A mammogram promotional blitz is big on promise, but the “evidence” is empty

Glass half empty

Did you catch the recent TV advertising blitz from the radiation industry?

No, it didn’t come during commercial breaks. You saw it DURING the news.

It might have been dressed up as news. But what it really was was a coordinated genuflection to mammography.

Newscasters may not have realized they were delivering a sales pitch, as they read the latest propaganda rolling off the teleprompter.

But they were certainly cheering the new “study” declaring that women should start getting regular screening at 40.

And maybe they aren’t as bad as Ron Burgundy when it comes to letting people put words in their mouths. But not one of them seemed to stop and think about the “wisdom” of exposing women to radiation every…single…year, from 40 on.

Stay classy, guys.

Because here’s what they ignored…

That path leads directly to an INCREASED risk of breast cancer.

So what are they actually reporting on?

Something is missing

The basics actually seem pretty solid. At first, that is. But when you read a few lines down, it all falls apart.

Among hundreds of women who were diagnosed with breast cancer in their 40s and later died, about 70 percent did not get regular mammograms.

The too-easy conclusion is that mammograms would have saved them.

And there’s your teleprompter version of the story.

But one doctor saw right through this bunk.

A Dartmouth professor of medicine pointed out to Fox News that the study only tells half the story. In addition to those hundreds of women who died from breast cancer, the study also looked at THOUSANDS who survived.

But THEIR mammogram stats are a no-show.

The Dartmouth doc said, “If, among women who live, 30 percent were screened and 70 percent were not, everyone would agree that screening had no effect.”

So…why are those stats missing?

Hmmm… If I were a betting gal, I’d say it’s because they didn’t fit with the dogma about starting yearly mammograms at 40?

Ladies, you do not have to submit to radiation and “smushing” to get screened. There’s an alternative that’s MUCH safer and more effective than mammography.

Of course, we’re the only ones talking about it. Since it doesn’t meet the national propaganda guidelines…

If you want to really annoy the radiation cheerleaders, just go here to read about the breast screening alternative that will someday bring mammography ad blitzes to a grinding halt.

Sources:
“A failure analysis of invasive breast cancer” Cancer, Published online ahead of print, 9/9/13, onlinelibrary.wiley.com

“Breast cancer screening: New study suggests benefit of early mammograms” Rachael Rettner, Fox News 9/9/13, foxnews.com