Are Mammograms Causing More Breast Cancer? – Discussion

Dec 18, 2009 by

Are Mammograms Causing More Breast Cancer? – Discussion

And they nearly got it. Today Health and Human Services Secretary Kathleen Sebelius went on the air to announce that the task force announcing the new mammography recommendations, “does not set federal policy and they don’t determine what services are covered by the federal government.” She went on to explain, “My message to women is simple. Mammograms have always been an important lifesaving tool in the fight against breast cancer and they still are today.”

In other words, keep getting your breasts irradiated. It’s important for the U.S. economy! The disease industry is counting on your future cancer, didn’t you know?

Confused?

The Associated Press says the new mammography recommendations from the government panel have “left women across the country confused about which advice to take.”

Confused? Really?

Let’s see, there’s a machine that smashes your breasts, that hurts like the devil, and that blasts your breasts, heart and lungs with cancer-causing radiation.

All the evidence now points to the fact that the risk of harm caused by the machine is far greater than the risk of have your life saved by early cancer detection — especially for women under 50.

So what is there to be confused about? The only confusion that exists is caused by the cancer industry itself which has always operated on the principle of keeping women uninformed and confused, knowing full well that people who are confused can be more easily manipulated with fear into surrendering to high-profit treatments like chemotherapy.

That’s the whole point of the industry, after all: To make money treating cancer, whether the patient needs it or not.
Big, big money to be made by giving women cancer
The cancer industry likes to hide behind the false idea that it’s “helping people” or “saving lives,” but in reality, it’s a for-profit industry that’s out to maximizing profits just like every other business. And as we all know, medical corporations have absolutely no ethics: They will engage in outright criminal fraud, bribery of doctors, falsifying clinical trial data, price-fixing their products and overcharging Medicaid programs, and other similar crimes, all of which have been documented here on NaturalNews.com.

For these same corporations to intentionally cause cancer in women as a strategy for future profits is just standard operating procedure. They don’t even think about acting with integrity or compassion: It’s all about the money. So what if a few million women have to die along the way, right? We’ve got shareholders to think about!

Cancer is a $200 billion a year business, Suzanne Somers told me yesterday in an exclusive interview with NaturalNews. That gives the industry 200 billion reasons to keep on exposing women to radiation and creating more repeat business. That’s why the cancer profiteers will fight these new recommendations tooth and nail — their livelihoods depend on making sure more women get cancer!

Mammography is, by any honest assessment, pure quackery. It’s no more accurate at detecting tumors needing acute treatment than just waving your hand over someone and guessing whether they have a tumor that needs treatment. In fact, waving your hand over someone is a lot less harmful, so it’s actually better.

A far better alternative is thermography. It can detect breast cancer tumors using the infrared heat emitted by a tumor’s blood supply. It’s non-invasive, safe, affordable and doesn’t involve deadly radiation.

And remember, even if you’re diagnosed with breast cancer, chemotherapy does not work on breast cancer! You’ll need a different, more natural approach. Read Suzanne Somers’ book “Knockout” to find some answers, or read about Vitamin D here on NaturalNews.

Source: NaturalNews.com

Pages: 1 2 3

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>