American Cancer Society Report is Misleading; younger women getting more triple negative, estrogen positive & HER2+ breast cancers

Women of childbearing age, in many states around the U.S. today, face historically high invasive breast cancer levels. The American Cancer Society’s (ACS’) recent study, published Feb 22, in the American Association for Cancer Research, is incorrect when it says breast cancer rates are not changing for younger women.

In Massachusetts, younger women (under 50), saw a 45% increase in invasive breast cancer between 1995-2007; younger women in Colorado saw a 27% increase between 1990-2008, and younger women in Florida saw a 40% increase between 1984-2008.

The American Cancer Society’s February, 2011 report doesn’t count the actual number of women diagnosed in each state; instead, it uses an estimate, based on a formula, based on 9% of the U.S. population.

To know the real story, we need to count every woman who is affected, and we need to have those numbers published for all of us to see and understand.

Contact you state cancer board and ask them how many younger women developed invasive breast cancers last year, compared to the past five or ten years. Also ask them, how many of these younger women were diagnosed with triple negative, HER2+ and estrogen receptor positive breast cancers.

We need this specific information, not estimates. Keeping women in the dark when it comes to these critical numbers, makes it impossible to measure any positive changes, as women try easy and healthy ways to stop breast cancer before it starts.

BPA Baby Bottles & Increasing breast cancer in America's younger women; What is the connection?

Increasing numbers of younger American women were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer during the past eight years. According to American Cancer Society statistics, pre-menopausal women (under age 54) had a 41% increase in invasive breast cancer from 2002 to 2010.

This sharp increase in triple negative, HER2 positive and estrogen/progesterone positive invasive breast cancers probably means that younger women are absorbing higher levels of chemical and animal hormones, hormone disruptors and/or are getting zapped with ionizing radiation while in the womb and/or during their infancy, childhood, teen and/or younger adult years.

Some laboratory tests have shown that bisphenol A or BPA, a chemical hormone disruptor, used to make baby bottles soft and pliable, can  leach into the milk when the bottles are heated.  Absorbing enough BPA over time can sometimes cause cell mutation, often a  first step in the development of breast cancer or other adverse biological changes in infants.  Based on these studies, Canada banned the use of BPA in baby bottles beginning in 2011 and the European Union will ban the sale and import of these same bottles in 2011.  “Better to be safe than sorry” is the motive behind these  new  prevention laws.

Unfortunately, the U.S. government has not yet banned the sale of BPA in baby bottles. Just last week, after being pressured by the chemical industry lobby, GOP Senate leaders again refused to allow a vote that would have banned BPA from baby bottles.

What causes breast cancer?

Breast cancer only seems to happen when an individual absorbs a personalized cocktail of radiation, chemical hormones, animal hormones and/or hormone disruptors from a variety of sources, over a period of years. But often, the younger you are when you are hit by any of these toxic events, the stronger their impact.

Not using baby bottles containing BPA is probably one easy, healthy and important way that women can help protect their daughters and granddaughters from developing breast cancer later in their lives.

To learn 7 other easy, inexpensive and healthy ways to protect your daughter and yourself from this unnecessary epidemic, see:  http://www.knowbreastcancer.net http://www.thetruthaboutbreastcancer.com

For more information on how BPA can harm babies when it is used to make baby bottles, see the Work Group for Safe Markets report, Baby’s Toxic Bottle: Bisphenol A Leaching from Popular Baby Bottles

http://www.chej.org/documents/BabysToxicBottleFinal.pdf

Birth Control Pills Now Linked to Triple Negative Breast Cancer

Recent research out of Seattle  shows a disturbingly strong link between young  women (40 years and younger) who used oral contraceptives  and their tendency to develop triple negative breast cancer, a rapidly growing estrogen-negative type of the disease.

Among women (40 years and younger) the relative risk for triple-negative breast cancer associated with oral contraceptive use (of more than one year ) was 4.2. (95%confidence interval, 1.9-9.3)

This study, Risk Factors for Triple-Negative Breast Cancer in Women Under the Age of 45 Years,  involving over 1,000 women, led by Jessica M. Dolle, at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle,  and published in the academic journal, Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers and Prevention in April of last year, did not find a similar link between   other kinds of  breast cancer and the use of oral contraceptives in this  same  group of breast cancer patients.

( one page abstract/summary of study)

http://cebp.aacrjournals.org/content/18/4/1157.abstract

( full study: ten page PDF)

http://www.jillstanek.com/Abortion%20Breast%20Cancer%20Epid%20Bio%20Prev%202009.pdf

Most types of breast cancer seem to be  caused by a  cocktail of various ingredients that appear to be unique to each person, that  mixed together can create  a perfect toxic storm.

Triple Negative breast cancer strikes  younger women more often than older women, and strikes black women at double the rate of white women. Younger black women are currently the most at- risk population for developing this type of breast cancer.

Sadly 90+%  of the dollars earmarked for  triple negative breast cancer research,  by Susan G Komen for the Cure, by  the Triple Negative Breast Cancer Foundation, by government and other private grant makers are only focused on developing  expensive drugs that can “find a cure”  for this disease.

Last week  a recent  market research report predicted that by 2018 a new breast cancer drug, BSI-201 will enjoy  $1.7 billion in worldwide sales, with special potential for the triple negative market.

http://www.drugstorenews.com/story.aspx?id=131607&menuid=345

For women fighting this disease, this is wonderful news as such drugs can be critical. But we also need  to figure out how to stop triple negative breast cancer before it starts... even if there is no $1.7 billion drug at the end of the rainbow.

Audre Lorde,  poet, lesbian, feminist leader,  African American and   author of The Cancer Journals, who  died  in 1992 after a fourteen-year struggle with breast cancer,   was one of the first to notice society’s interest in profit making, rather than in trying to stop  breast cancer before it starts.

…what would happen if an army of one-breasted women descended upon Congress and demanded that the use of carcinogenic, fat-stored hormones in beef-feed be outlawed?

Each year, about 30,000  women in the U.S.  are now being diagnosed with triple negative breast cancer and this number continues to grow.  Most of these women are younger than 40 and more than 15% of these young women are  black.

We need to ask  foundations and government agencies to fund Jessica Dolle and other cancer prevention researchers as they try to  understand more about what chemicals, foods and drugs are causing all of this triple negative.

Meanwhile, do not expect your birth control pack  to mention Dolle’s recent research linking birth control drugs to triple negative breast cancer; in fact do not expect the American Cancer Society or even most major breast cancer foundations to breathe a word of  Dolle’s 2009 study.

Birth control pills and breast cancer drugs are both multi-billion dollar a year markets. The   pharmaceutical companies that sell these drugs also give many millions of dollars each year to the American Cancer Society, Komen and other.  Few organizations, I suppose,  want to bite the hands that feed them.

From a practical, personal  point of view, younger women who want to continue using birth control  pills should  counterbalance their risk of developing triple negative by getting a Vitamin D3 blood test.. and taking 2,000 IUs or more of Vitamin D3 supplements every day until your blood test shows you have a level of 60-80 ng/ml of vitamin D3. New research shows that this level of vitamin D3  should protect a huge majority of all women against developing all types of breast cancer.

For more  ideas on how to help lower your risk of developing any type of breast cancer, at any age, see  Know Breast Cancer’s 7 Easy Ways at www.knowbreastcancer.net



Thermography: safer, more accurate than mammograms

February 13. 2010

I recently had a full body European thermogram instead of a screening mammogram. Happily,  I learned that I have no tumors in my breasts, nor do I have any inflammation there, which can be an early warning sign for future  atypical cells (DCIS) or various types of actual breast cancer.

The thermogram took place in the practitioner’s office, where she had me wear a long sleeved  button-down- the- front shirt with no bra and had me strip to my underpants.

She then touched her electromagnetic wand to   various points on my body… from head to pelvis, while the computer compiled the temperature of each point.

The worse part was having to stand fairly naked for ten minutes while my body cooled down! The practitioner again passed the wand over those same body points, as the computer took a second reading of my now cooled- off body.  BRRR!!!!

Five minutes later, the computer printed off a diagram, along with  an analysis of my body’s cool and hot spots!

I   recently  learned that there are two types of thermography,  both types  being safer and more accurate than screening mammograms.

The full- body European type, that I experienced, uses electromagnetic pulses, while the more common type of thermogram uses thermal imaging.

The European type offers a functional assessment of the nervous system and is more readily accepted by medical insurance companies. But both types of thermograms are usually done on the entire body, as the breasts are integrally linked to the rest of your body!  duh!!

For example, if your left breast shows inflammation, but not your right breast, your full body thermogram might show a core of inflammation in your left shoulder  that radiates over to your left breast; Hence as in everything in life.. it is always important to get the full picture, so you can  locate  the actual  source of a problem.

Two clinics that offer European Thermography (also called computer regulated thermography ) in New England are : Jackie Bell Natural Health in Cambridge, MA  www.naturalbell.com and Sojourns Community Health Clinic in Westminster, VT www.sojourns.org

As more and more women use some type of thermography,  instead of choosing to have an annual or biannual mammogram, I predict that breast health clinics and medical centers will complain or shout  that “mammograms are safer” … until these same  clinics decided to switch over to thermography as well!

But right now, many breast health clinics and medical centers  need to pay off the cost of their new digital mammography machines , so there will probably continue to be huge marketing pressure put on women of various ages to have an annual screening mammogram rather than a thermogram.

For those of us who like to think for ourselves, and limit the amount of radiation that touches any part of our bodies, it is nice that some of us now have the     thermography option.

Dr Mercola,   America’s #1 on-line natural health MD, agrees that thermograms are safer and better than mammograms. Check out this link to his video on thermography and vitamin D3 for breast cancer prevention)

Choosing thermography over a screening mammogram is one of Know B rest Cancer’s  7 Easy Ways to help stop breast cancer from happening to you.  To learn about all 7 Easy Ways, please  visit www.knowbreastcancer.net

Thinking of Sara Palin and Breast Health Centers…or.."Why our hospitals don't talk about real or natural breast cancer prevention

January 5, 2010

Manchester by the Sea, MA

Our  local  Breast ” Health” Centers,  located in medical centers, community hospitals and free-standing clinics around the U.S.,  currently do next to nothing about educating women on how to keep our breasts naturally healthy.

You can put lipstick on a pig, but as Sara says, “It’s still a pig.”

Breast “Health” Centers are currently breast cancer diagnostic centers; places where women are given screening x-rays and possibly more diagnostic  x-rays in the form of mammograms or MRIs with toxic dyes, along with needle aspirations,  and lumpectomies.

But real breast health is something different. Now that we know so much more about how breast cancer begins or grows; now that we know so much more about how to actually limit the number of women who ever develop breast cancer; it’s time for medical centers to also set up real Breast Health Centers or real Breast Cancer Prevention Centers.

Real or natural breast cancer prevention is no longer rocket science; getting the word out to women seems to be a more difficult task.

Here is a sampling of what real Breast Health Centers could offer women today:

  • A blood test to determine your vitamin D3 levels with info sessions on how much vitamin D3 and calcium supplements  you should be taking every day to gradually reach the new recommended level of 60-80 ng/ml of vitamin D3 in your blood serum levels.

For more info on how 60-89 ng/ml of vitamin D3 can amazingly block the first stage of breast cancer development, go to Easy Way #1 at www.knowbreastcancer.net

  • Individualized birth control counseling for women over 40, to help you switch off of birth control pills, patches, rings and estrogen-based IUDs. Women in their  40’s,  who still use these drugs,  significantly raise their risk of developing aggressive estrogen negative breast cancers.

To see some of the research showing that  contraceptive drugs are considered unsafe for women  over 40 years of age, go to Easy Way #3 at www.knowbreastcancer.net

  • Cooking classes for women who want to include dairy-free recipes and other breast cancer-protecting foods, such as Japanese miso and fermented black beans in their families’ daily meals. The Japanese and Chinese, with their dairy-free diets and numerous fermented soy dishes, have one third the breast cancer rates of North American and Northern European women!

For more info on how organic fermented soy foods can be more effective and safer than taking Tamoxifen or Arimidex, see Easy Way #6 at www.knowbreastcancer.net

  • Education groups for women who want to put less alcohol, less nicotine and less sugar into their bodies each day. This is obviously not an easy task, but offering such support under the label of  breast cancer prevention, will take some of the stigma out of treating these dangerous lifestyles.  Using one or more of these toxins every day can triple a woman’s risk level if trying to avoid a second breast cancer diagnosis. Carrying twenty extra pounds of fat can double any older woman’s risk of developing invasive breast cancer. Also heavy drinking and/or  any level of smoking appear to cancel out any protection offered from Vitamin D3 supplementation.

For the latest research on alcohol, smoking, excess body fat and increased breast cancer risk levels, go to Easy Way #7 at www.knowbreastcancer.net

This is all pretty sobering, exciting and hopeful info, but sadly don’t expect our local medical centers to open up any real Breast Health Centers any day soon.

Why not??!

A real or natural Breast Health Center is a low-tech, low-profit service, geared to decreasing the number of community women who will ever develop breast cancer. For these two reasons alone, medical centers do not believe it is in their financial self interest to create such centers.

Remember… most non-profit and for-profit medical centers and clinics operate as for-profit corporations. Executives are often paid a six or seven figure income when they are able to snuff out competing medical centers,   recruit more cancer patients, and continue to offer highly profitable medical services  to these individuals until they die.

Until we have a  health care system that is detached from any profit motives (such as your  local fire department is)  where people’s health (your burning home) comes before corporate profits, medical  centers will never be interested in sponsoring real breast health centers.

note: If you appreciate reading the opinions and research- based information shared in these blog postings and at www.knowbreastcancer.net we need to ask each of you to help support our work with a tax-deductible contribution.

Please at least send us $7 (for our 7 Easy Ways) and ask 7 of your friends to do the same. We, of course, would also appreciate your sending  larger contributions as well.  Just go to  www.knowbreastcancer.net and click on the “contribute” link.

Together, one woman at a time,  we can stop this unnecessary epidemic.

Thanks so much,

Susan

www.knowbreastcancer.net

Please give Know Breast Cancer a tax deductible contribution today.

$7 for our 7 Easy Ways

Best Kept Secret: Cows' Milk increases risk for breast cancer

May 25, 2009

\In my May 29th Honest Health column on the need to ban rBGH and other growth hormones from our food supply  www.gloucestertimes.com  I describe known links between drinking milk from cows treated with rBGH and eating meat and poultry containing added growth hormones with the increased risk of developing breast, prostate and other hormonal cancers.

 

What I don’t say is that cows milk by itself, is considered to be a major risk factor in breast and ovarian cancer. It appears that when individuals do not have the correct enzymes to metabolize many of the hormones naturally found in any type of cow’s milk., a glass of milk can flood the body with excess estrogen. This raises the risk of developing or accelerating the growth of existing breast cancer.

 

Jane Plant, a British geologist, describes saving her own life twenty years ago after facing metastatic breast cancer. An estrogen positive tumor, growing in her neck, disappeared in six weeks once Plant , currently a professor at the University of Nottingham,  began a  dairy-free lifestyle. She has continued to follow a dairy free lifestyle since that time and has remained cancer free to this day.

 

Plant’s book,  The No-Dairy Breast Cancer Prevention Program,   http://www.amazon.com/No-Dairy-Breast-Cancer-Prevention-Program/dp/0312291671

 also published under the title, Your Life in Your Own Hands: Understanding. Preventing and Overcoming Breast Cancer,  http://www.amazon.com/Your-Life-Hands-Understanding-Preventing/dp/0312275617   are both available from Amazon and other booksellers.

 

One  possible reason most people have not read much about the connections between dairy products and an increased risk of breast cancer may be because the U.S. Dairy Lobby is formidable. The industry  is able to maintain federal milk subsidies in spite of the fact that this policy artificially raises  milk prices for  U.S. consumers, tot the  benefit of milk producers.

 

The Industry’s popular Got Milk? Campaign reflects a motherhood and apple pie feeling by including former federal cabinet members (Donna Shlala) , movie starts (Jennifer Aniston) and sport heroes. (Muhammad Ali).  No wonder it is difficult to believe the research that shows how milk can increase breast cancer rates and accelerate breast cancer growth in a huge group of women.

 

See Andrew Weil’s comments on the strong links between dairy and hormonal cancers.  http://www.drweil.com/drw/u/id/QAA400175

 

For additional studies linking cows’ milk to breast cancer risk factors in humans, see:  

http://milk.elehost.com/    www.notmilk.com   www.milksucks.com;   and  www.sustainabletable.org