By Dr. Mercola
Breast cancer has become big business, and routine mammography is one of its primary profit centers. While mammograms are touted as the best way to prevent breast cancer death, studies suggest otherwise.
The fact that you are reading this article gives you an enormous advantage, as most women are unaware of the mounting research indicating routine mammograms harm far more women than they save.
Despite the facts, the industry is fighting tooth and nail to keep mammography alive by downplaying or outright ignoring its significant risks.
One of industry’s latest tactics is introducing a “new and improved” type of mammogram called 3D tomosynthesis, which is basically a CT scan for your breasts. Tomosynthesis is a clever re-branding of the status quo.
The multi-millions of dollars spent on creating these invasive machines could have been better utilized for educating women about cancer prevention; developing less dangerous technologies, such as ultrasound and infrared imaging; and inventing completely new and safer technologies.
3D Tomosynthesis: Three Steps Down on the Ladder of Progress
Two of the greatest mammogram risks are high radiation exposure and compression of breast tissue, which potentially causes cancer cells to spread. 3D tomosynthesis does not reduce or eliminate either of these risks!
In fact, with this “new and improved” technology, your radiation exposure is even greater than from standard mammograms—and by a significant margin. This is disturbing, as we know that all levels of ionizing radiation can cause cancer.
According to one study,1 annual screening using digital or screen-film mammography on women aged 40–80 years is associated with an induced cancer incidence and fatal breast cancer rate of 20–25 cases per 100,000 mammograms. Meaning, annual mammograms cause 20-25 cases of fatal cancer for every 100,000 women getting the test.
The 3D mammogram requires multiple views in order to achieve three-dimensionality, so it stands to reason your total radiation exposure would be considerably higher than from a standard 2D mammogram.
With mammography, each