doctors are now beginning to realize that, unless the tumour is entirely removed at the same time, such tampering may cause the cancer to ‘seed’ elsewhere. This is now such an acknowledged risk that doctors performing prostate biopsy routinely offer radiotherapy at the same time. Cancer-seeding occurs in one-third of cases in breast biopsy140 and a sixth of cases in liver biopsy.141
‘Such a biopsy on a secondary tumour, which was diagnosed after a “local” needle biopsy, I consider responsible for the death of my beloved wife Geena at the age of 50,’writes Conor from Ireland. ‘Geena was then radiant, playing sports and active in the garden. She was also into alternative therapies and fighting her cancer magnificently.’ He goes on:
However, she was pressurized into that surgical biopsy by arrogant dismissals of our expressed fears, and assurances that such a test carried no risk; the doctors stressed the need to locate the primary tumour immediately so that ‘urgent treatment’ could start.
Tragically, medical dogmatism prevailed over our instincts and better judgement, and the biopsy took place. That biopsy caused the tumour (in her neck) to spread rapidly.
It was agonizing to witness. Just two months later, radium had to be prescribed to reduce its growth. From day two of the ‘treatment’, Geena experienced abdominal pain. After its conclusion in September, her decline was precipitous.
A few weeks later, an emergency hysterectomy had to be performed to treat what was finally diagnosed as cancer of the ovaries.
Surgery could not extract all the cancer; what remained spread like wildfire. ‘Last-ditch’ chemotherapy was powerless to prevent it. Geena died on 23rd November.
Twelve years ago, my father died within two weeks of a ‘routine’ biopsy test on his lung.
With this great potential for error and danger, it is vital that you forego any test – even the most seemingly gentle – unless it is truly vital. Also insist on a thorough verbal and physical exam before you get a test. Oftentimes, taking a good clinical history will give your doctor enough information to pre-empt a routine test. Finally, think twice about annual check-up tests when you are feeling perfectly healthy.
If you are told to have a cholesterol test, insist on a test that will measure all your blood lipids and have them compared. The US National Cholesterol Education Panel now recommends that all cholesterol tests should include four components: total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, and triglycerides. Insist on two tests, given at different times at between one and eight weeks apart, preferably by another lab.142 This small inconvenience could save you from a life of drug-taking.
Because of the inherent dangers, CAT scans should be used only in exceptional circumstances, when there is no safer diagnostic tool available. If you do need a CAT scan, insist that one is enough. During all x-rays (even benign ones of the hand or finger), ignore the likely ridicule of nurses and insist that your reproductive organs and thyroid gland are shielded, which can reduce scatter radiation by 20 per cent.143
Whenever possible, avoid contrast agents in imaging tests and look to the safest alternatives. New techniques like endoscopic ultrasound (where sound waves are used with an endoscope) probably offer the safest alternative.
Resist biopsies whenever possible and look into new and safer imaging techniques, such as thermography for breast cancer, ultrasound, MRI or PET scans.
TESTING THE TEST
Before you agree to the simplest test, including one for your blood-pressure, ask your doctor some of the following questions:
• Do I really need this test? Is there another, safer way of determining the same thing (such as a thorough interview and physical exam by an experienced medic)?
• What will you advise me to do if the tests are normal/abnormal? If your doctor cannot do anything about any abnormal findings, why take the test?
• What is this test’s track record of accuracy? What are the risks of the test? Of the subsequent treatment? Again, you may have to do your homework, contacting the medical journals, the internet, our offices and even the manufacturers of the test (see pages 246–8 for more suggestions about how to do your own research).
• What are the qualifications of the operators (and how many hours are they likely to have been on duty when you take the test)? If the operators are house officers at the end of a 72-hour stint, you would be wise to insist on more experienced – and rested – parties to handle the equipment.
• When was the equipment last checked for safety/accuracy? This is a particularly pertinent question in a health-care system increasingly strapped for cash.
• What dosage (of radiation or ultrasound, say) will I receive? Are there any protective devices (shields, in the case of radiation) that I can wear? A protective apron worn when you receive dental x-rays can prevent the rest of your body getting ‘zapped’ at the same time.
• Is it possible to use earlier test results so that I am not exposed to further risk? Insist that your dentist keep your x-rays permanently on file. And if you move, insist that they be transferred to your new dentist. If your former dentist balks at this, get your Community Health Council to intervene, on the basis of your concern about ‘dosage constraints’.
• What is the real risk of my developing the condition you’re investigating? If the doctor suggests a mammogram to investigate a breast lump and you’re 15 and have never been exposed to hormones, the risk of your developing breast cancer at your age may be far less than the risk of the test.
All this test-taking presumes that you have symptoms, which is why you went to your doctor in the first place. These days, you’re more than likely to get screened for diseases even before there’s anything wrong with you – and never more so than from the first moment you are ‘diagnosed’ as being pregnant.
3 Prenatal Testing: Dead Certainty
The moment you first miss a period, medical science informs you that you will not be able to give birth unless you are subjected to a large round of prenatal tests, all supposedly designed to ‘put your mind at rest’. In reality, these tests have the opposite effect. According to medical science, for instance, my daughter, Caitlin, could have had Down’s syndrome. If I had listened to the experts I might have aborted her or lost her through a high-tech, test-induced miscarriage. The very thought sends a chill down my spine.
When I got pregnant, I firmly resisted all recommendations to have ultrasound monitoring and amniocentesis despite being a reasonably elderly primagravitas (37) at conception, because of my fears about their known and unknown risks.
Nevertheless, when I was 16
