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.

Breast Cancer and Common Chemicals

2007-06-01T06:37:00.000-07:00

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

2007-04-18T10:48:00.000-07:00

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

2007-04-18T10:35:00.000-07:00

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

2007-04-18T10:32:00.000-07:00

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

2007-04-18T10:26:00.000-07:00

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.

2007-03-01T15:09:00.000-08:00

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

2007-03-01T15:05:00.000-08:00

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

2007-03-01T14:58:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:53:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:50:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:48:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:46:00.000-08:00

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!)

2007-01-17T15:41:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:36:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:32:00.000-08:00

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

2007-01-17T15:25:00.000-08:00

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.

Taking time to make a decision...

2006-10-29T15:10:00.000-08:00

After surgery, most women are faced with choices about chemotherapy and radiation. Sometimes chemo is helpful and sometimes it is not. Taking the time to do the research can be of great help. Some women like to get a second opinion. Some women want to have the tumor tissue that was removed tested to see which chemo is going to help with their particular type of cancer. For information on chemo sensitivity testing, there is more information at Dr. Larry Weisenthal s website.

A new study shows that you can take some time to make your decision - up to 12 weeks - and the chemo regime will still be helpful. If you are having some difficulty making a desicion about what is best for you, we highly recommend Dr Ralph Moss' Cancer Report. Not only do you get great information about your type of cancer, you get some to an oncologist to ask questions about what your doctor is telling you.

Here are the finding from the study.

"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.

Vitamin E slows cancer growth

2006-10-29T15:02:00.000-08:00

This study posted by Ivanhoe is from the Cancer Research Journal. The role of antioxidants in protection from cancer will continue to be in the news. While there is a large push to isolate compounds (which can be patented.) that are effective in preventing cancer, the whole foods source is always a better option. Most studies show at least to take Vitamin E with A and C for the best effects. Vitamin E is known as a Super Antioxidant because it can regenerate itself and somewhat recycle itself.

Here is the study.

Altered Form of Vitamin E Stops Cancer Spread in Mice

(Ivanhoe Newswire) -- A special form of vitamin E may someday treat breast cancer that has spread.

The study from the University of Arizona in Tucson reveals chemically altered vitamin E mixed into mouse food dramatically reduced the spread of cancer in mice. It's the first study to show the synthetic compound has powerful anti-cancer benefits when given as a dietary supplement.

Researchers report mice that ate the so-called super chow had a 4.8-fold reduction in the number of tumors that spread to the lungs compared to the control mice.

Researchers say vitamin E cannot destroy tumor cells on its own. But chemically changing it helps it force cancer cells to self-destruct.

"Cell survival is maintained when pro-apoptotic proteins are confined, and these synthetic forms of vitamin E release them, pushing the cell into committing suicide," reports lead author Emmanuel T. Akporiaye, Ph.D., University of Arizona. "Only a little part of vitamin E is changed in these synthetic derivatives, but they show amazing anti-cancer properties, and they selectively target tumor cells." Pro-apoptotic means something that encourages the process of apoptosis, or cell death.

Researchers report combining this synthetic vitamin E derivative with other anti-cancer treatments may help treat and prevent breast cancer in humans.

This article was reported by Ivanhoe.com, who offers Medical Alerts by e-mail every day of the week. To subscribe, go to: http://www.ivanhoe.com/newsalert/.

SOURCE: Cancer Research, 2006;66:9374-9378

Breast Cancer and Abortion

2006-10-29T14:34:00.000-08:00

Full term pregnancies and subsequent breast feeding seem to be protective of the breast. There is the theory that when a pregnancy is terminated early, the health of the breast may be affected. This issue around breast cancer risk and abortion is really heightened by the pro-choice/pro-life movement. Sometimes it is hard to distinguish what is credible research because of this. There is also the question of miscarriage verses induced abortions. A study published in the International Journal of Cancer this month states that there is no increased risk from abortion. They did find that more than two miscarraiges indicated some sort of risk.

From a Holistic perspective, there is some sort of hormonal imbalance that would have caused the miscarraiges. This same hormonal imbalance might increase breast cancer risk. This is why we talk about symptoms as signs. All of your hormonal symptoms, PMS, miscarraige, endometriosis, fibroids, painful breasts, etc. are signs of hormonal imbalance. Dealing with this imbalance by using a combination of nutrition and reduction of exposure to hormone disrupting chemicals would make a lot of sense here.

This is a highly emotional issue for people on both sides. We would love to see a meta analysis of this issue done. For now, it seems more reasonable to spend time focusing on what we know is a risk factor. We will keep you posted on any new research that comes up on this issue. We've even tried to interview people about it, but politics gets in the way of interpretation almost every time. Anyone have views on this?

The exposure of our parents - what does this mean for our children?

2006-09-28T08:16:00.000-07:00

Researchers from Washington State University in Pullman, Wash., report when a pregnant animal is exposed to an environmental toxin, it can make the animal and its descendants develop illnesses like cancer and kidney disease for several generations.

Researchers exposed pregnant rats to vinclozolin, a fungicide commonly used in vineyards. Vinclozolin is part of a group of chemicals that interfere with the normal functioning of reproductive hormones. These rats then had male babies with low sperm counts and a high number of adult-onset diseases. When they mated with females not exposed to the toxins, their offspring had the same problems. The pattern continued through four generations. About 85 percent of the offspring in each generation developed conditions such as breast tumors, prostate disease, kidney disease and immune system abnormalities.

"Only the original generation mother was exposed to the environmental toxicant," says Michael K. Skinner from Washington State University. "A human analogy would be if your grandmother was exposed to an environmental toxicant during mid-gestation, you may develop a disease state even though you never had direct exposure, and you may pass it on to your great-grandchildren."

The study shows the potential impact of epigenetic inheritance, the transmission of biological information from parent to offspring that is not encoded in the DNA sequence but instead stems from small chemicals that become attached to the DNA. The genes remain the same but the chemical modifications change the way the genes work.

The study results also show environmental factors may play a much larger role in evolution than once thought.

Plastics and Breast Milk

2006-07-25T13:01:00.000-07:00

Here is more information on babies exposure to toxic chemicals thru breast milk. This is why getting these toxins out of our bodies is so important! 1st, the problem. This article was in the Environmental Science and Technology online magazine.
This article was in the Environmental Science and Technology online magazine.

After you learn about the problem, go here to see how Dr Cousins used Zeolite and nutrition to remove exactly these toxins from pregnant women so their babies would not have this level of exposure. Below is a summary: and here is a link to the site. This Goes To Dr Cousins site.

This is what we wrote about Zeolite recently

A pilot study at the Tree of Life Rejuvenation Center with 60 people, based on my non-toxic baby protocol for preparing parents to bring forth non-toxic babies, consisted of a one-week green juice fast and detox support program with zeolite in the form of Natural Cellular Defense (NCD) 15 drops, 4X/day.

The following very significant results were found. 22 people were tested for depleted uranium (DU), a very serious worldwide radioactive contamination resulting from the use of DU armaments, especially used in Iraq. 20 of the 22 people tested initially had DU in at least the liver, the breast, or the brain, and 17 of the 22 people had started with it in all three organs, the liver, the breast, and the brain. In one week on this protocol, all the people became DU-free except for one person, who still had DU in the liver.

Also, thirty-two people were tested for Teflon and Perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), the carcinogenic element of teflon. Teflon was found in the livers of 27 people, the breasts of 25 people, and the brains of 28 people. All but two people became teflon-free after one week. Only one person had Teflon remaining in the breast, and one person had Teflon remaining in the brain.

In the same 32 people, initially PFOA was found in the liver of 28 people, the breast of 29 people, and the brain of 28 people. After one week, all people became PFOA-free except for one person having PFOA remaining in the breast and brain. In testing people for a whole set of toxins consisting of 14 to 26 of the common heavy metals, pesticides, and herbicides, the people initially had on average 90 to 95% of the toxins in their liver, breast, and brain, whether they were live-food eaters or not. The overall percentage of removal of these toxins from these organs was 87%, leaving only 13% of the toxins in their systems overall. This included 90% removal from the liver, 87% removal from the breast, and 86% removal from the brain.

In the 55 people tested the heavy metals, pesticides, and herbicide toxins, initially 845 toxins were found in the subjects’ livers, 876 toxins in the breasts, 8 toxins in the brain. After the one-week protocol, just 88 toxins were left in the liver, 115 toxins left in the breast, and 124 toxins left in the brain::

RESULTS OF WEEK-LONG NCD AND JUICE FASTING NON-TOXIC BABY PROTOCOL

Toxins Found BEFORE
LIVER 845
BREAST 876
BRAIN 875
TOTAL 2596

Toxins Found AFTER
LIVER 88
BREAST 115
BRAIN 124
TOTAL 327

Percentage Removed
LIVER 90%
BREAST 87%
BRAIN 86%
TOTAL 87%

Radiation and the Breast Cancer Gene

2006-07-17T11:02:00.000-07:00

A study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology confirmed what some Doctors from Europe have been warning about. The radiation exposure from X-rays increases the likelihood that someone with the "breast cancer gene" BCRA1 or 2 will develop cancer.

This from Reuters:
Women with mutations in BRCA1 or BRCA2 who reported having a chest X-ray were 54 percent more likely to develop breast cancer than those who had never had one, the study found.

Women exposed to X-rays before age 20 had a 2.5-fold increased risk of developing breast cancer before age 40, compared with those who had never had a chest X-ray.

"Since BRCA proteins are integral in repairing damage to breast cells, we hypothesized that women with BRCA 1/2 mutations would be less able to repair damage caused to DNA by ionizing radiation," Goldgar said. (Dr. David Goldgar of the University of Utah School of Medicine one of the leading researchers)

The major reason most of the women the in the study would have had a chest X-ray was to screen for tuberculosis before enrolling in school or as job requirement, Goldgar said in a telephone interview.

However, "if my daughter was 30 and known to be a (BRCA1 or BRCA2) carrier I wouldn't say 'don't have a mammography,'" he added.

That last statement is controversial at best. If radiation is a known factor in developing breast cancer, why would you expose women who are at a higher risk for the disease. Remember radiation exposure is cumulative. We will talk about this more next month and hear from some experts. Here is a link to the article.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,13509-2244348,00.html

Educating Young Women on Risk

2006-07-17T10:35:00.000-07:00

In a study of more than 10,000 young women designed to assess knowledge of breast cancer risk factors, a study found young women more likely to believe in genetic risk factors than lifestyle risk factors. This despite the fact that lifestyle factors, including alcohol use, birth control use, diet and exercise are important factors associated with breast cancer risk. If you are a mother of young women, please talk to your daughters about the importance of developing healthy lifestyle choices. Some of the evidence points to these "periods of vulnerability" puberty being one, as times when lifestyle choices, exposures to toxins or use of hormones can have an especially harmful effect in influencing genetic expression.
It is hard to get young people to act preventatively when they feel so strong and invulnerable. But education is powerful and open discussion can be helpful. This study shows that our young women are not educated that their choices make a difference. Let's change that! If you want ideas about talking to the young women in your life, contact us and we will help you find resources.

http://www.breasthealthproject.com/contact-us.html

More info on lymphedema and exercise. Good news!

2006-06-22T14:43:00.000-07:00

This article from the New York Times offers more weight for the tipping of the standard of practice in how women are able to care for themselves after surgery. It looks like there is a lot more you can do that previously thought. Now don't go out and start pumping iron, but work with someone who is familiar. Please print out this article and give it to your doctor or your physical therapist.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/18/fashion/thursdaystyles/18Fitness.html?ex=1151121600&en=9a46c4494f87f5ce&ei=5070

If you have trouble with this link, go to the New York Times page and seach lymphedema and the article will come right up.

Cows milk makes you grow - maybe not in places you want...

2006-06-22T14:38:00.000-07:00

This study out of Japan was printed in the Internation Journal of Cancer. It showed that rats given commercial cows milk caused the uterus of rats to grow. Not as much as if they were fed estrogen, but there were estrogenic effects.

The Ruters article said "Dr. Sato concludes that milk and dairy product consumption should be kept to a minimum. These products "contain sex steroid hormones, which promote the development of hormone-dependent cancers (prostate cancer in men, and breast and ovarian cancers in women)." Dr. Sato also does not recommend milk for prepubertal children."

Yipes! Better think twice. See the arguement for asking your local starbusks to not use RGBH milk just got a lot stronger...

New Research on Breast Cancer Prevention!

2006-06-22T14:27:00.000-07:00

This month an study from Germany was published that shows using plant lignans (the stuff at the bottle of your flax seed oil bottle) could help to PREVENT breast cancer in pre menopausaul women. The study used biomarkers and blood levels of lignans as markers. It seems up to a 78% reduction in possible breast cancer could be achieved. This is what we look for in research and it was not on your front page news...

The study was published in the European Journal of Cancer Prevention. Just in case you are not a current subscriber, here is a link to an article. http://www.nutraingredients.com/news/printNewsBis.asp?id=68403

This is another good reason to add ground flax seeds to your daily diet. Next months newsletter will publish the flax seed muffin recipe for those of you who enjoy cooking and would like the healthy recipe.

More evidence for exercise after breast cancer treatment!

2006-04-02T15:19:00.000-07:00

This study in the Integrative Cancer Therapies journal measured the effects of restoring upper body strength to women after treatment. Using both regular exercise and exercise with walking poles, the walking poles were even more efffective in getting womens strength and flexibilty back We believe that in order to help prevent lymphedema exercise and restoring proper function to the treated area is crucial. Here is a link to the study. http://ict.sagepub.com/cgi/content/abstract/4/4/287

Deodorant and Breast Cancer?

2006-04-02T15:01:00.000-07:00

A recent reference in the Journal of Applied Toxicology about aluminum salts and breast cancer is worth some discusssion.

In every class we teach, the question always comes up, do deodorants cause breast cancer. This is the most recent interesting research we have found - the answer seems to be yes! Aluminum Salts have estrogen effects in the body. Most researchers agree that estrogen activity and breast cancer are related. Putting an active estrogen on your underarms could effect the breast tissue.

Here's a quote from Philippa D Darby of the University of Reading in the UK. "..it is possible that aluminum salts and other inorganic estrogen-related compounds called "metalloestrogens" can further disrupt normal hormonal signaling within the breast, Darby says. "There is no doubt that the human breast is now subject to a wide range of environmental estrogenic insults," she writes.

What is particularly concerning about aluminium, according to Darby, is the fact that it is applied to the underarm, close to the breast, and left on the skin. Deodorants also are frequently used after shaving, making it easier for aluminium salts to enter the blood stream. Studies also have demonstrated that aluminium salts can penetrate human underarm skin even if it is unbroken.

Many of us are very commited to not smelling bad, there are deodorants out there without aluminum. Make sure that what you are using does not have aluminum salts.

State of the Evidence

2006-02-25T11:56:00.000-08:00

Last Month the Breast Cancer Fund and Breast Cancer Action published their annual State of the Evidence Report. Here is a link to read the report. http://www.breastcancerfund.org/site/pp.asp?c=kwKXLdPaE&b=206137

This year the report states that up to half of Breast Cancer cases may be linked to environmental causes. When you read about prevention and the issue of reducing pollutants that are known to cause cancer is not addressed, use caution. Showing a direct link between cancer and environmental pollution is difficult. The report is EXCELLENT and we encourage you to read it and then send it to your elected representatives.

At times addressing environmental issues around cancer can seem intimidating because the issues are really big. Keep in mind that our market is consumer driven and the choices you make shopping will be what effects change. Asking questions of your grocer, your florist, your politician, your hairdresser, your car dealer, your local restaurant owners and others in your community makes the change. Just asking "is there a less toxic alternative?" is a important and powerful question.

You don't have to go live in a tent and eat off of the land to be environmentally friendly anymore. Over the coming months, we will be giving you tip on making small powerful changes that can make a big impact on reducing waste and pollution. For now, read the report and COMMIT to doing what you can to turn the tide in a more sane direction.

Mother was right, Eat Your Vegetables!

2006-02-14T12:33:00.000-08:00

Scientists are now figuring out the way that vegetables prevent cancer. A new study is published in the research journal Nature. Scientists know that in order for cancer to develop, the DNA of the cells has to be damaged. It seems that vegetables help to repair that damage. The study showed that vegetables, specifcally cruciferous vegetables (brocolli, cauliflower, brussel sprouts) contain a compound called Indole 3 carbinol (I3C) help to repair damaged DNA.

The study quotes the lead scientist Eliot M. Rosen, MD, PhD, professor of oncology, cell biology, and radiation medicine at Georgetown’s Lombardi Comprehensive Cancer Center.

“It is now clear that the function of crucial cancer genes can be influenced by compounds in the things we eat,” Rosen says. “Our findings suggest a clear molecular process that would explain the connection between diet and cancer prevention.”

to access the full article, use this link.
http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v94/n3/full/6602935a.html

There is debate in the world of breast cancer as to whether lifestyle factors with regard to breast cancer are in some way "blaming the victim" Does getting breast cancer mean that you didn't eat enough vegetables and that it is then YOUR FAULT? This is such a gross oversimplification, it is hard to believe.

The question that is often overlooked is "why are the genes mutating in the first place?" This often leads to environmental issues. In the next post, we will explore those environmental issues with the Breast Cancer Fund State of the Evidence Report. In the meantime, our opinion (for what it is worth) is that lifestyle changes are worth looking at AND they are obviosly not the whole picture. Of all the cases of breast cancer, we only understand why women get it about 30% of the time. The REFUSAL to look at environmental exposure is a big problem.

Solving the problem of breast cancer will not be done by only looking in one direction. These chemicals that we are exposed to every day cause known genetic mutations, DNA damage and a variety of hazards. Helping our bodies heal from this damage using diet, nutrition, energetic medicine and other "lifestyle" components does not remove the original problem but it does put us in a better position to be able to confront it. Every group has it's "this is why" about cancer. The environmentalists think it is the environment. The new agers think it is our thought patterns because it is all about energy. Anyone who tells you they understand everything about cancer is most likely deluded.

We must be willing to put our ego's aside in the search for truth. Opinions are allowed and valued but this problem is best solved when we are willing to work together.

Dogs can smell cancer

2006-01-14T12:56:00.000-08:00

The easiest research to find is always in the area of disease management rather than disease prevention. Prevention studies are hard because they have to be very long AND that makes them expensive. There is a cool study that was published this week about dogs being able to smell cancer with a very high accuracy rate. Imagine not having to compress your breast just going to the office and breathing into a tube. This is a very cool idea and we look forward to watching the follow up.

What it does lead to is knowing that there are better ways than we currently have - that is great news. The study was done by the Pine Street Foundation. They have a great website and an interesting newsletter. Here is a link to that: http://www.pinestreetfoundation.org.

Here is the dog study.

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Dogs' keen sense of smell might help in the early diagnosis of cancer, researchers report in the current issue of Integrative Cancer Therapies. The findings show that trained ordinary household dogs can detect early-stage lung and breast cancers http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc06.html by merely sniffing the breath samples of patients.

"We've seen anecdotal evidence before suggesting that dogs can smell the presence of certain types of cancer," Michael McCulloch, from the Pine Street Foundation in San Anselmo, California, told Reuters Health, "but until now, nobody had conducted a thorough study such as this." Researchers have observed that cancer cells release molecules different from those of their healthy counterparts, and that might be perceived by smell by the highly sensitive dog's nose.

For the study, five dogs, three Labrador retrievers and two Portuguese water dogs, were trained by a professional instructor to respond differently to exhaled breath samples of healthy and cancer patients. "The dogs learned to sit or lie down in front of cancer patient samples and to ignore control samples through the method of food reward," McCulloch explained.

After an extensive, though relatively short, period of training, the McCulloch and his colleagues tested the animals' ability to distinguish cancer patients from controls. The animals were given breath samples from 55 patients with lung cancer http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc72.html, 31 with breast cancer http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc06.html and 83 healthy controls who were not included in the original training sessions. Neither the dogs nor the observers knew the identity of the samples.

McCulloch's group found that the dogs were able to correctly distinguish the breath samples of cancer patients from the those of the control subjects in about 90 percent of the cases, even after the researchers adjusted the results to take into account whether the lung cancer patients were smokers http://www.reutershealth.com/wellconnected/doc41.html. The dogs were also capable of detecting early-stage lung and breast cancers.

"These results show that there is hope for early detection," McCulloch said. The researchers are planning to conduct further studies on the breath composition of cancer patients to possibly design an electronic device that can do the dogs' job. "I hope people will be interested in pursuing this research," McCulloch added. "It shows that there is definitely something out there."

SOURCE: Integrative Cancer Therapies, March 2006.

Lymphedema study

2006-01-10T22:31:00.000-08:00

This article appeared in the John Hopkins newsletter in December of 2005. It illustrates the amount of assumption about what is and is not acceptable when dealing with breast cancer and the effects after treatment. There is some interesting preliminary evidence that strength training during and after breast cancer treatment is beneficial mentally, spiritually and physically. If you know someone with lymphedema, please advise them of this new research!

Can Bench Pressing Reduce or Prevent Lymphedema in Breast Cancer Survivors?

In a novel research study being launched at the Abramson Cancer Center of the University of Pennsylvania, Kathryn Schmitz, PhD, MPH, Assistant Professor in Epidemiology, will help to determine the extent to which a slowly progressive program of strength-training exercises is safe for breast cancer survivors with and without symptoms of lymphedema.

Lymphedema, which is characterized by a painful swelling of an affected arm and resulting loss of arm function, is one of the most common and feared side effects of breast-cancer treatments that involve lymph-node removal and/or radiation therapy.

Actions of the lymph system include regulating the balance of fluids in the limbs and fighting infections. When lymph nodes in the armpit are removed or damaged, patients can no longer appropriately regulate the fluid in their affected arm – which leads to swelling that can range from mild to extensive (bordering on elephantitis) and quite disfiguring.

"Statistically, this is a public health problem," says Schmitz. "It affects up to one-half of the nearly two million breast-cancer survivors alive in the U.S. today – which means that there may be as many as one million women suffer from some form of lymphedema." "Further, the psychological effects are enormous," adds Schmitz. "Indeed, many women have reported that they would rather have another mastectomy than lymphedema – because it's a painful, constant, and debilitating reminder of their breast cancer."

Current clinical guidelines advise lymphedema sufferers to not participate in any vigorous upper-body exercise; and, in particular, to not lift objects that weigh more than five to 15 pounds. "A gallon of milk weighs eight pounds," notes Schmitz, "so, basically, you're telling women, 'Don't carry your own groceries … don't pick-up your own grandchildren … don't live your own lives!' And the guidelines are based on air … on nothing. There's no scientific evidence to suggest that they're correct."

Strength training, believes Schmitz (an exercise physiologist), is an intriguing intervention for breast-cancer survivors as there is evidence that exercise improves health parameters and quality of life. Based on data from her own previous study (as well as other reports in the medical literature), a program of slowly-progressive weight-lifting exercises permits women to gradually increase the physical capacity of the damaged arm in a controlled setting, making it less likely that the occasional activities of daily living that require strenuous upper-body work – such as shoveling snow or carrying children – would over-stress the injured lymphatic system.

Schmitz's current randomized clinical-trial will seek to recruit 288 breast-cancer survivors (144 with lymphedema; 144 without). For those with lymphedema, the study is designed to determine whether or not upper-body strength training is safe – Schmitz believes it is.

Biomonitoring Breasts

2005-10-20T00:28:00.000-07:00

Just returned from the Bioneers conference in San Rafael, CA. Founded in 1990, Bioneers is a nonprofit organization that promotes practical environmental solutions and innovative social strategies for restoring the Earth and communities. The Bioneers explores the interconnected nature of life and the fundamental intelligence of nature. The conference brings biologists, farmers, scientists, social justice activists, students and health care workers together to explore ways to help learn from nature in order to preserve and restore our planet.

The most common question I hear from clients is, “What does that have to do with breast health?” Our website focuses on creating breast health using the best of energetic medicine and western knowledge. It is becoming increasingly clear that known toxic chemicals are showing up in our blood supply.

The sign of problems with chemical contamination has been evident in nature for some time. In 2004 MSNBC reported on Male Fish Becoming Female, saying that fish in Colorado rivers are being born with both male and female genitals. It is believed to be because of hormone mimicking chemicals in the water.

It is now becoming more evident in humans. A Wall Street Journal article in October 2005 mentions exposure to phthalates and decreased genital size in boys.

A recent study from the Environmental Working Group (www.ewg.org) and Commonweal (www.commonweal.org) tried testing umbilical cord blood. This process, called biomonitoring tests human body fluids to monitor the amount of chemical contaminants in our bodies. The
EWG study found “an average of 200 industrial chemicals and pollutants in umbilical cord blood from 10 babies born in August and September of 2004 in U.S. hospitals. Tests revealed a total of 287 chemicals in the group. The umbilical cord blood of these 10 children, collected by Red Cross after the cord was cut, harbored pesticides, consumer product ingredients, and wastes from burning coal, gasoline, and garbage.” (Taken from the EWG website.) These toxins are affecting even the most vulnerable members of our society.

We are also finding it in our breast milk! Many of these carcinogens are fat-soluble compounds. That is to say, they like to be stored in fatty tissue. As we age, our breast tissue to fat tissue ratio in our breast changes, our breasts become more fatty. As we age our risk for breast cancer also increases. (That is one of the few facts about breast cancer that everyone seems to agree on.) The more we collect these toxic chemicals in our breasts, the more likely they are to cause a mutation – or so the theory goes.

Breast Milk toxicity is an increasingly alarming issue. Breast milk samples show signs of a variety of these fat-seeking chemicals. There is an effort to watch how many toxic chemicals are stored in our bodies AND track how that increases the risk of disease. To learn more about toxins in breast milk, check these two sites.

National Resource Defense Council at http://www.nrdc.org/breastmilk.

Also try the Environmental Working Group at www.ewg.org/reports/mothersmilk.

The controversy here is around two main points. First, we must ask the question: Is it a problem to have these carcinogens in the breast tissue? Can it be proved that they cause the cancer to develop?

How come some women with known exposure to toxic chemicals get cancer and others don’t? This become further complicated by the fact that many of these fat seeking chemicals actually mimic estrogen in the body. They are referred to as xenoestrogens. The more xenoestrogens in the breast are thought to effect estrogen levels. Most breast cancers are estrogen related. This theory is still just a theory and has not been widely accepted.

One of the ideas that environmentalists are promoting is the precautionary principle. That is, until we know it is safe, don’t put it on the market. If these chemicals are causing harm in our bodies, let’s stop putting them in the environment. Carolyn Raffensperger, executive director of the Science and Environmental Health Network, spoke at the Bioneers conference about this important issue. To learn more about this idea go to her website at http://www.sehn.org/precaution.html.

The second controversy about chemicals in the breast tissue is whether we can do anything about it. Can we get these chemicals out of the body? Most environmentalists and western medical doctors do not know of effective ways to clean the tissue from toxins. There is very little evidence to show what is most effective at pulling specific chemicals out of the body.

What we do know is that the body has a system designed to clean itself. The liver has two detoxification pathways. There are hundreds of articles (mostly in naturopathic journals) about helping these pathways work better. Strong evidence shows that certain nutrients can help improve the body’s ability to detoxify chemicals and render them neutral. The evidence is poor in offering precise evidence about specific chemicals and effective treatment protocols. One of the main problems is that the tests for these chemicals are cost prohibitive. Heavy metals are an exception; there is adequate evidence that natural chelation is effective to help excrete heavy metals.

The naturopathic community believes there are non-toxic ways to help the body eliminate toxins. The Chinese and Ayurvedic medical communities believe there are natural and non-toxic ways to remove toxins from the body. Energetic theory believes there are non-toxic ways to remove chemicals from the body. The lymphatic massage community is built on the belief that lymph helps to remove toxins from the system. These ideas need to be tested using scientific methods to see whether they really work AND what protocols are most effective.

Using the same idea of the precautionary principle, we at the Breast Health Project believe that we must not wait for the western medical community to accept the idea of detoxification before it is seriously researched. If monies are being spent to monitor toxicity in humans, part of it should go towards finding a solution on how our bodies can best manage this new amount of toxicity.

The Bioneers conference brought many key people who are researching these issues together. We hope to work with people we met at the conference to further this research agenda. This was the most positive and hopeful conference I have been to in a very long time. There are thousands of bright people very committed to making this planet safer and less toxic. The Bioneers community has become a central meeting place. Please take a look at the Bioneers website, check out their radio program or read the newsletter. We are all connected and when we all work together for the greater good, we become unstoppable! Visit them at www.bioneers.org.

Breast Cancer Awareness Month

2005-10-05T16:38:00.000-07:00

This month is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. AstraZeneca and the other pharmaceutical companies have brought this idea to you. There is no discussion about the environmental links to breast cancer or the ionizing radiation and its link to breast cancer. In fact this month is used to encourage women to get mammograms despite the fact that they have not been proven to be effective for women under fifty.

Next month we will be interviewing a QiGong Master to learn the Asian views about breast cancer and how they believe that breast cancer is preventable.

Subscribe to our blog to keep up on breast health advocacy issues.