Did you enjoy this radio show? Average rating: 4.9/5 (99 votes)
What do you think? Click the stars to vote!
If you have more to say, post a comment below!
Click the arrow to play audio file:click here if you cannot view audio player: BB-747.mp3
Bonus Interview:
click here if you cannot view audio player: HadlerScreeningFull.mp3
When an official with the American Cancer Society suggested recently that we expect too much from some screening tests, such as those for breast or prostate cancer, he got a lot of pushback. We get more insight on the utility of these tests from Nortin Hadler, MD.
Vitamin D levels are surprisingly low in children. What's responsible for this serious vitamin shortfall and what can be done about it?
We take your questions about prescription drugs, over-the-counter medicines, dietary supplements and home remedies.
Guests:
Nortin Hadler, MD, MACP, FACR, FACOEM, is Professor of Medicine and Microbiology/Immunology at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. His books include Stabbed in the BACK: Confronting Back Pain in an Overtreated Society, Worried Sick: A Prescription for Health in an Overtreated America, and The Last Well Person:How to Stay Well Despite the Health-Care System. The photo is of Dr. Hadler
Jonathan Mansbach, MD, is a staff physician at Children's Hospital Boston, and Assistant Professor of Pediatrics at Harvard Medical School.
Did you enjoy this radio show? Average rating: 4.9/5 (99 votes)
What do you think? Click the stars to vote!
If you have more to say, post a comment below!
My prostate cancer was found when I was 54 . My PSA went from 2.5 to 4.5 to 9 in a mater of 6 months. The digital exam did not find any thing. I had a biopsy which was not good. I had surgery right away and the cancer was out of the prostate capsule, In nerves and lymph node's. My PSA following surgery did not drop. So I had hormone treatment, and A full course of radiation external beam. Had I not had a PSA run as part of a normal health screening three years ago, just where would I be now? My PSA still is not 0, but it is below 0.5. But would I be looking at bone cancer now?
Hello,
Thank you for this interesting and insightful presentation. I'm delighted we have the health professionals like Dr Hadler who base their opinions and recommendations on the research rather than myths. Obviously PSA testing and mammograms are pretty useless, but nevertheless still extensively used. I am a woman, so I will focus on the mammograms.
Mammograms are not only unreliable, but also potentially dangerous (health risk with radiation). Multiple studies suggest that 70-80 % of the mammographically detected tumors weren't tumors at all. False results cause additional (often highly traumatic i.e. biopsies) testing, emotional and financial stress, and invasive procedures.
Mammograms also have a high rate of missed tumors, or "false negatives." Dr. Samuel S. Epstein ("The Politics of Cancer") states that in women ages 40 to 49 mammograms miss 25% of cancers! The National Cancer Institute (NCI) puts the false negative rate even higher at 40 percent among women ages 40-49. According to NIH (National Institutes of Health) mammograms miss 10 percent of malignant tumors in women over 50.
Frequent and repetitive mammograms present a substantial risk associated with radiation. Dr. John W. Gofman (an expert on health effects of ionizing radiation) states that 75 percent of breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or minimizing exposure to the ionizing radiation. This includes mammography, x-rays and other medical and dental sources.
Some more statistics: Since mammographic screening was introduced, the incidence of a form of breast cancer called ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) has increased by 328 percent. In addition to harmful radiation, mammography may also help spread existing cancer cells due to the considerable pressure placed on the woman's breast during the procedure. According to some health practitioners, this compression could cause existing cancer cells to metastasize from the breast tissue.
Cancer research has also found a gene, called oncogene AC, that is extremely sensitive to even small doses of radiation. A significant percentage of women in the United States have this gene, which could increase their risk of mammography-induced cancer. They estimate that 10,000 A-T carriers will die of breast cancer this year due to mammography.
The risk of radiation is higher among younger women. The NCI released evidence that, among women under 35, mammography could cause 75 cases of breast cancer for every 15 it identifies. Another Canadian study found a 52 percent increase in breast cancer mortality in young women given annual mammograms. UK
Dear Terry & Joe Graedon:
Thank you for your informative programs. If our country was not subject to the medical industrial complex and big pharma, we wouldn't be having this dialog now, and our healthcare system wouldn't be bankrupt. Our cancer industry operates under the system of hype and fear.
I am healthy 67-year old female who has had 2 mammograms and 2 colonoscopies during my entire lifetime--both only after being pressured by well-meaning friends. I'm sure I must have had cancer cells in my body at some point(according the Johns Hopkins cancer news.) My parents gave me the genes for colon cancer, diabetes, Alzheimers, high cholesterol, high blood pressure, etc. However, my weight has not changed since college, I take no drugs, avoid processed foods and meat, get aerobic exercise 4 times a week, and do yoga. I am in better health and have more energy than I did at 35.
Your show today was outstanding... and courageous. A huge thanks to Dr. Hadler for his direct and knowledgeable information on medical testing. I have not had a mammogram for many years - since the last one left a purple bruise over a sizable lump in my left breast. It makes no sense to me to compress a breast that may have a cancerous lump. And then have to wait while oncology appointments are scheduled, decisions are made, etc. I seldom tell people, even close friends, that I forgo mammograms since they are such sacred cows of the cancer industry and thus the public. I am so glad this is changing especially since there are better alternatives such as thermography. The industry will only change when consumers become educated and say 'no'. Thank you for your work.
I enjoyed your program this past week end, on the effectiveness (or lack thereof) of various screening tests for cancer with Dr. Hadler. I run a high PSA score (generally between 6 and 10, which I have been tested every 3 or 4 months for about 6 or 7 years now. But 2 biopsies have not found any cancer. I guess that is not too uncommon.
Anyway, I thought I heard you mention, you had a review on the colonoscopy as a screening test for cancer on your web site. As I am due to have one in about 10 days, I was curious, and wanted to read it. I can't find it on this web site. Can you tell me where I can find it?
Thanks.
Thanks to Dr. Hadler for his ongoing willingness to take on medical dogma in spite of the howls of protest from those who practice medicine on the basis of intuition or accepted standards without requiring evidence in support.
I suggest that a physician should inform a patient of the potential benefit and also the risk of any screening test and the risk of dying of the disease in question before performing a screening test. Beware especially of organizations selling screening tests such as ultrasounds and PSA testing to all comers.