Unfortunately, the latter is the case. Yet again, a seeming medical advance that is heavily supported and widely utilized has a serious downside that in many ways undercuts not only the effectiveness but the wisdom and judgment of such widespread acceptance and heavy use for so many women despite the hazards. This is nothing new because it has happened again and again and again with all manner of medical diagnostics, therapies, and treatment strategies. As you know, most of the advanced technologies utilized by human beings have inherent health hazards they create, so the benefits come with a high cost in morbidity and mortality.
Using radiation for imaging tissue as a means to detect tumors when that itself is carcinogenic is a kind of folly. It plays on the natural inclination of physicians to be able to do something rather than forced to do nothing but watch and wait until there are palpable lumps that can be biopsied for determining the seriousness of the growth occurring. The ability to do imaging extends the reach and allows a much earlier intervention with the logical assumption that early detection will promote better outcomes through catching things early before metastatic spread, and so on. This indeed can occur, but there are many instances where women end up being harmed, as you point out, from inappropriate medical follow-up based on misinterpretations of the imagery and the time bomb created through its carcinogenic effects on normal tissue to end up causing what it is designed to nip in the bud through early detection. This is all being swept under the rug and concern about it suppressed through mind control manipulation, as is true of an endless parade of widely touted medical advances in the many medications, surgical procedures, and technological adjuncts that inherently contain risks and take a heavy toll from the side effects and misdirection in medical follow-up.
Please login or Register to submit your answer