Many women, including some doctors, fear mammograms are causing over-treatment and mammogram radiation is resulting in more cases of cancer.
According to a study in The New England Journal of Medicine, between 1976 and 2008, 1.3 million U.S. women received unnecessary and invasive cancer treatments, including surgery, radiobiology, hormone therapy, and chemotherapy.
This is in large part due to routine mammograms detecting harmless tumors.
Other studies conducted in European countries have concluded that mammograms reduce the risk of death from cancer by less than 10% or not at all.
But when combined with anatomical testing, breast thermography can reduce the number of false positives and over-treatment of breast cancer by demonstrating whether a tumor is metabolically active or not.
Mammogram Radiation Puts Young Women at Risk
More than 20,000 cases of breast cancer have been reported annually in U.S. women under the age of 40.
Unfortunately, when cancer strikes a younger woman, it is typically a more aggressive form and is less likely to respond to treatment.
But despite this greater risk, younger women have been consistently neglected by traditional breast cancer screenings, and besides mammography, there is currently no other routine screening test for women under the age of 40.
Thermography, on the other hand, offers an ideal test for this age group, especially considering that it’s radiation-free.
If you’d like to learn more about the dangers of mammogram radiation, check out the video below from NutritionFacts.org.
Offering Breast, Upper Body, and Full Body Exams
Contact me to book your thermography appointment today.
As a thermographer, I have imaged thousands of women, and one of the most common things I find is lymphatic backup, which can be caused by wearing a bra.
Every time I see this, it provides a poignant reminder of the fact that wearing a bra can put your breasts at risk of breast disease and even breast cancer.
It’s these kinds of findings that make me even more grateful for the research of experts like Sydney Ross Singer.
His findings are crucial for women who want to take control of their breast health, and he was nice enough to let me publish another one of his articles, which you can read below:
Have you or someone you know been harmed by wearing bras?
If so, then you could become a co-plaintiff in a future class action lawsuit against the bra and cancer industries.
Product liability applies to garments, as well as other consumer products, and bras are known to cause health problems, including everything from headaches and back pain to nerve compression and tingling in the hands.
Bras have been shown to affect digestion, breathing, and even menstruation since they also interfere with the sympathetic nervous system.
Bras can also constrict the lymphatic system, which is the circulatory pathway of the immune system.
This causes reduced lymph and blood circulation, toxin accumulation, and reduced immune function, which can lead to breast pain, cysts, and even cancer.
The degree of damage that a bra can cause depends on the bra’s material, its toxic chemical content, how tightly it’s worn, the length of time it’s worn daily, and the number of years it has been worn.
According to the 1991-93 US Bra and Breast Cancer Study, documented in Dressed to Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras, bra-free women have about the same risk of breast cancer as men, and the tighter and longer a bra is worn the higher the risk rises, to over 100 times higher for a 24/7 bra user compared to a bra-free woman.
Since that groundbreaking study, numerous other studies worldwide have confirmed a bra-cancer link.
The Lymph Connection
The lymphatic system consists of microscopic vessels that originate in the tissue space and lead to larger, but still tiny vessels that ultimately enter a lymph node. These nodes are bean-sized filters lined by white blood cells. This is the front line of the immune system.
Most of a breast’s lymph nodes are in the armpit. If the nodes detect a virus, cancer cell, or other foreign or hazardous substance in the tissue fluid, they begin an immune response by producing white blood cells to combat the problem.
Once through the lymph node, the fluid works its way through larger lymphatic vessels back to the heart and the bloodstream.
One important fact about the lymphatic system is that it is a passive drainage system. While the bloodstream delivers fluid under the pumping pressure of the heart, the lymphatic system has no pressure. Its flow is influenced by gravity, breathing, exercise, movement, and massage, and it is kept moving toward the lymph nodes by one-way valves.
The slightest constriction or compression of the tissue can close down the tiny lymphatic vessels, inhibiting lymph flow and leading to fluid accumulation, cysts, pain, and tenderness.
This fluid congestion within the tissue is called lymphedema.
Bras + Toxins = Cancer
The toxins that are within the breast tissue include some biochemical products of tissue edema, such as free radicals, which are known to cause cancer.
In addition, there are toxins in our air, food, and water, including pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, plastics, and other products of our petrochemically polluted world. Many of these are known to cause cancer, and we deliver these toxins to all our tissues each day through the bloodstream.
It is the job of the lymphatic system to remove these toxins, but bras can inhibit this process by compressing and constricting the breasts.
This is how bras cause breast cancer.
Cancer-causing toxins are delivered to the breast tissue by the bloodstream and are kept there by the bra. The toxins are the bullets, and the bra holds them in place, pointed directly at the breasts.
In addition, cancer cells that spontaneously develop in germ cells of the breast tissue cannot be properly removed from the breasts when the lymphatics are impaired. This means the body cannot effectively kill these seeds of cancer, allowing cancers to develop.
The breasts are the most clothing-constricted of any organ, and this explains why women have more cancer in the breast than anywhere else in their bodies.
It also explains why women have more breast cancer than men, and why breast cancer is only a problem in cultures in which bras are worn.
Where there are no bras, there is virtually no breast cancer.
If you feel you have been harmed by wearing a bra, please reach out to Sydney Ross Singer at sydsinger@gmail.com.
When you get home, after you take off your shoes, what’s the next thing you take off? Probably your bra.
But if society didn’t dictate wearing a bra, would you? Are you at a loss to find a comfortable bra? And if your breasts could talk, what do you think they would say?
He has studied the health impact of wearing bras around the world. Please enjoy this article, which he has given me permission to share:
Of all the body parts, the breasts would probably have the most to say, if they only could. But even if breasts could talk, would women listen?
In modern Western culture, breasts have taken on more than their biological role as mammary glands to feed babies. Breasts are cultural icons, sexualized and fetishized through the use of a special garment constructed to alter the shape and position of the breasts on the chest wall, to limit breast movement, and to hide the nipples. The garment, of course, is the brassiere, or bra.
How Do the Breasts Feel in a Bra?
Are they comfortable being compressed, constricted, and reshaped? When a bra leaves marks on the skin, it is from compression. This interferes with circulation in the breasts of blood and lymph. The result is pain, cysts, and ultimately, breast cancer.
This woman has not been wearing a bra for 15 minutes prior to her thermography exam. The red in her upper torso is lymphatic backup.
Of course, most women are introduced to bra usage when they reach puberty, as a rite of passage into womanhood and a future of needing to manage their breast appearance.
The “training bra” breaks the girls in, as they get used to the discomfort of having a tight band around the chest. After that, girls don’t think about the discomfort so much, or at least they learn to subordinate their breast discomfort to the mandates of fashion and society.
In other words, girls become desensitized to the feeling of their breasts through the use of bras. The chronic constriction of daily bra usage, however, does take a toll on breast health, leading to lymphatic stagnation, or lymph-stasis, with associated tissue toxification and eventual deterioration.
You can’t have healthy breasts if you have poor circulation from wearing tight bras daily. Circulate or deteriorate. The choice is each woman’s, although the fashion industry would like to make that choice for all women, turning breasts into fashion accessories.
Meanwhile, the breasts are crying for help, but are told to just shut up and put up with it.
Culture Has Usurped the Breasts for Fashion
Women are culturally compelled to wear bras to be socially accepted.
A fetish garment for the breasts that serves no biological purpose, and can also cause harm, is the standard of dress for women, even for professional women whose work has no relevance to a breast fetish.
The cultural programming needed to achieve this remarkable commitment to breast obsession has resulted in a cultural blind spot to the hazards of wearing tight bras.
As a result, the bra has become the leading cause of breast disease. Circulation of blood and lymph is essential for health, and any tight garment interferes with circulation. Women wear bras daily, often for 12 or more hours and sometimes 24/7. Over time, the constriction takes its toll.
And since bra use is universal throughout the culture, it’s hard to find bra-free women with whom to compare breast health with those who use bras. In order to see the problems caused by wearing bras, you need to have a comparison with bra-free breasts.
How Can You Tell if a Bra Is Causing Harm?
Bras are known to cause health problems, from headaches and back pain to nerve compression and tingling in the hands.
Bras have been shown to affect digestion, breathing, and even menstruation since bras also interfere with the sympathetic nervous system.
Bras constrict the lymphatic system, which is the circulatory pathway of the immune system. This causes reduced lymph and blood circulation, toxin accumulation, and reduced immune function, which leads to breast pain, cysts, and cancer.
The degree of damage from bras depends on the bra material and its toxic chemical content, its tightness, the length of time it is worn daily, and the number of years it has been worn.
Stop wearing a bra and see how it makes you feel. If bras have been harming you in some way, you will feel better when you stop wearing them.
If you feel you have been harmed by wearing a bra, please reach out to Sydney Ross Singer at sydsinger@gmail.com.
According to the 1991-93 US Bra and Breast Cancer Study, documented in Dressed to Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras, bra-free women have about the same risk of breast cancer as men, while the tighter and longer the bra is worn the higher the risk rises, to over 100 times higher for a 24/7 bra user compared to a bra-free woman. Since that groundbreaking study, numerous other studies worldwide have confirmed a bra-cancer link.
Bras are also used as medical devices, worn tightly to stop lactation. And while a tight bra can cause breast lymphedema, bras are also used as a compression garment to manage lymphedema. Clearly, bras have an impact on breast function and circulation.
Despite the fact that bras affect the health of the breasts, bras are sold without any wearing instructions or warning labels. While manufacturers provide sizing charts, these do not mention the problems with wearing ill-fitting bras. In addition, many styles of bras are constrictive and tight by design, such as push-up and strapless bras, even if worn at the recommended size. There is also no mention of the maximum recommended wearing time for these garments.
Some bra manufacturers have responded to the consumer demand for more comfortable and healthy clothing, developing less toxic materials and more comfortable, less constrictive designs.
However, the lingerie industry may still be found liable for the harm caused by its products, and bras may eventually be required to have instructions about tightness and limiting the time that they’re worn.
Once again, we find ourselves in the pinkwashing month of October.
Known as Breast Cancer Awareness Month, this time of year ushers in a flurry of pink ribbons, and the war-like mantra, “Catch it early, save a life and save a breast.”
Yet we still have no cure in sight. Just treatments.
Fortunately, there are options. Women can also consider using infrared imaging or thermography for their breast cancer screening.
This technology can detect very small differences in temperature and “see” the blood vessels in breast tissue.
Density, size, cysts, and other variables do not make any difference.
Whatever the case may be, seeing blood vessels is important because tumors develop new blood vessels to supply nutrients for new growth, whereas lumps without a blood supply are at a much lower risk of being cancerous.
That being said, this test provides early information about breast cancer risk that also allows ample time for lifestyle changes that can further minimize your risk of developing breast cancer.
So, considering this is Breast Cancer Awareness Month, let’s focus on true breast health awareness by looking at ways to prevent cancer at the cellular level, such as minimizing our exposure to environmental toxins.
True Breast Health Awareness
I know I’ve addressed this in a previous blog, but it bears repeating that detoxing from foreign estrogens and chemicals is a must for maintaining good health in the long term.
When it comes to breast cancer, the greatest concern is exposure to a group of toxins called endocrine disruptors, which are chemicals and byproducts that mimic the effects of estrogen in the body or cause estrogen to act in a way that isn’t normal.
Using these products in combination with hundreds of other chemicals that we come in contact with on a daily basis may increase the risk of several cancers.
The average adult is exposed to 126 chemicals every day just in their personal care products alone. So, if you want to be healthy, being educated on the latest toxins is a must!
At the same time, it’s just as important to point out how we’re being exposed to these toxins.
Much of our exposure comes from chemicals in household and personal care products, along with food, plastics, air, water, synthetic fabrics, such as polyester, and of course, exposure to ionizing radiation from health care procedures.
Whatever it is you’re being exposed to, make sure to keep this stuff in mind so you can work to minimize the toxins you’re being subjected to in your daily life.
The Connection Between Plastics and Breast Cancer
The connection between plastics and breast cancer was first discovered in 1987 at Tufts Medical School in Boston by research scientists Dr. Ana Soto and Dr. Carlos Sonnenschein.
In the midst of their experiments on cancer cell growth, endocrine-disrupting chemicals leached from plastic test tubes into the researcher’s laboratory experiment, causing a rampant proliferation of breast cancer cells.
In addition, Spanish researchers, Fatima and Nicolas Olea, tested metal food cans that were lined with plastic.
Around 50% of the cans tested were found to be leaching hormone-disrupting chemicals, and the levels of contamination were 27 times more than the amount a Stanford team reported was enough to make breast cancer cells proliferate.
Reportedly, 85% of the food cans in the United States are lined with plastic. Both of these findings were published in Environmental Health Perspectives.
So, if you want to reduce your exposure to these chemicals, make sure to do whatever you can to avoid exposing yourself to plastics, like only purchasing cans that say BPA-free.
Whatever you choose to do, these studies show that plastics are simply not good for us, and this is reflected in the increase in breast cancer that has coincided with the proliferation of plastics. Prior to 1940, breast cancer was relatively rare; today it affects one in eight women.
Now, let’s talk about polyester.
This fabric is soft, smooth, and supple, but it is still made from plastic, and this contributes to our body’s burden in ways that we are just beginning to understand.
For example, polyester is highly flammable, and it’s often treated with a flame retardant, which increases its toxic load.
Now, at this point, many of you are probably thinking that there’s no need to worry, as you’ve lived this long being exposed to these chemicals and haven’t had a problem.
But remember, the human body can only withstand a certain amount of toxins, and those endocrine-disrupting chemicals that don’t seem to bother you could end up affecting you years down the road.
What You Can Do to Reduce Your Risk
A healthy lifestyle, coupled with an effort to minimize your exposure to toxins can help protect your breasts and lower your risk.
At the same time, experts say early detection methods are key, and thermography is the earliest and most effective way of detecting breast cancer without radiation, in tandem with an ultrasound.
Thermography can also identify your levels of estrogen dominance and environmental contaminants, such as xenoestrogens and Bisphenol A (BPA), which attach to the receptor sites of breasts and mimic our natural estrogens.
Estrogens affect breast tissue, showing up as distinct heat patterns that can be seen on thermal imaging. The textbook appearance is one of “leopard spots” or hypervascularization.
Routine hormonal panels do not test for these estrogens, which are linked to the alarming and increasingly common issue seen in thermographic screenings known as fibrocystic breast syndrome AKA estrogen dominance.
With that in mind, if you want to maintain the health of your breasts, you need to know what’s going on with them, and only thermography can provide you with a visual image that can assess the severity of this syndrome.
This can be used as a preventative adjunctive screening for identifying signs of abnormal pathology years before conventional anatomical screenings.
It’s safe, environmentally friendly, radiation-free, and also safe for pregnant or nursing mothers, young dense breasts, fibrocystic breasts, and even implants.
In any case, it’s time for women to take action to reduce their risk, become informed consumers, and make concerted efforts to analyze their environments.
This involves things like reading product labels to avoid purchasing products that could harm you or your family.
You can also work with a holistic healthcare practitioner to detoxify your body.
All things considered, practicing radical self-care is becoming increasingly important, and living in a sea of toxins is not to be ignored. Health is wealth!
That being said, if you want to prioritize the health of your breasts by evaluating and monitoring them on a cellular level, thermographic imaging is your best option.
To understand the process of using thermography for detecting breast cancer, we must first understand physiology. We are not looking for breast cancer itself per say, but physiological changes that may be involved with its formation and growth. Breast cancer can cause inflammation due to tissue disruption, or through the development of new blood vessels that feed the tumor — a process known as angiogenesis.
However, some physiological changes can also make it more difficult to detect breast cancer, such as a symphatic response that causes hypothermia in the tissue around a tumor. This is why following up is so important, as thermography and other anatomical tests can evaluate the body over time and under different physiological states. Physiology is key, and we should be mindful of the signs and obstacles when trying to detect breast cancer as early as possible.
More on ANGIOGENESIS…
by Kimberly Lavoie, ACNP-BC, CCRN, SCRN
As Dr. Piana stated, angiogenesis is the formation of new blood vessels from previously existing blood vessel plexus. This process involves the growth of endothelial cells, which line the inside walls of blood vessels. It is supportive in the healing of wounds and granulation of tissues. Physiological angiogenesis is a normal and vital process in growth and development specifically, during fetal development, female reproductive cycle, and tissue repair. The fine balance between pro-angiogenic growth factor (GF), anti-angiogenic GF, and cytokines tightly regulate angiogenesis.
Whereas, an uncontrolled or inadequate balance of angiogenesis plays a pivotal role in pathological angiogenesis and promotes the formation of neoplasms, retinopathies, coronary artery disease, and other various disease processes. Tumors are dependent on angiogenesis and need vascular growth to transition from a benign to a malignant state. In the absence of vascular growth, tumors are not sustainable. With increased vascular activity generating heat, thermography can aid in early detection.
The mammogram industry has created a view towards dense breasts that is rather demeaning, as if having dense breasts is similar to a disease. The truth of the matter is, dense breasts are perfectly healthy and normal.
The reason dense breasts have been stigmatized is because mammograms have a difficult time identifying tumors within higher density breasts. This could be caused by the breast being as dense as the tumor, making it hard to distinguish. A way of understanding this is if you were taking an X-Ray of an ice cube that was frozen in a slab of ice. This would cause it to appear no different than the rest of the surrounding area, because the density is the same.
Standards for mammograms have been specifically created around this idea that dense breasts are a nuisance or disease. This is why a few years ago the age recommendation for a mammogram was increased to the age of 50, based on the idea that breast density lowers with age. Still, many women in their 50s have dense breasts.
Another issue is that research studies related to the accuracy of mammograms have adjusted their research perimeters to not include women with dense breasts, despite them being over half of the population. The findings of the studies have shown greater results for mammogram screening, but ultimately they do not reflect well for the general population when identifying tumors.
This isn’t to say that other tests are perfect, though. As an example, thermography has similar limitations when it comes to breast size, obesity, and breast implants. This is why it is important to discuss information with your clients, so they understand that a combination of tests provide the best results — especially when dealing with dense breasts.
Breast Density and Cancer Risk
by Kimberly Lavoie, ACNP-BC, CCRN, SCRN
Medical literature is often misleading when describing the impact of breast density on cancer risk. Many studies illustrate the risk probability by comparing women in the 10% highest density category (extremely dense) with 10% in the lowest density category (almost entirely fatty breasts). Comparisons such as these are not statistically meaningful to the remaining 80% of women in the middle, nor should risk comparisons be related to such a small subset population.
More on Dense Breasts
Dense breast tissue is a common finding and is not abnormal. Statistics have shown that approximately 50% of women have dense or highly dense breasts.
However, mammography imaging can make it difficult to detect cancer in women with breast densities. Consequently, mammography is less sensitive in women with dense breasts — that is, it is more likely to MISS cancer. This is precisely why Dense Breast Notification Laws have been implemented.
False-negative mammograms result in about 1 in 8 missed cases of breast cancer whereas as false-positive findings can result in over-diagnosis. Over-diagnosing can lead to additional diagnostic testing, invasive procedures, and over-treatment.
According to the American Cancer Society, about 50% of women getting annual mammograms will receive a false-positive finding over a 10-year period. The probability of false-positive findings is even higher when comparison imaging is not available. More than ever we need to continue to educate and help spread THERMOGRAPHIC AWARENESS !!!
MORE examples of mammograms that were reported as “normal” and less than one week later, MRI reveals “CANCER”
Has your state implemented Dense Breast Notification Laws?
Currently, 38 states and the District of Columbia have enacted dense breast notification laws mandating radiologists to include language in their reports informing women of risks related to dense breasts. If you live in a state that does not have a dense breast notification laws, I encourage you to reach out to your local representative today and let your voice be heard.
Tips on Working with Your Doctor for Total Breast Health Care
Patients are always asking me if their doctor will understand their thermography report.
There’s a large spectrum of responses I’ve heard from my patients’ doctors.
Some doctors support thermography so much so, they highly suggest all their patients to have an annual full-body scan. The full-body scan will assess an individual’s current health status by listing any abnormal hot or cold spots throughout the entire body.
Medical thermography is infrared imaging. Ideally, you would use thermography for cancer prevention, but it can also be early cancer detection which could save your life (70% of those who have diagnosed cancers from anatomical testing, could have been found up to 10 years earlier on a thermography scan).
Other doctors have never heard of thermography. Most are somewhere in between.
Here are some tips on working with your doctor:
Let them know we are not looking to replace the traditional tests, only add to them.
Email your report to them and ask for a consult appointment to review your results. A thermologist will compose your thermography report much like how a radiologist will write a report on an X-ray or ultrasound.These reports are meant for your primary care physician to offer you further recommendations based on your results if any are needed.
If you’d like a sample report to review with a Breast Thermography International (BTI), I am happy to discuss it with you or your doctor. Contact me to set up a review.
There is a wide range of suggestions your doctor could give you to improve your next thermography report.
Here are some examples they may recommend:
Change parts of your diet or balance your hormones.
Relieve muscle and joint tension with yoga or other forms of exercise.
Have a chiropractic adjustment.
Meditate with calming music or breath practices, since most diseases can be caused by stress.
Sometimes, although we try our best to live a healthy life, we still may need to reduce toxins with a detox program.
Also your doctor may want to order diagnostics testing from the findings in your report.
These are just some of the many recommendations you and your physician can discuss to work toward a healthier life.
And go ahead and share your thermography report with your family and friends. This might encourage them to include thermography into their own annual health regimen.
Remember, early detection saves lives and prevention is ideal.
This August I was invited to be invited on Mo Akins’ podcast, Health Your Own Way.
Mo and and I had a lovely chat, covering breast cancer symptoms to watch out for, breast cancer prevention, the importance of the immune system, and everything in between. Watch it now!
The number of women diagnosed with breast cancer has been increasing dramatically in recent years.
As a thermographer I can attest to this as I have personally seen an increase in women with fibrocystic breast, suspicious thermographic findings and breast cancer over the past 2 years.
Aren’t we getting tired of these statics?
One out of eight women is diagnosed with the disease with a staggering 4,000 new cases diagnosed weekly.
Every year in the United States, more than 186,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer and more than 41,000 die because of the disease. With the billions dedicated to cancer research only 1-3% spent in research goes to prevention.
Breast cancer is an industry that focuses on treatment, not prevention.
The rhetoric of the war on breast cancer is just that…rhetoric, women want answers to prevent, treat and gain remission from the grip of breast cancer.
Informed women are aware of the actions they can take to minimize their risk of developing breast cancer like reducing exposure to environmental estrogens and other toxins in their body, including:
eating healthy organic produce,
consuming hormone -free animal products,
using natural skin care products,
maintaining optimal levels of vitamin D,
exercising on a regular basis,
maintaining a healthy weight,
ditching their under-wire bras,
healing sexual trauma and
getting a yearly thermogram to monitor the health of their breasts.
However, there is one secret weapon many women are not aware of: the essential mineral known as iodine.
Iodine helps your hormone receptors function properly, giving your hormones the ability to communicate with ease and allowing your moods to be regulated. The breast tissue also requires iodine to remain healthy.
There is growing evidence linking iodine deficiency and:
breast cancer,
fibrocystic breast,
uterine fibroids,
thyroid nodules,
breast cysts,
pancreatic cancer,
prostate cancer,
thyroid cancer and
lower IQ.
Estrogen production becomes unbalanced and dysfunctional, and breast tissue becomes more sensitive to estrogen. Cystic changes occur, increasing the risk of breast cancer. Iodine turns on cancer cell death, apoptosis.
Dr. Dave Derry, breast health specialist, states “iodine enables the excess cells [in the breasts] to be cleared out, and the breast can return to its natural state as the fibrocystic disease slowly disappears from the breast. A lack of iodine in the body can lead to the development of fibrocystic breasts.” You can read more at www.theiodineproject.webs.com
Results obtained in studies of breast health noted that all forms tested: molecular iodine, sodium iodide and potassium iodide produced beneficial results; the best results were achieved with molecular iodine. Molecular iodine comes from sea vegetables.
Without the proper amount of iodine, breast tissue can become fibrocystic or develop precancerous and cancerous lesions.
Recent research shows prolonged deficiencies of iodine can exacerbate or be a contributing factor in the development of breast cancer. Animal studies conducted over 40 years ago showed breast tissue of animals with iodine deficiency developed cancer when the deficiency was not corrected.
The same study showed the risk of breast cancer was directly related to the length of time the iodine deficiency was present. Iodine deficiency is also known to cause fibrocystic breast disease.
It is a pre-cancerous condition of the breast tissue, which makes your breast very painful and fibrous.
Due to the fibrous and dense nature of breast tissue in a fibrocystic state, it is very difficult for doctors to detect the presence of breast cancer.
Iodine supplementation has been shown to significantly decrease breast pain, tenderness, and nodules of women with fibrocystic breast disease.
Iodine can also decrease uterine fibroids.
Japanese women consume a diet high in iodine-rich seaweed, which provides them with an iodine intake twenty-five times higher than the average American woman.
Japanese women also have breast cancer rates roughly one-third of those found in American women, and that disappears in Japanese women who immigrate to the US, where they consume considerably less seaweed.
If you have Graves Disease, or Hashimotos, please consult your physician before supplementing with iodine.
There are three beneficial forms of iodine to nourish multiple body systems. Three forms are optimal because different tissues in the body prefer different forms.
For example, your thyroid tissue absorbs iodine best as potassium iodide, while breast tissue takes up iodine in the form of molecular iodine. Additionally, there is evidence using sodium iodide enhances absorption of the other forms. Iodine supplementation is not just for preventing goiter.
Actually, only a small amount of iodine is really necessary for preventing goiter. But today, doctors have found that all tissues of the body require iodine.
The breasts, ovaries, uterus, thyroid, brain and prostate tissue require iodine.
This is far from a definitive guide to iodine as there is so much information and science out there on the subject. We need to know of its importance in breast health as well as in all endocrine health. Look for the continuation of iodine in the next blog or grab a copy of by book: Thermography and the Fibrocystic and Dense Breast that provides further information.
When we are educated about our breast health, it is empowering. No one loves her breasts as much as you do, and you want to keep them for the rest of your life!
As the holiday season approaches, a gathering would not be complete without a cheese board. Until I started researching the genetically engineered growth hormone called rBGH, I was a hard core grazer at those cheese boards. Not anymore.
This is not new news, but like news, it is released and falls by the way side. It is urgent that women in particular know the dangers that genetically engineered cheese poses to their breast health.
Please seek out organic milk and cheese at your local farmers market and health food stores. For those wanting to avoid cheese altogether, several vegan cheeses have come on the market. There are options.
Thank you Dr. Mercola for permission to share this message.
By Dr. Mercola
Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women. If you’re a woman, your chance of getting breast cancer in your lifetime is about one in eight.
Researchers at a breast cancer conference stated that up to one-third of breast cancers could be avoided by making different lifestyle choices, such as the foods you choose to eat.
There is one food you may be surprised to learn, that is directly linked to breast cancer—and that is pasteurized dairy in the form of milk or milk products.
The risk lies in consuming milk from cows treated with a synthetic, genetically engineered growth hormone called rBGH. Unfortunately, this applies to about one third of the dairy cows in America.
When you consume dairy products from these cows, every product made from their milk is contaminated with this dangerous hormone—be it cheese, ice cream, yogurt, butter—or just plain milk.
Cows are injected with rBGH to boost their milk production.
But science has proven this practice, although profitable to the industry, comes at a high price to you, as well as to dairy cows. RBGH, or recombinant bovine growth hormone, is a synthetic version of natural bovine somatotropin (BST), a hormone produced in cows’ pituitary glands.
Monsanto developed the recombinant version from genetically engineered E. coli bacteria and markets it under the brand name “Posilac.”
RBGH is the largest selling dairy animal drug in America.
But it is banned in Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and in the 27 countries of the European Union because of its dangers to human health. Many have tried to inform the public of the risks of using this hormone in dairy cows, but their attempts have been met with overwhelming opposition by the powerful dairy and pharmaceutical industries, and their government liaisons.
Monsanto Lawyers Threaten “Dire Consequences” for Whistleblowers
In 1997, two Fox-affiliate investigative journalists, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, attempted to air a program exposing the truth about the dangers of rBGH. Lawyers for Monsanto, a major advertiser with the Florida network, sent letters promising “dire consequences” if the story aired.
After attempts by Fox to bribe the reporters to keep quiet failed, the station agreed to air a revised version of the report. An unheard of 83 edits later, the report was shelved and the courts took over. Although a lower court ruled in favor of the reporters for some $425,000, a Florida appeals court denied them whistleblower protection, claiming Fox (and the media in general) have no obligation to tell the truth and have the freedom to report, essentially, fact OR fiction as real news.
They tell their story in an article at PR Watch. (It was taken down)
It is stories like this that reignite my determination to bring you factual information about these important issues regarding your health.
Despite decades of evidence about the dangers of rBGH, the FDA still maintains it’s safe for human consumption and ignores scientific evidence to the contrary. According to Dr. Samuel Epstein, a well-respected professional in cancer prevention and toxicology and chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, the FDA has responded to evidence that rBGH is unsafe with a wide range of “tenuous and inconsistent claims” based on “highly speculative and misleading calculations…based on a wide range of assumptions,” often citing flawed scientific studies that simply are not meaningful.
In 1999, the United Nations Safety Agency ruled unanimously not to endorse or set safety standards for rBGH milk, which has effectively resulted in an international ban on U.S. milk. The Cancer Prevention Coalition, trying for years to get the use of rBGH by the dairy industry banned, resubmitted a petition to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, MD, in January 2010.
They are still waiting for a response. Although the FDA stubbornly sticks to its position that milk from rBGH-treated cows is no different than milk from untreated cows, this is just plain false and is not supported by science.
Differences Between rBGH-Treated and Untreated Milk
According to Dr. Epstein, rBGH milk differs from natural milk nutritionally, pharmacologically, immunologically, and hormonally, and he cites the following differences. RBGH milk contains:
Increased levels of insulin growth factor-1 (IGF-1)
Contamination with illegal antibiotics and drugs used to treat mastitis and other rBGH-induced diseases, as well as pus from increased rates of mastitis among the cows injected with rBGH
Increased levels of the thyroid hormone enzyme thyroxin-5′-monodeiodinase
Reduced casein content (a milk protein)
Increased concentration of long-chain fatty acids and decreased concentration of short-chain fatty acids
ALL of the factors above can cause or contribute to health problems for people. But people aren’t the only ones suffering—as it turns out, the cows getting injected with these hormones are suffering as well.
RBGH Causes 16 Different Medical Problems in Dairy Cows
As mentioned above, the cows receiving this synthetic hormone suffer massively high rates of mastitis, a painful infection of their udders. Monsanto’s own data show up to an 80 percent incidence of mastitis in hormone-treated cattle, resulting in the need for routine administration of antibiotics and other drugs. This increases the frequency of allergic reactions and fuels antibiotic resistance. But mastitis is not the only adverse veterinary effect. The Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research (2003) found 16 different harmful medical conditions resulting from rBGH administration to dairy cattle, including:
40 percent increase in infertility
55 percent increased risk for lameness
Shortened lifespan
Hoof disorders
Visibly abnormal milk
From the data presented in this meta-analysis, I think it’s a reasonable conclusion that injecting animals with rBGH is cruel and inhumane treatment, besides producing milk that is not fit for human consumption.
RBGH Raises Levels of IGF-1 in Milk by Up to 70 Percent
IGF-1 is a potent hormone that acts on your pituitary gland to induce powerful metabolic and endocrine effects, including cell growth and replication. Elevated IGF-1 levels are associated with breast and other cancers. When cows are injected with rBGH, their levels of IGF-1 increase up to 20-fold, and this IGF-1 is excreted in the milk.
According to some confidential, unpublished industry studies, IGF-1 levels consistently elevate by 25 to 70 percent in rBGH milk. In reality, it is probably worse than that, since standard calculation techniques used by the dairy industry underestimate IGF-1 levels by a factor of four.
Not only are IGF-1 levels elevated in the milk of rBGH-treated cows, but a significant portion of this IGF-1 is in the free, or unbound, form, which may be about 10 times as potent as the IGF-1 in untreated milk. And not only does pasteurization NOT destroy this protein, but studies show it actually increases IGF-1 levels by about 70 percent, presumably by disrupting protein binding. There is a glaring absence of safety margins for IGF-1 in milk, and assurances by industry and government regulators to establish these parameters have been nothing more than empty promises.
Ok, so the levels of IGF-1 are higher in rBGH milk. But does the IGF get absorbed into your system when you drink it, or does your digestive tract break it down and render it inert?
Science tells us unequivocally that you do NOT break this down when you swallow it, but you DO absorb it into your bloodstream, as evidenced by both human and animal studies. Infants and young children absorb IGF-1 in even higher concentrations than adults, because their gut wall is more permeable to proteins. Infants and young children show higher levels of cow’s milk protein antibodies. The IGF-1 in dairy products appears to be protected during digestion by casein and by dairy’s buffering effects.
How Elevated IGF-1 Levels May Raise Your Breast Cancer Risk
Only one of every 10 breast cancer cases is attributed to genetics—the other nine are triggered by environmental factors, some of which are dietary. The fact that increased IGF-1 levels in hormone-treated milk increase your risk for breast, colon, and prostate cancers as has been documented in about 50 scientific publications over the past three decades. Among them is the 1998 Harvard Nurses Health study, which showed that premenopausal women with elevated IGF-1 levels had up to a seven-fold increase in breast cancer. And women younger than age 35 who have elevated IGF-1 have more aggressive breast cancer.
How does IGF-1 contribute to breast cancer?
IGF-1 regulates cell growth, cell division, and the ability of cancer cells to spread to your distant organs (invasiveness). In other words, IGF-1 has potent mitogenic effects in human breast tissue, especially in the presence of estradiol (a form of estrogen). Growth factors such as IGF-1 are “catalysts” for the transformation of normal breast tissue into breast cancer tissue, and are critically involved in the aberrant growth of human breast cancer cells. The following two findings have direct bearing on this link between elevated IGF-1 levels and breast cancer:
Specific IGF-1 mammary cell receptors are elevated by a factor of 10 in malignant human breast tissue.
IGF-1 plasma concentrations are higher in breast cancer patients than in healthy patients. (As an aside, this is how the breast cancer drug tamoxifen exerts its action—by reducing blood IGF-1 levels.)
According to Dr. Epstein, IGF-1 blocks your natural defense mechanisms against early microscopic cancers—it prevents apoptosis of cancer cells, or programmed cellular self-destruction.
The breast tissues of female fetuses and infants are especially sensitive to hormonal influences and cancer-causing chemicals. Infants and children exposed to high IGF-1 early on may become “sensitized,” leading to health problems later in life, such as breast enlargement in infants and young children, and breast cancer in adult women. Yet, despite these elevated risks to children, few schools make rBGH-free or organic milk available, nor do most state governments under low-income food programs. A study authored by Dr. Epstein demonstrated that IGF-1 in rBGH milk is a potential risk factor for both breast and gastrointestinal cancers. And a study published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention concluded that diet can impact cancer risk by influencing IGF-1 level.
The risks don’t end with breast cancer.
Ten studies show that consuming milk from rBGH-treated cows raises your risk for colon cancer. Seven studies document this for prostate cancer. If you want more information on this topic, I recommend reading Dr. Epstein’s 2006 book, What’s In Your Milk?
Are You Drinking rBGH Milk?
You very well may be drinking rBGH milk, or eating rBGH cheese or yogurt, as no labeling is required. This is despite the fact that surveys show that more than 80 percent of Americans want it labeled, but the government, as usual, continues bowing to industry lobbyists. The good news is, as increasing numbers of consumers and dairies choose to avoid rBGH, you can find labels that say “rBGH-free” or a similar variation. Organic milk is also rBGH-free. According to the Hartman Group, organic milk is now among the first organic product consumers buy.
Organic milk is enjoying an annual growth rate of about 20 percent, while overall milk consumption has dropped by about 10 percent.
Organic milk is certainly preferable to milk that contains this dangerous hormone. However, I still don’t recommend drinking any milk that is pasteurized—organic or otherwise. You can avoid the risks of rBGH, as well as pasteurization, by drinking only raw milk that comes from a small farmer you know and trust. The milk issue is really part of the larger problem of genetic manipulation of our food supply. The more you can avoid genetically modified (GM) and highly processed foods, the healthier you and your family will be.
HERE ARE THREE THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO:
1. Do not buy milk from cows treated with rBGH. Unless the milk-label states “NO rBGH”, you can assume the milk is contaminated. rBGH has become so widely used by dairy farmers. Most health food stores sell rBGH-free milk.
2. Contact your local supermarket and find out if they have a policy regarding rBGH and milk. Make clear that you would like rBGH-free milk.
3. Write to the FDA and express your concern that they are restricting the labeling
If you want to use an article on your site please click here. This content may be copied in full, with copyright, contact, creation and information intact, without specific permission, when used only in a not-for-profit format. If any other use is desired, permission in writing from Dr. Mercola is required.
Organic milk is enjoying an annual growth rate of about 20 percent, while overall milk consumption has dropped by about 10 percent.