Greenhouse gases: Any gas that, by an accident of chemistry, happens to absorb radiation of a type that the Earth, by an accident of history, would like to lose.
The internet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhoea -- massive, difficult to redirect, awe-inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind- boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it.
Routine screening in the UK is from age 50 to 75, although from 2012 the initial age will be 47.
I would like to know why Thermography is not used more widely especially for the 40 plus who have a family history and need to be monitored:
Martha Grout M.D.
With mammograms, the false negative reading rates (not detecting cancers) range from 10% to 40%.
According to the 2002 Breast Cancer Study, issued by the Physician Insurers Association of America (PIAA), internists were named in 7% of the surveyed failure-to-diagnose breast cancer suits brought during the 1990s. Family physicians were named in 11% of cases and gynecologists in 29%. Radiologists topped the list, however, being named in 40% of all failure-to-diagnose breast cancer claims.
That observation has not been lost on future generations of radiologists, many of whom are avoiding mammography.
Mammography has not proved to be a flawless screening tool. It has a difficult time giving a good reading in women with dense breasts. It exposes women year after year to radiation. As every woman knows who has undergone one, it hurts to have breast tissue squished between two pieces of metal. And there is the argument that compressing cancerous tissue will just spread the malignancy.
Researchers have long warned that the compressive force used to obtain useable mammograms may be a contributing factor to breast cancer:...
There is mounting evidence that the x-rays from repeated mammograms induce cancer. Dr. John W. Gofman, an authority on the health effects of ionizing radiation, estimates that 75 percent of breast cancer could be prevented by avoiding or minimizing exposure to the ionizing radiation. This includes mammography, x-rays and other medical and dental sources. 
We're now hearing stories from all sorts of people saying "I got mammograms and it caught my cancer! Don't wait!" Well, these people don't get it - the mammograms may have caused the cancer.
I am planning to have breast thermography. It increases the likelihood of catching cancer at an early stage and it is not that expensive ($150. per screening ) and it poses no health risks. Why isn't it part of the national discussion, I wonder? Because it is not routinely covered by health insurance?
Breast Thermography and Early Breast Cancer Detection
Disclaimer: Breast thermography offers women information that no other procedure can provide. However, breast thermography is not a replacement for or alternative to mammography or any other form of breast imaging. Breast thermography is meant to be used in addition to mammography and other tests or procedures. Breast thermography and mammography are complementary procedures, one test does not replace the other.
If a woman has yearly thermograms that appear normal why would she need a mammogram? If the thermogram raises an alarm then certainly the next step would be a mammogram- or that is what makes sense to me but I intend to look into it further.
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. Thermography’s only “error” was that it was too accurate too early and the results couldn’t be corroborated at the time......
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 AMA’s House of Delegates and at Medicare, brought about the removal of thermographic coverage by most insurance....
I know nothing about thermograms except what I've read here and on the site.