How Safe Are Mammograms? The Myths Uncovered...

Once a woman reaches the age of 50, she may start considering taking part in a breast-screening programme. In the UK, this means having a mammogram every three years up to the age of 64.

I hope to have some very good news for these women in about a year and a half when well get the results of a trial that will hopefully do away with mammograms forever.

Youre going to WHAT?

Women who go to a radiology clinic for their first mammogram are often surprised to find that their breasts must be squeezed between two flat surfaces so the tissue will be sparse enough to allow tumours to be revealed. And you can be certain that its not a tender squeeze.

To call this uncomfortable is a nice way of saying excruciatingly painful.

But it's also dangerous. The compression required for mammograms can actually break down cancer tissue and rupture small blood vessels that support the cancer, causing it to spread.

This is known as the compression contradiction, and heres what US physician Dr William Campbell Douglass II, has to say about it: I find it maddeningly contradictory that medical students are taught to examine breasts gently to keep any possible cancer from spreading, yet radiologists are allowed to manhandle them for a mammogram.

When Dr. Douglass says manhandle, thats a nice way of saying squashed flat.

Three up...three down

Whenever I write about mammograms I always receive messages from women who feel they owe their lives to cancer detected by mammograms. I dont doubt that at all, but I still believe that mammograms will someday be viewed as barbaric and ineffective.

Three common mammography myths are:

Mammograms are safe. In fact, they're not. Compression of the breast may prompt cancer to spread. And then theres the radiation: A mammogram delivers about 1,000 times more radiation than a chest x-ray and carries a risk of cardiovascular damage.

Mammograms catch cancer at an early stage. In fact, if a tumour is large enough to be detected by a mammogram its most likely already in an advanced state.

Mammograms save lives. In fact, studies have shown that women who have mammograms suffer about the same rate of death due to breast cancer as women who do not have mammograms.

Reading the currents

Mammography is not the future of breast cancer detection. And Ive got a feeling that even proponents of mammography would agree with that.

In the e-alert Yet another myth concerning mammograms (14/8/03), I told you about an experimental technique called computed tomography laser mammography (CTLM); a breast imaging system that uses a combination of laser light and thermal heat (but no radiation) to produce a full colour, three-dimensional cross-section view of each breast. This method - which is quick and painless - is still being developed and tested.

Today well turn our attention to another new technique called the Breast Cancer Detection System (BCDS); a method thats also completely non-invasive and radiation-free. And best of all: no squashing.

Hear that sound? Thats the sound of female HSI members shouting in unison: Halleluiah!

BCDS technology is based on the discovery that electricity passes through cancerous tissue differently than it passes through normal tissue. A BCDS device consists of several strips containing electronic sensors that are laid over the breast in a spoke-like pattern. Very low electrical currents are transmitted into the breast without causing any pain to the patient. Diagnosis is made with computer analysis.

An American company called Z-tech is now conducting the final stage of clinical trials with an 18-month test of BCDS at 16 medical centres in the US, Canada and Europe. And you can be sure that this is a trial I'll be following very closely.