TG-1 * Transgallaxys Forum 1

Pages: [1]

Author Topic: Colonoscopy helps to prevent cancer  (Read 1288 times)


  • Jr. Member
  • *
  • Posts: 1094
Colonoscopy helps to prevent cancer
« on: January 17, 2009, 08:41:19 AM »

Aus der Healthfraud-Mailingliste:

Date: Sat, 17 Jan 2009 08:27:12 -0600

A constant barrage of criticism by fringe healthcare practitioners  
such as DCs, NDs, "holists" and others of that ilk is meant to inform  
the public that mainstream medical professionals (MDs, DOs) aren't  
interested in preventing or treating disease. They simply treat  
symptoms rather than addressing the "whole person" and taking steps  
to keeping us from getting sick in the first place. (Of course they  
either ignore the success of inoculations in eradicating major killer  
diseases from much of the world or, worse, make deranged claims that  
shots cause more harm than good).

A letter to the editor in this morning's Chicago Tribune is a fine  
example of why the fringies are wrong.
Written by a Chicago area MD  
the letter cites colonoscopy as a highly effective method for  
preventing cancer. Here's the whole letter:

This is in response to "Medical stats can cloud real risk  
factors" (Smart, Jan. 11), which stated, "Clearly, a screening test  
will not protect you from getting colon cancer. But because of early  
detection, it might keep you from dying of the disease."

This is a false statement.

Colonoscopy screening allows doctors to identify polyps (precursors  
to cancer) and remove them before they turn into cancer, therefore  
preventing cancer from developing in the first place. Prevention  
through colon-cancer screening is credited for the recent decline in  
the incidence and death rates from colon cancer announced late last  
year by leading cancer organizations.

The life-time risk for developing colon cancer is approximately 6  
percent, and by getting a colonoscopy at regular and appropriate  
intervals, the risk may be reduced to a very low number.

While the statistics may seem small, we would not think that losing  
50,000 people each year from the disease was insignificant if it  
included our mother, father, sister or brother. And for many people,  
it does.

This is a preventable disease; if you are 50 or over and at average  
risk, talk to your doctor about getting screened.



No doubt some chiropractors and others who practice outside the  
scientific field will counter with some trumped-up reasons to impugn  
the procedure. I've heard of cases of injury and death resulting from  
colonoscopies but, as stated by the letter writer, there is  
overwhelming proof that huge numbers of lives are saved by such  
screening. At the same time, the DCs insist that chiropractic neck  
jerking is safer than having one's hair washed in a beauty salon, all  
the while ignoring the reality that there is no known benefit from  
neck adjustments.
(See, for example:
which includes the following from a former chiropractor:

I have been doing a vascular surgery rotation for the past month,  
which is part of my postgraduate medical education. During my  
chiropractic training, when the subject of manipulation-induced  
stroke was brought up, we were reassured that "millions of  
chiropractic adjustments are made each year and only a few incidents  
of stroke have been reported following neck manipulation." I recently  
found that two of the patients on my vascular service that suffered a  
cerebrovascular accident (stroke) had undergone neck manipulation by  
a chiropractor, one the day that symptoms had begun and the other  
four days afterward. If indeed the incidence of stroke is rare, one  
M.D. would see a case of manipulation-induced CVA about every 10  
years. But I believe I have seen two in the past month! I therefore  
urge my medical colleagues to question their patients regarding  
recent visits to a chiropractor/neck manipulation when confronted  
with patients that present with the neurologic symptoms of stroke. I  
also urge potential chiropractic patients to not allow their necks to  
be manipulated in any way. The risk-to-benefit ratio is much too high  
to warrant such a procedure.


Kurt Youngmann

healthfraud mailing list
Pages: [1]