Oct
01
2005

More Education Needed About Ovarian Cancer

By | Cancer

Campaigns that inform about breast cancer are abundant in the media, but the one cancer which may be the most fatal of gynecologic cancers is silently at work, killing more than 60% of women diagnosed – ovarian cancer.
It is also the cancer women know shockingly little about, and most women cannot identify its symptoms. Dr. Barbara Vanderhyden from the University of Ottawa, Canada confirmed in a study, that there are a lot of misconceptions about the disease. One in three women falsely believe that a Pap test screens for ovarian cancer. Remarkably, 12% of Canadian women claim that they have never heard about the disease, and only 35% consider themselves well informed. Even more problematically, women 50 years and older-those with the highest risk for ovarian cancer- are significantly less likely to be aware of their risk for disease than their younger counterparts. 71% of women think that ovarian cancer mainly affects women under 50 years of age.
In the view of the findings that 96% of the women could not identify a combination of the most common symptoms of ovarian cancer, it is of great importance that more education and information is needed. Women as well as their health care providers have to be vigilant about early warning signs and symptoms. The most common warning signs and symptoms for ovarian cancer are bloating, abdominal pain, changes in urinary frequency, weight fluctuation and nausea.

More Education Needed About Ovarian Cancer

More Education Needed About Ovarian Cancer

Diagnostic tests involve a bimanual examination by a physician, which is needed for all women, including those who did have a previous hysterectomy. The other test to consider would be an abdominal ultrasound.

More information about ovarian cancer: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/ovarian-cancer/

Reference: The Medical Post, September20, 2005, page 47

Last edited October 29, 2014

Sep
01
2005

Environmental Toxins Harmful For Generations To Come

By | Cancer, Health, Men's Health, Women’s Diseases

It is a known fact that exposure to toxic substances during pregnancy can cause birth defects.
Investigators at the Center For Reproductive Biology of the University of Washington in Seattle examined the consequences of environmental toxins, which are also known as endocrine disruptors in their research. Dr. Michael K. Skinner led the study. The research team worked with rats, and they noticed that it was not only the first generation that was affected, but the effect persisted for as many as four generations later The substance they used in the experiment was either vinclozolin, an antiandrogenic compound commonly used as a pesticide in vineyards or methoxychlor, an estrogenic DDT replacement. Both pesticides are endocrine disruptors, as they interfere with the normal functioning of reproductive hormones. It was no surprise that ninety percent of male offspring that had been born to the exposed females had low sperm counts and reduced fertility.
The unexpected result showed up in the next generation. If these offspring were mated to unexposed females, they still had low sperm counts and reduced fertility. The effect persisted-completely unexpectedly- through all generations tested without further pesticide exposure. The researchers concluded that the toxins affected inheritance by altering patterns of DNA in the germ line. Genetic changes that are passed on for generations to come might play a role in more frequently occurring diseases such as breast cancer and prostate disease, as they may not be caused by genetic mutations.

Environmental Toxins Harmful For Generations To Come

Environmental Toxins Harmful For Generations To Come

This is also the first report that shows the menacing ability of an environmental factor to reprogram the germ line and promote a transgenerational disease pattern.

More information on environmental toxins: https://www.askdrray.com/protecting-yourself-from-environmental-toxins/

Reference: Parkhurst Exchange Volume 13,Number 6, August 2005, page 33

Last edited October 29, 2014

Sep
01
2005

No Relationship Between Allergies And Cancer

By | Allergies, Cancer, Health

Two opposite opinions have been voiced. There is the sinister threat that people who are prone to allergies are also at risk for coming down with cancer, because their immune system is constantly in overdrive. The opposite rumoring has also been heard: people with an overactive immune system and allergies have a built-in protection against cancer, because their immune system is in a constant state of vigilance.
Researchers from the Karolinska Hospital and Institute in Sweden made a point to examine these opposed hypotheses in a study that involved 70,136 patients between the years 1988 and 2000.

All these patients were tested for allergic disease and the results were linked with data from the Swedish Cancer Registry. The total number of cancers found was what could be expected in the general population. In addition this large epidemiological study performed specific analysis for cancer of the lung, the cervix cancer, cancer of the pancreas as well as lymphoma and skin cancers. The findings demonstrated that none of these cancers were independently related to allergies.

No Relationship Between Allergies And Cancer

No Relationship Between Allergies And Cancer

Dr. B. Lindelöf and his research team concluded: “Our study did not support the reported decreased risk of cancer in allergic patients, nor did it support an increased risk.”

More info available for:

Allergies (allergic rhinitis): http://nethealthbook.com/ear-nose-and-throat-diseases-otolaryngology-ent/nose-problems/allergic-rhinitis/

Cancer: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/overview/

Reference: Allergy 2005; 60: 1116-1120

Last edited October 29, 2014

Aug
01
2005

Virtual Colonoscopy May Help Find Other Disease

By | Cancer, Gastrointestinal Disease, Prevention

California-based researchers reported in the August issue of the medical journal Radiology about a study involving CT colonography, also known as “virtual colonoscopy”. This utilizes CT scanning. Dr.Yee, from the University of California School of Medicine, San Francisco, did a prospective study where 500 men were studied with an average age of 62.5 years.
200 of them had an average risk for colon cancer; the remainder was at a high risk for colon cancer. The surprising finding was that many disease conditions were found (315 patients or 63%) that were not related to the colon at all, such as renal cysts and hiatal hernias. These were considered to be clinically not important. However another 50 patients (8.4%) were found to have liver lesions, pulmonary nodules, aneurysms and renal tumors, which were largely unknown and were thought to be clinically very significant.
Dr. Judy Yee said that it takes a trained radiologist to interpret these CT scan findings, but that this method of screening would be very cost effective. Looking for the additional life threatening conditions in the routine virtual colonoscopy added only about 28 $ per CT examination and was considered to be very cost effective. The clinically important extra-findings were equally distributed between the high and low risks for colon cancer. Dr. Yee summed up by saying that she hopes that many more Americans would come in for virtual colonoscopy as part of colorectal cancer screening.

Virtual Colonoscopy May Help Find Other Disease

Virtual Colonoscopy May Help Find Other Disease

The advantage is that this is less invasive than a conventional colonoscopy procedure, but at the same time that colon cancer is screened for the radiologist may pick up other clinically relevant medical problems.

More info about colon cancer:  http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/colon-cancer/

Reference: Radiology 2005;236:519-526.

Last edited October 29, 2014

Jul
01
2005

Less Alcohol And Fat, More Exercise Battles Cancer

By | Cancer, Substance abuse

A lot has been said about choosing a healthy lifestyle in the prevention of cancers, but there is even better news now. It is not too late to make a switch to healthy living for those who have been diagnosed with cancer to reap significant benefits.
Dr. Bruce Johnson, director of the Lowe Center for Thoracic Oncology at the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute says that it is helpful to impress on cancer patients to cut down on fat and to exercise more in order to reduce their risk for recurrence. Dr. Jeffrey Meyerhardt, an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, also points out that in the past studies have shown that physical activity can lower the risk of developing colon cancer, but his new research is the first to suggest a benefit for people who already have the disease. A study including 832 patients with Stage III colon cancer who had been treated with surgery and chemotherapy showed that the cancer survival rate (where no disase was present) was 49% higher in those who were moderately active. The activity was either a two to three mph walk, six days a week, or other equivalents: running fast two times a week, or playing tennis three times a week.

Less Alcohol And Fat, More Exercise Battles Cancer

Less Alcohol And Fat, More Exercise Battles Cancer

In a second study breast cancer was investigated in a group of patients who adopted a low-fat diet. Compared to those who continued to eat their regular food they were about one-fourth less likely to suffer a breast cancer recurrence in the next five years. This report comes from Dr. Rowan Chlebowski at the Harbor-UCLA Medical Center in Los Angeles. This was a larger study involving 2,437 women ages 48 to 79 years. The goal was to reduce fat intake to 20% or less of daily calories. The women were not taught to reduce total calories; just fat was reduced: no butter, margarine or baked goods. By five years, less than 10% of women on the low-fat diet had a breast cancer recurrence, compared with more than 12% of those on their usual diet. This translates into a relative risk reduction of 24%, concludes Dr. Chlebowski.

Breast Cancer Risk From Longterm Daily Alcohol Consumption As Compared To Non-Drinkers

Breast Cancer from Daily Exposures to Increasing Amounts Consumed

Breast Cancer from Daily Exposures to Increasing Amounts Consumed

Research about alcohol intake and the risk of developing breast cancer is especially important for women.The study comes also from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute in Boston. Dr. Wendy Chen, a medical oncologist, reports that the more alcohol consumed regularly, the greater the risk. A study involved 121,700 registered nurses who were 30 to 55 years old in 1976. This study went on for 14 years and between 1980 and 1990 alcohol consumption questions were asked on several occasions; the women were followed up until 2004. Women who drank 5 to 9.9 grams of alcohol per day on average (the equivalent of a half-glass of wine) were 6% more likely to develop breast cancer than teetotalers. Women who consumed 10 to 19.9 grams per day saw their risk increase to 21%, and those who drank more than 20g per day, which means two drinks per day, were 37 % more likely to develop breast cancer. The finding of increased breast cancer rates was an independent risk factor associated solely with alcohol consumption. There has been a lot of hoopla lately about the benefits of a glass of wine for heart health, and the phrase of “everything in moderation” consoles us that a little bit cannot hurt. It turns out, that a little bit on a daily basis, alcohol in this case, can be a risky choice for women (see dose-response curve in the graph above). A link has been established between alcohol and breast cancer.

More information on:

Cancer causes: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/overview/epidemiology-cancer-origin-reason-cancer/

Exercise: http://nethealthbook.com/health-nutrition-and-fitness/fitness/

Lowering fat intake: http://nethealthbook.com/health-nutrition-and-fitness/nutrition/fat-good-bad-fatty-acids/

Reference: The Medical Post, June7, 2005, page 20

Last edited October 28, 2014

Jul
01
2005

Power Lines And Childhood Leukemia

By | Cancer, Health

High voltage power lines have come under scrutiny in the past, and researchers have examined health risks, especially the cancer risk. Several reports exist that either contradict or support that the magnetic fields associated with power lines can cause cancer. There have been publications that pointed out a link to childhood leukemia, and new research has re-examined the link between childhood leukemia and high voltage power lines.
Under the leadership of Dr. Gerald J. Draper from the University of Oxford new studies have been made available and published in the British Medical Journal. The researchers examined the population living within 1 km from 275 to 400 kV power lines. Dr. Draper’s group found no association between the distance from power lines and the overall incidence of cancer.

One finding however was different: children who lived within 200 m of high voltage power lines had a relative risk for leukemia of 1.69-fold as compared to those who lived 600 m away, who had no elevated risk. The relative risk for those living 200 to 600 m away from the lines was still elevated at 1.23-fold (where 1-fold is no risk). The research group points out that the increased risk cannot only be explained by the presence of magnetic fields, and some of the reasons are at this point unknown. Dr. Heather O. Dickinson from the University of Newcastle upon Tyne writes in an accompanying editorial that the magnetic fields surrounding the power lines amount to “about 1% of the earth’s magnetic field, which affects all of us at all times.”

Power Lines And Childhood Leukemia

Power Lines And Childhood Leukemia

According to Dr. Draper’s research there are only 5 cases of childhood leukemia per year associated with the presence of power lines, and researchers agree that there is a link, however it remains a weak one.

More information about leukemia: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/leukemia/leukemia-acute-leukemia/childhood-leukemia/

Reference: BMJ 2005:330:1279-1280,1290-1293

Last edited October 28, 2014

Jun
01
2005

Pancreatic Cancer And Processed Meats

By | Cancer, Nutrition

A large multi-ethnic study analyzed data from 190,545 men and women at the Cancer Research Center at the University of Hawaii. In an average follow-up time of 7 years there were 482 incidents of pancreatic cancer, and it became obvious that processed meats play a role in the increase of pancreatic cancer. After taking other risk factors into consideration like a positive family history, age, smoking and diabetes mellitus, those patients who consumed the largest amount of processed meats had a 67% increased risk for pancreatic cancer as opposed to those who had the lowest intake of these foods. A diet rich in red meats increased the risk by about 50%.

Poultry, fish, dairy products and egg intake showed no pancreatic cancer risk factor, nor did it matter how much fat, saturated fat or cholesterol was consumed over the 7 year observation period.

The lead investigator of the study, Dr. Ute Noethlings, observes that the risk increase is a consequence of the meat preparation with carcinogens. The main culprit would very likely be sodium nitrite, which is a preservative that also enhances the meat color.

Pancreatic Cancer And Processed Meats

Pancreatic Cancer And Processed Meats

For the consumer it means taking a critical look at processed meats before picking up sausages with your next shopping. Read the labels, avoid sodium nitrite. Your pancreas will thank you for it!

More information on pancreatic cancer: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/pancreatic-cancer-pancreas-cancer-or-cancer-of-the-pancreas/

Reference: The Medical Post, May 17, 2005, page 50

Last edited October 28, 2014

May
01
2005

Burgers, Fries and High Healthcare Costs

By | Cancer, Health, Heart Disease, Nutrition, Obesity, Stroke

“Everything in moderation” and “A little bit cannot harm” are the deceptively soothing terms that can lull consumers into the belief, that fast foods cannot be so bad after all. A study, called the” Coronary Artery Risk Development in Young Adults” however gives us the facts, that paint a more realistic picture: the “little bit” actually has fairly serious consequences!
In this U.S. study a wide cross section of young adults were followed in four U.S centers: Birmingham, Ala., Chicago, Minneapolis and Oakland Calif. 3031 people in the age of 18 to 30 years were recruited in 1985 and followed until 2001.

Lifestyle habits, such as smoking, watching TV and intake of other foods were recorded, and insulin resistance was measured. In addition there were detailed studies of weight, height, waist size and other body measurements. Some interesting facts emerged: women ate fast foods less frequently than men. Fast food intake was associated with lower education, more TV watching, lower physical activity, high intake of trans fats and alcohol intake. In short: fast foods and other unhealthy lifestyle choices were correlated.

Dr. Mark Pereira, PhD of the University of Minnesota School of Public Health, who is one of the authors of the study, points out that it is extremely difficult to eat in a healthy way in a fast foods restaurant. The menus still include foods high in fat, sugar and calories and low in fiber and nutrients. Dr. Arne Astrup from the RVA University in Copenhagen found the same issues: besides the fact that serving sizes have increased two to five fold over the past fifty years, the energy density is twice as high in fast foods as compared to food in healthy diets. Dr. Astrup also points out in his publication, that humans have only a weak innate ability to recognize foods with high energy density and then down-regulate the amount eaten to meet and not exceed energy requirements.

Burgers, Fries and High Healthcare Costs

Burgers, Fries and High Healthcare Costs

If a person ate more than 2 fast food meals per week, which would be a modest increase of the control group that ate less than 1 fast food meal per week, the 2 meals per week group was about 5 kg heavier after 15 years, as opposed to 11 kg in the control group. The insulin resistance increased by an alarming 230 %. This finding is of significance, as insulin resistance (=metabolic syndrome) promotes the occurrence of cardiovascular disease and cancer, especially breast and colorectal cancers. The data are showing that even a modest increase has a unique effect in increasing the risks for these disease patterns, and the message is, that health care costs will only come down, if the root cause of disease is attacked at the societal and lifestyle level.

More information about the metabolic syndrome (insulin resistance): http://nethealthbook.com/hormones/metabolic-syndrome/

Reference: The Medical Post, March 8, 2005, page 20

Last edited October 28, 2014

Incoming search terms:

Feb
01
2005

Public Strategies Help Quit Smoking

By | Cancer, Heart Disease

Quitting to smoke has been a New Year’s resolution for many, and in view of the health care dollars spent for diseases related to smoking and the approximately 440,000 deaths in the United States per year alone, it should be a priority to implement comprehensive tobacco-control programs.
Smoking was more common among men (an average of 24.8 % nationally), whereas a national average of 20.3% of women lit up. There are also considerable differences between various states. In Kentucky 33.8% of men and 28.1% of women were smokers. Utah had the lowest prevalence with 14% men and 9.9% women. The national health objective is a goal for 2010 is to reduce the numbers to 12% smokers, which underscores the need for increased efforts to reduce tobacco use. Strategies include a clean air act to ensure clean indoor air laws, media campaigns, telephone support quit lines, insurance coverage for cessation counseling and pharmaceuticals are effective, but there are substantial variations across the states. In addition there are significant differences in the cost of cigarettes. It comes as no surprise, that Kentucky, which has the lowest price at $3.10 per pack, also has the highest number of smokers. Telephone support lines are available in the majority of states, but in 2002 only 2 states offered Medicaid coverage for medication treatment or counseling, and only six states (California, Conneticut, Delaware, Maine, Massachusetts, and New York) have comprehensive statewide smoking bans in effect on indoor workplaces and public places.

Public Strategies Help Quit Smoking

Public Strategies Help Quit Smoking

Too few states have public smoking bans in effect. Only four states (Arkansas, Delaware, Maine, and Mississippi) were investing at least the minimum per capita amount that the CDC recommends for tobacco-control. There is obviously the need to expand efforts and resources, to achieve the goal to reduce the smoking habit to 12% in the population by 2010.

Reference: Journal Of The American Medical Society, December 22/29,2004,Vol.292, No.24

Jan
01
2005

Vaccine To Eradicate Cervical Cancer

By | Cancer, Health, Prevention, Women’s Diseases

Dr. Diane M. Harper, a lead researcher from Dartmouth Medical School in New Hampshire has called the results of a vaccination trial against the Human Papilloma Virus (HPV) “extremely exciting and encouraging”. A simple vaccination against this virus, which is the cause for cancer of the cervix, has the potential to eradicate the vast majority of cervical cancers worldwide.
The injection in the study was tested on 1,113 women between the ages 15 and 25 over an 18-month period. One hundred percent of the patients of the vaccinated group escaped persistent infection.

The protection against initial HPV- infection was at 92 %.
At this point a much larger trial is set to begin, before the vaccination can be licensed for general use. It will very likely soon be a routine vaccination for young women. If it is successful, it will be a powerful tool for prevention and will save thousands of lives that otherwise would be lost to cervical cancer. Even for those patients who dread shots, a needle prick will be a small price to pay.

Vaccine To Eradicate Cervical Cancer

Vaccine To Eradicate Cervical Cancer

More info on cervical cancer: http://nethealthbook.com/cancer-overview/cervical-cancer/

Comment on Nov. 7, 2012: In the meantime the vaccine has been introduced into the school vaccination program of many countries around the world, but mostly concentrating on the female population.  In Australia the vaccine is given to boys aged 9 to 15 and girls.  The two main brand names are Gardasil and Cervarix. Here is a detailed medical review from Great Britain.

Last edited October 27, 2014