{"id":2187,"date":"2015-06-26T11:54:17","date_gmt":"2015-06-26T18:54:17","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.naturalpathremedies.com\/blog\/?p=2187"},"modified":"2023-11-15T12:01:30","modified_gmt":"2023-11-15T20:01:30","slug":"studies-show-radiation-causes-breast-cancer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.NaturalPathRemedies.com\/blog\/studies-show-radiation-causes-breast-cancer\/","title":{"rendered":"Studies Show Radiation Increases Cancer Risk"},"content":{"rendered":"

Updated Aug. 20, 2020:<\/h4>\n

It is \u00a0well established that exposure to ionizing radiation can trigger mutations and other genetic damage that can contribute to rampant growth of\u00a0\u00a0normal cells. This article presents studies on Breast Cancer, but radiation affects all cells.<\/h4>\n

So it seems amazing how mainstream medicine and governing Health departments\u00a0 contunally dismiss the idea that medical imaging tests from mammograms to CT scans do not play a role in causing breast cancer. Take this example from the web site for Cornell University’s Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors:<\/p>\n

In answer to the question “Is ionizing radiation a cause of breast cancer?”, the Cornell experts say “Yes ….. female breast tissue is highly susceptible to radiation effects.” But then they disregard the possible hazard from mammography x-rays saying the risk \u2026”should not be a factor in individual decisions to undergo this procedure. The same is true for most diagnostic x-ray procedures.”<\/p>\n

If that’s not confusing enough, they turn around and state: “Nonetheless, unnecessary radiation exposures should be avoided and continued vigilance is required to ensure that the benefits associated with specific procedures outweigh the future risks<\/strong>.”<\/p>\n

Risk – benefit ratios are often overlooked in pharmaceutical medicine.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Why radiation increases risk of breast cancer<\/h4>\n

Common sense suggests there is plenty of reason to be worried about radiation causing breast cancer. And now there’s a new reason to be concerned. Researchers at the U.S. Department of Energy’s Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (Berkeley Lab) have discovered that radiation exposure can alter cells’ micro-environment (the environment surrounding cells). And that greatly raises the odds that future cells will become cancerous.<\/p>\n

The reason is that signals from a cell’s micro-environment, altered by radiation exposure, can cause a cell’s phenotype to change by regulating or de-regulating the way a cell uses its genes. The result can be a cell that not only becomes pre-cancerous but that passes this pre-malignant condition on to future cells.<\/p>\n

“Our work shows that radiation can change the micro-environment of breast cells …..\u00a0a much greater potential to be cancerous,” stated Paul Yaswen, cell biologist and breast cancer research specialist with Berkeley Lab’s Life Sciences Division.<\/p>\n

“Many in the cancer research community have been slow to acknowledge and incorporate in their work the idea that cells in human tissues are not independent entities, but are highly communicative with each other and with their micro-environment,” he added.<\/p>\n

To find out what radiation exposure does to the cellular environment and how it could impact the future of cell behavior, the Berkeley Lab scientists grew normal breast tissue in culture dishes for about a week. Then they zapped each set with a single treatment of a low-to-moderate dose of radiation and compared the irradiated cells to sets of breast cells that had not been irradiated.<\/p>\n

The published results showed that four to six weeks after the radiation exposure, the normal breast cancer cells showed\u00a0premature cell senescence (aging & deterioration).<\/p>\n

The researchers pointed out that the levels of radiation used in their experiments were not as much as a woman would be exposed to during a single routine mammogram but were comparable to those a woman could receive during a CT scans or radiotherapy “and could represent sources of concern.”<\/p>\n

Women are often pushed to get annual mammograms, raising their overall radiation exposure through the years.\u00a0Mammographies are referred to in Lorene Benoit’s book: \u00a0<\/a><\/em><\/strong>The Paw Paw Program – The “Christopher Columbus” Approach to Cancer – The World IS Round and Cancer CAN Be Treated Naturally<\/a>,\u00a0<\/em><\/strong>on pages 34-35.<\/p>\n

Questions to Ask Your Doctor<\/a><\/strong>\u00a0is\u00a0 a good starting point anytime radiation techniques are recommended.<\/p>\n

A 2008 report from JAMA \u00a0found that the start of screening mammography programs throughout Europe has been associated with increased incidence of breast cancer: http:\/\/www.naturalnews.com\/024901.html.<\/p>\n

A Johns Hopkins 2015 study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute that concluded radiation exposure from mammograms could trigger malignancies in women at risk for genetic breast cancer has since been retracted, likely due to BIg Pharma & funding pressure.<\/p>\n

ALL Electro Magnetic Frequencies and Radiation (EMF and EMR) \u00a0are causing health challenges, including wireless, smart meters, and cell phones. The cumulative effect is that we are creating a microwave within which we are being baked!<\/p>\n

This\u00a0 2015 Canadian Parliamentary Report on “RF and EM Radiation and Health of Canadians”<\/a> is one of many worldwide. The full Standing Committee Report \u00a0presented major concerns\u00a0 with respect to Safety Code 6, considered by hundreds of scientific experts to be grossly outdated – even in 2015. Now, in 2020, with advent of more radiation from thousands of satellites radiating the earth, 5G, 6G and 7G, this is more troubling, yet none of the recommendations from this report have been followed up by government. ie. they are NOT protecting citizens. Some Concerns from the Expert Panel:<\/b><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n