Could it be so many breasts are squeezed by those Mega Iron Lung machines and probably develo0ped by men..... I had 2 in my 50's and none since and I'm 85.
In my experience, breast cancer is not "diagnosed" by mammography. It is just one tool to find abnormalities that require further testing for a positive diagnosis (biopsies, needle aspiration, ultra sound, etc.) Typically mammogram results are assigned a "BIRADS" score, indicating the level of concern that cancer may be present. My BIRADS was 5, and I was doomed. But my diagnosis didn't come until after a needle biopsy and an ultrasound, and then an MRI.
Also, regarding the initial topic of this thread, the thermal imaging is not widely used in the USA. I asked about it at MD Anderson and was told that even if a person had the thermal imaging, they would also need a mammogram and the additional testing for a cancer diagnosis. They considered the thermal imaging unreliable as a diagnostic tool.
Concerning the OP, "Catching Breast Cancer Early," early detection may involve many tests, once cancer is suspected. Mammograms are just a tool for routine checkups. A few months after a clean mammogram, I felt a very small lump in one breast about the size of a pea. A needle biopsy showed cancer cells so they did 5 more around the area about the size of a quarter. Those 5 showed clean. Note: A needle biopsy was used since it was tissue to be removed and not a liquid as might be taken from a cyst. A smaller lump yet, was found in the other breast using ultra sound and it biopsied clean. I chose to have tissue about golf ball size, from each, removed. One tested stage zero and the other nothing. Without frequent self exams, my story might have been different. I will never regret my decision to have tissue taken from both. After genetic testing a few years ago and since my family both sides has men with prostrate cancer at an alarming rate, even though just a couple of cases of breast cancer, that prostrate cancer in men translates genetically to breast cancer in women.
Well, my wife and I for one are very grateful for mammograms. My wife had been getting them annually and the insurance wanted her to switch to every 2 years instead. My wife refused, paid out of her own pocket to make sure she got them every year. Sure enough, she got a call back on one. She didn’t think it was too likely though after she went back, had a physical exam and did an ultrasound and found nothing. The breast cancer surgeon wasn’t convinced though and wanted to do a biopsy. Sure enough, low grade, low stage cancer. Everybody thought, OK, looks not to be too bad, lumpectomy surgery, then radiation. During the surgery, the surgeon routinely takes two sentinel lymph nodes, those closest to the gland. Guess what, the secondary tumor in the lymph node was as big as the primary and had already eroded through the lymph node. Back for a second surgery, 9 more lymph nodes removed and immediately started chemotherapy, followed by radiation therapy. I shudder to think if my wife had listened to the recommendations and waited a whole additional year to be screened.
My very first one I was called back, maybe that's the routine with all women, call t hem back and let's make more money, anyway I went back they did another one and it was calcifications in the breast. That was it for me, no more. I cut back on calcium intake... The generation before me didn't all this fear, there were no machines.... And one of t he MAIN reasons I started taking Grape Seed Extract in 1995, we were told they may prevent cancers. This is my truth. Couild be the G.S.E. saved me.
I may be one of those the article is referring to. I think I've had only 6 mammograms. Out of the first four, 2 were false positives, requiring ultrasound follow up. The 5th one was years later. They took 44 images! (I kid you not. I counted them.) Something on that session came back positive. I guess they were going to make sure to find something. The option this time was a needle biopsy. I agreed, the surgery was scheduled, then they hit me with this "marker" business. They would leave a 3mm size metal marker permanently at the biopsy site. That was the last straw. I canceled. Agreed to go for another mammogram 6 months later for comparison instead. Registered letters, that had to be signed, arrived from my doctor and someone at the hospital, resolving themselves of responsibility if I decided not to go through with this. Six months later the mammogram came back negative. Whatever they saw had disappeared. No more. That was about 12 years ago.
The little metal marker isn’t uncommon and can really help. My wife’s surgeon left one at the needle biopsy site. This gives a permanent marker, easily identified later. When it came time for surgery, the surgeon used a fluoroscope to inject a visible dye right at the point of the marker. When she cut in for the surgery, there was a brightly stained mass of tissue surrounding the chip. She said she excises all dyed tissue and then scoops/scrapes an addition 2 mm or so around the edge of the excised pocket just to be sure. It’s sometimes easy to miss target tissue when you cut in. Sometime later, while we were waiting for my wife’s chemotherapy session, we talked with another woman who had a similar lumpectomy procedure but was now being treated for recurrence at the same site. My wife told me later that she had a different doc who hadn’t done any of the tagging or dying of the tumor site and I can’t help but wonder if something got missed on the first attempt.
Thermography can pick up cancer at the cellular level long before it has became a tumor. Flir camera can pick up any temperature changes even at a cellular level. It is not aggressive and harmless. Some alternative medicine doctors offer this for diagnosis. I have a flir camera and My wife had a repeating ear infection with the camera we found it was coming from the base of one tooth once that was delt with no more ear problems.
Dyeing tumors is responsible medicine. My colon tumor was dyed during its colonoscopy discovery. It is very important especially with less invasive robotic surgery. It wasn't necessary to dye my breast tumors as they were easy to locate. Masses that can't be felt and are located by imaging, then biopsied, should certainly be dyed or marked. While I am a fan of natural medicines, I am also a fan of modern medicine with all the high tech equipment. Anyone can find a link to an article that supports their opinions or experiences, but I choose what has saved lives at a high rate. Over the last 150 years, the female life expectancy has gone from age 39 to 79. Deaths from breast cancer within 10 years of DX, have dropped by 50% since 1950. I have to think that diagnostic imaging has a lot to do with that.
I'm certainly NOT recommending what I did to anyone else. It was a gamble I was willing to take, based on false positives, the chance that if there was cancer it was the slower growing kind, and more invasive biopsy. If they had recommended another ultrasound, I would have gone for it. I don't know why that wasn't an option this time. Maybe ultrasound is useless also. After several years of laying off mammograms, the probability that this spot was fast-growing type cancer was small, imo.
I also had a tiny tumor marker implanted during needle biopsy. The markers are titanium or sometimes stainless steel, and are said to be harmless if left at the tumor site though they are typically removed by lumpectomy or mastectomy, and as Faye said, are a huge help to a surgeon's naked eye. I also avoided mammograms for the past 10 years or more before my diagnosis. I would not have known I had a problem if not for a pink "bruise" about the size of a quarter that appeared on my skin. Many women are diagnosed within months of a clear mammogram, especially if they have dense tissue. There are no absolutes with cancer.