Why your doctors may not approve of Thermography here in Queensland.

When you look thermography up on the internet, most or almost all of the information to be found on thermography comes out of the United States and the UK.  Clients often report their doctor as having said that  thermography was not proven. The Australian medical industry does not appear to  have an opinion on thermal imaging other than some sections of the screening industry who quote incredibly outdated, technically flawed  and biased negative information from New Zealand.  

I saw the following quoted in the Courier Mail the other day when China was trying to tell Australia our government shouldn’t receive the Dali Lama.  The quote read   “ What gives China the right to blast Australian Politicians for meeting with the Dali Lama? China doesn’t dictate our Government policies, America does”.

Having said that, thermography has been approved by the US Department of Health, Education and Welfare since the 1970’s, and the US Food and Drug Administration since the 1980’s.  Incredibly, Australia has not followed,  however I tend to believe the inertia is building and the time is ripe to develop our own industry base.  In total contradition to the main flow of resistance to change, a forward thinking Australian doctor  was quoted recently as having said that thermology was ten years ahead of it’s time.  So what is the answer to that original question?

The short answer to “Why do a number of doctors not approve of thermography?”  I guess can probably be found in the colleges where big Pharma dictates what is being taught to our new doctors.  If you do your own research into thermography, you will realise that doctors taking this line are simply ill-informed and most likely quoting the political stand of their institutions.  New doctors are trained in revenue based pharmacology and mainstream revenue based imaging modalities.  There is no will nor is there any financial advantage in introducing new modalities, especially when big Pharma has no control over this emerging technology…..yet.

Another factor which has considerable negative impact on thermal imaging is that Thermography often sees the result of changing pathology many years before anatomical testing, such as mammography, ultrasound or MRI. In this case, the typical physician considers the thermogram a false positive, as they cannot confirm the findings with conventional testing. Studies now reveal that the so called false positive thermogram will yield a disease finding years later in the exact location, as seen by conventional testing later on. The false positive was not false at all, just “too right, too early”.  There is little financial gain in preventative medicine for big Pharma.

The Australian thermographers suffer from a small and fragmented industry base that does not attract overseas investment or serious interest.  The only way that thermography is going to become accepted by the official medical people here in Australia is for you and I to continue to do our very best at demonstrating the enormous worth of thermal imaging to our attending health care professionals.  Our industry can do the hard yards if you as a client have faith in what we are trying to achieve.