Thermography is nothing new. In fact, it’s been around since the early 1960s and since then there has not been a single clinical trial that can substantiate the efficacy of the theory behind it.
On the other hand, there is an ongoing Scandanavian trial (Tabar, et al.) which has over the past 27 years proven beyond a doubt that mammography, and in recent years, full field digital mammography, is the most effective method of early detection.
The major difference between the two examinations is the specificity, ie not only that there is a problem, but also what the problem is.
Specificity on a digital mammogram is upward of 95%, while thermography is less than 50%.
Contrary to popular belief, digital mammography does not inflict trauma on the breast.
The breast is held in place by a positioning paddle which exerts an evenly distributed pressure of around 10 pounds per square inch on the breast for the time of the exposure. This is far less than the 21-25 pounds on the old analogue mammograms.
As to the claims that mammography exposes the body to levels of radiation up to 1 000 times greater than that of a chest x-ray, the SABS Radiation Monitoring Service and the Radiation Control Board will gladly provide the data proving that the levels on a digital mammogram are less than half of those on a standard chest x-ray.
Digital mammography exposes the patient to less radiation than what you would receive on a plane flight from Durban to Johannesburg, not to mention the levels of radiation we are being exposed to while using electronic equipment.
Breast cancer is every person’s concern. Annual examination by a qualified medical professional and monthly self-checks are crucial for finding changes as early as possible before they spread beyond the breast into the rest of the body.
CONCERNED MAMMOGRAPHER
