|
We
asked the same question. The answer is somewhat political but this
may help to explain:
When
thermography was first explored for breast imaging, it was viewed
as competitive to mammograms. It was tested and evaluated to see
if it was safer and more diagnostically accurate than mammography.
These comparisons should not have been made, as you can not compare
tests of physiology and anatomy.
In
particular, when thermography was tested on younger women, thermographic
abnormalities were detected many times but mammograms did not detect
any tumors. The results were considered false positives.
The more patients of younger age screened with the so-called false
positive, the more suspicion was placed on thermography. Years later,
in re-call studies, a large percentage of these women had developed
breast cancer or other breast disease, in the exact location of
the abnormal false-positive thermogram, thus validating
its early warning role. Thermographys only error
was that it was too accurate too early and the results couldnt
be corroborated at the time.
Secondly,
thermography was being used in sports medicine, dentisty, podiatry,
chiropractic, orthopedics rheumatology, and neurology in a variety
of support or adjunctive diagnostic roles. It was soon realized
that thermography could clearly, objectively, and easily demonstrate
the physiological component of pain and injury, especially to the
spinal column, due to car accidents, job injuries, and a host of
other tort related law suits. Everyone involved had
benefited from these positive test findings, which could be clearly
shown to a jury. Everyone that is except the defendant insurance
industry.
Needless
to say, the insurance industry in the United States placed an all-out
effort to diminish the value of thermography in courts of law due
to high litigation costs. Eventually, lobbying efforts at the AMAs
House of Delegates and at Medicare, brought about the removal of
thermographic coverage by most insurance companies and the greatly
reduced utilization of thermography in the United States. This was
most unfortunate for the patients who could clearly benefit from
thermal imaging.
|