Re: Mammograms

Actually JBR, that's not a bad idea - if you're expecting a bit of pain you can brace yourself for it. Some years ago, I had some damage to one of my fingers and the internal bleeding under the nail caused great pressure and tenderness. The doctor stuck a needle under my fingernail all the way down into my finger to `bleed` me and relieve the pressure. To say it made my eyes water a bit was an understatement.

Several years later, the same thing happened but this time, I shoved a needle in myself and though uncomfortable didn't hurt half as much as before.

Re: Mammograms

I read an article about two years ago that described a new mammography machine that didn't require all the compression but because so many health care providers have invested in the old ones they cannot or will not pay for the new version.

Re: Mammograms

I had one done last week and I commented that it didn't seem to hurt as much this time . I've received a letter giving me the all clear and it says that after 70 you no longer get called for a routine check up but you can request one if you want to continue having them

Re: Mammograms

Hi

A simple view of life for all men.

Avoid Lady Doctors, horrible things they are, no concept of pain as far as men are concerned.

Absolutely evil beings.

As a callow youth, doing my Meat Inspection Training, I managed to get a knife through my hand.

After a trip to the hospital and an X Ray, knife still stuck in and bleeding heavily I was seen by a Lady Doctor.

I understand you did this at the Slaughterhouse?

Yep, I replied.

This will hurt then, as she slid it out slowly without any anaesthetic at all.

No local anaesthetic for the stitches or cleaning it out either.

In particular, avoid any Vegetarian Lady Doctors.

Re: Mammograms

The mammographer would (politely) encourage the patient to press harder!

As for how much to compress: experience, visual recognition of the shape of the breast.

Re: Mammograms

Exactly.

However, when I have seen it done they have used a red hot needle to make a hole in the nail. Apparently, that is less painful than sticking a needle under the nail, although I wouldn't want to have either!

Re: Mammograms

Can you describe the machine, or provide a link?

Re: Mammograms

Yes, although invitations are not sent for 'really old people'(! ), you can always request one. You should regularly feel for lumps or other visual signs. My wife's web site lists such things.

http://wommen.org.uk/

Re: Mammograms

Clearly, she thought you were a nasty slaughterhouse worker!

Re: Mammograms

TBH I think we can expect the use of Mammography to decline in the future.

It is known that having a Mammogram exposes you to a dose of ionising radiation and that having repeated mammograms will thus actually increase your risk of getting cancer.

Irradiating the body is not a good idea.

The medical industry apologists will of course refute and harp on about how good it is to have these irradiating scans and have the peace of mind that you don't (yet) have breast cancer.

The more you go, the more you scan the more you irradiate your breasts until presumably you DO get cancer. Then the foolish will exclaim with glee at how fortunate they were to detect it early !!

All part of the great cancer big business apparatus imo.

Do your research.

Cochrane Study On Mammography

http://www.cochrane.org/CD001877/BRE...th-mammography

"The review includes seven trials that involved 600,000 women in the age range 39 to 74 years who were randomly assigned to receive screening mammograms or not."

"The studies which provided the most reliable information showed that screening did not reduce breast cancer mortality. "

"Studies that were potentially more biased (less carefully done) found that screening reduced breast cancer mortality. "

"However, screening will result in some women getting a cancer diagnosis even though their cancer would not have led to death or sickness. Currently, it is not possible to tell which women these are, and they are therefore likely to have breasts or lumps removed and to receive radiotherapy unnecessarily."


"If we assume that screening reduces breast cancer mortality by 15% after 13 years of follow-up and that overdiagnosis and overtreatment is at 30%, it means that . . .

for every 2000 women invited for screening throughout 10 years, one will avoid dying of breast cancer and 10 healthy women, who would not have been diagnosed if there had not been screening, will be treated unnecessarily

Furthermore, more than 200 women will experience important psychological distress including anxiety and uncertainty for years because of false positive findings."

--------

The radiation dose of a mammogram is said to be about 0.4mSv and possibly twice that for ladies with larger bosoms.

The average background radiation we absorb every day from cosmic rays and the like is said to be 3mSv in a year.

Thus each mammogram visit gives you the equivalent of about 7 weeks worth of natural radiation (or more) but it is of course being focused directly on the breasts rather than the whole body.

As with all things put out by the (Big Pharma) medical industry I would personally be somewhat sceptical of those figures and expect the radiation doses to be much higher but that's just my personal scepticism.