether or not you will get Breast Cancer over the course of your lifetime --- or whether or not you will relapse after taking the "cure". This is why women take drugs like Tamoxifen and Femara to "block" Estrogen for several years after successful treatment of their CANCER.
All Cancers, including cancer of the breast, tend to develop in similar fashion. Firstly, the body becomes oxygen deprived, toxic, and acidic --- usually due to a poor diet. The breast tends to act as a magnet for Cancer because of the close proximity of glandular tissue (the milk glands are highly responsive to estrogen) to fat cells (fat cells tend to accumulate toxins). As the cells in the glandular tissue of the breast struggle to survive in this increasingly acidic and poorly oxygenated environment, they begin to mutate. This allows them to produce energy from SUGAR (fermentation), instead of using oxygen. The whole process continues to feed itself as well as increasing the rate of cell replication (already a problem in Cancer --- read the articles in the link from the preceding paragraph on "Sugar Feeds Cancer").
Although I do not claim for one moment to be any sort of expert on Cancer, I do know that the vast majority of disease processes START IN SIMILAR FASHION. Who would I trust to take care of me if I had Cancer? That's an easy one to answer. One of the most brilliant minds on the subject is Dr. Kevin Connors of Minneapolis, Minnesota. He is on the cutting edge of Functional Neurology / Functional Medicine. Hopefully you will never need his expertise in this area.
BREAST CANCER, MASTECTOMY, SCAR TISSUE, AND CHRONIC PAIN
COULD THERE BE A SOLUTION FOR YOU?
"What we are really trying to get across is that this post-mastectomy pain is something that doesn't necessarily go away." Dr. Ognjen Visnjevac, MD, anesthesiologist at State University as told to MedPage Today during an interview at the annual meeting of the American Pain Society.
"By breaking up those fibers, you can actually improve mobility, decrease pain and increase range of motion." Dr. Shelley Hwang, Chief of Breast Surgery at the Buck Breast Care Center, University of California San Francisco.
One of the many treatments for breast cancer involves removing the breast (MASTECTOMY). It should be noted that some studies say that incidence of mastectomies are increasing in America, while other studies say they are falling. Regardless of who you believe, approximately 40% of those diagnosed with Breast Cancer will undergo a mastectomy. Although this procedure goes off without a hitch for the majority of women, a large percentage end up with chronic post-surgical pain. In fact, this problem is common enough that it has its own name (Post-Mastectomy Pain Syndrome or PMPS).
Google "Mastectomy Chronic Pain" and you'll get nearly 70,000 hits. This is not surprising considering such a large percentage of women undergoing mastectomy end up with PMPS, which is defined as having, "pain located in the area of the surgery or same-side arm, present at least 4 days per week and with an average intensity of at least 3 on a scale from 0 to 10". Here are some statements made by the medical profession concerning PMPS.
Although recent advances in the diagnostic and surgical procedures have reduced the frequency of the more invasive surgical procedures, there still is a considerable risk of developing PMPS after treatment of breast cancer. Department of Surgery, Odense University Hospital as published in the August 2008 issue of the British Journal of Cancer.
Post-Mastectomy Pain, also known as post-mastectomy pain syndrome (PMPS), is a type of chronic postoperative pain. PMPS is pain that persists after a mastectomy or other type of breast surgery is performed. Procedures that may lead to post-mastectomy pain include total mastectomy, partial mastectomy, lumpectomy and even breast reconstruction. From the website of the American Chronic Pain Association.
Current literature illustrates that PMPS has an alarmingly high incidence (20-57%, but has been reported as high as 82% in one study). Despite various strategies of prevention or therapy, PMPS often persists for many years for those patients who are diagnosed with this syndrome (greater than 50% of patients still report pain at an average 9-year post-op follow-up). The national burden from this often unrecognized but commonly occurring condition is staggering. From a study done at University of Buffalo (NY) and published in the April 2013 issue of The Journal of Pain.
Although I could have included dozens more quotes, this last study, published a mere 6 months ago, is truly a shocker. Although the authors did not do any specific research themselves, they did a literature review of nearly 30 studies on the topic. At a three year follow-up, fully half of women who underwent mastectomy were dealing with PMPS. Furthermore, they stated that almost 1 in 5 women who have undergone mastectomy, have NEUROGENIC PAIN a decade after the fact. There are an estimated 1.2 million women in the U.S. who deal with PMPS. The financial burden for PMPS is thought to be in the 2.5 billion dollar a year range, which does not include loss of workplace productivity, family and social costs, or counseling costs.
WHAT CAUSES THE PAIN ASSOCIATED WITH PMPS?
SCAR TISSUE is normal tissue that has been physically deranged (click on the link for lots of pictures). In other words, tissue that should be aligned all nice and neatly like well-combed hair, becomes matted, tangled, and twisted into a restricted clump due to the surgery ---- sort of like a hairball. Not only is Scar Tissue extremely immobile and restrictive, it is up to 1,000 times more pain-sensitive than normal tissue. Couple this with the fact that you cannot see FASCIA on MRI, and you set the table for Chronic Pain's "PERFECT STORM". This is true whether one is having a complete mastectomy, or reconstruction / implants. Read the quote below from Roni Caryn Rabin in the May 20, 2013 issue of the New York Times.
Even with the best plastic surgeon, breast reconstruction carries the risks of infection, bleeding, anesthesia complications, scarring and persistent pain in the back and shoulder. Implants can rupture or leak, and may need to be replaced. If tissue is transplanted to the breast from other parts of the body, there will be additional incisions that need to heal. If muscle is removed, long-term weakness may result. A syndrome called upper quarter dysfunction — its symptoms include pain, restricted immobility and impaired sensation and strength — has been reported in over half of breast cancer survivors and may be more frequent in those who undergo breast reconstruction, according to a 2012 study in the medical journal 'Cancer'.
SIDE NOTE TO THIS ISSUE:
Although there have been other similar studies published on this topic, BIG PHARMA, under the guise of the medical community, keeps churning out studies saying that HRT and Breast Cancer are not related. In fact, a brand new study said that while HRT with multiple hormones is counterproductive, straight estrogen is a long-term cancer preventative. Be very cautious about trusting studies like this. Don't take any doctor's word for anything (self included). Do your own research to find out what is best for you and your family. HERE is a starting point, followed by THIS.
BREAST CANCER SCREENINGS
GOOD or BAD?
Mammograms increase the incidence of diagnosed cancer in the following two ways.
- By detecting tumors earlier than they would have been otherwise found.
- By detecting tumors that would never have been clinically apparent in the woman's life.
Seven years ago, Norwegian women ages 50 to 69, were allowed to have a mammogram every other year using public health data from their government-run health system, Kalager and colleagues and his team looked at the statistics. They determined that Norway's over-diagnosis rate was a whopping one in four (25%). After looking at the data in a different manner, they still estimated the over-diagonisis to be as high as 20%.
When the rate of breast cancer diagnosis is added to the rate of breast cancer over-diagnosis (and the subsequent over-treatment, and mortality / morbidity associated with this process), their stats showed that one breast cancer death per 2,500 women was prevented.
This led experts Drs. Joann Elmore, MD, of the University of Washington, and Suzanne Fletcher, MD, of Harvard Medical School to publish their own research in the very same journal. These two well-respected breast cancer experts wrote in the Annals of Internal Medicine that, "Evaluating strategies for observing change in some lesions over time instead of recommending an immediate biopsy has been suggested. Unless serious efforts are made to reduce the frequency of overdiagnosis, the problem will probably increase."
As a side note to this issue, our own State Department's website on Norwegian travel states that, "Healthcare in Norway is very expensive and healthcare providers sometimes require payment at time of service." Norway's tax rate is approaching 50% of their GDP. They are one of the many nations that the AHA (Obamacare) is being modeled after.
WHAT ABOUT SELF BREAST EXAMS?
Let me say that none of these people are telling women not to do self examinations. They are simply telling them that self examinations do not prevent breast cancer like they have been led to believe. Rather than belabor this issue, be sure to read the position paper by the National Breast Cancer Coalition (HERE). Or you could read all my posts on BREAST CANCER.
Dr. Schierling completed four years of Kansas State University's five-year Nutrition / Exercise Physiology Program before deciding on a career in Chiropractic. He graduated from Logan Chiropractic College in 1991, and has run a busy clinic in Mountain View, Missouri ever since. He and his wife Amy have four children (three daughters and a son).
Brain Based Therapy
Can You Help
Cardio Or Strength
Cold Laser Therapy
Death By Medicine
Degenerative Joint Disease
D's Of Chronic Pain
Evidence Based Medicine
Gluten Cross Reactivity
Ice Or Heat
Jacks Fork River
Leaky Gut Syndrome
Number One Health Problem
Platelet Rich Therapy
Post Surgical Scarring
Re Invent Yourself
Rib And Chest Pain
Scar Tissue Removal
Sleeping Pills Kill
Stay Or Go
Stretching Post Treatment
Tensegrity And Fascia
The Big Four
Thoracic Outlet Syndrome
Whole Body Vibration