Jennifer Browdy de Hernandez - If You Want To Fight Cancer, Turn Those Pink Ribbons Green

I'm going to make a confession. I never could stand those pink ribbons. I've never done a "Walk for the Cure" or bought daffodils for cancer victims or even picked a cancer-cure-themed postage stamp.

I'm glad to hear that the Komen Foundation has bowed to pressure and is restoring funding to Planned Parenthood, a worthwhile organization if there ever was one. But in general, the idea of putting the energy and effort of well-meaning citizens behind "the search for a cure for cancer" just irritates me, because let's face it, we know what causes cancer, and therefore we can do better than cure it, we can prevent it! Maybe not 100%, but we can take it back to the modest rates that previous generations of human beings enjoyed.

For my grandparents' generation, a diagnosis of cancer was frightening because it was so often a death sentence, but it was rare. Not one of my four grandparents came down with cancer, and I don't believe their parents did either. This isn't due to some genetic serendipity, it's just a fact that cancer rates in the first half of the 20th century (and every century before that) were way lower than they are now.

Read More:

http://countercurrents.org/hernandez060212.htm

Lifestyle blamed for 40 percent of cancers

Forty percent of cancers in women and 45 percent in men could be prevented by a healthier lifestyle, British researchers say.

A Cancer Research UK report found more than 100,000 cancers each year in Britain are caused by four lifestyle factors -- smoking, unhealthy diet, alcohol and being overweight -- and the number rises to around 134,000 a year when 14 lifestyle and environmental factors are taken into account, the Guardian reported.

The research showed that in Britain:

-- Smoking accounts for 23 percent of all cancers in men and 15.6 percent in women. It causes lung cancer as well as bladder, kidney, pancreatic and cervical cancer.

-- One-in-25 cancers is linked to work-related exposure to chemicals or asbestos, while one in 33 is linked to infections, such as the human papillomavirus, which causes most cases of cervical cancer.

Read More:

http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=12182&Section=Disease

Grape seed extract kills head and neck cancer cells, leaves healthy cells unharmed

Nearly 12,000 people will die of head and neck cancer in the United States this year and worldwide cases will exceed half a million.

A study published this week in the journal Carcinogenesisshows that in both cell lines and mouse models, grape seed extract (GSE) kills head and neck squamous cell carcinoma cells, while leaving healthy cells unharmed.

“It’s a rather dramatic effect,” says Rajesh Agarwal, PhD, investigator at the University of Colorado Cancer Centerand professor at the Skaggs School of Pharmaceutical Sciences.

It depends in large part, says Agarwal, on a healthy cell’s ability to wait out damage.

Read More:

http://www.coloradocancerblogs.org/news/grape-seed-extract-kills-head-and-neck-cancer-cells-leaves-healthy-cells-unharmed

James Gallagher - Processed meat 'linked to pancreatic cancer'

A link between eating processed meat, such as bacon or sausages, and pancreatic cancer has been suggested by researchers in Sweden.

They said eating an extra 50g of processed meat, approximately one sausage, every day would increase a person's risk by 19%.

But the chance of developing the rare cancer remains low.

The World Cancer Research Fund suggested the link may be down to obesity.

Eating red and processed meat has already been linked to bowel cancer. As a result the UK government recommended in 2011 that people eat no more than 70g a day.

Read More:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16526695

Chlorophyll Can Help Prevent Cancer -- But Study Raises Other Questions

A recent study at Oregon State University found that the chlorophyll in green vegetables offers protection against cancer when tested against the modest carcinogen exposure levels most likely to be found in the environment.

However, chlorophyll actually increases the number of tumors at very high carcinogen exposure levels.

Beyond confirming the value of chlorophyll, the research raises serious questions about whether traditional lab studies done with mice and high levels of toxic exposure are providing accurate answers to what is a real health risk, what isn't, and what dietary or pharmaceutical approaches are useful.

The findings, published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology, were done using 12,360 rainbow trout as laboratory models, instead of more common laboratory mice. Rodent studies are much more expensive, forcing the use of fewer specimens and higher carcinogen exposures.

Read More:

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/01/120112142303.htm

Red meat lovers have more kidney cancer

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - People who eat lots of red meat may have a higher risk of some types of kidney cancer, suggests a large U.S. study.

Researchers found that middle-aged adults who ate the most red meat were 19 percent more likely to be diagnosed with kidney cancer than those who ate the least. A higher intake of chemicals found in grilled or barbecued meat was also linked to increased risk of the disease, they reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.

"Red meat is an important source for iron (and) it has protein," said Dr. Mohammed El-Faramawi, an epidemiologist from the University of North Texas Health Science Center in Fort Worth, who has studied diet and kidney cancer risks but wasn't involved in the new study.

Read more:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/news/fullstory_120221.html (*this news item will not be available after 03/27/2012)

John LaForge - CT Scans as a Leading Cause of Breast Cancer?

December 26, 2011

by JOHN LaFORGE

http://www.counterpunch.org/2011/12/26/the-leading-cause-of-breast-cancer/

Profiteers in the medical CT scan business took a big hit last week from a major new government report on the causes of breast cancer.

Published by the Institute of Medicine (IOM), the health arm of the National Academy of Sciences, the exhaustive analysis found that medical radiation, particularly the large radiation dose delivered by CT scans, is the foremost identifiable cause of breast cancer.[1]

Almost 230,480 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed this year in the United States, and about 40,000 women will die of the disease, roughly one out of every 3,875 women.

The new Institute of Medicine report probably doesn’t sit well with the industry, hospitals and clinics that make so many millions of dollars selling and over-using CT machines. The authors suggest that women avoid “unnecessary” or “inappropriate” medical radiation, a thinly veiled criticism of the industry that will give you a CT scan for a tooth ache if you don’t object to it.

In 1980, there were 3 million CT scans performed in this country. The number rose to 62 million in 2006,[2] to about 70 million by 2007,[3] and, according to NBC, to 72 million this year.[4] It’s a growth industry that doesn’t care if it promotes tumor growth.

Click to read more ...

Penn State University - Fish oil may hold key to leukemia cure

22-Dec-2011

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-12/ps-fom122211.phpPenn State

Penn State University

A compound produced from fish oil that appears to target leukemia stem cells could lead to a cure for the disease, according to Penn State researchers. The compound -- delta-12-protaglandin J3, or D12-PGJ3 -- targeted and killed the stem cells of chronic myelogenous leukemia, or CML, in mice, said Sandeep Prabhu, associate professor of immunology and molecular toxicology in the Department of Veterinary and Medical Sciences. The compound is produced from EPA -- Eicosapentaenoic Acid -- an Omega-3 fatty acid found in fish and in fish oil, he said.

"Research in the past on fatty acids has shown the health benefits of fatty acids on cardiovascular system and brain development, particularly in infants, but we have shown that some metabolites of Omega-3 have the ability to selectively kill the leukemia-causing stem cells in mice," said Prabhu. "The important thing is that the mice were completely cured of leukemia with no relapse."

Click to read more ...

Medical News Today - New Study Supports Claim That Breast Screening May Be Causing More Harm Than Good

Medical News Today, 11 Dec 2011   

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/releases/238936.php

A new study published on bmj.com supports the claim that the introduction of breast cancer screening in the UK may have caused more harm than good. 

Harms included false positives (abnormal results that turn out to be normal) and overtreatment (treatment of harmless cancers that would never have caused symptoms or death during a patient's lifetime). This may be because the cancer grows so slowly that the patient dies of other causes before it produces symptoms, or the cancer remains dormant or regresses. 

It shows that the harms of screening largely offset the benefits up to 10 years, after which the benefits accumulate, but by much less than predicted when screening was first started. 

The Forrest report in 1986, which led to the introduction of breast cancer screening in the UK, estimated the number of screened and unscreened women surviving each year over a 15-year period. Costs and benefits were measured in quality adjusted life years or QALYs (a combined measure of quantity and quality of life) but it omitted harms. 

It suggested that screening would reduce the death rate from breast cancer by almost one third with few harms and at low cost. 

Since the Forrest report, the harms of breast cancer screening have been acknowledged. So, researchers at the University of Southampton set out to update the report's survival estimates by combining the benefits and harms of screening in one single measure. 

The results are based on 100,000 women aged 50 and over surviving by year up to 20 years after entry to the screening programme. 

Inclusion of false positives and unnecessary surgery reduced the benefits of screening by about half. The best estimates generated negative net QALYs for up to eight years after screening and minimal gains after 10 years. 

After 20 years, net QALYs accumulate, but by much less than predicted by the Forrest report. 

The authors say more research is needed on the extent of unnecessary treatment and its impact on quality of life. They also call for improved ways of identifying those most likely to benefit from surgery and for measuring the levels and duration of the harms from surgery. From a public perspective, the meaning and implications of overdiagnosis and overtreatment need to be much better explained and communicated to any woman considering screening, they add. 

However, the continuing uncertainty surrounding the extent of overtreatment is apparent in a study of French women published on bmj.com last month, which put overdiagnosis of invasive breast cancer due to screening at around 1%.

Times of India - Breast cancer treatment affects memory

Times of India | Dec 12, 2011

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health/Breast-cancer-treatment-affects-memory/articleshow/11082553.cms

Experts have revealed that breast cancer survivors may experience problems with certain mental abilities several years after treatment, regardless of whether they were treated with chemotherapy plus radiation or radiation only.

The study indicated that there might be common and treatment-specific ways that cancer therapies negatively affect cancer survivors' mental abilities.

Previous research had suggested that chemotherapy could cause problems with memory and concentration in breast cancer survivors.

To compare the effects of different types of cancer treatment on such mental abilities, Paul Jacobsen, PhD, of the Moffitt Cancer Centre and Research Institute in Tampa, and his colleagues examined 62 breast cancer patients treated with chemotherapy plus radiation, 67 patients treated with radiation only, and 184 women with no history of cancer.

Study participants completed neuropsychological assessments six months after completing treatment and again 36 months later.

Click to read more ...

Joel Fuhrman - Fighting breast cancer with flaxseeds

http://www.diseaseproof.com/archives/breast-cancer-fighting-breast-cancer-with-flaxseeds.html

Joel Fuhrman, DiseaseProof.com  November 30, 2011

What are lignans?

Plant lignans are one of the four classes of phytoestrogens (isoflavones, lignans, stilbenes, coumestans), phenolic compounds that are structurally similar to the main mammalian estrogen, estradiol.1 Plant lignans are modified by bacteria in the human digestive tract into enteroligans. It is important to recognize the role of healthy bacteria in this process, because antibiotics can destroy beneficial bacteria in the gut resulting in long-term reduction in enteroligans.2 Eating commercial meats exposes us to antibiotics, as does the overuse and inappropriate prescribing by physicians.

Which foods are good sources of plant lignans?

Flaxseeds are the richest source of plant lignans, having about 8 times the lignan content of sesame seeds [note that flaxseed oil does not contain lignans – they bind to the fiber]. The other plant foods on the list have about one-tenth or less the amount of lignans as sesame seeds per serving.2,3 Chia seeds are also a rich source of lignans, however the exact amount is still debatable, so that number will be made available at a later date.

Click to read more ...

Alliance for Natural Health - TSA Attempts to Cover Up Cancer Threat From Its Airport X-ray Machines

Alliance for Natural Health On November 29, 2011

http://www.anh-usa.org/tsa-cancer-cover-up/

Forget the embarrassment of your private parts being seen by strangers. The scanners can cause cancer—and TSA is trying to keep you from knowing about it.

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) uses two types of body scanners. The backscatter machines are of particular concern because these X-ray scanners emit low levels of radiation and can cause cancer. The European Union has even put a moratorium on the scanners in light of the cancer threats—member states have been told not to install scanners until scientific assessment of risks has been carried out [1], and they will be banned completely in April if experts find them dangerous—but the US has so far swept the safety issues under the carpet.

According to a ProPublica/PBS NewsHour investigation, up to 100 US airplane passengers could get cancer from the machines each year. As reported by Natural News over a year ago [2], some noted scientists think that the risk is actually far higher than this because of the particular way that these machines operate, and they wrote TSA with their concerns. They described how the majority of the machine’s energy is delivered to the skin and the underlying tissue—not distributed throughout the volume of the entire body—so the dose to the skin may be dangerously high. This means that the ionizing radiation from the naked body scanners may pose a much higher risk of cancer than one might be assumed from the total radiation emissions, an observation that has so far been totally ignored.

Click to read more ...

ANI - Milk thistle halts spread of lung cancer

ANI | Nov 16, 2011, 03.31PM IST

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/life-style/health-fitness/health/Milk-thistle-halts-spread-of-lung-cancer/articleshow/10754789.cms

An Indian origin scientist has suggested that silibinin, a major component of milk thistle, may be a promising therapeutic compound in the treatment of lung cancer.

Alpna Tyagi, PhD, of the University of Colorado Skaggs School of Pharmacy, and her team found that treatment with silibinin stopped the spread of these lung cancers in mouse.

Tissue with wound-like conditions allows tumours to grow and spread.

In the new animal study, silibinin help removed the molecular billboards that signal these wound-like conditions inhibiting the spread of these lung cancers,

Click to read more ...

Canadian Press - Estrogen from birth-control pill in water linked to rising prostate cancer cases

Canadian Press  11-15-11

http://www.lef.org/news/LefDailyNews.htm?NewsID=11896&Section=Disease

TORONTO - Researchers suggest there may be a link between estrogen from oral contraceptives that has found its way into the environment and rising rates of prostate cancer among men around the world.

In a study in the online publication BMJ Open, researchers at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto looked at the percentage of women using the pill, intrauterine devices, condoms and vaginal barrier contraceptives in 87 countries, then examined the incidence and deaths from prostate cancer.

"Looking at these percentages, we find a strong correlation between female use of oral contraceptives at a population level and both new cases of prostate cancer and mortality from prostate cancer," said lead author Dr. David Margel, a urologist and fellow in uro-oncology.

Click to read more ...

Paul Towers - New Evidence Links Common Herbicide to Cancer and Hormone Disruption

Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) Paul Towers, Pesticide Action Network/ Nov. 14, 2011 http://www.panna.org/

Thousands Urge EPA to Discount Flawed Science on Syngenta’s Atrazine

WASHINGTON - November 14 - As EPA reconsiders the science on atrazine, new findings highlight the link between low-level exposure to the nation’s most widely used herbicide and adverse human health effects, including cancer and altered hormones. At the same time, the chemical’s manufacturer, Syngenta, continues to influence scientific analysis of the chemical, downplaying evidence showing that atrazine is harmful.  

“Syngenta has misrepresented and obscured the science, leading federal officials and the scientific community astray as we look to understand the full scope of the atrazine problem,” said Dr. Margaret Reeves, PhD, senior scientist at Pesticide Action Network. “EPA’s decisionmaking on atrazine should follow the science. That’s the best way to ensure farmers, farmworkers and rural communities are protected.”

Atrazine is found more often than any other pesticide in groundwater – almost 95% of US groundwater contains the chemical. The weed killer is one of the most widely used pesticides in the U.S. — and the world. More than 76 million pounds are used in the U.S. each year, mostly on Midwestern corn fields.

Click to read more ...

Alliance for Natural Health - Breaking News: Outrageous New Attack on Dr. Burzynski

Alliance for Natural Health  On November 14, 2011

http://www.anh-usa.org/new-attack-on-dr-burzynski/

The pioneering cancer doctor is a target once again.

Stanislaw Burzynski, MD, PhD, is a biochemist practicing in Texas who developed (using his own money) a nontoxic gene-targeted cancer therapy calledantineoplastons [2]. It has been shown to effectively help cure some of the most “incurable” forms of terminal cancer.

Dr. Burzynski had tried to get the FDA to review and approve antineoplastons since 1977, to no avail. To make sure he would not get into trouble for using the experimental therapy in his practice, his legal team confirmed that he was acting within the law and could use antineoplastons in his own practice “to meet the immediate needs of patients.” But in the 1980s the Texas Medical Board (TMB) charged him with breaking a law that didn’t actually exist and tried to revoke his medical license. Numerous investigations later—including an appearance before the Texas Supreme Court—found no violation of any law or standard of care. The TMB came up empty-handed.

Click to read more ...