KC Craichy SuperHealth Podcasts: Truth About Mammography

Comments Off

Posted on 2nd August 2011 by admin in Health Alerts |SuperHealth Podcasts

, , , , , , , ,

KC Craichy shares important information about mammography and what much of the media won’t tell you about medical radiation dangers.

Audio Transcript

KC: Welcome. I’m KC Craichy, founder and CEO of Living Fuel. Coming to you today with another health alert, relating to a health alert we put out not too long ago, on the dangers of medical radiation.

I’m amazed at the feedback we got on the subject. That most of you have no idea that these simple things like CT scans and mammography’s and such have actual real risks associated with the procedure, and that one needs to only have such procedures when it is extremely medically necessary.

Well today, I’ve been pondering whether or not to bring this to you. Because normally we do follow up on health alerts through Facebook and thru Twitter, which we invite you to join. Also our blog and our forum. But today, I needed to reach all of you because I personally am outraged at the way the media has covered a story lately regarding medical radiation. You know when you start touching on subjects like vaccination, and medical radiation, and mammography, and global warming, and evolution, you start really making people upset. So I’m already prepared for the deluge of emails I’m going to get from many of you but I’m going to give you facts as I see them.

First of all, I relate back again to Dr. Rongoff’s medical text book; has a lot of significant information on this subject. One thing he points out is that most of these medical procedures can be done at dramatically lower doses of radiation, and still give the same clinical benefit and there’s no negative to lowering the dose response.

As we know, a lifetime of radiation is the net lifetime load is what triggers disease or not. But the issue that it really has stricken me today, is that there’s been a great report. You’ve all seen in the news where the recommendation by independent scientific panel, has been changed on mammography. From starting mammography at 40 years to starting at 50 years old, and there’s been an absolute outrage from many of the people whom I very much respect in the new have taken a really bizarre position on this matter. Because somehow mammography has become a staple, a right, a basic human right and obviously mammography saves lives. And they have shown mammography has saved some people but a study came out recently reported by Natural News and others. That brought up some very interesting points that needed to be addressed because my contention is that mammography was changed, the recommendation was changed from 40 to 50, because of the risks associated with the procedure itself.

Now, we know we don’t do it under 40 because of the increase radiation load for young people because it’s a lifetime load once again. So, the change to 50 is actually a positive step, because mammography, we talked about this, a lifetime 20 mammography exams is roughly equivalent to standing one mile from Hiroshima when the bomb went off. So, we have to understand that this is serious business. Now we do understand that breast cancer kills a lot of people. The number one killer of women in the U.S, particularly black women, and dark skin women, and 500,000 people worldwide. So it’s no joking matter.

But what I want to point out is this procedure of screening, has not been shown to reduce the incidence of cancer. While screening is important there are other modalities that can actually get you similar information and also some things you can do in your lifestyle to minimize the possibility of this happening. But what I want to point is a quote that says “For a women in the screening subset of mammography detectible cancers there’s less than 5% change that mammography will save her life” wrote the researches from the University of Nebraska and John Stoger a Junior of Cook Hospital.

By comparing mammography, mammography’s lifesaving absolute benefit with its expected harms, a well-informed women along with her physician can make a reasonable decision to screen or not to screen, and that’s what this is about. I’m not telling you not to get mammography. But mammography and similar exams are to try to find a physical mass. A physical mass takes many years, probably ten years to form. But with some aggressive forms of cancer it can form between one year’s mammography and the next year’s mammography, and already have a very advance state. So for the ones that we’re normally looking for are a really small dime or less size mass, these things take ten years to form.

There are other technologies out there like thermography, which has been around since 1972 in various forms, and is really becoming advanced. Thermography judges the heat and cancer at all levels required blood flow. So when thermography finds the heat associated with additional blood flow, it can point out years in advance something about to form. So, obviously there are other things like ultrasound that can be done and so on but my main point today is it’s not the government take over trying to take away your mammography.

It is informed scientists trying to tell you that the risk exceeds the reward from age 40 to 50. Now the thing that needs to be pointed out here, is that the study that was just reported on, out of almost 3,000 women it took to prevent a single death. Now if these 3,000 women over a period of 20 years have 20 mammography’s, there chance of getting cancer is dramatically increased. So you really have to, again, weigh the risk and the reward. Now also, the other thing that is very significant, is that ever death saved also includes many false positives that people go through cancer procedures, and the trauma of thinking they have a problem, and sometimes even lose their breast because of a false positive. This is many more times the people that are actually found and saved. So, there are other ways to approach this issue. We’re going to put a lot of links on the site so that you can do your own research, but be well informed as this study says. Be well informed and make your own decisions. It is time to take charge of your own health care.

This is to your super health. God bless you, and have a great day.

LivingFuel HealthAlert: Airport Scanner Danger Update

Comments Off

Posted on 8th April 2011 by admin in Health Alerts

, , , , , , , , , ,

Dear Living Fuel Family,
In January, we reported on the potential radiation dangers of airport scanning machines.  Today on LivingFuelTV, we update you on this issue from recent testing.  Are these devices a health risk and should you change your approach at airport security checkpoints?
Tune in today by clicking on the graphic below to watch and forward this message to a frequent flyer you know.

To watch LivingFuelTV episodes on the dangers of medical radiation, click here.
For more information, visit www.livingfuel.com or call 1-866-580-FUEL(3835).
Here’s to your SuperHealth,
KC Craichy
Founder & CEO
Living Fuel, Inc.