Chlorella Supplement decreases Dioxin in Breast Milk

This is MAJOR! BCF are you out there?

Nakano et al., 2007. Chlorella ( Chlorella pyrenoidosa ) Supplementation
Decreases Dioxin and Increases Immunoglobulin A Concentrations in Breast
Milk. Journal of Medicinal Food 10 (1): 134–142

ABSTRACT

In addition to meeting nutritional requirements, breast milk plays
important roles in biodefense for nursing infants. Dioxins have been
detected at high concentrations in breast milk, raising concerns about
disorders in nursing infants caused by breast milk containing dioxins in
Japan.

We analyzed dioxin levels in breast milk and maternal blood samples
from 35 pregnant women in Japan. We also measured immunoglobulin (Ig) A
concentrations in breast milk and investigated correlations with dioxin
concentrations. In addition, 18 of the 35 women took Chlorella pyrenoidosa (
Chlorella ) supplements during pregnancy, and the effects on dioxin and IgA
concentrations in breast milk were investigated.

Toxic equivalents were significantly lower in the breast milk of women taking Chlorella tablets than in the Control group ( P = .003). These results suggest that Chlorella supplementation by the mother may reduce transfer of dioxins to the child through breast milk.

No significant correlation was identified between dioxin and IgA concentrations in breast milk in the Control group. It is unlikely that normal levels of dioxin exposure via food have a remarkable influence on IgA in breast milk.

IgA concentrations in breast milk in the Chlorella group were significantly higher than in the Control group ( P = .03). Increasing IgA levels in breast milk is considered to be effective for
reducing the risk of infection in nursing infants. The present results suggest that Chlorella supplementation not only reduces dioxin levels in breast milk, but may also have beneficial effects on nursing infants by increasing IgA levels in breast milk.

Soy and Breast Cancer Risk

The University of Ulster reports that eating more soy foods could prevent cancer risk. The use of soy is controversial for a few reasons. 80% of soy in the USA is genetically modified. Many people eat soy as a meat replacement, but it is still highly processed. Processing foods add preservative and food additives that may have their own health risks. Soy is not eaten as a main course in the traditional asian diet. It is most commonly used in it's fermented form.

Therfore eating soy bacon or having even a 4 - 6 ounce soy burger is still not the way soy has been used for centuries. siting the asian diet as evidence for a soy based diet is tricky. This comment by Jeanne Wallace is a favorite resource. We hope it is helpful. It is from our website.

Animals with mammary cancer were fed soy from differing sources—from unprocessed soy foods to highly processed soy protein isolates—all at the same dose level of genistein. While unprocessed soy posed no risk, highly processed soy appeared to promote cancer growth.

With all the focus on the “phytoestrogen” effects of soy, the other beneficial effects of soy against cancer are often overlooked. Soy compounds have been shown to:

• Arrest the cell cycle of cancer cells (induce cytostasis)
• Promote differentiation
• Induce programmed cell death (apoptosis)
• Modify gene expression, down-regulating oncogenes (like Her2neu) and increasing tumor suppressor genes (like p53 and p21)
• Have Anti-angiogenesis actions
• Help inhibit invasion and metastasis

Putting all this together: I favor intake of Tradiational whole soy foods (miso, tempeh, tofu and soymilk), particularly in women who have eaten soy earlier in life and whom are likely to have excess estrogen or significant xenoestrogen exposure. Supplements of high dose soy isoflavones, or processed soy protein isolates, are best avoided.

Vitamin D and Breast Cancer Risk

The studies about Vitamin D and breast cancer risk keep coming out. This study published in Nutrition Reviews claims that up to 600,000 cancer deaths could be prevented with higer Vitamin D serum levels.

At a recent cancer conference we attended the clinicians that spoke repeatedly spoke of Vitamin d levels and cancer risk. All the clinicians recommended supplements in addition to natural sun exposure. Most of them recommended levels at least 3 times higher than the recommended daily allowance of 400IU.

Here are some more articles.

And another.

Black Cohosh and Breast Cancer

This article from Phytomedicine used the common herbal remedy for menopausal symptoms to induce cell death in breast cancer cells. This study was invivo which some will argue is not relevent. the study was conducted by a company which makes Black Cohosh which is also a factor in considering the results. The actual study was conducted by Columbia University.

There are favorable results for using Black Cohosh for menopause so there may be some evidence that can lend itself in that arena. Here is another article that says women who use Black Cohosh have a lower risk of breast cancer.

Diet just does not matter?!?

The results of a large study - Women's Healthy Eating and Living (WHEL) were presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer conference in December. They found that eating more vegetables and lowering fat intake to 15/20% just does not matter in terms of mortality rates in breast cancer survivors.

The actual results that make the headline in the papers are not always what the study indicates. The study showed a change in estrogen levels that seems to be due to the amount of fiber in the diet.

The recommend fat intake was apparently very hard to cpmly with. most women were at about30% fat intake. The study does not seem to differentiate between healthy fats and toxic fats. Here is another article.

Don't give up and grab the twinkies. Diet does make a difference, Keep reading!

MRI scans might prevent breast cancer, study shows

hhhmmm...

finding cancer early is preventing cancer.... how does that work?!? Don't believe this lie about prevention - early detection is not prevention!

But you might be curious so i'll post the article - but don't be fooled!

By Maggie Fox

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - MRI scans may offer a new way to detect breast cancer at its earliest stages and perhaps even prevent cancer among high-risk women, European researchers said on Thursday.

Details of a German study show that magnetic resonance imaging was better than standard mammograms, a type of X-ray, at detecting a nonmalignant tumor called ductal carcinoma in-situ, or DCIS.

This could give surgeons time to remove the lesion before it can turn cancerous.

The findings, published in the Lancet medical journal, suggest that MRI should be tested in more women to see if it should become a standard screening tool, said Dr. Carla Boetes and Dr. Ritse Mann of the Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre in the Netherlands.

"Although these results were unexpected, the pathophysiology of breast cancer provides ample justification for the findings," they wrote in a commentary in Lancet.

Boetes and Mann noted that autopsy results show that about 9 percent of women have undetected DCIS, and that almost all malignant breast cancer is believed to start out as DCIS.

"MRI should thus no longer be regarded as an adjunct to mammography but as a distinct method to detect breast cancer at its earliest stage," they wrote.

Dr. Christiane Kuhl, a radiologist at the University of Bonn and colleagues studied 7,319 women over five years for their study, which was also presented in June to a meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

MRI found DCIS in more than 90 percent of the 167 women with the condition, while mammograms only found 56 percent of DCIS cases.

"MRI could help improve the ability to diagnose DCIS, especially DCIS with high nuclear grade," Kuhl's team wrote.

TOO SOON TO RECOMMEND

But Debbie Saslow, director of breast and gynecologic cancer at the American Cancer Society, said it is far too soon to use MRI routinely for breast cancer screening.

"The American Cancer Society recommends that MRI screening be done annually in addition to mammography starting at age 30 for women at high risk," Saslow said in a telephone interview.

"For the most part, these are women who have had either a genetic test or found a mutation (that puts them at high risk of developing breast cancer), there is a mutation in the family, or there is a strong enough family history that would lead you to think that the risk of having a mutation is pretty high," she added.

Women who already have had breast cancer have only a moderate risk of a recurrence and are not necessarily candidates for MRI, Saslow said. The reason is that MRI is expensive -- $1,000 to $1,500 per scan -- and has a high rate of false positives, meaning it detects lesions that are harmless.

"Sometimes doctors will think they see something. With MRI it is not clear-cut," Saslow said. "Some of those women are choosing to have mastectomies."

And having an MRI does not save women from undergoing the uncomfortable mammogram process, as MRIs are always done alongside mammograms, Saslow noted. "Mammography still finds things that an MRI doesn't," she said.

Breast cancer is diagnosed in 1.2 million men and women globally every year and kills 500,000.

Copyright © 2007 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.

DES Cancer Risk After in Utero Exposure Persists

If you want to know about this in depth, read Hormonal Disruption by Lindsey Berstrom... it's a bit depressing, but an important issue.

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Aug 10 - The increased risk of vaginal and cervical cancer in young women prenatally exposed to diethylstilbestrol (DES) remains elevated through the reproductive years, according to findings published in the July 15th issue of the International Journal of Cancer. However, the risk only applies to clear cell adenocarcinomas and breast cancer among women 40 or older.

"In 1971, a strong association was reported between DES and clear cell adenocarcinomas of the vagina and cervix in young women," Dr. Rebecca Troisi, of Dartmouth Medical School, Hanover, New Hampshire, and colleagues write.

"Animal studies suggest the teratogenic and carcinogenic effects of prenatally administered DES may be due to changes in the expression of genes involved in the development of the reproductive tract and raise concerns of elevated risk of other female reproductive tract cancers besides clear cell adenocarcinomas, they add.

To examine if the overall cancer risk is elevated after prenatal DES exposure, they used data from the DES Combined Cohort Follow-up Study to assess total and site-specific cancer risk comparing women exposed to DES versus unexposed women.

Exposed and unexposed women were followed for a total of 97,831 and 34,810 person-years, respectively. During that time, there were a total of 143 cancer cases in the exposed group and 49 cancer cases in the unexposed group.

They found that age-adjusted incidence rate ratio for exposed versus unexposed women for all cancers was 1.32, a non-significant difference.

No association was observed between DES and excess risks of endometrial or ovarian cancer.

As expected, in DES-exposed women, the risk of vaginal and cervical clear cell adenocarcinomas was higher through age 40, and the age-adjusted incidence rate ratio for breast cancer was 1.83, but only for women 40 years of age or older.

Int J Cancer 2007;121:356-360.

Green tea extract may boost cancer-fighting enzymes

By Joene Hendry

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Healthy subjects who received daily caffeine-free green tea extract capsules had an increased production of detoxification enzymes, which may provide some cancer-fighting benefits, study findings show.

"Concentrated green tea extract could be beneficial to those who are deficient in the detoxification enzyme and shouldn't be harmful for those who have adequate detoxification enzyme," lead investigator Dr. H.-H. Sherry Chow, of the University of Arizona, Tucson, told Reuters Health.

Genetic and environmental factors cause people to have varying levels of glutathione S-transferase (GST) enzymes. These enzymes may play a crucial role in helping the body defend against toxic and cancer-causing compounds, note Chow and colleagues.

Previous laboratory and animal studies found that green tea compounds, antioxidants called "catechins," activate these GST enzymes. Therefore, Chow's team investigated the effect that concentrated compounds from green tea would have on GST enzymes levels in 42 healthy adults.

Their findings are published in the medical journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention.

For 4 weeks prior to the study, the non-smoking volunteers refrained from drinking green tea, taking supplements, or eating foods known to contain epigallocatechin gallate, a potential cancer-fighting antioxidant.

Over the next 4 weeks the volunteers took four capsules, each containing 200 mg of epigallocatechin gallate, every morning prior to eating. This provided the equivalent amount of epigallocatechin gallate obtained from drinking 8 to 16 cups of green tea daily, Chow said.

The researchers found that the detoxifying GST enzymes increased by 80 percent in the study participants with the lowest GST levels at the start of the study. Participants with medium or high GST levels had either no increase or a slight increase in GST levels.

The capsules used in this study were specifically made for clinical trial use. Chow cautions that commercially available green tea extracts are not required to meet the same strict concentration and purity standards.

Chow adds, "More clinical testing is underway to confirm the cancer preventive activities of green tea or green tea extract."

Diet and Breast Cancer - no connection?!?

This study received a lot of press. They found that eating a very healthy diet did not influence breast cancer recurrence or survival. This study has some major flaws and we really appreciated this article spelling them out.

Here are the major points from the article:

When you ask people questions about how they eat, they generally make it sound better than it is. From the looks of it, the womens diet did not change much.

The "high vegetable" diet was averaging two servings a day?

The women were not well educated about what truly constitutes a healthy diet.

Organic Dairy product are good for Breast Milk

Here is another DUH study, but this info could be of great concern to mothers whose children have asthma or allergies.

Here is a link to the article.


In case you don't read it, here are some important highlights. There is a significant difference in the type of fatty acid in Mother's milk for mothers who are eating organic meat and dairy. This Fatty Acid, known as CLA is known to be an immunomodulator with other positive health effects as well.

DDT and Breast Cacner

A lot of the research coming out lately seems to indicate that the time of exposure to chemicals is relevant to developing disease later in life. In some instances, in utero exposure is the issue. This study showed that women who were exposed to DDT before the age of 14 have a much higher rate of breast cancer. Women who were exposed after the age of 14 did not have a significantly higher rate of breast cancer. Here is a link to the study.

So we are really practical and hit this issue all the time in our classes. How do you convince a young mind, that may not have fully developed cause and effect thinking, to avoid exposure to chemicals or not drink and take hormones?!? Now that we have the info and it seems to be coming pretty consistently - what do we do?

Dairy and Breast Cancer

There is a new study from France that associates more dairy consumption with lower incidence of breast cancer. We find this study curious because it contradicts some studies we have sited here before.

One thought is that there is not Bovine Growth Hormone being used in France. There is a connection betweeen Bovine Growth Hormone and Breast Cancer. Read this article from the prevent cancer website.

The study contradicts what Colin Campbell found while he was doing the China Study. Here is a great interview with him.

We will keep you posted as we learn more about this study. Comments anyone - would love to hear from you!

Even China will Admit the Connection....

Beijing- Widespread pollution has caused cancer to become the leading killer
in China, a newspaper reported Monday, citing a government study. A Health
Ministry survey of 30 cities and 78 counties found that rapidly increasing
air and water pollution as well as the use of pesticides and food additives
are the main cause behind the quickly rising cancer rates, the China Daily
reported.

"Many chemical and industrial enterprises are built along rivers so that
they can dump the waste into water easily," Chen Zhizhou, a health expert
with the cancer research institute affiliated with the Chinese Academy of
Medical Sciences, told the newspaper. "Excessive use of fertilizers and
pesticides also pollute underground water. The contaminated water has
directly affected soil, crops and food."

Pollution "is getting worse day by day," he added.

Of the 10 most lethal illnesses recorded last year in China, cancer was
number one, followed by cerebrovascular and heart diseases, the government
survey found.

Major contributors to the cancer rates were found to be air pollution that
causes harmful particles to become lodged in the lungs, formaldehyde and
other compounds used in building renovations and furniture, and additives
used to make livestock grow faster.

More info on Antioxidants and Chemo

There is no evidence that antioxidant supplements interfere with the therapeutic effects of chemotherapy agents, according to a recent systematic review of the use of antioxidants during chemotherapy, available in the May, 2007 issue of the peer-reviewed journal Cancer Treatment Reviews. In fact, they may help increase survival rates, tumor response, and the patient’s ability to tolerate treatment.


This conclusion has important implications for patients whose oncologists discourage the use of antioxidant supplements during treatment. Until now, their concern has been that these supplements may counteract the tumor-shrinking abilities of the chemotherapy.

“This review demonstrates that there is no scientific support for the blanket objection to using antioxidants during chemotherapy. In addition, it also appears that these supplements may help mitigate the side effects of chemotherapy,” said Keith I. Block, MD, lead author of the study and Medical Director of the Block Center for Integrative Cancer Treatment. “This is significant because it increases the likelihood that patients will be able to complete their treatment.”

Co-author Dr. Robert Newman, Professor of Cancer Medicine at M. D. Anderson Cancer Center said, “This study, along with the evolving understanding of antioxidant-chemotherapy interactions, suggests that the previously held beliefs about interference do not pertain to clinical treatment.”

The analysis, titled “Impact of Antioxidant Supplementation on Chemotherapeutic Efficacy: A Systematic Review of the Evidence from Randomized Controlled Trials,” evaluated 845 articles from five scientific databases that examined the effects of taking natural antioxidant supplements concurrent with chemotherapy.

Out of the 845 studies that were analyzed, 19 met all evaluation criteria. These included the use of randomized trials with a control group, and the reporting of treatment response (tumor shrinkage) and survival data. The 1,554 patients represented had a variety of cancer types, and most had advanced or relapsed disease. Some of the antioxidants used in the trials included glutathione, vitamin A, vitamin C, vitamin E, ellagic acid, selenium and beta carotene.

Among the findings:

All of the studies that included survival data showed similar or better survival rates for the antioxidant group than the control group.
None of the trials supported the theory that antioxidant supplements diminish the effectiveness of chemotherapy treatments.
All but one of the studies that reported treatment response showed similar or better response in the antioxidant group than in the control group.
15 of 17 trials that assessed chemotherapy toxicities, including diarrhea, weight loss, nerve damage and low blood counts, concluded that the antioxidant group suffered similar or lower rates of these side effects than the control group.


The authors noted that reducing side effects may help patients avoid having to cut back on their chemotherapy dosing, interrupt scheduled treatments, or abandon treatment altogether. This in turn, is likely to favorably impact treatment outcomes. A recent study of a group of colon cancer patients indicated that those who completed their full prescribed schedules of chemotherapy had survival rates nearly double those of patients who abandoned their chemotherapy treatment prematurely.

This new study encourages further exploration of the potential importance of antioxidant supplements as a means of improving cancer survival.

Note: This story has been adapted from a news release issued by Block Center for Integrative Cancer Treatment.

Breast Cancer and Common Chemicals

The fact that the American Cancer Society and Susan Komen are both recognizing this problems is HUGE!!!!

More than 200 chemicals — many found in urban air and everyday consumer products — cause breast cancer in animal tests, according to a compilation of scientific reports published today.

Writing in a publication of the American Cancer Society, researchers concluded that reducing exposure to the compounds could prevent many women from developing the disease.

The research team from five institutions analyzed a growing body of evidence linking environmental contaminants to breast cancer, the leading killer of U.S. women in their late 30s to early 50s.

Experts say that family history and genes are responsible for a small percentage of breast cancer cases but that environmental or lifestyle factors such as diet are probably involved in the vast majority.

"Overall, exposure to mammary gland carcinogens is widespread," the researchers wrote in a special supplement to the journal Cancer. "These compounds are widely detected in human tissues and in environments, such as homes, where women spend time."

The scientists said data were too incomplete to estimate how many breast cancer cases might be linked to chemical exposures.

But because the disease is so common and the chemicals so widespread, "the public health impacts of reducing exposures would be profound even if the true relative risks are modest," they wrote. "If even a small percentage is due to preventable environmental factors, modifying these factors would spare thousands of women."

The three reports and a commentary were compiled by researchers from the Silent Spring Institute, a women's environmental health organization in Newton, Mass.; Harvard's Medical School and School of Public Health in Boston; the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, N.Y.; and USC's Keck School of Medicine. Silent Spring Institute Executive Director Julia Brody led the team.

In response to the findings, Susan G. Komen for the Cure, a breast cancer prevention group that funded the work, pledged an additional $5 million for developing research tools to root out environmental causes.

Reviewing hundreds of existing studies and databases, the team produced what it called "the most comprehensive compilation to date of chemicals identified as mammary carcinogens." No new chemical testing was conducted for the reports.

The researchers named 216 chemicals that induce breast tumors in animals. Of those, people are highly exposed to 97, including industrial solvents, pesticides, dyes, gasoline and diesel exhaust compounds, cosmetics ingredients, hormones, pharmaceuticals, radiation, and a chemical in chlorinated drinking water.

"Almost all of the chemicals were mutagenic, and most caused tumors in multiple organs and species; these characteristics are generally thought to indicate likely carcinogenicity in humans, even at lower exposure levels," they reported.

For many of the compounds, the federal government has not used animal breast cancer data when conducting human risk assessments, which are the first step toward regulating chemicals or in setting occupational standards to protect workers. Companies are not required to screen women who work with the chemicals for breast cancer.

"Regulators have not paid much attention to potential mammary carcinogens," the researchers wrote.

Toxicologists say that other mammals, such as rats and mice, often develop the same tumors as humans do, and that animal tests are efficient means of testing the effects of chemicals. Environmental regulators, however, often want conclusive human data before taking action.

Animal studies generally use high doses of a substance to simulate a lifetime of exposure, and then the results are extrapolated to the lower levels that people are exposed to.

Ana Soto, a Tufts University professor of cell biology who specializes in cellular origins of cancer and effects of hormone-disrupting contaminants, said there probably was a link between breast cancer and exposures to chemicals in the environment, particularly early in life.

"I cannot say I'm convinced, but what I can say is that it's a very likely, very plausible hypothesis," said Soto, who did not participate in the new research. "More and more, cancer looks like an environmental disease."

Twenty-nine of the chemicals are produced in volumes exceeding 1 million pounds annually in the United States.

Seventy-three are present in consumer products or are food contaminants — 1,4-dioxane in shampoos, for example, or acrylamide in French fries. Thirty-five are common air pollutants, 25 are in workplaces where at least 5,000 women are employed, and 10 are food additives, according to the reports.

New Recommendations for Mammograms

The American College of Physicians has changed it's recommendation for mammograms for women under 50. This is huge!

They know say that there are risks and those risks should be discussed with the patient before deciding on mammography. The risks include: false-positive results, radiation exposure, false reassurance and pain during the mammogram procedure.

We have a few pages about mammography on the website.

Exercise and Breast Cancer Risk - more evidence comes in

Over the past few months there have been several articles about breast cancer risk reduction using exercise, reduction of breast cancer treatment side effects using exercise, and group workouts being of benefit to women in cancer treatment. We call theses "duh" studies because they are so obvious to the logical ind, but research has not proven it - so they really are valuable.

Another factor here is that women after breast cancer treatment used to be discouraged from exercising and lifting weight. We still recommend working with a trainer after surgery who is familiar with working with breast cancer survivors but GO FOR IT!!!

Here are some of the studies

here is another one

and one more

I could go on, but you get the point!!!

Eating Mushrooms may Help Prevent Breast Cancer

Eating a few ounces of mushrooms every day could help prevent breast cancer , a new study suggests.

"You don't need a strong effect to cause cancer prevention. Eating 100 grams or even less of mushrooms per day could have an effect on preventing new breast cancers ," Dr. Shiuan Chen of the Beckman Research Institute of the City of Hope in Duarte, California, the study's lead author, said in a press release accompanying the study.

Extracts of the fungi interfere with the action of aromatase, an enzyme that helps the body make estrogen, the researchers explain in the medical journal Cancer Research. Most breast tumors require estrogen to grow.

Chen and her colleagues tested seven vegetable extracts for their aromatase-blocking activity, and found that white button mushroom had the strongest effect. The researchers evaluated 10 other types of mushrooms, and found stuffing mushrooms, portobello, crimini, shiitake and baby button mushrooms also inhibited aromatase activity.

Because white button mushrooms are the most commonly eaten type, the researchers tested extracts of the mushrooms in a series of laboratory and animal experiments.

The extract reduced the proliferation of breast cancer cells in a lab dish, while feeding the extract to mice implanted with breast cancer cells suppressed tumor growth, Chen and her team report. Further experiments showed that linoleic acid, a fatty acid usually found in meat and dairy products, was probably responsible for the extract's anti-cancer effects.

Based on the amount of extract used in the experiments in mice, about 100 grams of mushrooms daily would be enough to prevent breast cancer growth, Chen and her team state, adding that it is possible that eating even less every day could be effective.

"Results from this and other laboratories support the hypothesis that white button mushrooms may be an important dietary constituent for reducing the incidence of hormone-dependent breast cancer in women," they write. "Prevention strategies involving mushrooms are readily available, affordable, and acceptable to the general public."

Click on the headline to go to the City of Hope website

SOURCE: Cancer Research, December 15, 2006.

Tea Extract helps with skin damage from Radiation

Findings from a new study confirm that tea extracts applied to the skin promote the repair of damage from radiotherapy, and shed light on the mechanisms involved in the injury. The beneficial effects of the extracts are mostly from their ability to attenuate the body signals that trigger inflammation.
This study involved head, neck and pelvic cancers. Both Green and black tea were used. Many people going thru cancer radiation therapy have long term affects to their skin. This may be a good non-toxic alternative.

Prenatal exposure can be influential in developing cancer.

Scientists in Boston looked at women who were exposed in the womb to Diethylstilbestrol (DES), a synthetic estrogen that was used to prevent miscarriage may be at a higher risk for breast cancer. This lends more support to the growing understanding that pre natal exposure is a big factor in developing cancer later in life. This news may seem depressing and fatalistic, but i would argue just the opposite. If we elevate the time before pregnancy to the level it deserves, parents would take time to prepare their bodies to bring a new child into the world. Instead, many parents use an abundance of hormones to get pregnant and do not cleanse or detox while they are pregnant.

With more knowledge, hopefully this practice will change. Mothers be aware, you are what you eat and your children are even more so!

Chemo has long term efffects for nurses

This study has been repeated by others, also medical personel who work with radiation may have long term health effects. Just an FYI

Cancer drug exposure reduces fertility in nurses

By Will Boggs, MD

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - In a study of oncology nurses, skin contact with chemotherapy drugs seemed to increase the time needed to conceive and to also raise the risk of premature delivery, according to a report in the journal Epidemiology.

"Our findings show that even very low (skin exposure to chemotherapy drugs) can cause an elevated risk of a prolonged time to pregnancy, premature delivery, or a low birth weight, even when gloves are worn during work." Dr. Wouter Fransman told Reuters Health.

"We hope that people working with (these) drugs are aware of the potential risks of these agents," Fransman said. "The awareness on how to safely work with these agents and following the right protocols and regulations will minimize exposure and hence reduce health risks."

Fransman from Utrecht University in the Netherlands and colleagues used questionnaires to assess pregnancy outcomes, work-related exposures, and lifestyle factors among 4,393 oncology nurses, 1,519 of whom reported skin exposure to cancer drugs during the course of their work.

On average, nurses with skin exposure to chemotherapy drugs took one month longer than unexposed nurses to get pregnant, the authors report.

Moreover, exposed nurses were twice as likely as unexposed nurses to deliver a low birthweight child, the results indicate.

Skin exposure to chemotherapy drugs also slightly increased the risk of premature delivery, the researchers note, but there was no significantly increased risk of stillbirth, miscarriage, or congenital malformations.

Fransman commented that his group hopes to extend the study to other countries, where exposure levels may differ. "Maybe exposure levels in other countries are much higher, so that we can test our hypothesis that higher exposure levels could lead to fetal loss and congenital malformations."

SOURCE: Epidemiology, January 2007.

Exercise and Breast Cancer Risk

Two studies came out this month about strenuous exercise lowering breast cancer risk for reoccurrance. Both studies hypothesized that reduction in weight gain, increased immune activity and/or changes in metabolism could be a contributing factor. With studies like these, there is very little risk in beginning to exercise if you don't already do so. There are other studies that link regular exercise to reduction in estrogen levels - specifically E1.

Here are the studies as reported in Reuters:

Strong exercise may cut breast cancer risk

Last Updated: 2007-02-27 9:48:51 -0400 (Reuters Health)

CHICAGO (Reuters) - Strenuous exercise -- such as lap swimming, aerobics and running -- appears to cut the risk of some breast cancers in women, a study said on Monday.

While it is still not clear how hard or long women need to exercise, the study adds to a growing body of evidence that rigorous activity lowers breast cancer risk.

The team at the University of Southern California in Los Angeles said exercise may reduce cancer risk through changes in metabolism and the immune system, and by reducing weight gain.

The study, appearing in the Archives of Internal Medicine, involved 110,599 women in California whose health histories were tracked from 1995 onward.

Women who said they engaged in strenuous activity for more than five hours a week had a 20 percent lower risk of invasive breast cancer and a 31 percent lower risk of early stage breast cancer, compared to women who participated in less than 30 minutes of such activity every week.

Through 2002, a total of 2,649 of the women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer, and 593 with early-stage forms of the disease.

The study is the first to look at the cumulative effect of exercise over time, as opposed to women's reports of whether they had exercised shortly before being diagnosed with breast cancer.

"These results provide additional evidence supporting a protective role for long-term strenuous recreational physical activity on risk of invasive and (early stage) breast cancer, whereas the beneficial effects of moderate activity are less clear," the study concluded.

AND

Strenuous exercise lowers lifetime breast cancer risk

Last Updated: 2007-02-21 15:02:14 -0400 (Reuters Health)

By Anne Harding

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - A new study confirms that for most women, 6 or more hours of strenuous recreational exercise each week can reduce the risk of invasive breast cancer , according to the findings of a new study.

While women with a family history of breast cancer didn't have a reduced risk with exercise, all of the other women did, regardless of how old they were when they started exercising, Dr. Brian L. Sprague of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and colleagues found.

"A lot of women are particularly concerned about breast cancer, and our study just adds more evidence that physical activity is indeed related to breast cancer risk," Sprague told Reuters Health.

His team interviewed 7,630 women who were free of breast cancer, 1,689 with very early-stage or in situ disease, and 6,391 with invasive breast cancer. All of the women ranged in age from 20 to 69.

While there was no link between physical activity and in-situ breast cancer risk, women who reported more than 6 hours of strenuous recreational exercise each week had a 23 percent reduced risk of developing invasive breast cancer compared to women who never exercised.

The reduction in risk was seen women who exercised early in life, after menopause , or in the recent past.

Sprague noted that there were relatively few women in the study with in situ disease, so it may be that the study was not powerful enough to identify a reduced risk with exercise, which other studies have reported. It's possible, he added, that exercise may prevent invasive breast cancer by stopping in situ disease from progressing.

The researchers found no link between physical activity on the job and reduced breast cancer risk. However, Sprague noted, he and his colleagues had to use a fairly crude measurement to gauge occupational activity, based on job titles, so the current study does not necessarily mean on-the-job activity is not protective.

SOURCE: Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention, February 2007.

Radiation Helpful in Women With Ductal Carcinoma in Situ

This looks to contradict other information we have on the website. We'll keep watching here. For a bay area second opinion on DCIS, go to If you have DCIS , talk to Dr. Michael Lagios:

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) Sept 26 - Radiation therapy has meaningful benefits for older women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), even those at low risk, according to findings in the September 20th Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

Dr. Benjamin D. Smith of the Yale School of Medicine in New Haven, Connecticut and colleagues identified 3,409 women aged at least 66 years with DCIS treated with lumpectomy. The team sought to determine whether additional treatment with radiation was associated with a clinically significant benefit.

Data analysis showed that women who received radiation therapy experienced a 68% lower relative risk for each component of the combined outcome -- recurrence of ipsilateral in situ or invasive breast cancer and/or a subsequent mastectomy.

For women at high risk of a subsequent breast event, the 5-year risk was 13.6% without radiation versus 3.8% with radiation. For low-risk women, the 5-year risk was 8.2% without radiation versus 1.0% with radiation.

The relative benefit of radiation therapy persisted regardless of the presence or absence of accepted risk factors such as being younger at diagnosis, large tumor size, high tumor grade, and aggressive tumor histology.

The researchers point out that "the absolute benefit associated with radiation therapy in DCIS was "considerable and compared favorably with that of other accepted clinical interventions."

Dr. Smith noted in comments to Reuters Health, that "these results suggest that radiation therapy effectively prevents recurrence and mastectomy for older women with DCIS and should be considered a reasonable component of therapy."

J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:1302-1310.

Reuters Health Information 2006. © 2006 Reuters Ltd.
Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.

Short delay of chemo safe after breast surgery

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Research has shown that women who undergo chemotherapy after surgery for early-stage breast cancer have an improved chance of survival. Now, investigators have evidence that therapy can be safely delayed for up to 12 weeks - but waiting longer may adversely affect the outcome.

"Our findings can reassure women with early-stage breast cancer that it is okay to take some time before they start chemotherapy -- to gather information and be actively involved in treatment decision-making," lead author Dr. Caroline Lohrisch, from the British Columbia Cancer Agency in Vancouver, Canada, said in a statement.

The study, which is reported in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, involved an analysis of data for 2,594 women who underwent chemotherapy for early breast cancer at between 1989 and 1998. The women were divided into four groups based on the time between surgery and the start of chemotherapy: within 4 weeks, 4 to 8 weeks, 8 to 12 weeks, or 12 to 24 weeks.

No significant differences in survival were seen among the three groups that began chemotherapy within 12 weeks of surgery. By contrast, starting chemotherapy at greater than 12 weeks was associated with inferior survival.

Eighty-four to 89 percent of women who started chemotherapy within 12 weeks of surgery were alive 5 years later compared with 78 percent of women who began chemotherapy after 12 weeks.

Similarly, the percentage of women who were alive and had no evidence of cancer relapse after 5 years was also higher in the groups that started chemotherapy within 12 weeks.

"Based on currently available data, including the findings in this study, patients should be encouraged to start chemotherapy before more than 3 months have elapsed from surgery, to maximize the anticipated benefit," the researchers conclude. "The issue of timing between surgery and chemotherapy warrants further study, particularly in specific subgroups."

SOURCE: Journal of Clinical Oncology, October 20, 2006.

US study looks at second opinions in breast cancer

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Breast cancer patients were urged to change their treatment plans more than half the time when they received a second opinion from a team of specialists, U.S. researchers reported on Wednesday.

Overall, 52 percent of patients whose original diagnosis and treatment recommendations were taken to a multidisciplinary team were advised to make one or more changes in their treatment, the researchers at the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center found.

The changes were a result of breast imaging specialists reading a mammogram differently or breast pathologists interpreting biopsy results differently, the researchers reported in this week's issue of the journal Cancer.

The team, called a multidisciplinary tumor board, included surgeons, radiation oncologists, medical oncologists, radiologists and pathologists.

"A multidisciplinary tumor board that involves the collaborative effort of multiple medical specialties allows expert opinion and recommendations based on the most recent research findings," said Dr. Michael Sabel, a surgeon who worked on the study.

"Meanwhile, the patients come to only one setting, with no need to visit multiple specialists individually."

His team looked at the records of 149 breast cancer patients referred to the Cancer Center's multidisciplinary breast tumor board for a second opinion.

They found the original doctors often did not consider new surgery techniques, such as delivering chemotherapy before surgery to help save more of the breast, or sentinel lymph node biopsy, a new technique that helps find whether cancer has spread beyond the breast.

And radiologists reinterpreted imaging results in 45 percent of patients, in some cases identifying previously undiagnosed second cancers.

More than a quarter of patients were advised to have another biopsy.

Specialized breast pathologists made new interpretations of how aggressive a tumor, or what type of tumor it was, in 29 percent of patients, the researchers found.

More than 200,000 U.S. women will be diagnosed with breast cancer this year, according to the American Cancer Society, and 40,000 will die of it. Globally, 500,000 women die every year from breast cancer.

Copyright © 2006 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or redistribution of Reuters content, including by framing or similar means, is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Reuters. Reuters shall not be liable for any errors or delays in the content, or for any actions taken in reliance thereon. Reuters and the Reuters sphere logo are registered trademarks and trademarks of the Reuters group of companies around the world.

The Sins of Our Grandmothers

From: New Scientist, Nov. 13, 2006

YOU ARE WHAT YOUR GRANDMOTHER ATE

By Roxanne Khamsi

A mother's diet can change the behaviour of a specific gene for at
least two subsequent generations, a new study demonstrates for the
first time.

Feeding mice an enriched diet during pregnancy silenced a gene for
light fur in their pups. And even though these pups ate a standard,
un-enriched diet, the gene remained less active in their subsequent
offspring.

The findings could help explain the curious results from recent
studies of human populations -- including one showing that the
grandchildren of well-fed Swedes had a greater risk of diabetes.

The new mouse experiment lends support to the idea that we inherit not
only our genes from our parents, but also a set of instructions that
tell the genes when to become active. These instructions appear to be
passed on through "epigenetic" changes to DNA -- genes can be
activated or silenced according to the chemical groups that are added
onto them. Gene silencer

David Martin at the Children's Hospital Oakland Research Institute in
California, US, and colleagues used a special strain of genetically
identical mice with an overactive version of a gene that influences
fur colour. Mice with the AVY version of this gene generally have
golden fur.

Half of the mice were given a diet enriched with nutrients such as
vitamin B12 and zinc. These nutrients are known to increase the
availability of the "methyl" chemical groups that are responsible for
silencing genes. The rest of the mice received a standard diet.

The pups of mice on the standard diet generally had golden fur. But a
high proportion of those born to mice on the enriched diet had dark
brown fur.

Martin believes that the nutrient-rich maternal diet caused silencing
of the pups' AVY genes while they developed in the womb. Passed down

Intriguingly, even though all of the pups in this generation received
a standard diet, those that had exposure to a high-nutrient diet while
in the womb, later gave birth to dark-coated offspring. Their control
counterparts, by comparison, produced offspring with golden fur.

This shows that environmental factors -- such as an enriched diet --
can affect the activity of the AVY gene for at least two generations,
the researchers say.

"The results make it clear that a nutritional status can affect not
only that individual, but that individual's children as well," says
study member Kenneth Beckman. Skin colour

Beckman notes that the AVY gene is linked to weight and diabetes risk.
He adds that there is some evidence that a related gene in humans
might affect skin colour -- but it is unknown if it also affects
weight.

Even though humans may have a similar gene, they should not make
dietary changes based on the results of the mouse experiment,
researchers stress. "It would be irresponsible to make any
prescriptions about human behaviour based on these findings," says
Martin.

An earlier Swedish study which used historical data of harvests in
Sweden, found that a youngster had a quadrupled risk of diabetes if
their grandfather had good access to food during his own boyhood.

Journal reference: Proceedings of the National Academy of Science
(DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0607090103)

Drop in Breast Cancer Rates (colon cancer too!)

Everyone is talking about this one. Where does that leave us with birth control ladies?

U.S. breast cancer rates declined 7.2 percent in 2003
Experts believe drop is due to reduced use of hormone replacement therapy
Drop means about 14,000 fewer cases were actually diagnosed

SAN ANTONIO, Texas (AP) -- In a startling turnaround, breast cancer rates in the United States dropped dramatically in 2003, and experts said they believe it is because many women stopped taking hormone pills. The 7.2 percent decline came a year after a big federal study linked menopause hormones to a higher risk of breast cancer, heart disease and other problems. Within months, millions of women stopped taking estrogen and progestin pills.

A new analysis of federal cancer statistics, presented Thursday at a breast cancer conference in Texas, revealed the drop in tumors. About 200,000 cases of breast cancer had been expected in 2003; the drop means that about 14,000 fewer cases were actually diagnosed. Because breast cancer takes years to form, experts think that withdrawing hormones mostly caused small tumors that had been growing to stop or shrink, making them no longer detectable on mammograms. Whether this is true or will result in fewer cases over the long run will take more time to tell. The next set of cancer statistics, for 2004, is due out in April.

Why do doctors think the 2003 drop is largely due to hormones? Cases declined most among women 50 and older, with tumors whose growth is fueled by estrogen -- the age group and type of cancer most affected by hormone use. The drop also was seen in every single cancer registry that reports information to the federal government. Researchers looked for a similar drop in other cancers, which could indicate something other than hormones was at work, "and we didn't see anything," said Kathy Cronin, a National Cancer Institute statistician who worked on the analysis.

When the 2003 numbers were first released a few months ago, they were grouped with 2001 and 2002 and portrayed as a leveling off of breast cancer after decades of steady rise. The big single-year drop was not pointed out because experts did not want to make too much of it without knowing whether the trend would continue. However, Dr. Peter Ravdin, a breast cancer specialist at the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center who led the new analysis, said the single-year drop is important regardless, because it was so huge and came after years of steady increases. "We don't know about whether or not it's going to be a trend but we know for this year it was a significant effect," he said.

Doctors estimate that half of women who were taking hormones stopped after July 2002, when the federal Women's Health Initiative study was halted because more women taking estrogen/progestin pills developed breast cancer or heart problems. That led to new warning labels on the drugs and doctor groups urging women to use the lowest dose for the shortest time possible. "The hypothesis is entirely plausible, that the discontinuation of hormone replacement therapy could be having an effect," said Dr. Michael Thun of the American Cancer Society. Copyright 2006 The Associated Press . All rights reserved.This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Fat in the Diet and Cancer Recurrence

A lot of the studies on fat don't account for the rancid oils, hydrogenation or trans fats. This one is not clear.

REDUCED LEVELS OF FAT IN THE DIET MAY DECREASE THE RISK OF BREAST CANCER RECURRENCE ACCORDING TO NEW CLINICAL TRIAL

Postmenopausal women who reduce their consumption of dietary fat and have been treated for early-stage breast cancer may reduce their chances for breast cancer recurrence or a second breast cancer, according to results from the Women's Intervention Nutrition Study (WINS). WINS was the first large-scale randomized trial to show that a change in diet can improve breast cancer outcomes in women who are receiving conventional treatment for early-stage breast cancer. Results of this study, which was sponsored by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), part of the National Institutes of Health, appear in the December 20, 2006, issue of the "Journal of the National Cancer Institute"* along with an editorial on the findings by NCI scientists**. This report is based on an interim analysis of the trial data.

Red Meat Increases Breast Cancer Risk

Interesting in light of the carnitine issue. Red meat is the best source. Maybe it has something to do with how we treat the cows. Would you like some hormones and antibiotics with that?

This is from the Cancer Project Newsletter

New data from Harvard’s Nurses’ Health Study II show that women who consumed one and a half or more servings of red meat per day had nearly double the risk of developing hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer compared with women consuming three or fewer servings of red meat per week. Hormone-receptor-positive breast cancer is the most common type of breast cancer and has been on the rise in recent years. This study involved more than 90,000 premenopausal women age 26 to 46 who completed food surveys during a 12-year period. Animal fat and red meat intake were found to increase premenopausal breast cancer risk in a previous analysis of the Nurses’ Health Study II. Possible reasons for this association include carcinogens produced as meat is cooked, hormones given to cattle for growth promotion, red meat’s high content of heme iron, which has been shown to increase estrogen-dependent tumor growth, and red meat’s high fat content.

Cho E, Chen WY, Hunter DJ, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA, Hankinson SE, Willett WC. Red meat intake and risk of breast cancer among premenopausal women. Arch Intern Med. 2006;166:2253-2259.

Carnitine and Cancer fatigue

There is a new study out about Carnitine. If you have fatigue during cancer treatment, you might be deficient in carnitine. Still we always recommend working with a professional to help sort out the deficiencies in your body rather than throwing nutrients based on a new study.

Here is a link to the webpage from NIH

Carnitine: What is it?
Carnitine, derived from an amino acid, is found in nearly all cells of the body. Its name is derived from the Latin carnus or flesh, as the compound was isolated from meat. Carnitine is the generic term for a number of compounds that include L-carnitine, acetyl-L-carnitine, and propionyl-L-carnitine [1-2].

Cancer
Fatigue resulting from chemotherapy, radiation treatment, and poor nutritional status is common in cancer patients [23]. They may also be deficient in carnitine [23]. In one study, treatment with carnitine supplements (4 grams/day for one week) ameliorated fatigue in most chemotherapy-treated subjects and restored normal blood levels of carnitine [24]. In another trial, terminal cancer patients supplemented with carnitine (doses ranged from 250 milligrams to 3 grams/day) experienced less fatigue and improved mood and quality of sleep [23]. In both studies, most subjects were carnitine deficient before taking the supplements.