Women Over 40 "Advised" Against Routine Annual Mammograms ...Tribune staff reporter
In a highly controversial move, an influential government-sponsored organization is recommending against routine annual mammograms for healthy women in 40's Advised Against
Routine Annual Mammograms.
After re-evaluating scientific research on mammography's ability to reduce deaths from breast cancer, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force says these women should consult a physician and make a decision reflecting their own preferences and values. The recommendation does not apply to women at high risk for the disease.
Advised by whom?
Controversial why?
Is money made by "checking" women's breasts for cancer?
Is "checking" breasts for cancer a business?
Is it a profitable business?
Why not check all women over 30?
Hell, why not "check" all women over 20?
How can a business not be profitable if the government mandates its product?
Is Plantation Medicine A Vampire Profiting Off Of Managing Sickness?
Check For Cancer. Find Cancer. Now What?
Oh. Drugs. That's right. Radiation pills for $40 a pop.
Instead of checking this woman's breasts for cancer, they should check the food she eats for cancer.
But I guess that would actually save too many lives and too much money. Plantation Medicine is a temple built of fear. Frightened people are easier to control.
8 comments:
Good food for thought questions, and
"Instead of checking this woman's breasts for cancer, they should check the food she eats for cancer."
Amen.
This is from today's news:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/33979090/ns/health-infectious_diseases
There is a heated debate on these recommendations...pitted in one corner Oncologists who actually treat women with breast cancer, and the task force...without nary an oncologist on the board. The main complaint is that this confusing message will keep women from seeking screening before a potential cancer is clinically noticable.
DMG,
Knowing that you are generally liberal, it's nice to read you make the unprincipled exception and make the correct observation that all information is not equal. You are correct in suggesting that you see this as an expert versus layman debate, but the reality is that this debate isn't about who's information is better. Rather, it's a debate about whether free people can be coerced into acting against their will in service of the will of the expert or layman with the "right" information?
You will not touch this topic BECAUSE we already know where you stand and it's UGLY!!! US Marine with an unconstitutional conscience runnin' thru his veins???
Well I'm just pleased to see DMG acknowledging there exists a debate.
Normally he takes the position that there is the Medical Orthodoxy vs. "Conspiracy" Theory.
Even as more and more conscientious orthodox physicians take a stand against mass vaccinations, the good doc played company man and dutifully attacked the messenger.
What this study reveals is the insanity and self-serving policy of Plantation Medicine to approach health care as a series of "checks" to detect cancer.
Waiting for people to get cancer ... and then treating them ... with expensive toxic chemicals ... that inevitably makes them more sick is by no means an example of the "Scientific Method".
It is an example of exploitation.
The entire "Breast Cancer Industry" should be ashamed of itself.
If the media attention spent on this silly little announcement that mammography doesn't "reduce" deaths by cancer ... but ups the profits of those who sell cancer drugs ... was spent on the dangers of toxic antiperspirants filled with parabens and aluminum.
But that would reduce the cases of cancer ... and the profits of the industry.
Denmark
You missed this story:
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2009-11/w-st5111709.php
What's up Big Man? How you?
Read the piece. What did I miss? How does this thalidomide fit in?
"Well I'm just pleased to see DMG acknowledging there exists a debate."
Yes, but your position isn't part of that debate....
Post a Comment