Where diagnoses are involved no effort can be too high. As already cited with the mammography example, apparently for those of us in the western world no costs and no efforts are too high, when the objective is diagnosing an illness. Whether these diagnoses are harmful to the health or not, is not important. This certainly applies for all types of biopsies. A biopsy is a removal of tissue for purposes of examination under the microscope. In this regard there are various processes like fine-needle aspiration, core-needle biopsy, stereotactic biopsy processes, like vacuum assisted breast biopsy or ABBI etc. However, they all have one thing in common, they are very dangerous. Before you have one of these examinations, you should have read the following arguments very carefully:
1. Each biopsy releases millions of cancer cells into the blood-stream and in many processes they also get into a different tis-sue, because doctors often poke several times with the same needle. Thousands of professors at numerous universities around the world teach the theory of micrometastases and it is precisely these same doctors who distribute cancer cells throughout the body through biopsies.
2. In particular with fine-needle aspiration, the pathologist only gets a little cell material and this small amount of cell material is then often torn. Naturally this means for the pathologist that this material is much more difficult to evaluate.
3. With many biopsies bacteria or viruses get to a location where they do not belong, for instance with prostate aspiration biopsy hundreds of thousands colon bacteria can get into the prostate.
4. Each biopsy leaves a scar behind, and each scar is an interference field. However the last thing that I would want is an interference field which is close to a tumor.
5. Almost all surgeons still believe that every pathologist is capable of determining whether the tissue that the pathologist sees under the microscope is cancer or not, within a few seconds or minutes. You must know that these diagnoses must often be made very quickly, while patients are lying on the operating table under anesthesia. I am not sure whether I would want to let a pathologist, who has just separated from his wife, and who since yesterday has a paternity suit hanging over him, make a decision in a few seconds about whether my tissue now has cancer or not.
6. We know today that there are encapsulated tumors that are not very aggressive and with which patients can perhaps live until their natural death, without having problems due to the tumor. We do not know what it means when we puncture this tumor with a needle and destroy the encapsulation.
7. The pathologist Professor Kemnitz in Essen, apparently made systematically incorrect diagnoses for years. More than 170 women sued the pathologist, who released himself from his responsibility through suicide. To this day we do not know why Professor Kemnitz did this. Was he a poor pathologist, was he angry at women, or …?
We will never be able to find out why, because he is dead. But we also do not know how many practitioners like Professor Kemnitz are in Germany or in other countries. Anyone who maintains that this is a unique case apparently does not know how Professor Kemnitz was actually found out. It was not the surgeons in the hospital, or the oncologists that were treating the patients who uncovered the scandal, rather it was a family doctor who noticed that many of his patients suddenly had breast cancer, and that all of them had been diagnosed by Professor Kemnitz.
This case, which is referred to as the Essen scandal, raises many questions that remain answered. Instead of questioning the entire system, all the responsibility is placed on Professor Kemnitz – because this means that everything can stay as it is.
Nothing, absolutely nothing has been undertaken by surgeons, hospitals, politicians, or health insurance companies, to ensure that such a scandal cannot occur again. For me this is the real scandal. This is tragic and it also indicates how completely patients are subjugated by a healthcare system – or should I say: to a sick system? In any event, the Kemnitz case demonstrated how uncertain doctors can be with the diagnosis of cancer, how dependant patients are on the statements of individual pathologists, and how quickly surgeons are prepared to cut parts out of you that are completely healthy. Please do not make the mistake and believe that there are no more Professor Kemnitzes on this planet.