<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>ACCT Blog &#187; breast conditions</title>
	<atom:link href="http://acct-blog.com/tag/breast-conditions/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://acct-blog.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 19 Aug 2010 16:20:50 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4</generator>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
			<item>
		<title>Alternative to Mammograms</title>
		<link>http://acct-blog.com/2009/11/23/62/</link>
		<comments>http://acct-blog.com/2009/11/23/62/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 23 Nov 2009 20:29:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ACCT</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DITI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Thermal Imaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medical Thermography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thermal Breast Screening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thermal Imaging]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thermographic Evaluation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thermography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast lumps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alan L. Woods]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Alternative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast screening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast thermography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[female health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[guidelines]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Institute of Natural Health and Wellness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mammograms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[MRI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[U.S. Preventive Services Task Force]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ultrasound]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acct-blog.com/?p=62</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Sunday, November 22, 2009 
The Record
Alternative to mammograms
In view of the recent U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations concerning new guidelines for having mammograms, some vital information for women needs to be presented. The new guidelines are for the general population, not those at high risk of breast cancer because of family history or gene [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><strong><a title="Alternative to Mammograms" href="http://www.northjersey.com/news/opinions/70739052.html" target="_self">Sunday, November 22, 2009 </a></strong></p>
<p><a title="Alternative to Mammograms" href="http://www.northjersey.com/news/opinions/70739052.html" target="_self">The Record</a></p>
<p>Alternative to mammograms</p>
<p>In view of the recent U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendations concerning new guidelines for having mammograms, some vital information for women needs to be presented. The new guidelines are for the general population, not those at high risk of breast cancer because of family history or gene mutations.</p>
<p>It has always been known that mammograms carry a significant risk of causing and spreading breast cancer, although this has largely been ignored by mainstream medicine. They can cause breast cancer through repeated irradiation of the breasts and spread cancer by the fracturing of the fibrous capsule surrounding the tumor through compression of the breasts.</p>
<p>A 1999 meta-analysis, &#8220;Is Screening for Breast Cancer with Mammography Justifiable?,&#8221; was published in The Lancet, the United Kingdom&#8217;s premier medical journal, in 2000. It said, &#8220;Screening for breast cancer with mammography is unjustified.&#8221; This study showed that &#8220;for every 1,000 females having mammograms over a 12-year period, the life of one was saved, while the total number of deaths increased by six.&#8221; The United States continued to screen with mammography until the new recommendations appeared in the Nov. 17 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine.</p>
<p>Many women are asking themselves, &#8220;What should I do now?&#8221; The answer is simple: thermography, or digital infrared thermal imaging. This is a true &#8220;screening&#8221; test that is absolutely 100 percent safe, since it does not require contact with the breasts or use ionizing radiation. It has been approved by the FDA for breast cancer screening since 1982.</p>
<p><span id="more-62"></span></p>
<p>Thermography employs an infrared camera that measures the physiology of the breast, not the structures within the breast, as does mammography. The physiology is function rather than structure, more specifically inflammation. Inflammation at any tissue depth will be recorded by the sympathetic fibers in the neurological supply of nerves to that area. This neural information will then be processed through the central nervous system, which will then cause a sympathetic (automatic) response in the area of the skin corresponding to the affected site. Thermographically, the area of hyperthermia seen at the surface of the skin is due to a decrease of sympathetic motor tone (reduced sympathetic function) allowing increased blood flow through the postganglionic gates serving that area. And, all this happens before the presence of a tumor.</p>
<p>In addition, thermography can pick up breast disease eight to 10 years earlier than mammography can pick up a tumor. This happens long before tumor formation, whereas a tumor of a rather large size must be present for mammography to be effective. The bottom line is thermography is preventive, and mammography is no more than &#8220;early detection&#8221; of an already present tumor.</p>
<p>If any further studies are required for diagnosis, breast ultrasound and breast MRI are the tests of choice, since they are completely safe and do not employ radiation.</p>
<p>Women 21 or older should screen for cancer by doing breast self-examination, clinical breast examination annually and at each doctor&#8217;s visit, and thermography.</p>
<p>Alan L. Woods. </p>
<p>Wyckoff, Nov. 17</p>
<p>The writer, a physician, is director of natural health education for the Institute of Natural Health and Wellness in Wyckoff.</p>
<p>Readers Comments:</p>
<p>Welcome attack on &#8216;holy grail&#8217;</p>
<p>Speaking from the vantage point of a senior citizen, I am thrilled that the U.S. Preventive Task Services Force has issued new guidelines for mammogram screenings.</p>
<p>In the past, whenever I tried to have a conversation with my doctors about the risks of mammography, my questions were answered with anger and belligerence as if I were violating a sacred holy grail.</p>
<p>Now, women can feel free to ask such questions as: Will repeated radiation exposures to the breast pose a cancer risk for premenapausal women under 50?</p>
<p>What about so-called indolent cancers that will never spread and tiny cancers that might go away by themselves? Is it possible that I could be subjected to unnecessary surgery, radiation and chemotherapy and really be healthy?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://acct-blog.com/2009/11/23/62/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>90% of Breast Conditions are Not Cancer</title>
		<link>http://acct-blog.com/2009/07/07/90-of-breast-conditions-are-not-cancer/</link>
		<comments>http://acct-blog.com/2009/07/07/90-of-breast-conditions-are-not-cancer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 07 Jul 2009 16:25:27 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>ACCT</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DITI]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Thermal Breast Screening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast lumps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[benign]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast conditions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast tenderness]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cysts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[fibroadenoma]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hormonal thickening]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[lumps]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mammography]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[needle biopsy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nipple discharge]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[non-cancerous]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ultrasound]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://acct-blog.com/?p=38</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[ Content from ACCT website
90% of Breast Health problems are benign &#8211; not Cancer.
Abnormalities may include:

 CYSTS

They are  NOT  related to breast cancer.
 About 60% of women will have at least one cyst during their lifetime.

Cysts are collections of fluids in breast tissue.


They are usually small and do not cause problems, but may increase in size, form a [...]]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p> Content from <a title="90 % of Breast Health Problems are Benign - Not Cancer" href="http://www.medithermclinic.com/News/Breast%20Advice%20lumps.pdf" target="_self">ACCT website</a></p>
<p><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">90% of Breast Health problems are benign &#8211; not Cancer.<br />
Abnormalities may include:</span></p>
<div>
<p><strong> CYSTS</strong></p>
<ul>
<li><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">They are  </span><strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman,Bold;">NOT  </span></strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">related to breast cancer.</span></li>
<li> <span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">About 60% of women will have at least one cyst during their lifetime.</span></li>
<li>
<div><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">Cysts are collections of fluids in breast tissue.</span></div>
</li>
<li>
<div><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">They are usually small and do not cause problems, but may increase in size, form a lump, or cause pain or tenderness.</span></div>
</li>
<li>
<div><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">Cysts occur most commonly between the ages of 35 and 50 years and especially between 42 and 48 years.</span></div>
</li>
<li>
<div><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;">They are uncommon after menopause except in women on Hormone Replacement Therapy.</span></div>
</li>
</ul>
<p align="left"><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;"><span id="more-38"></span></span></p>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<p><strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman,Bold;"></p>
<p align="left">HORMONAL THICKENING</p>
<p> </p>
<div></div>
<p></span></strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;"></p>
<ul>
<li>
<div>Hormonal thickening is NOT related to the development of breast cancer.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>This can occur at any age during the reproductive years and may come and go.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>It is a response to hormone changes and is often related to pre-menopausal breast tenderness. It usually disappears naturally after menopause.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>Further diagnosis can be made with a combination of breast examination, mammography, ultrasound and needle biopsy.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>No treatment is necessary unless there is pain.</div>
</li>
</ul>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<p></span><strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman,Bold;"></p>
<p align="left">FIBROADENOMA</p>
<p> </p>
<div></div>
<p></span></strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;"></p>
<ul>
<li>
<div>They are not related to breast cancer but do need to be accurately diagnosed. This can usually be done by needle biopsy.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>These are very common nodules in the breast and are commonly benign.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>They are common in young women (under 25) but can occur at any age. They appear as oval, tender masses and may not be able to be felt as lumps.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>Many women have more than one.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>Diagnosis is usually made by ultrasound, needle biopsy and mammography (in older women).</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>They may be removed by surgery but this is not essential.</div>
</li>
</ul>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<div><strong></strong></div>
<p></span><strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman,Bold;"></p>
<p align="left">NIPPLE DISCHARGE</p>
<p> </p>
<div></div>
<p></span></strong><span style="font-family: TimesNewRoman;"></p>
<ul>
<li>
<div>Most nipple discharges are harmless &#8211; particularly if the discharge comes from more than one duct and from both nipples.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>If the discharge is bloodstained or watery it is important to see your Doctor.</div>
</li>
<li>
<div>These discharges are due to the production of fluid by normal breast cells in response to hormones.</div>
</li>
</ul>
<p></span></div>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://acct-blog.com/2009/07/07/90-of-breast-conditions-are-not-cancer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
