OMG!! You said it!!!!
I thought I was the only one thinking this way. Thank you for bringing this truth to light - and long may people benefit from your teachings.
I think that the herd mentality which many demonstrate is the same for health creation as it is to following the pink movement; in other words, very little thought at all. They just follow the crowd, in case they find themselves being the odd one out. Well, you don't want to be the ONLY one without cancer, do you....?!!!

While we should certainly concentrate on preventing cancers through diet and lifestyle changes, scaring women away from mammograms is a hugely dangerous tactic, and is irresponsible journalism. The survivability of breast cancer has increased significantly through early screening programs. Before these programs, more women were dying from breast cancer - this is an incontestable fact. How it is treated once diagnosed is still far from ideal, and is still up for debate, but the simple fact is that avoiding screening increases the death rate from this terrible form of cancer. This has been proven in large trials: http://bit.ly/b0uD4R

I completely agree with this article! My closest friend lost a 3 year battle back in 2000, she was only 39.

She had no family history of cancer, didn't smoke, didn't have any dangerous personal habits.

When she was first diagnosed in 1997, I asked her what her doctors had her doing different nutritionally. She was being treated at Sloan Kettering in NYC.

She said they told her that if she had really poor eating habits to just eat a few more fruits or vegetables and that was it!

I was floored, but I guess looking back, I'm not surprised now.

She never once went into remission. I personally believe the chemo and radiation killed her.

From that point on, I have not supported breast cancer 'awareness.'

We're already aware, we need to concentrate on prevention, but as you know, the main stream medical community will not do that.

So glad someone has put this in an article that will seen by many. I've been thinking and saying these exact thoughts for years. I too felt I was the only one pointing out that what we need to focus on is PREVENTION. It is unprofitable for the big drug companies to find a cure. Frankly I always thought people were being emotionally manipulated with the silly idea of 'walking for a cure' while remaining ignorant of what is causing the cancer in the first place.

You have said what I have been thinking and trying to tell people for a while now. Having watched a number of friends endure the medical route of breast cancer treatment, I don't support any of the cancer trade's requests for money because I know it will never be used to provide preventative education. I find this so sad.

This is an emotionally charged topic for so many people. I do not have breast cancer, but know and knew a few women that do. Not one of their doctors discussed nutrition with any of them. The simple truth is that most doctors are not taught much about nutrition in medical school. I am a registered nurse and I was actually told by a doctor, "what does what you eat have to do with you health?" Doctors are seen as gods who have all the answers and they do not.
According to the American Cancer Society only 5-10% of cancers are hereditary. So why are so many women being tested for the "breast cancer gene"? Diet, exercise, weight, smoking and exposure to other known carcinogens are all linked to cancer risks. All of which we have control over.
The problem is there is no profit in it. Think about it for a minute. Doctors, hospitals, nurses, pharmacies, not get paid unless they are taking care of sick people. According to Forbes magazine, healthcare makes up 16% of our Gross Domestic Product, with personal emphasis on the word Product. We do not have healthcare in this nation, we have sickcare and that is what the "Pink Washing" industry is promoting.

Keep spreading the truth!!

This is a very irresponsible article. There is a lot that can be done to prevent cancers, but there are other factors that come into play. Blaming the patient doesn't help anyone. We don't need any more research??? A little organic food and vitamin D will save the day??? That is delusional and just plain incorrect.

The hypocrisy of this article is funny - you criticize one industry for making money off illness, yet you post this article and then sell all your "anti-cancer" DVDs at the bottom. Also, your "sources" are a joke, since the author is the editor of "natural news".

the trademarked slogan that should by law be branded across all allopathic "conventional cancer " treatment"? worldwide that involves chemo and radium should be
"WARNING ! KILLING IS OUR BUSINESS !! AND BUSINESS IS GOOD"

Angus Heseltine, it is not necessary to take God's name in vein, vis-a-vie: OMG.

I do have breast cancer and the only way we can feel good and know we are truly doing something about it is to ask questions. I told my doctor, no chemo and no radiation, I did have a bilateral mastectomy. My doctor had me see a naturalpath because I wanted to. We as patients need to be proactive abaout our own health also. We are the only ones who can really cure ourselves. We can say NO to what we do not believe in and that is what I did. Do NOT be afraid to take your nutrition to another level.The food matters DVD opened my eyes also.

Love the article, thanks. Like many people, there is breast cancer currently in my family. I want them to know I support what they're going thru, but to promote all this PINKING of the world, isn't the way to do it. I don't support Pink chicken or Pink makeup.. just cause it says "we suppport cancer awareness". I hate how "they" get people everywhere to promote their pink crap/campaigns cause we will feel guilty or nonloyal to our friends if we don't share/buy/promote.. it's sick and promotes sickness.

The article is great and you are so right! PREVENTION is the key!! Thank you.

To those who think that women are being frightened from getting Mammograms done... Duh. If you eat what your body needs to and protect yourself from as many environmental toxins as possible, you will create an environment in your body where cancer and most other degenerative deceases cannot possibly exist! Learn what the correct nutrition is and live it. Then we can use doctors for accidents NOT disease... (and most cancer is no accident. It is something we nurture by not allowing our immune systems to do what they were made to do)

I thought I was the only one who feels this way - cancer is such a big business now and a lot of people are getting rich from the whole 'pink' thing. I will not contribute money to any of those causes - prevention is the key yet there is no money in it.

I read the other day that there is a new longitudinal study (which means the results will be available in about 20 years) which tracks women who get breast cancer versus those who do not - by recording things like lifestyle, nutrition, etc. This study will be the first of its kind! Until those results are in, conventional medicine only offers a reaction to cancer once we become ill (Ack! Cancer! Kill it!)instead of helping women to live more mindfully and make better lifestyle/nutritional decisions. Cancerous cells are always there - what triggers them to reproduce like crazy is what "mystifies" conventional medicine. And thanks to Food Matters, we've all been given the tools to survive and even flourish in this toxic world.

Thanks for this article. I have breast cancer and turned down conventional treatments. I made a total lifestyle switch and have been living a clean, healthy life. I have never felt better and my cancer has not returned. Even though my doc at Sloan Kettering admitted that breast cancer and prostate cancer can be affected by diet, she did not recommend I make any lifestyle changes. She only recommended chemo. I am on an effective regime of healthy diet, supplementation and exercise. It feels good and it works!

I agree whole heartedly with the author that October should be re-named "Be Afraid of Breast Cancer Month". The whole medical industry is more about fear of cancer then about prevention and quality of life! I was diagnosed with B.Cancer at the age of 36. No family history, no smoking, was living a "healthy" lifestyle with exercise and diet. The medical response was "surgery, chemotherapy, and follow up with tamoxifen." My response was fear. My doctors told me all about cancer statistics, surgeries, the new chemo treatments, and follow-up drugs. I didn't want my treatment choices to reflect my fear but be based on some sort of logic. I felt that the doctors "treatment" was a one size fits all scenerio regardless of their "great strides in medicine" so I did have surgery but opted out of all other "traditional" treaments. I asked my Oncologist about diet - "what kinds of foods to avoid and what to eat?" I was told to eat 10 servings of fruits and veggies every day. Because I chose not to take the traditional treatment route it seemed that I was no longer the oncologist's patient.

It is very sad to me that the medical industry doesn't do more with prevention and quality of life. They tell you to eat right, exercise, and avoid stress. Nutritional coaches, physcial therapitst, acupuncture, and other options are out there but you have to look for them on your own. Unfortunately, they are not included as an complimentary option or alternative to the "traditional" treatment but they would certainly help women deal with their diagnosis along with the after affects of surgery, chemotherapy, radiation, follow-up drugs, etc. It has always bothered me that there is a bigger focus on the "cancer treatment" then on the prevention and it was nice especially during this month of "awareness" to hear this side of the "pink" story!

I'm all in favor of 'an ounce of pervention is worth a pound of cure' -
That which we dwell on, comes forward,
So Dwelling on Healthy Breasts or any other parts of our body sounds much better than fighting against something.
thanks

I am one of the luckyones...I am a breast cancer survivor....when I found out I had breadt cancer I immediately went on a raw diet...drank green smoothies and did the budwig protocol. I went from being a late stage 2 to a zero when they did my pathology reports after my bilateral masectomy. I didn't have to even do chemo or radiation. It is imperative that the word gets out we can prevent or starve cancer from the foods we eat. I am living proof. My tumor was the size of a baseball and I had a high grade form of Ductal Carcinoma (more aggressive) and 2 months after my reconstructive surgery i am cancer free. But if I had the choice I would have prefered to not have gone through the cancer at all. I also had 100's of people praying for me...Power of Prayer and God's healing foods were my answer.

I have ran in Race for the Cure the last 5 years (my work pays for our entry fee and t-shirt)and at the end sponsors provide free yogurt, granola bars, apples, bananas, and bottled water. These things are loaded with high fructose corn syrup/aspartame, pesticides, dyes, GMO, partially hydrogenated oil, ect = complete garbage. It really is sick- come give us money to research for a "cure" so we can aid in your body developing cancer and make more money off of your cancer bill. I know that's not their intention but, for real- educate yourself! Is there some where I can buy a foodmatters t-shirt to wear at the race next year? I really do want one!

My mom passed away from pancreatic cancer this year and 4 doctors and a "nutritionist" all told her diet doesn't really matter. I heard them all say it myself. If only I knew about all of this before- she might still be here today. Have you heard about thermal imaging or thermography instead of a mammogram? We have to get out of the chemo box!

So one anonymous thinks "Mike Adams is a joke". Mike presents information from studies, and provides links and references, he doesn't make it up! Without Mike we wouldn't get to read this important information as it is usually suppressed by mainstream media.

It needed to be said and you've said it again Food Matters & Mike Adams at Natural News. Thank You!

Here's what I've added to my fb page. Will share too on twitter, youtube & my website:

We need to ask ourselves: How long will be satisfied to raise money for research and cancer awareness while the rise in cancer continues to climb?

Dear Friends, this is my official postion on anything that is described as:
"bla bla bla awareness month"

It is the strong opinion of this writer that these events claim to raise awareness but are more and more just another marketing fiasco.

I agree that the time is now more than ever for us to do something but that something is not to join forces with the disease of the month club.

In saying that; lets make everyday: Mother's Day, Father's Day, Grandparent's Day & Friendship Day, etc,,,,, and commit our lives to Loving Oneanother for a Lifetime of Health & Wellbeing.

This is both; time & resources well spent!

Please know that I have sent this message to you with much love and with the greatest of intentions. Let our hearts no longer be pulled this way and that by clever marketing but let us focus our hearts on love.

Awareness is good, but only if it leads to people taking action towards prevention, and support of people going through cancer.

What annoys me though, are all the 'pink' products that are actually unhealthy - I've seen pink 'timtam' chocolate biscuits, pink endorsed non-stick cookware (which contains harmful chemicals), and pink skin care products which contain 'parabens' and other chemicals that have actually been found in breast cancer cells!

If anything should be pink endorsed, it should be fruits and vegetables, quality nutritional supplements, and natural household/personal products.

A dvd is worth about $3 max to make maybe a little extra. Who's profiteering off what? Shameful!

Love it! I too thought I was the only one who felt this way. It's pretty sad to hear that doctors tell people that food doesn't matter. Seriously! I guess they are right, it doesn't matter to them as long as you keep getting sick and filling their pockets. Education is the key. Ignorance is bliss.

Keep spreading the word, people are listening!

I believe that wiping out Breast Cancer depends on Breast Cancer Prevention & Breast Wellness Education. Thermographies are a great place to begin this journey. Check my recent article. http://rockvillecentre.patch.com/articles/breast-cancer-know-your-risk-before-detection

I totally agree with this "pink washing" term and have always been distrustful of pink products. There should be equal attention to cancer prevention among cancer societies, organizations, etc., but this article has put me on edge.

We should be embracing non-conventional treatments and be wary of one treatment fits all scenarios, but I am uneasy because I get the distinct feeling that this article is sending a message telling women to be distrustful of doctors and science which has brought about tools to detect breast cancer; like mammograms.

We should be whole heartedly embracing prevention methods that deal with diet and lifestyle, but we should also not fear monger like this. Perhaps it is me alone that has had the unusually good relationship with my doctors, I feel sad that there are people who cannot discuss options with their doctor. But an article like this does exactly what you're preaching against. Yes, medical doctors have little nutritional training, but they are not moronic, they spend years learning about the body and how it works, so dismissing their medical training is appalling to me.

What you have failed to acknowledge is the uncanny ability women have to detect falsities and things that are amiss... it's called intuition.

So, what is my point? My point, is do not be distrustful, and to let love into your heart. The message here should be, know thyself... in all it's forms; mind, body and soul. I think once you have done this, you will know in your heart and soul, that traditional medical cancer treatments do more harm then good, and this will only lead people to alternative paths... well, paths that are alternative now, and will hopefully be more publicly aware and appraised in the future.

If more people were interested in PREVENTION, if more doctors were interested in PREVENTION, there would be less suffering and disease. What we put into our mouths, movement, friendship and love does so much in keeping one healthy. What you say is so true, Cancer is Money. So we must take responsibility for our own health, we must make the right decisions, we must be interested enough in PREVENTION.

While I'm very interested in the ideas espoused in this article, I would ask that you back up your statistics with evidence. You claim "Breast cancer is anywhere from 70% - 90% preventable through simple changes in diet, exercise, consumer product use and nutritional supplementation," but give no evidence to support this. Why is it 70% - 90% preventable through diet and exercise? If you really want to lead the brigade for breast cancer prevention over breast cancer awareness (which I'm all for, and am eager to get behind), check your facts and post your sources. That's responsible journalism.

Thanks,
Heather

THINK SERIOUS BEFORE YOU BUY PINK
So true, Purex is donating 25 cents to every Purex Pink Colored Toilet Paper bought for this Breast Cancer Campaign.
READ ON PUERX WEBSITE ABOUT THIS.
Q & A is this harmful due to allergies...do I ask my dr if I can use pink toilet paper HELLO OUT THERE PEOPLE...DYES FOUND IN TOILET PAPER YRS AGO WERE KNOWN TO GIVE PEOPLE USING IT CANCER(NOT ALL) BUT PEOPLE STOPPED USING IT FOR THAT REASON....NOW CANCER RESEARCH IS ASKING FOR US TO BUY THIS PINK TOILET PAPER.....DO YOU THINK THEY ARE NEEDING MORE BODIES TO USE AS GUINEA PIGS....OH MY GOD!

WOW. Can i say this feed has certainly impacted me. The positive feedback, and the negative. Profiteering ? WOW, what a word. Im not much of a writer or 'blogger' but Just the sound of that word jumping off the page into my ears denotes such negativity. Having met the directors and owning a copy of this fantastic DVD I had to comment. Profiteering. Its very connotation creates an anxious air of of dismay and negativity. These are 2 lines that popped into my head.
"Pay a man his worth" OR "Pay peanuts, get monkeys".

We are happy to invest in the safety of an ANCAP rating5 vehicle as we know the research has gone into creating such an outstanding level of safeness. This comes with a price. Where is the price picked up and where is it passed onto ? Who ever said we cannot find comfort and life within an idea or education ? Do teachers "profiteer" from educating our children, preparing them in the best way possible for a big world full of decisions ? To create such a DVD, MUST have taken research or did the directors just wake up with this knowledge ? And assuming they weren't lucky enough to be born with it, they must have had to learn this information via research. Which MUST have taken time, no ? We all know, unless there is some magical world I've not heard of (count me in), that time is money. We must live and eat pay bills etc etc !! Is it wrong to benefit openly to some extent, or better put, have a career from/in helping others or enlightening those who may be busy in their own careers. I know that i haven't got time to go test my own car for a safety rating, so ill trust those who's job it is, do do just that. Their job. And guess what, Im happy to pay for their services, which support their families and so on. And when it comes to health and suggestions for what my family should eat for a longer happier life, i know exactly who I go to.
Thanks FM for your care and concern.

I agree with this article completely we should be focusing on a natural preventative base lifestyle not only will we reduce Cancer, we can also reverse it, and other diseases such as Heart Disease, Diabetes, and others, it's been proven. Here is another proven fact for anyone who already has cancer. There is a natural safe alternative treatment of cancer, It has saved the lives of many even with 4 stage cancer.

Cesium is one of the most alkaline elements. Otto Warburg won a Nobel Prize for showing that cancer thrives in anaerobic (without oxygen), or acidic, conditions. research by Keith Brewer, PhD and H.E. Satori has shown that raising the pH, or oxygen content, range of a cell to pH 8.0 creates a deadly environment for cancer. The pH scale ranges from 0 to 14, with numbers below 7 representing an acidic condition and above 7 representing an alkaline, or oxygenated, condition. When cesium is taken up by cancer cells, it raises the pH, or oxygen content, of the cell. The cells that die are absorbed and eliminated by the body.
Cesium has been used to raise the pH of the body as an alternative cancer treatment of therapy for breast cancer, lung cancer, prostate cancer, colon cancer, pancreatic cancer, liver cancer, skin cancer, ovarian cancer, stomach cancer, cervical cancer, brain cancer, kidney cancer, testicular cancer, bone cancer, throat cancer, thyroid cancer, gastrointestinal cancer, cancers of the bladder and gallbladder, metastatic melanoma, and cancers in animals including feline, canine, and equine cancer.

Over 75 years ago, Otto Warburg was awarded two Nobel prizes for his theories that cancer is caused by weakened cell respiration due to lack of oxygen at the cellular level. According to Warburg, damaged cell respiration causes fermentation, resulting in low pH (acidity) at the cellular level.

Dr. Warburg, in his Nobel Prize winning paper, illustrated the environment of the cancer cell. A normal healthy cell undergoes an adverse change when it can no longer take in oxygen to convert glucose into energy. In the absence of oxygen, the cell reverts to a primal nutritional program to nourish itself by converting glucose through the process of fermentation. The lactic acid produced by fermentation lowers the cell pH (acid/alkaline balance) and destroys the ability of DNA and RNA to control cell division. The cancer cells then begin to multiply. The lactic acid simultaneously causes severe local pain as it destroys cell enzymes. the cancer appears as a rapidly growing external cell covering with a core of dead cells.

There are a number of areas on the world where the incidence of cancer is very low. At the 1978 Stockholm Conference on Food and Cancer, it was concluded that there is a definite connection between food composition and cancer rates. Significant is the report on the presence of high levels of Cesium (Cs) and Rubidium (Rb) in food consumed in these areas, along with availability of various supportive compounds such as Vitamin A, Vitamin C, Zinc and Selenium. Examples are the Hopi Indian territory (Arizona), the Hunza area (North Pakistan), and the volcanic regions of Brazil. Incidence of cancer is 1 in 1000 in these populations vs. 1 in 3 in the USA. The diets of these populations is similar to the nutritional requirements for the high pH cancer therapy developed by Dr. Brewer.

Want to learn more the life you save can be your own...

Manny Reyes
661-466-9101
http://ashnow.com/124577

"Let food be thy medicine and
medicine be thy food"
Hippocrates, the Father of Medicine (460-377 B.C.)

Mark Adams has done it again! what a wonderful article. He just manage to put beautifully and clearly what a lot of us think about! Lets make a "safe nutrtion awarenes month" and see how many of this institutions are going to join in!

Speaking as someone who lost their best friend to melanoma when we were only 29 years old I cannot comprehend this article. The suffering and heartbreak that cancer brings is unbelievable and to blame the victim is outrageous and hurtful!
How can anyone read Susan Kohman's story and not be touched??? It's hard to believe that some people's gospel is making villians out of the medical industry!!!
PS: I saw a DC and had adjustments for seven months for back pain. Had knee replacement surgery in April. Guess which pain was killing me today--my back. Never again!

A great book that helps regarding supplementation and habits that help reduce and/or eliminate cancer growth/risk is Dr. Blaylock's Natural Strategies for Cancer Patients. It is a book that could literally save millions of lives and should be given to every cancer patient across North America. It should be mandatory reading in all public schools to make sure these people never make it to the status of "patient" in the first place.

To the person that said

"A dvd is worth about $3 max to make maybe a little extra. Who's profiteering off what? Shameful!"

What a idiotic statement, yes it may take only 3 dollars to physically make a DVD, but there is overhead involved in this, you have to pay royalties to anything trademarked in the dvd, pay the people shooting and editing the dvd, pay the artists to create the packaging and artwork, pay people to get bids on getting all the materials sourced and a facility lined out to manufacture the dvd. You also have to pay to have anything trademarked, certified and copyrighted, have to pay a PR firm or pay for marketing and advertising, pay for storage pay for, transportation, pay.... i could go on and on but you should know that it costs a lot to get anything done these days.

thanks for bringing this to light. i've always thought the pink theme was a bunch of nonsense that makes "somebody" wealthy & doesn't get the TRUTH out there.

I have already written a blog that reflects much the same sentiments as this article does! Why isn't the whole world standing up in opposition to these greedy, immoral, unscrupulous drug giants who have no concern for the sick? To those who are already sick with cancer look on the internet. There is much credible information for you to draw on. Whatever you do, don't succumb to the drug companies or medicos and their butchering tactics.
Our staff recently held a 'pink' morning tea, where, you guessed it, all 'edibles' had to be pink. I was not popular, but I made a concientious objection not to participate or donate, just as I made a decision not to participate or donate to a walk to find a cure for type 1 diabetes.

Another really good article! With regard to mammograms, is there anything els that can help detect cancer? I have heard of thermal imaging but was told that it only really works in conjunction with a mammogram. When I was rung op for a breast screening appointment by the nurse and I told her "thanks but I won't have one" she was quite taken back and got quite bossy with me. But I think that it can't be good for the breast tissue to have that kind of treatment done. Any alternative ways of detecting cancer?

This is totally unscientific and infuriatingly ignorant.

Don't dismiss "unscientific" as some snobby academic term, used to hold intellectual high ground or make you feel bad. It just means that the above claims have NOT actually been established, and the treatments they advocate are no more likely to ACTUALLY work than sitting around and doing nothing... To present this rubbish as "scientific" (directly to the public, who won't know better) is the height of irresponsibility. And make no mistake, it's all about money and greed. Scientists are not rich. Busy natural therapy clinicians are.

A scientist would be more interested in asking questions liks: WHAT CAUSES CANCER, and HOW CAN WE TREAT IT, and TO WHAT EXTENT IS A TREATMENT SUCCESSFUL.

Exploitative marketing tactics, which rely on expensive DVDs and websites, isolated opinions, experiences, interviews with purposely-selected "experts", small un-randomised samples (often n = 1), sincere personal testimonies.. (all designed to manipulate trust) may be emotionally persuasive, but mean NOTHING in terms of answering any of the above questions.

If you want to learn more, go to uni and study SCIENCE, and learn how to conduct research (properly!!!) into what causes cancer. Physiology, molecular biology, biophysics, cellular physiology, etc. Otherwise, continue to live in a dreamworld.

Those convinced against their will are of the same opinion still.

Michael, I acknowledge a better understanding into science and research is important to improving cancer treatments. Indeed, we are always going to have people who are sick and having the best "treatment available" is only a good thing. I think there is some merit to this article however. Over the last 40 years, the USA have spent billions of dollars on breast cancer research. But since 1970, the risk of breast cancer has actually increased from 10% to 12%. (http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Detection/probability-breast-cancer). Surely, from what we know about nutrition, even if "the science" may not conclusively link breast cancer to poor diet, wouldn't that be worth considering as a cause? Let's spend money into researching the cause such that we can prevent it in the first place. Why is it that the focus on breast cancer or any other cancer for that matter is the "treatment or cure". Improving one's health through diet, exercise etc. surely should be considered by now. But the fact the "cancer industry" seems determined to address "treatments" and "cure" rather the "cause", does make one suspicious, even if their intentions are honourable. As Andrew Saul said in the Food Matters DVD, "Good nutrition is really the only thing we haven't tried". Science is important, but has its limitations. Even "good quality" research has limitations, and resarch is constantly changing. Therefore we must not discount getting back to basics and building a society who is motivated and educated about good health. So we have this "tug of war" between the medical profession, and the natural therapists (nutritionists, chiropractors etc). Both have their place but perhaps in the case of breast cancer, a change of approach into the preventative paradigm may be the shift which reduces the deaths of breast cancer. It seems that our current approach isn't working too well.

you write with an us v them overtone, i know organisers who have lost a loved one, volunteer time and try thier best to organise a rally walk and give people a day they can remember , support and be supported. they have no hidden agenda to keep people ignorant and would give thier right arm and more to find a cancer cure or prevention or any way you want to say it. you are guilty of the very scare tactics you are so quick on pointing out others are using. If you have something to add lets hear it and if anyone else has an opinion lets hear them too. hopefully we can all find an answer. i thought food matters was a great show, dont cheapen it by getting so worked up on a tangent your no longer helping the original quest.. you think the average public woman is an ignorant fool that cant survive without you pointing out these ideas? they're not facts because you haven't provided one bit of evidence to support what you say. i could say 1 in 2 journalists use shock and confrontation to get a reaction from thier unresearched work. does this mean its now fact? you word it to suggest anyone trying to sell something is a money crazed bastard, who will kill to get more profit?? yet at the end of the article you kindly suggest it would be much better to purchase your DVD's?.hhmmmm

Personally, I believe the way women are recruited into screening resembles herd mentality - very paternalistic. There is a double standard in healthcare - informed consent is respected for men, not women. The screening authorities and doctors are permitted
to provide women with misleading "information", suppress risk information and anything that might put you off testing and inflate the benefits - all carefully worded to manipulate...perhaps, throw in a scare campaign. I have no interest in campaigns or public
health targets - I care about MY health. I assess my risk profile and do my own research - on the basis of information that is not released to women, I've rejected both cervical (over 25 years ago) and breast cancer screening. Some doctors are outraged that
a woman would dare reject an elective test - our screening is apparently compulsory. I disagree.... I'd urge every woman to read, "The risks and benefits of mammograms" at the Nordic Cochrane Institute website, a rare unbiased summary put together as they
were concerned at the "information" being given to women. Also, the lecture given at UCL recently by Prof Michael Baum, UK breast cancer surgeon, "Breast cancer screening: the inconvenient truths"....at the Medphyzz site. I consider the way women are recruited
into screening, counted like sheep to reach Govt-set targets, as a great threat to our health and rights. I also strongly disagree with paying doctors target payments for pap testing - it's unethical and creates a potential conflict of interest. The vast over-detection
and over-treatment of healthy women to "possibly" help 0.45% of women is shameful - IMO, this testing would not be approved today. There are no randomized controlled trials for pap testing, but if it helps anyone, the numbers are small....fewer than 0.45%.
This was always a rare cancer in natural decline before screening started - 0.65% is the lifetime risk...other factors continue to have an impact on the death rate, but all of the credit for any decline is grabbed by the screening authority. We know more hysterectomies,
fewer smokers, better condoms & hygiene, less STD, better standard of living/stronger immune systems all have an impact. Stomach cancer has fallen by a similar or greater margin with no screening at all, but you can bet if there was a screening test, they'd
be grabbing the credit. 77% is the lifetime risk of referral after an "abnormal" pap test in Australia - 95% in the States - almost all referrals are false positives to possibly help fewer than 0.45% (taking out false negative cases) We also over-screen and
over-treat which increases the risks. Women under 30 don't benefit from pap tests#, but produce lots of false positives. (Research by Angela Raffle, UK expert) 2 yearly testing is too often and increases false positives for no additional benefit. Finland has
the lowest rates of cc in the world and sends the fewest women for biopsies, they offer 5 to 7 tests, 5 yearly from age 30. Some women could safely forget testing altogether - IMO, at age 30 if they test negative to high grade HPV they could forget about this
testing until/unless their risk profile changed...at the moment women are not given this information, they're tested "in case". Women should be left to make up their own minds. (#See: Cervical cancer screening in Australian Doctor July 2006 by Assoc Prof Margaret
Davy and Dr Shorne - where this scenario is raised - testing women negative to HR HPV) Also see: Dr Joel Sherman's medical privacy forum under women's privacy concerns Pts 1 to 6 - in the side bar you'll find links to the research by Angela Raffle (1000 women
need regular smears for 35 years to save one woman from cervical cancer:BMJ 2003/4) and others. Cervical screening is highly political, highly emotive with lots of vested interests - one billion dollars is generated every year in the States from excess cervical
biopsies. Their doctors also sell well-woman exams that are not evidence based and more likely to harm you. While we spent millions and millions "fighting" this rare cancer, other far more common cancers/health issues are largely ignored... It is vitally important
for every woman to protect herself from these programs and if you want to test, make it on your terms.