I mentioned Digital Infrared Imaging to my doctor and was told that the procedure is outdated and useless, is this true?
Unfortunately, many physicians either do not know about this technology or are knowledgeable about a single poorly performed (with regards to DII) research study; the BCDDP (Breast Cancer Detection Demonstration Project). The BCDDP was a large study done in the 1970’s that collected data from many centers around the United States. Three methods of breast cancer detection were studied: physical examination, mammography, and thermography.
With regards to thermography, the BCDDP was seriously flawed in six critical areas.
- Completely untrained technicians were used to perform the scans.
- The study used radiologists who had no experience or knowledge in reading infrared images.
- No standardized reading protocol had yet been established for infrared imaging.
- Proper laboratory environmental controls were completely ignored. In fact, many of the research sites were mobile trailers with extreme variations in internal temperatures.
- Low resolution industrial grade infrared imagers were used.
- The initial premise of the study was flawed: "A negative thermogram would preclude the need for a mammogram." A fuctional imaging test (thermography) cannot replace a structural imaging procedure (mammography). These two imaging tools complement each other. Thermography is to be used in addition to mammography, not as a replacement.
Of considerable concern was the reading of the images. It wasn’t until the early 1980’s that established and standardized reading protocols were introduced. Considering these facts, the BCDDP could not have properly evaluated infrared imaging. With the advent of known laboratory environmental controls, established reading protocols, and state-of-the-art infrared technology, a poorly performed 20-year-old study cannot be used to determine the appropriateness of DII.