10 comment  view:10   blogger:0 view

  1. fastandeffective

    Bayes' Theorem and Breast Cancer Screening with mammography.

    Please update and re-upload this excellent informative video using current scientific data.

    Sensitivity and Specificity of screening digital mammography in a recent extensive Norwegian clinical trial were 54.1% and 94.2% respectively.



    0.01×0.541 + 0.99×0.942



    0.00541 + 0.93258








    If a woman receives a positive mammography result for breast cancer the probability she actually suffers from the disease is only 0.57%



  2. Roji Kaur

    Please Hindi speak

  3. Blessed Indeed!

    Great 👍🏾 I just had my mammogram and I chose the 3D as well to have done and the technician went ahead and did the 2D too! I’m praying all is well 💜✝️💜

  4. roxxylala26

    I have dense breast & had a mammogram 2 years ago & got nothing from the Dr. & now just felt a very small & hard golf ball in my right breast. Scared & on Monday urgently getting another mammogram or ultrasound. 😢 Pray for me.

  5. Baide TKO

    Cancer producing technology.

  6. Ratattack

    Nope…. its how to GET cancer early.

  7. yolanda munoz

    What if is no little bums or any other diferente unisual thing ??are we only have that guide to know abouted?

  8. Habibi Keishi

    I had sonomammography and mammography yet nothing was seen on the lump why I consulted my doctor. 4 months after,;I was diagnosed with Stage3B Breast Cancer.

  9. Runcible2010

    And your "newest technology" such as tomosynthesis, 3D mammography, is brought to you by GE, which exposed prisoners' and other captured human specimens' scrotums, to radiation which caused cancer. If these research universities do not understand what low-dose radiation does to people who have genomes susceptible to DNA alteration from low-dose ionizing radiation, then they should be put out of business. This videostream is a perfect example of dangerous disinformation being given to women.

  10. Runcible2010

    Low-dose ionizing radiation of mammography has been found by medical geneticists to cause double-strand breaks in tumor suppressor DNA, such as pt53 and BRCA1/2 (and there are 14 other genes identified as associated with breast cancer that are susceptible to breakage and mutation), altering the DNA repair pathway and therefore causing mutations which can result in neoplasms (tumors). The statements of hospitals and doctors that mammography lowers the mortality rate and "prevents cancer through early detection," are creditably refuted by the Cochrane Collaboration metastudy of over 600,000 women. No, Mammography has NOT been shown to reduce mortality from breast cancer more than l/2 of one percent, results in an unacceptably high rate of false positives and an unacceptably high rate of false negatives, overdiagnosis resulting in mutilation and traumatizing of women for no good reason. Further, Calcifications are normal as people get older. They are not necessarily associated with breast cancer. Let's hear you talk about double-strand breaks in the DNA repair pathways and mammography…. This is exactly what is material to informed consent, which women are being denied by these intentional misrepresentations. Further, calcifications completely unassociated with any cancer whatsoever, commonly occur. Mammography is incapable of making a distinction between a benign and a malignant artifact. And mammography misses tumors in dense breast tissue. But it will image a tumor when it is too late, after years of exposing patients to low-dose ionizing radiation. Mammography is an extremely poor test, and in only the rarest of cases does mammography save a life.Mammography does not save any more than 0.05 percent of lives. It is time to retire this lucrative but unethical mode of "breast cancer screening." Its use is unconscionable.

leave me a message

Copyright@Springever inc. © Chinese Medicine All rights reserved.  

User login ⁄ Register