Mammography vs. Thermography

Many women today are concerned about the effects of accumulated radiation from routine mammograms. That concern is addressed by instead using thermography, which involves no radiation, and ultrasound when necessary.

A major asset of thermography is in the area of early detection and confirmation of breast cancers. In a German study, 54 percent of breast cancer patients were correctly diagnosed by history and physical examination. The number rose to 76 percent when mammography was added. However, when computerized regulation thermography was used, the accuracy of diagnosis rose to 92 percent.

With thermography, we do not have to rely on mammographies. And with the growing controversy on the radiation exposure from repeated mammographies, as well as the not insignificant percentage of false-negative results, thermographic screening becomes increasingly attractive. However, it is always important for women to do thorough manual evaluation of their own breast tissue, and to have the practitioner do likewise.

Computerized regulation thermography, or CRT, is an objective, non-invasive, and safe way of evaluating the body’s functions. CRT, also simply called thermography, is a medical imaging method that supplies information as meaningful as that obtained through an MRI or X ray. Current medical journals contain more than 12,000 citations and studies on thermography.

CRT evaluates body functions by a direct temperature measurement probe instead of by measuring thermal radiation. This scanning method is far more precise than any other thermographic system.

Each internal organ and gland has a corresponding point on the skin. A technician, holding a direct temperature measurement probe, measures the temperature of 68 points on the body. Measurements occur simply by touching a probe against these 68 points. There is no discomfort. Next, the patient partially disrobes, which gives the body a chance to cool. These same points are measured again 10 minutes later.

Adapted from Healthy Medicine, by Robert J. Zieve, M.D. (Bell Pond Books, 2005).


Linda AWAY Be Back
Linda G.5 years ago

I have heard many good things about thermal imaging but in my area it is very expensive and with no insurance I have not tried it yet. I would much prefer to not have mammograms.

Lynn C.
Lynn C.5 years ago

Thanks for letting us know there is an alternative.

Gordana Roljic
Gordana Roljic5 years ago

good to know

Gordana Roljic
Gordana Roljic5 years ago

thanx for article...

Patricia Geller
Patricia Geller5 years ago

Good info, thanks.

Vural K.
Past Member 7 years ago


Poobear Honey
Poobear Honey7 years ago

Well I had an exam done at the Breast Imaging Centers on a machine they call the Sofia. It is a 3-D ultrasound, but the ultrasound wasn't the key it was the 3-D that set it apart. I had a mammogram and they said there was a supicious area. Then I had an ultrasound and they said I should get a biopsy. Before my biopsy that I was terrified of I found an ad showing the Sofia machine so I went there for another opinion. It cost me $299. I got their report before I told them anything. This report said there were several cyst filled with fluid but the breast are symetrical no follow up needed. Wow. So that scared me cause it was new. I got the biopsy. Nothing. I went through all that and Sofia was right. I went back. I neede to know how they were so sure. They showed me using their 3-D software. Unreal! the radiologist can basically hold it in his hand like a baseball turning it round and round looking at it like it is real and then turning it all colors to show me blood flow and other things that made him sure that he could safely tell me see you next year. Because I do have cyst I will be back every year, and OMG no radiation, no compressions and I had no pain. Actually it was pleasurable enough to ask for a smoke. Sorry, its true.

Poobear Honey
Poobear Honey7 years ago

Oh one other thing I should say about the Sofia at the Breast Imaging Centers. They opened in September 2008 and they said they have zero false reports so far and said they too know it is because the 3-D ability. They said had it been a 2-D ultrasound and they couldn't see them like they can with the Sofia software a biopsy would have been recommended. How cool thank you God for 3-D. WE HAVE REAL HOPE.

Aruna Ullal
Aruna Ullal8 years ago

I had breast cancer in 2001 -mastectomy followed by chemo and now after adjuvant therapy with tamoxifen for 5yrs I am on Letrozole.
Where in India can I get thermography?Mammography is painful>

JUDY R.8 years ago

After having breast cancer in 2000, I decided that having thermographies would be a better option because of the early detection. Only one place in New Zealand that did them and I travelled every 6 months. In 2006, I was once again diagnosed with breast cancer - this was because I felt a lump, had a mammogram, and ultrasound, and then confirmation that I had another type of breast cancer. What happened to the thermography picking up anything - my last thermography 4 months earlier - it showed nothing. I questioned this and they re-checked - nope - nothing there. That is a worry - so all should be aware that every possible testing should be used. Unfortunately now I have ct scans and bone scans to make sure that all is OK - that is worse! But I don't have too many options now. And no, I would not bother with thermographies again. In Australia they now believe that will be able to market a testing using a hair sample - I will try that if and when it is available. Hate mammograms, have no faith in thermographies so anything is worth a try!