© 2003–2023 The Redmond Family. All rights reserved.


Since screening began in 1988 there has been a rise in breast cancer, in the 50 - 64 age, of 25%. No studies have yet shown a significant reduction in mortality in breast cancer, in the under 50s, through routine screening.

A Canadian study involving six trials, discovered that only one in 14 positive mammograms result in the woman actually having the cancer. What sort of test is this? The harm this causes is considerable. Swedish researchers monitered 352 false positives. They found that these women had 1,112 doctor visits, 397 biopsies, 187 follow up mammograms, and 90 in hospital surgical biopsies. Even after six months only two thirds had been given the all clear.

Canadian, 3 Swedish, and a New York Trial showed one third more women died of breast cancer in the group who had mammograms, than those in the group who did not. How can this be? Many cancers are picked up by mammograms which would have done no harm if left alone ie benign. Massive unnecessary treatment is carried out on benign tumours mistakenly considered malignant. There have been many cases of Mastectomies being done unnecessarily. It would seem that if you do not have good reason to suspect cancer, leave well alone.

About 1% of the population have a gene which is sensitive to x-rays, placing them at extreme risk from mammograms.

When a breast is squashed in the machine to try to get a better image at up to 20 kg force, it can rupture cysts, and disseminate cancer cells to other parts of the body.

There is a shortage of radiologists at the moment, with not enough being trained to fill the gaps, this means there is a shortage of experience, with new inexperienced radiologists coming in. And you don't know the difference. Even amongst experienced radiologists tested on 150 good quality mammograms, there was widespread difference in their interpretations, and how the patient should be managed.

With all these findings stacked up against mammograms why is it still done? Well it sounds like a good idea, detect cancer early and treat it. There is such a commitment to the service now that a deaf ear is created in those who would have to make the decision, there would be a national outcry by the 99% of uninformed, and it is not compulsory. And if you do have cancer, and they detect it (a false negative is where they don't detect it), they will treat you, not cure you. The treatment usually makes you more sick, than the cancer.

Books to read:

  • What Dotors Don't Tell You by Lynne McTaggart.
  • Health Wars by Phillip Day.
  • The Cancer Prevention Handbook by Katherine Joyce Smith.
  • The Cancer Conspiracy by Dr. Toni Jeffreys PhD

© 2003–2023 The Redmond Family. All rights reserved.