Breast Health Project

Breast Cancer and Radiation - New Study

2011-05-18T20:39:00.000-07:00

Breast Cancer Recurrence Rates Appear Different When Radiation Used
Early finding shows fewer local recurrences in short term, more invasive recurrences in long run.

(our note on this) Most women think that radiation is a must when getting a lumpectomy, but here is another study that shows radiation is not without side effects. We highlight some sentences here that we think are worth considering and will comment again at the bottom.)

FRIDAY, April 29 (HealthDay News) -- Patients with early stage breast cancers are commonly treated with surgery or surgery plus radiation, and radiation is widely believed to cut local recurrence rates by about half.

Now, researchers report that they have found that surgery plus radiation does cut local recurrences, but appears to increase the risk of invasive breast cancers later.

"I don't want people to think radiation is bad," said study author Dr. Janie Weng Grumley, a fellow in breast oncology at the University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine. "We know there is less recurrence with radiation."

Grumley's team evaluated 1,014 patients with early breast cancer, known as ductal carcinoma in situ. Of these, 651 had surgery alone while 363 had surgery plus radiation.

The 10-year probability of any recurrence at the same site was 30 percent for the surgery group and 18 percent for the combination group. However, when cancer does return in those who get the combination treatment, her study showed the patterns are different.

"The patients who got radiation recurred a lot later than the patients who didn't," she said. The average time to the cancer recurring in the same site was 7.5 years for those who had radiation plus surgery and 4.4 years for those who had surgery only.

However, "surgery plus radiation had more invasive recurrence," she said. Thirty-seven percent of the surgery group had an invasive recurrence at the same site, but 57 percent of the combination group did, she said.

While 28 percent of the recurrences were in different quadrants of the breast for the combination patients -- essentially new cancers -- only 10 percent of the recurrences in surgery-only patients were in new quadrants.

The survival rate among the surgery group at 10 years was 99.7 percent, compared to 98.3 percent for the combination group, the study found.

The study leaves many questions unanswered. "Is the radiation causing more new cancers?" Grumley wondered.

The research also has several limitations: The average follow-up for the surgery group was six years, while the average follow-up for the combination group was a little over nine years. "One could say the follow-up is longer, and maybe we would find the same thing if we followed the surgery-only group," Grumley said.

The findings were slated to be presented Friday at the American Society of Breast Surgeons meeting, in Washington, D.C.

The finding should be considered very preliminary, said Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical and scientific officer for the American Cancer Society and professor of oncology and epidemiology at the Emory University School of Medicine, in Atlanta.

"I would say you have to look at all abstracts from scientific meetings with a grain of salt," Brawley said. The research has not yet been exposed to rigorous review and critique by the researchers' colleagues, he said. If a study is the first of its kind, it must be replicated by others to confirm the finding.

Grumley said the message for now is that women should be aware of the different patterns found. "Really, the message should be we should monitor these patients beyond the [typical] five years," she added.

SOURCES: Otis Brawley, M.D., chief medical and scientific officer, American Cancer Society, and professor, oncology and epidemiology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta; Janie Weng Grumley, M.D., fellow, breast oncology, University of Southern California Keck School of Medicine; April 29, 2011, presentation, American Society of Breast Surgeons meeting, Washington, D.C.

(did you see the difference in survival rates! That really what we wanted to draw attention to here. The surgery only group had higher survival rates!!! Most women don't realize with DCIS the chance of recurrence is small. Still respecting individual choices to take more or less treatment, just wanting those choices to be INFORMED choices...)

Weightlighting after Breast Cancer Surgery - It's a YES!

2011-01-14T11:03:00.000-08:00

Charlene Laino

Freelance writer for Medscape.
From WebMD Health News
Weight Lifting May Be OK After Breast Cancer Surgery

Charlene Laino

December 10, 2010 — Contrary to what’s been thought, a program of weight lifting may not increase the risk for arm swelling caused by lymphedema in breast cancer survivors. This is according to a new study performed by the same researchers who previously found that weight lifting may help breast cancer patients who already have lymphedema in their arms to gain strength.

Lymphedema is buildup of fluid that causes swelling. It can be a lasting side effect of removing lymph nodes during breast cancer surgery.

To avoid developing the condition or making it worse, the vast majority of the 2.4 million breast cancer survivors in the U.S. are typically advised against lifting children, heavy bags, or anything else weighing more than 5 pounds.

But the studies challenge such advice.

The findings "do not mean women can just go out, buy a set of weights and start their own rehabilitation program," says researcher Kathryn Schmitz, PhD, MPH, associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics at the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine.

What "breast cancer survivors should do is go to their physician and insist on getting a prescription for physical therapy. The physical therapist can evaluate them and develop a safe weight lifting program," Schmitz tells WebMD.

The new study was presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium and published online in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Weight Lifting and Lymphedema

The study involved about 150 breast cancer survivors who had their cancer diagnosed one to five years previously. All had two or more lymph nodes removed, and none had signs of lymphedema when they entered the study.

Arm measurements were taken throughout the one-year study. A woman was considered to have lymphedema if her affected arm swelled by 5% or more.

Eleven percent of 72 women in the weight lifting group had their affected arm swell by 5% or more vs. 17% of 75 women who did not change their normal physical activities.

Among women who had five or more lymph nodes removed during breast cancer surgery, 7% of 45 women in this group had arm swelling of 5% or more, compared with 22% of 49 women who did not lift weights. This translates to a 70% reduction in risk, Schmitz says.

Women in the weight lifting group were given a one-year membership to a local fitness center. For 13 weeks, they attended small, twice-weekly, 90-minute classes led by certified fitness professionals who taught them safe techniques for weight lifting using both free weights and machines. Weight was increased slowly for each exercise if the women had no arm symptoms including swelling, pain, tingling, or numbness.

For the remainder of the study, the women exercised on their own while being monitored for any change in symptoms.

The rest of the women weren't asked to start weight training, and they got a one-year pass to a health club only when the study ended.

Any woman who developed lymphedema was given a custom-fitted compression garment for their affected arm and was required to wear it if performing weight lifting exercises.

Some Breast Cancer Survivors Still Get Arm Swelling

Some women are going to develop lymphedema even if they follow a well-designed weight lifting program, Schmitz cautions. "A reduction in risk does not mean total prevention."

Alphonse Taghian, MD, PhD, chief of breast radiation oncology at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston, tells WebMD that he thinks the study will have "a great impact."

"This will change the way we counsel women, who are usually afraid of using their affected arm. They don't have to be afraid," says Taghian, who was not involved in the study.

That said, "women have to be careful so [lifting] won't cause harm," he says.

But another expert in cancer and exercise cautions that further study is needed before any advice to avoid lifting heavy objects can be changed.

Lee W. Jones, PhD, scientific director of the Duke Center for Cancer Survivorship at Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center, tells WebMD that while the study is "a step in the right direction," the number of women studied was "small and the number of patients who actually developed lymphedema was especially small," he says.

Lymphedema: What's at Risk

Studies have shown that the one-third of breast cancer survivors who have had multiple lymph nodes removed are at greatest risk of lymphedema, with as many as 47% of these women developing the condition.

Of the 61% of women who undergo less invasive sentinel lymph node biopsies and have only one or two nodes removed, up to 7% develop lymphedema.

"This is a real-life concern that often limits their ability to work, play with their kids, even lift up all those holiday bags this season," Schmitz says.

Insurance co-pays generally cover the cost of five to 10 physical therapy sessions, Schmitz says. If you don’t have insurance, cost varies widely, but is typically in the range of $75 to $100 per session.

SOURCES:

San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, San Antonio, Dec. 8-12, 2010.

Kathryn Schmitz, PhD, MPH, associate professor of epidemiology and biostatistics, University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, Philadelphia.

Lee W. Jones, PhD, scientific director, Duke Center for Cancer Survivorship, Duke Comprehensive Cancer Center, Durham, N.C.

Alphonse Taghian, MD, PhD, chief of breast radiation oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston.

Schmitz, K. Journal of the American Medical Association, published online Dec. 8, 2010.

WebMD Health News © 2010 Medscape, LLC

To Mammogram or not to Mammogram

2010-11-29T10:46:00.000-08:00

We get a lot of questions about this so here is an attempt to clarify some things. The recent task force recommendation AGAINST mammography screening in women 40 - 50 year old women is stirring up a lot of confusion.

What the panel actually said is that it does not make FINANCIAL sense to screen these women. The numbers they issued are as follows. Of the 250,000+ women in this age group who are screened every year. 80,000 of those women are called back for further screening and or biopsy. Of those 80,000 only 1,200 will be diagnosed with breast cancer. Those are the numbers, here come the emotions....

Getting a call back for a mammogram is scary, really scary. Getting a biopsy is horrible. There is no way around it, either lying face down totally uncomfortable while a core needle biopsy or the small needle and then the surgical biopsy. I would not wish either of these things on my worst enemy. 80,000 women have to walk thru this. That is nearly one third of the women who get mammograms!!

On the other hand, i know sooo many women between 40 and 50 who found their cancer thru a mammogram. What do we say to these women?!?

I think the choice is personal, intensely personal. If you know these numbers, make your choice and trust your self. No one can tell you what to do. Most of the arguments we hear are so based in fear that they do not even make sense. Some story of someone who did or did not get help from a mammogram is not what you should base your decision on.

More to follow....

Study shows promise against Breast Cancer

2010-11-11T07:49:00.000-08:00

We love the company and the products. I personally take breast defend, what higher recommendation can I give!?! - I have no connection financially to the company, i do sell and recommend it to my clients but there is no incentive for me to sell it to you.

Indiana University Study Shows Blend of 6 Mushrooms Fight Breast Cancer

Researchers at Indiana University and Methodist Research Institute publish the dramatic effects of a unique medicinal mushroom formula against breast cancer

Santa Rosa, Calif. (Nov. 11, 2010) – Researchers at Indiana University and Methodist Research Institute studied an innovative medicinal mushroom formula against breast cancer. The impressive results are found in the December issue of the International Journal of Oncology. Lead investigator Dr. Daniel Sliva says, “The formula inhibits growth of highly metastatic human breast cancer cells, and suppresses metastatic potential of these cells.” The all-natural, doctor-designed formula is a blend of six potent varieties of medicinal mushrooms grown on immune enhancing and cancer fighting botanicals that work together to provide breast protection and immune support. Dr. Sliva adds, “These cultivation conditions help naturally increase the amount of biologically active components in these medicinal mushrooms.”

Breast cancer is one of the most common cancers affecting women and may lead to more than 38,000 deaths this year in the U.S. Despite significant advances in breast cancer treatment, available treatments for advanced stage breast cancer offer little hope. However, as the study shows, this potent mushroom formula can be beneficial in the fight against highly invasive breast cancer. Medicinal mushrooms have been extensively researched for their anti-tumor and immune-modulating effects, and are essential for the maintenance of overall vitality and cellular health. “This unique mixture of ingredients produced positive and promising results,” says Isaac Eliaz, M.D., whom the study authors acknowledge for his development of the formula. Dr. Eliaz explains, “These compounds support breast health through cellular protection, and vital immune enhancement.”

Cancer metastasis is a complex process consisting of cell adhesion, cell migration, and cell invasion, and the inhibition of some of these events is crucial for the suppression of cancer metastasis. “Fortunately, the formula we studied inhibits all of these processes, without side effects, which are associated with cancer chemotherapy,” explains Dr. Sliva.

Source: International Journal of Oncology

Jiahua Jiang, Daniel Sliva, Novel Medicinal Mushroom Blend Suppresses Growth and Invasiveness of Human Breast Cancer Cells

Hear us interviewed on the radio!

2010-10-04T21:55:00.000-07:00

We were interviewed last week by Jan Janzen author of Breast Health Revolution.

Listen to internet radio with Jan Janzen on Blog Talk Radio

Breast Cancer Prevention Comes With Increasing Evidence

2010-10-03T18:31:00.000-07:00

This Article from Kansas City talks about the typical woman who has breast cancer in her family and what her choices are. However here they lay out some interesting research about prevention thru three main strategies. Weight Loss, Exercise and Nutrition. One study mentioned from University of Kansas put 25 women on a 1,200 calorie-a-day diet and an exercise regimen of six hours or more of walking every week.

The women not only lost weight, they ended up with fewer precancerous cells in their breasts.

Exercise reduces inflammatory chemicals in the body that seem to make it easier for pre-cancerous cells to survive.

The other things mentioned were flax seeds and vitamin D. We talk about other flax seed studies here, it is right under the recipe.

We will be interviewing an expert about Vitamin D in November.

Read the entire article here: http://www.kansascity.com/2010/10/02/2270033/research-is-emphasizing-prevention.html#ixzz11LkW0fh5

Breast Cancer Spreads from Stress

2010-09-17T08:28:00.000-07:00

Stress accelerates breast cancer progression in mice
Chronic stress acts as a sort of fertilizer that feeds breast cancer progression, significantly accelerating the spread of disease in animal models, researchers at UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center have found.

Researchers discovered that stress is biologically reprogramming the immune cells that are trying to fight the cancer, transforming them instead from soldiers protecting the body against disease into aiders and abettors. The study found a 30-fold increase in cancer spread throughout the bodies of stressed mice compared to those that were not stressed.

It's long been thought that stress fuels cancer growth in humans. This study provides a model that not only demonstrates that stress can speed up cancer progression, but also details the pathway used to change the biology of immune cells that inadvertently promote the spread of cancer to distant organs, where it is much harder to treat.

The study appears in the Sept. 15, 2010 issue of the peer-reviewed journal Cancer Research.

"What we showed for the first time is that chronic stress causes cancer cells to escape from the primary tumor and colonize distant organs," said Erica Sloan, a Jonsson Cancer Center scientist, first author of the study and a researcher with the Cousins Center for Psychoneuroimmunology. "We not only showed that this happens, but we showed how stress talks to the tumor and helps it to spread."

In addition to documenting the effects of stress on cancer metastasis, the researchers were also able to block those effects by treating stressed animals with drugs that block the nervous system's reprogramming of the metastasis-promoting immune cells, called macrophages.

Beta blockers, used in this study to shut down the stress pathways in the mice, are currently being examined in several large breast cancer databases for their role in potential prevention of recurrence and cancer spread, said Dr. Patricia Ganz, director of cancer prevention and control research at UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center. If preliminary findings indicate benefit, early phase clinical trials are being considered at the Jonsson Cancer Center testing beta blockers as a means of preventing breast cancer recurrence. Other healthy lifestyle behaviors may also influence the biological pathways described in the study, such as exercise and stress reduction techniques.

"We're going to be focusing on younger women, because they may have a multitude of things weighing on them when they're diagnosed with breast cancer. Younger women have more significant life demands and typically are under more stress," Ganz said.

Ganz said her proposed research will focus on "host factors," or things affecting the patient, that may be aiding the cancer progression and could help explain why a group of patients with the same type and stage of disease have varying rates of recurrence and cancer spread.

"This study provides evidence for a biological relationship between stress and cancer progression and identifies targets for intervention in the host environment," Ganz said. "Because of this study, we may be able to say to a patient in the future that if you follow this exercise regimen, meditative practice or take this pill every day it will help prevent recurrence of your cancer. We can now test these potential interventions in the animal model and move those that are effective into the clinic."

In Sloan's study, mice with breast cancer were divided into two groups. One group of mice was confined in a small area for a short period of time every day for two weeks, while the other group was not. The breast cancer cells were genetically engineered to include the luciferase gene, which is the molecule that makes a firefly glow. The growth and spread of the cancer in the mice was monitored using sensitive cameras that can pick up the luciferase signal and allowed Sloan and her team to observe both the development of primary tumors and the spread of metastases throughout the body, said Steven Cole, an associate professor of hematology/oncology, a Jonsson Cancer Center researcher and senior author of the study.

What was interesting, Cole said, was that the primary tumors did not seem to be affected by stress and grew similarly in both groups of mice. However, the stressed animals showed significantly more metastases throughout the body than did the control group. The cancer, in effect, acted differently in the stressed mice.

"This study is not saying that stress causes cancer, but it does show that stress can help support cancer once it has developed," Cole said. "Stress helps the cancer climb over the fence and get out into the big, wide world of the rest of the body."

Cole said Sloan detailed the biology of the stress-induced changes in the cancer cells along every step of the pathway, providing a road map by which stress promotes cancer metastasis. Additionally, she proved that using beta blockers in stressed mice prevented the same cancer progression seen in the stressed mice that did not receive medication.

When cancer occurs, the immune system sends out macrophages to try to repair the tissue damage caused by uncontrolled growth of cancer cells. The macrophages, in an attempt to help, turn on inflammation genes that are part of the normal immune response to injury. However, the cancer cells feed on the growth factors involved in a normal immune response. Blood vessels that are grown to aid healing instead feed the cancer the oxygen and nutrients it needs to grow and spread, and the extra cellular matrix, which provides structural support for normal cells, is attacked during the immune response, In Sloan's study, mice with breast cancer were divided into two groups. One group of mice was confined in a small area for a short period of time every day for two weeks, while the other group was not. helping the cancer cells escape from the primary tumor and spread to distant parts of the body.

"Many of the genes that promote cancer metastasis get turned on during the immune response by macrophages," Cole said. "This study shows that stress signaling from the sympathetic nervous system enhances the recruitment of macrophages into the primary tumor, and increases their expression of immune response genes that inadvertently facilitate the escape of cancer cells into other parts of the body."

Sloan showed that the beta blockers prevented the macrophages from hearing the signals sent by the sympathetic nervous system, and stopped them from infiltrating the tumor and encouraging cancer spread.

###
The study was funded by the National Institutes of Health, the Department of Defense and the Jonsson Cancer Center.

UCLA's Jonsson Comprehensive Cancer Center has more than 240 researchers and clinicians engaged in disease research, prevention, detection, control, treatment and education. One of the nation's largest comprehensive cancer centers, the Jonsson center is dedicated to promoting research and translating basic science into leading-edge clinical studies. In July 2010, the Jonsson Cancer Center was named among the top 10 cancer centers nationwide by U.S. News & World Report, a ranking it has held for 10 of the last 11 years. For more information on the Jonsson Cancer Center, visit our website at http://www.cancer.ucla.edu .

Reduce your breast cancer risk

2010-09-12T11:52:00.000-07:00

The American Institute for Cancer Research tells us there are three big things we can do to reduce cancer risk.

Move more
Weigh Less
Eat Well

Exercise is proving to be not only helpful for reducing risk of re-occurrence but also for general prevention. Several recent studies suggest that higher levels of physical activity are associated with a reduced risk of the cancer coming back, and a longer survival after a cancer diagnosis," said Kerry Courneya, PhD, professor and Canada Research Chair in Physical Activity and Cancer at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada.

Weight gain is more related with breast cancer in post menopausal women. This is probably due to the estrogen produced by fat cells.

There are so many studies now on eating well and cancer prevention that we hardly feel we need to talk about it anymore. Literally what you eat becomes your cellular intelligence. The phyto-nutrients in food help your cells in every possible way.

Next we will talk about how adding your mental energy and thinking to these three things might multiply their efforts!

Sugar feeds Cancer

2010-09-03T11:31:00.000-07:00

A new study looks at how pancreatic cancer cells use fructose to feed cancer.

There is the thought that all sugars are the same and that it does not matter weather you eat fruit or something with high fructose corn syrup. This study suggests otherwise.

"These findings show that cancer cells can readily metabolize fructose to increase proliferation," Dr. Anthony Heaney of UCLA's Jonsson Cancer Center and colleagues wrote.

"They have major significance for cancer patients given dietary refined fructose consumption, and indicate that efforts to reduce refined fructose intake or inhibit fructose-mediated actions may disrupt cancer growth."

There is evidence that high fructose corn syrup increases risk for a number of health concerns including obesity, heart disease and diabetes.

Tumor cells thrive on sugar but they used the fructose to proliferate. "Importantly, fructose and glucose metabolism are quite different," Heaney's team wrote.

The team is trying to find a way to reprogram the cells to not be so sensitive to fructose. Why not avoid fructose?!? A cheaper and more common sense (obvious?) solution that is sure not to please the food and beverage industry. If you have cancer, please think about this. all sugars are not created equal.

Here is more from the Diet Channel...

There is also the connection between obesity and cancer.

lymphedema and weightlifting

2009-09-27T14:41:00.000-07:00

For those of you new here to our website, you may not have heard this news about lymphedema prevention. There is a great article on the Susan Love website about how weightlifting can not only be safe but also reduce symptoms of lymphedema. If you are interested, try to get to a YMCA and join the LIVESTRONG program to get proper training. Don't just go to any trainer who isn't aware of how to work with you.

Here again is the article from Susan Loves website. Susan Love is a HERO to us and if you have not joined up for the "MILLION WOMEN" campaign on her website, we encourage you to do so.

Cadmium as an metallohormone

2009-09-27T14:32:00.000-07:00

I know, i know - a WHAT?!?

here is the article:

No margin of safety for cadmium

A large portion of non-smoking adults have urinary cadmium concentrations that are near, at, or even above those at which epidemiological studies have shown kidney damage, adverse bone effects, and increased risk of cancer and death. Smokers generally have even higher cadmium levels.

While cadmium has no known physiological function, laboratory studies have found it to be a potent metallohormone that functions biologically as an estrogen and an androgen. It has been suggested that increased exposure to cadmium and other metalloestrogens could explain as much as 30 percent of breast and prostate cancers. Also increased environmental exposures to such metals over the last half century may explain a large portion of the increased rates of these cancers in developed countries.

This situation indicates that there is no margin of safety between the point of departure and exposure levels in the general population. Measures should be put in place to reduce cadmium exposure to a minimum.

Cadmium is used in galvanizing and electroplating, in batteries, in electrical conductors, in the manufacture of alloys, pigments, and plastics, and in the stabilization of phosphate fertilizers. It is also a prevalent environmental contaminant due to its release from metal smelters. In the general population, exposure to cadmium occurs primarily through food, cigarette smoking, and, to a lesser degree, drinking water. Occurrence in food comes through atmospheric deposition of the airborne cadmium, mining activities and the application of cadmium-containing fertilizers and sewage sludge (biosolids) on farm land.

Sources:

Byrne, C., S. D. Divekar, et al. (2009). "Cadmium - a metallohormone?" Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology In Press, Accepted Manuscript.

Järup, L. and A. Åkesson (2009). "Current status of cadmium as an environmental health problem." Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology 238(3): 201-208.

Chlorella Supplement decreases Dioxin in Breast Milk

2008-02-24T16:01:00.000-08:00

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

2008-02-24T15:51:00.000-08:00

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

2008-02-24T15:31:00.000-08:00

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

2008-02-24T15:23:00.000-08:00

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?!?

2008-02-24T15:09:00.000-08:00

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

2007-09-05T17:16:00.000-07:00

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

2007-09-05T17:15:00.000-07:00

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

2007-09-05T17:13:00.000-07:00

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?!?

2007-08-02T17:06:00.000-07:00

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

2007-08-02T16:59:00.000-07:00

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

2007-08-02T16:48:00.000-07:00

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

2007-08-02T08:54:00.000-07:00

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....

2007-06-01T06:41:00.000-07:00

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

2007-06-01T06:39:00.000-07:00

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.