Friday 22 April 2011

The Top 5 Cholesterol Myths

cholesterol-myth American men rank 83rd in the world in average total cholesterol.Even if you think you know everything there is to know about cholesterol, there may be a few more surprises in store. Check out these common myths about high cholesterol; find out who’s most likely to have it, what types of food can cause it, and why—sometimes—cholesterol isn’t a bad word.

Myth 1: Americans have the highest cholesterol in the world
One of the world's enduring stereotypes is the fat American with cholesterol-clogged arteries who is a Big Mac or two away from a heart attack. As a nation, we could certainly use some slimming down, but when it comes to cholesterol levels we are solidly middle-of-the-road.

The Cholesterol-Inflammation Connectionred-clogged-arterieInflammation is cholesterol's partner in crime  Read moreAccording to 2005 World Health Organization statistics, American men rank 83rd in the world in average total cholesterol, and American women rank 81st; in both cases, the average number is 197 mg/dL, just below the Borderline-High Risk category. That is very respectable compared to the top-ranked countries: In Colombia the average cholesterol among men is a dangerous 244, while the women in Israel, Libya, Norway, and Uruguay are locked in a four-way tie at 232.

Myth 2: Eggs are evil
It's true that eggs have a lot of dietary cholesterol—upwards of 200 mg, which is more than two-thirds of the American Heart Association's recommended limit of 300 mg a day. But dietary cholesterol isn't nearly as dangerous as was once thought. Only some of the cholesterol in food ends up as cholesterol in your bloodstream, and if your dietary cholesterol intake rises, your body compensates by producing less cholesterol of its own.

While you don't want to overdo it, eating an egg or two a few times a week isn't dangerous. In fact, eggs are an excellent source of protein and contain unsaturated fat, a so-called good fat.


View the original article here

No More Headaches: 10 Surprising Headache Triggers

headache-trigger Could it be something you ate? Not enough sleep? Want to know what could be causing your headache? Our comprehensive list just might help you out.

1. Your weight
In a recent study, researchers found that women with mild obesity (a body mass index of 30) had a 35 percent greater risk of headaches than those with a lower BMI. Severe obesity (BMI of 40) upped the chances to 80 percent.

migraine-quizWhat really triggers that debilitating pain in your head?  Read more2. Your personality
Certain traits, including rigidity, reserve, and obsessivity may make you headache-prone. If that sounds like you, it could be time to sign up for relaxation training.

3. The big O
In one survey, 46 percent of headache sufferers said sex had triggered a headache. Usually, this is an overexertion headache (like joggers and weight­lifters sometimes get); you may feel a dull pain that builds during foreplay or get a sudden headache around orgasm (more likely in men). In rare cases, such an intense headache could be caused by a tumor or aneurysm. For most folks, though, sex headaches are harmless.

4. That three-day vacay
Weekend or “let-down” headaches can happen when you take a break from your routine, says Alexander Mauskop, MD, founder and director of the New York Headache Center and co-author of What Your Doctor May Not Tell You About Migraines. Ease into the change by keeping your sleep time as normal as possible—you’ll end up feeling more rested than if you stay in bed until noon.

5. Your bathroom paint job
It’s not just arguing over paint colors that can give you a headache; fumes from traditional paints can trigger pain. Many companies now make nearly odorless, low-VOC (volatile organic compound) formulas, like Benjamin Moore’s Natura line or Devoe’s Wonder Pure.

6. Dehydration
You don’t have to drink gallons of water to stay hydrated, says John La Puma, MD, author of ChefMD’s Big Book of Culinary Medicine, “I’d love it if people got more water from eating fruits and vegetables because then they’d get all the other good things that come with them.”

7. Skipping meals
We know you’re busy, but hunger is a common headache trigger.

Take the Migraine Quiz: Find out what really triggers that debilitating pain in your head.


View the original article here

Atherosclerosis: An Artist's Rendering

atherosclerosis-art Atherosclerosis is a disease of the arteries, the blood vessels that carry oxygen and nutrients to our organs and tissues (including heart muscle tissue). It is a type of arteriosclerosis, the term for any stiffening of the arteries. Atherosclerosis is especially dangerous because it is hidden deep in the body and not easily detectable. It is a slow, progressive disease.

Here is Vicki Behms's artistic rendering of atherosclerosis. View the slideshow.

What did you think of this slideshow?

View the original article here

Atherosclerosis Can Cause Coronary Artery Disease

Picture of the heart

What is coronary artery disease?

Coronary artery disease occurs when fatty deposits called plaque (say "plak") build up inside the coronary arteries. The coronary arteries wrap around the heart and supply it with blood and oxygen. When plaque builds up, it narrows the arteries and reduces the amount of blood that gets to your heart. This can lead to serious problems, including heart attack.

Coronary artery disease (also called CAD) is the most common type of heart disease. It is also the number one killer of both men and women in the United States.

It can be a shock to find out that you have coronary artery disease. Many people only find out when they have a heart attack. Whether or not you have had a heart attack, there are many things you can do to slow coronary artery disease and reduce your risk of future problems.

What causes coronary artery disease?

Coronary artery disease is caused by hardening of the arteries, or atherosclerosis. Atherosclerosis occurs when plaque builds up inside the arteries. (Arteries are the blood vessels that carry oxygen-rich blood throughout your body.) Atherosclerosis can affect any arteries in the body. When it occurs in the arteries that supply blood to the heart, it is called coronary artery disease.

Plaque is a fatty material made up of cholesterol, calcium, and other substances in the blood. To understand why plaque is a problem, compare a healthy artery with an artery with atherosclerosis:

A healthy artery is like a rubber tube. It is smooth and flexible, and blood flows through it freely. If your heart has to work harder, such as when you exercise, a healthy artery can stretch to let more blood flow to your body’s tissues.An artery with atherosclerosis is more like a clogged pipe. Plaque narrows the artery and makes it stiff. This limits the flow of blood to the tissues. When the heart has to work harder, the stiff arteries can't flex to let more blood through, and the tissues don't get enough blood and oxygen.

See a picture of a normal artery and an artery narrowed by plaque Click here to see an illustration..

When plaque builds up in the coronary arteries, the heart doesn't get the blood it needs to work well. Over time, this can weaken or damage the heart. If a plaque tears, the body tries to fix the tear by forming a blood clot around it. The clot can block blood flow to the heart and cause a heart attack. See a picture of how plaque causes a heart attack Click here to see an illustration..

What are the symptoms?

Usually people with coronary artery disease don't have symptoms until after age 50. Then they may start to have symptoms at times when the heart is working harder and needs more oxygen, such as during exercise. Typical first symptoms include:

Chest pain or discomfort, called angina (say “ANN-juh-nuh” or “ann-JY-nuh”). Shortness of breath. Heart attack. Too often, a heart attack is the first symptom of coronary artery disease.

Less common symptoms include a fast heartbeat, feeling sick to your stomach, and increased sweating. Some people don't have any symptoms. In rare cases, a person can have a “silent” heart attack, without symptoms.

To find out your risk for a heart attack in the next 10 years, use this Interactive Tool: Are You at Risk for a Heart Attack? Click here to see an interactive tool.

How is coronary artery disease diagnosed?

To diagnose coronary artery disease, doctors start by doing a physical exam and asking questions about your past health and your risk factors. Risk factors are things that increase the chance that you will have coronary artery disease.

Some common risk factors are being older than 65; smoking; having high cholesterol, high blood pressure, or diabetes; and having heart disease in your family. The more risk factors you have, the more likely it is that you have coronary artery disease.

If your doctor thinks that you have coronary artery disease, you may have tests, such as:

Electrocardiogram (EKG or ECG), which checks for problems with the electrical activity of your heart. An EKG can also show signs of an old or new heart attack. Chest X-ray. Blood tests. Exercise electrocardiogram, commonly called a "stress test." This test checks for changes in your heart while you exercise.

Your doctor may order other tests to look at blood flow to your heart. You may have a coronary angiogram if your doctor is considering a procedure to remove blockages, such as angioplasty or bypass surgery.

How is it treated?

Treatment focuses on taking steps to manage your symptoms and reduce your risk for heart attack and stroke. Some risk factors you can't control, such as your age and family history. Other risk factors you can control, such as high blood pressure, high cholesterol, and smoking. Lifestyle changes can help lower your risks. You may also need to take medicines or have a procedure to open your arteries.

Lifestyle changes are the first step for anyone with coronary artery disease. These changes may stop or even reverse coronary artery disease. To improve your heart health:

Don't smoke. This may be the most important thing you can do. Quitting smoking can quickly reduce the risk of heart attack or death.Eat a heart-healthy diet that includes plenty of fish, fruits, vegetables, beans, high-fiber grains and breads, and olive oil. See a dietitian if you need help making better food choices.Get regular exercise on most, if not all, days of the week. Your doctor can suggest a safe level of exercise for you. Walking is great exercise that most people can do. A good goal is 30 minutes or more a day. Lower your stress level. Stress can hurt your heart. Limit alcohol to 1 drink a day for women and 2 drinks a day for men.

Changing old habits may not be easy, but it is very important to help you live a healthier and longer life. Having a plan can help. Start with small steps. For example, commit to eating five servings of fruits and vegetables a day. Instead of having dessert, take a short walk. When you feel stressed, stop and take some deep breaths.

Medicines may be needed in addition to lifestyle changes. Medicines that are often prescribed for people with coronary artery disease include:

Statins to help lower cholesterol.Beta-blockers or ACE inhibitors to lower blood pressure.Aspirin or other medicines to reduce the risk of blood clots.Nitrates to relieve chest pain.

Procedures may be done to improve blood flow to the heart.

Angioplasty is used to open blocked arteries. It isn't major surgery. During angioplasty, the doctor guides a thin tube (called a catheter) into the narrowed artery and inflates a small balloon. This widens the artery to help restore blood flow. Often a small wire-mesh tube called a stent is placed to keep the artery open. See a picture of angioplasty with stent placement Click here to see an illustration.. The doctor may use a stent that is coated with medicine, called a drug-eluting stent. When the stent is in place, it slowly releases a medicine that prevents the growth of new tissue. This helps keep the artery open.Bypass surgery, which is major surgery, may be used if arteries are severely narrowed or blocked. It uses healthy blood vessels to create detours around the narrowed or blocked arteries.

To stay as healthy as possible, it is important to:

See your doctor for regular follow-up appointments. This lets your doctor keep track of your risk factors and adjust your treatment as needed.Take your medicines exactly as prescribed. Do not stop or change medicines without talking to your doctor.Keep nitroglycerin with you at all times, if your doctor prescribed it for chest pain.Tell your doctor about any chest pain you have had, even if it went away. Get the support you need to succeed in making lifestyle changes. Ask family or friends to share a healthy meal or join a stop-smoking program with you. Or ask your doctor about a cardiac rehab program. In cardiac rehab, a team of health professionals provides education and support to help you make new, healthy habits.

View the original article here

Study: Moderate Drinking Ups Risk of Breast Cancer Return

liquor-breast-cancer
THURSDAY, Dec. 10, 2009  (Health.com) — Breast cancer survivors who have just a few alcoholic drinks per week are more likely than women who drink little or no alcohol to see their breast cancer return, according to research presented today at an annual meeting of breast cancer specialists.

The study, which followed about 1,900 early-stage breast cancer survivors for eight years, found that women who consumed an average of at least three to four alcoholic drinks in a week had a 34% higher risk of breast cancer recurrence. (One drink equals a 5-ounce glass of wine, a 12-ounce beer, or a 1.5-ounce shot of liquor.)

The increased risk was more pronounced among breast cancer survivors who had gone through menopause and those who were overweight or obese, the study found.

Wine was by far the most common drink among women in the study, followed by liquor and beer, but no one type of alcohol was found to be significantly more or less associated with the risk of recurrence.

In all, there were 349 breast cancer recurrences and 332 deaths during the follow-up period. Alcohol use was not linked to the risk of death from breast cancer, however.

“More research should be done, but there is a growing body of evidence which suggests that women previously diagnosed with breast cancer should speak with their doctor about possibly limiting their consumption of alcohol,” says the lead researcher on the study, Marilyn L. Kwan, PhD, a staff scientist at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland.

Previous research has suggested that alcohol consumption may increase the risk of developing breast cancer in the first place. Kwan's research extends these findings to include the risk of recurrence among women who have already been diagnosed and treated for breast cancer, a population that numbers about 2.5 million in the United States, according to the American Cancer Society.

“Cutting back on alcohol represents a real step that a breast cancer survivor can take to reduce her risk of recurrence,” says Marisa Weiss, MD, the president and founder of the advocacy group Breastcancer.org. “You don’t have to give up alcohol, but use it more carefully and in moderation,” she says.

Limiting alcohol intake can improve the overall health of breast cancer survivors, according to Dr. Weiss, the author of the forthcoming book Living Beyond Breast Cancer. “Alcohol is liquid calories, and being overweight is a risk factor for breast cancer,” she says.  “If you consume a lot of alcohol, you tend to be less physically active and/or smoke. So, for a number of reasons, that one step of cutting back on alcohol does have a number of health benefits."

Exactly how alcohol consumption affects breast cancer risk is not fully understood, says Kwan, although estrogen, which fuels the growth of most types of breast cancer, is likely involved.

“It has been suggested that alcohol could increase the risk of breast cancer by increasing estrogen metabolism and circulating levels of estrogen, thus promoting growth of the tumor,” she says.  “A similar mechanism might be responsible for increasing the risk of breast cancer recurrence.”

Drinking-related weight gain could also play a role, Kwan adds. “Obesity may…promote estrogen production and breast cell proliferation, in addition to the direct effect alcohol can have on estrogen metabolism and levels in the body,” she explains.

The study, which was funded by the National Cancer Institute, was presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, an annual meeting for oncologists, surgeons, and other breast cancer specialists. The symposium is co-hosted by the American Association for Cancer Research and the Cancer Therapy & Research Center at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.


View the original article here

Thursday 21 April 2011

Lower Cholesterol May Lessen Risk of Some Cancers

cholesterol-cancer THURSDAY, Nov. 5 (Health.com) — Most people know that healthy cholesterol levels can help protect your heart. But new research suggests another potential benefit: a lower risk of developing some types of cancer.

In fact, low total cholesterol is associated with about 60% less risk of the most aggressive form of prostate cancer, and higher levels of good cholesterol (HDL) may protect against lung, liver, and other cancers, according to two studies published this week in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention.

That’s quite a reversal of fortune for low cholesterol, which has, in the past, been associated with a higher cancer risk. The new studies suggest that low cholesterol may not deserve its bad reputation, earned from a series of studies in the 1980s that said people with low cholesterol might be at risk of cancer.

In fact, cholesterol may drop in people with undiagnosed cancer, meaning that low cholesterol may be a result—not a cause—of cancer.

In the first study, men with HDL cholesterol above roughly 55 mg/dL had an 11% decrease in overall cancer risk, including lung and liver cancer. (HDL levels between 40 and 50 are average for men.) The study, conducted by National Cancer Institute (NCI) researchers who looked at about 29,000 male smokers in Finland over an 18-year period, is the largest to show a relationship between HDL and cancer.

"Very few studies measured [HDL], and any relationship between HDL and overall cancer risk had therefore not been adequately evaluated," the NCI's Demetrius Albanes, MD, the lead author of the study, said at a press briefing.

While the findings are new and intriguing, more research needs to be conducted to confirm a link between HDL and cancer risk reduction.

“[It’s] a very new, exciting question, but we need to do a great deal more research before we have any clear answers," says Eric Jacobs, PhD, an epidemiologist with the American Cancer Society, who co-wrote an editorial accompanying the studies. For his part, Dr. Albanes stressed that the results need to be confirmed, especially in women and nonsmokers.


View the original article here

Cholesterol-Lowering Supplements: What Works, What Doesn’t

fiber If you’re looking for an all-natural way to lower your cholesterol—in addition to watching what you eat and exercising—there are plenty of dietary supplements on the market that claim to do the trick. Each year seems to bring a new alternative remedy—garlic, ginseng, or red yeast rice, for example—that users tout as the next best thing to get cholesterol under control.

But just because your Uncle Jack says a supplement worked miracles on his cholesterol doesn’t mean it will work for you. In fact, his success may be due to a placebo effect or a diet overhaul he neglected to mention.

Though not always perfect, scientific studies are the best way to determine if nonprescription remedies really work. Below, we break down what the research does—and doesn’t—say about the benefits of the most popular alternative remedies for lowering cholesterol.

To see what these supplements look like, view this slideshow.

Artichoke leaf extract

What it is: The dried extract of the artichoke leaf is also known as Cynara scolymus.

The evidence: In 2000, German researchers performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial using nearly 150 adults with total cholesterol over 280—well into what the American Heart Association (AHA) considers “high risk” territory. The participants who took an artichoke supplement for six weeks saw their levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or bad cholesterol, fall by 23%, on average, compared to just 6% in the placebo group.

These are promising numbers, but they haven’t been replicated. A more recent, three-month trial of similar design found that total cholesterol fell by an average of 4% among participants taking artichoke leaf extract, but the researchers found no measurable impact on either LDL or high-density lipoprotein (HDL), also known as good cholesterol. They suggested that differences in the health of the participants and the potency of the supplements—the patients in the second study received a dose about 30% smaller—could explain the discrepancy between the results of the two studies.

The bottom line: There have been very few quality studies conducted on artichoke leaf extract, and the mixed results suggest that more evidence is needed to confirm its effect on cholesterol. Don’t expect your LDL to plummet if you take artichoke supplements.

Fenugreek

What it is: Fenugreek is a seed (often ground into a powder) that has been used since the days of ancient Egypt and is available in capsule form.

The evidence: Several studies from the 1990s have reported that, in high doses, various fenugreek seed preparations can lower total cholesterol and LDL, in some cases dramatically. (One study recorded an LDL drop of 38%.) Almost without exception, however, the studies have been small and of poor quality, which casts some doubt on the validity of the results.

Fenugreek contains a significant amount of dietary fiber (anywhere from 20% to 50%, analyses have shown), and some experts speculate that the purported cholesterol-lowering effect of fenugreek may in fact be attributed largely to its fiber content.

The bottom line: Despite the studies frequently cited as proof of fenugreek’s ability to lower cholesterol, there is not enough evidence to support its use.

Fiber

What it is: Soluble fiber is a type of dietary fiber found in oats, barley, bran, peas, and citrus fruits, as well as in dietary supplements. (Though it is good for the heart in other ways, insoluble fiber does not affect blood cholesterol.)

The evidence: In 1999, a team of Harvard Medical School researchers conducted a meta-analysis of nearly 70 clinical trials that examined the effect of soluble fiber on cholesterol levels. High soluble fiber intake was associated with reductions in both LDL and total cholesterol in 60% to 70% of the studies they examined. For each gram of soluble fiber that the participants of the various studies added to their daily diet, their LDL levels fell by about 2 points. (The average time frame was seven weeks.)

The amount of fiber you’d need to eat to significantly lower your LDL is a bit unwieldy. Most people eat far less than the 25 grams of dietary fiber recommended as a minimum by most health organizations—and only about 20% of your total fiber intake is likely to be soluble. (Eating three bowls of oatmeal a day will only yield about 3 grams of soluble fiber, according to the Harvard researchers.) Taking daily fiber supplements can help, but they can cause some gastrointestinal side effects if taken regularly and can interfere with some prescription medications.

The bottom line: A diet high in soluble fiber can lower your LDL. The effect is likely to be relatively modest, however, and loading up on soluble fiber may be impractical.


View the original article here

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy: What You Need to Know

pregancy-breast-cancer You may not recognize the name Kerryn McCann, but it's all over the news this week. McCann was an award-winning Australian runner, age 41, who died Monday from breast cancer that spread to her liver and brain. Sadly, about 1.3 million women will be diagnosed with breast cancer worldwide this year, and 465,000 women will die from it—McCann is just one of many. The twist on the story is that she discovered her breast lump while pregnant, and initially she thought it was nothing.

Breasts can do all sorts of strange things during pregnancy: They blow up, they get tender and lumpy, they squirt mysterious substances. For many women, pregnancy boobs are a downright strange experience. When I was pregnant, it was the first time I had a generous bosom, and I poked my boobs every now and then to see if they were real. What I didn't do was check them to make sure they were healthy.

Like McCann, I figured breast changes during pregnancy were normal. And they usually are. Breast cancer during pregnancy is quite rare. In the United States, just 1 in 3,000 pregnant women is diagnosed with breast cancer.

But you still need to be vigilant. That means doing routine breast self-exams and reporting anything suspicious to your doctor immediately. Breast tenderness is normal during pregnancy, but hard lumps are not. It's really important to take action quickly: The average reported delay in reporting a lump or other symptom detected during pregnancy is 5 to 15 months, a factor that may contribute to less promising outcomes.

Have you checked your breasts during pregnancy?If you and your doctor do find an abnormality, there are ways to perform diagnostic tests, such as ultrasound and mammography, without exposing the fetus to radiation. Sometimes babies are induced early (as was the case with Kerryn McCann's baby) so that the mother can start chemotherapy or another treatment as soon as possible.

There are lots of lessons to take away from Kerryn McCann: She was an inspirational athlete and mother of three and, whether you are pregnant or not, her story is a call to check your breasts—now.

Read Anne's previous posts:
How Blogging Is Good for Your Breasts
Good News: My Migraines May Be Good for My Breasts
The Survivor Files: Amazing Women Share Their Breast Cancer Journeys


View the original article here

Nearly Half of Breast Cancer Survivors Have Lingering Pain

breast-cancer-survivors TUESDAY, Nov. 10, 2009 (Health.com) — Almost half of women who have breast cancer surgery still have pain or numbness two to three years later, according to a new study. Women younger than 40 who receive lumpectomies are at the greatest risk.

In general, women are most likely to have pain or a loss of sensation in the breast region, followed by the armpit, the arm, and their sides. However, 40% of women with lingering symptoms have pain in parts of the body not affected by treatment, according to a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

“This is a very well-done study by very well-respected surgeons in Denmark,” says Allen Burton, MD, a professor and the chair of the department of pain medicine in the division of anesthesiology and critical care at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, in Houston.

“This is a known phenomenon,” says Dr. Burton, who wasn’t involved in the study. “These women have pain and huge numb patches in their chest, underarm, down their arm, and in their back that never feels normal again.”

None of the women in the study had reconstructive breast surgery, which is commonplace in the United States. “It would be interesting to see if that changes the outcome,” Dr. Burton says. “Would they have more pain? Less pain? Different kinds of pain?”

In the study of 3,754 breast cancer survivors ages 18 to 70, 47% had pain in one or more area, and 58% reported problems in the treated breast, including burning and a loss of sensation for one to three years after their surgery. Overall, 13% of women with lingering problems said their pain was severe, 39% said it was moderate, and 48% reported light pain. And 76% of patients with severe pain said they ached every day.

Women at the greatest risk for chronic pain were ages 18 to 39 and had undergone breast-conserving surgery, or lumpectomy, in which doctors remove only the tumor and some surrounding tissue. Other risk factors for persistent pain included radiation therapy, which is directed at the breast area to destroy any remaining cancer cells after surgery.


View the original article here

Products That May Reduce Your Risk of Breast Cancer

breast-cancer-products There is no proven link between breast cancer and household products, whether they be soap or water bottles. But many consumers, activists, and experts are concerned that a variety of goods contain hormone disruptors, chemicals that when absorbed into the body can mimic or interfere with hormones such as estrogen. Some researchers believe that chemicals with estrogenic characteristics can cause normal breast cells to divide.

"Each time they divide, they have the risk of copying DNA incorrectly and creating mutations in key genes, which may lead to increased breast cancer risk," says Suzanne Snedeker, PhD, the associate director for translational research for the Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors at Cornell University. Chemicals that mimic estrogen might also enable an existing breast tumor to keep growing, because most tumors depend on estrogen to grow.

Individual products contain only small amounts of these questionable chemicals, if they do at all. But there is growing concern that the ubiquity of such agents in cosmetics, household products, and certain plastics, may have a cumulative estrogenic effect. "We are not saying if you use a certain product with estrogenic ingredients it will cause breast cancer," Snedeker says. "But the science suggests your risk may be reduced if you avoid these ingredients." Here are a few ways to play it safe.

View the slideshow


View the original article here

Panel Says Women Should Start Mammograms at 50, Not 40

mammogram-breast-cancer Women should have a mammogram every two years starting at age 50—not 40, according to an expert panel’s new breast cancer screening guidelines, which are sure to cause confusion among women, particularly those in their 40s who routinely schedule a mammogram each year.

However, a number of prominent groups say they strongly disagree with the new advice, which was issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) on Monday.

The USPSTF panel has backed off a 2002 statement advising women to have a routine mammogram every year or two beginning at age 40. The panel now recommends that women undergo mammography screening every two years starting at age 50 and continue being screened through age 74.

The USPSTF concluded that the benefit gained by starting screening at 40 versus 50 is “small” and that the decision to start screening before 50 should be an individual one.

The new guidelines would seem to reopen a debate that raged in the 1990s, but seemed to have been settled years ago. The American Cancer Society (ACS) now recommends that women get an annual mammogram and have a clinical breast examination beginning at age 40.

Otis W. Brawley, MD, the chief medical officer of the ACS, said in a statement that the ACS would stick to its current guidelines.

Mammograms are the “one screening test I recommend unequivocally, and would recommend to any woman 40 and over, be she a patient, a stranger, or a family member,” Dr. Brawley said. The USPSTF is an independent panel, sponsored by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, whose members make recommendations about preventive-care services and published the new recommendations in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

The panel’s recommendations are based, in part, on a review of the latest scientific evidence on the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening. The pooled data show that mammography screening does reduce breast cancer death—by 15% for women ages 39 to 49. To prevent one cancer death in this group, 1,904 women would have to be screened. Among women 50 to 59, one death is avoided per 1,339 screenings.

Because breast cancer risk increases with age, younger women are at a somewhat lower risk of developing the disease, explains George W. Sledge Jr., MD, a professor of oncology at Indiana University’s Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, in Indianapolis, and president-elect of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

They’re also somewhat more likely to have a false-positive mammogram—a test result that triggers a biopsy or other tests, but turns out not to be cancer—because they tend to have denser breasts, he says.

“No one is saying, or no one should say, that screening mammography has no value for younger women,” he says.

What the task force is saying is that the absolute reduction in breast cancer deaths is much greater in an older population.

But the American Cancer Society’s Dr. Brawley reasoned that “the USPSTF is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them.”


View the original article here

Wednesday 20 April 2011

Breast Cancer Risk and Estrogen Alternatives

estrogen-hormone-breast-cancer Taking estrogen may increase a woman's risk of getting breast cancer.Getting relief from menopause symptoms doesn’t need to mean estrogen-only treatments or combined hormone therapy (HT), which may increase your risk of breast cancer. If you can, consider nondrug remedies first, says JoAnn Manson, MD, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and the author of Hot Flashes, Hormones & Your Health.

Dr. Manson has several suggestions for managing hot flashes and night sweats:

Wear layered clothing.Lower the thermostat.Use portable fans.Avoid dietary triggers such as caffeine, spicy foods, and alcohol.Avoid tobacco.Increase your intake of soy-based foods.Consider trying the herb black cohosh.A low dose of a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or the antiseizure medication gabapentin may also be useful, according to Kala Visvanathan, MBBS, assistant professor of epidemiology and oncology at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in Baltimore. Alternative Therapy for Side Effectsacupuncture-woman-cancerMore than 80% of breast cancer patients have tried complementary therapies.  Read more"If a woman has only vaginal dryness and discomfort with intercourse and no other symptoms, she can use a topical estrogen or a vaginal estrogen ring, which have a much lower absorption of estrogen," adds Dr. Manson, who notes that relaxation and breathing techniques have worked for some women as well. "I would encourage women to try lifestyle modifications before going with estrogen, especially if they have mild symptoms," she says.

Dr. Visvanathan agrees: "You definitely want to try simple things first, then go to [HT] if you need to. It used to be that hormones were the first thing you tried, but the paradigm is changing because we’ve determined the long-term breast cancer and cardiovascular risk associated with HT, and because the benefits of HT have been shown to be less effective than previously thought. Women with modest menopausal symptoms can often treat their symptoms effectively with nonmedical therapies."

Have you tried estrogen alternatives for hot flashes?If you end up needing estrogen or combination HT, though, and you want to keep your breast cancer risk low while still keeping menopause symptoms in check, ask your doctor about transdermal patches, gels, and sprays, which deliver low doses of estrogen through the skin and may have fewer risks than pills. "Transdermal estrogen may be less likely to cause blood clots and gallbladder disease," Dr. Manson explains. "And lower doses may be less likely to increase the risk of breast cancer or other cancers."

The bottom line: Consider alternative approaches to see if one or several together can control your menopause symptoms before turning to oral estrogen or combination HT.


View the original article here

Can Twitter and Facebook Help Fight Breast Cancer?

twitter-facebook Twitter and other social media sites are often perceived as the ultimate navel-gazing tools. Seemingly a narcissist’s dream, many think that Facebook status updates and the 140-character Twitter messages (known as “tweets”) are really just boring play-by-plays of daily life—I had granola for breakfast! I’m stuck in traffic!

But Laurie Brosius, 31, isn’t buying it. Brosius, a business analyst in Dallas, used Twitter to raise $6,000 for a walk for breast cancer research in 2008. “Fifty percent of that came from online strangers,” she says. She was able to reach those people in part because her Twitter followers re-tweeted her messages.

In 2004, Brosius started blogging about her upcoming wedding. But after she married, she felt a key person was missing from the happy picture—her husband’s mother, who had died of breast cancer at age 48 when her husband was 20 years old. “I felt like I missed out on having her in my life,” says Brosius. “I felt cheated.”

She wanted to raise money for breast cancer research, so she participated in a three-day walk and fund-raiser, but felt she could do more. She had used Twitter to raise a small sum for that first walk, but for the second walk she relied mainly on tweets to direct people to the donation website.

(Anyone can see breast cancer–related tweets by typing #breastcancer into Twitter’s search field.)

Brosius still blogs and says that breast cancer organizations’ websites are great places to donate. However, Brosius says, they only reach a specific crowd—those already interested in the topic.

“[Social media sites] are reaching people who might not be specifically looking for that kind of information,” she explains. “They’re reaching everyone.”



View the original article here

Drugs Help Prevent Breast Cancer but Pose Risks Too

metastatic-breast-cancer THURSDAY, Sept. 17, 2009 (Health.com) — Women at high risk of breast cancer can often lower that risk by taking medication, including drugs like tamoxifen or the osteoporosis drug raloxifene (Evista).

Now, a new analysis suggests that women and their doctors need to weigh the dangers of the drugs’ side effects—which can include blood clots, cataracts, and cancer of the uterine lining—against the benefits of breast cancer prevention.

More about metastatic breast cancerThe analysis, funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, was published in the September 15 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine.

However, the bigger problem may be that not enough women who are candidates for the drugs are actually taking them. About 2% of U.S. women are at high risk for breast cancer, but many don’t take tamoxifen or raloxifene, according to Christy Russell, MD, an American Cancer Society spokesperson who chairs the organization’s breast cancer advisory committee.

“That’s extremely unfortunate, because we have 200,000 new cases of invasive breast cancer every year and we could potentially reduce that number by half using drugs that are already approved by the [Food and Drug Administration] for this specific purpose,” she says. Dr. Russell says the drugs are underused due to a lack of education among both patients and physicians as to their safety and effectiveness.

“As a culture, it’s a very hard sell to convince us to take drugs for a disease we don’t already have,” she adds.


View the original article here

Study: Soy May Benefit Breast Cancer Survivors

soy-breast-cancer TUESDAY, December 8, 2009 (Health.com) — Women with breast cancer who eat more soy are less likely to die or have a recurrence of cancer than women who eat few or no soy products, according to a new study.

In the past, physicians have often warned breast cancer patients not to eat soy. The new research represents "a complete turnaround" from the previous understanding about the link between soy consumption and breast cancer, says Sally Scroggs, a registered dietician and senior health education specialist at M.D. Anderson's Cancer Prevention Center in Houston.

"We have gone from saying, 'No soy for breast cancer survivors' to, 'It's not going to hurt,'" Scroggs says. "Now it looks like we can say, 'It may help.'"

The study followed more than 5,000 women in China who had undergone a mastectomy for about four years. The women who consumed the most soy protein (about 15 grams or more a day) had a 29% lower risk of dying and a 32% decreased risk of breast cancer recurrence compared to the women who consumed less than about 5 grams of soy protein a day, according to the study, which appears in the December 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. The National Cancer Institute and the U.S. Department of Defense's Breast Cancer Research Program funded the study.

Women who ate between 9.5 and 15 grams of soy protein saw nearly the same decrease in risk as the women who ate more than 15 grams. In fact, the researchers found no additional benefits to eating more than 11 grams of soy protein a day. (An 8-ounce glass of soy milk and a cup of shelled edamame contain about 7 and 14 grams of soy protein, respectively.)

In all, 534 women had a breast cancer recurrence or died from breast cancer during the study period.

Soy foods—such as milk, tofu, and edamame—are rich in naturally occurring estrogens (especially isoflavones) that can mimic the effects of estrogen in the female body. Because the most common types of breast cancer depend on estrogen to grow, experts once feared that soy isoflavones could stimulate the estrogen receptors in breast-cancer cells, even though the estrogens in soy are much weaker than those produced by the body.

The current study suggests the exact opposite: Soy may actually reduce the amount of estrogen that's available to the body.

"Soy isoflavones may compete with estrogens produced by the body. Soy isoflavones may also reduce the body's production of estrogen, and increase clearance of these hormones from the circulation—all of which together reduce the overall amount of estrogen in the body," says the lead author of the study, Xiao Ou Shu, MD, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.

Dr. Shu says, however, that factors beyond estrogen may be at work. Other components of soy foods, such as folate, protein, calcium, or fiber (or some combination thereof) may also be responsible for the health benefits reported in the study, she says.


View the original article here

Breast Cancer During Pregnancy: What You Need to Know

pregancy-breast-cancer You may not recognize the name Kerryn McCann, but it's all over the news this week. McCann was an award-winning Australian runner, age 41, who died Monday from breast cancer that spread to her liver and brain. Sadly, about 1.3 million women will be diagnosed with breast cancer worldwide this year, and 465,000 women will die from it—McCann is just one of many. The twist on the story is that she discovered her breast lump while pregnant, and initially she thought it was nothing.

Breasts can do all sorts of strange things during pregnancy: They blow up, they get tender and lumpy, they squirt mysterious substances. For many women, pregnancy boobs are a downright strange experience. When I was pregnant, it was the first time I had a generous bosom, and I poked my boobs every now and then to see if they were real. What I didn't do was check them to make sure they were healthy.

Like McCann, I figured breast changes during pregnancy were normal. And they usually are. Breast cancer during pregnancy is quite rare. In the United States, just 1 in 3,000 pregnant women is diagnosed with breast cancer.

But you still need to be vigilant. That means doing routine breast self-exams and reporting anything suspicious to your doctor immediately. Breast tenderness is normal during pregnancy, but hard lumps are not. It's really important to take action quickly: The average reported delay in reporting a lump or other symptom detected during pregnancy is 5 to 15 months, a factor that may contribute to less promising outcomes.

Have you checked your breasts during pregnancy?If you and your doctor do find an abnormality, there are ways to perform diagnostic tests, such as ultrasound and mammography, without exposing the fetus to radiation. Sometimes babies are induced early (as was the case with Kerryn McCann's baby) so that the mother can start chemotherapy or another treatment as soon as possible.

There are lots of lessons to take away from Kerryn McCann: She was an inspirational athlete and mother of three and, whether you are pregnant or not, her story is a call to check your breasts—now.

Read Anne's previous posts:
How Blogging Is Good for Your Breasts
Good News: My Migraines May Be Good for My Breasts
The Survivor Files: Amazing Women Share Their Breast Cancer Journeys


View the original article here

Estrogen and Your Breast Cancer Risk

estrogen-hormone-breast-woman Taking estrogen may increase a woman's risk of getting breast cancer.Estrogen is probably the hardest-working hormone in a woman’s body, but it also has a dark side: Research has determined that estrogen often plays a key role in the development of breast cancer, especially after a woman reaches menopause. How? The estrogen in a woman’s body seems to raise breast cancer risk by encouraging the growth of breast tissue, which can speed up an existing tumor’s growth. Here's what you need to know.

Combination hormone therapy (HT): If you’re considering taking estrogen and progestin (a synthetic form of the hormone progesterone) to give you relief from annoying menopause symptoms like hot flashes and night sweats, be sure to limit the time you’re on the drugs. That’s because over time your breast cancer risk climbs, says JoAnn Manson, MD, professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and author of Hot Flashes, Hormones & Your Health.

"In the Women’s Health Initiative (WHI) trial, when women got seven years of estrogen alone, there was no increased risk of breast cancer, but after four to five years on combined hormone therapy, the risk emerges," she says. In fact, over time, estrogen plus progestin can raise a woman’s risk for breast cancer by 24%; even if you take estrogen on its own for more than 10 to 15 years, your risk may still go up.

Dr. Manson was a coauthor on a March 2008 study in the Journal of the American Medical Association that followed up on the WHI trial. It showed that even after the women stopped taking combination HT, their breast cancer risk remained elevated. "The risk of breast cancer does decline after stopping hormone therapy," she stresses, "but if a tumor has formed while a woman is on hormones it’s very likely to come to light even after she stops hormones, so there is some residual risk. Stopping drug therapy doesn’t mean a tumor evaporates, but the risk gradually declines."

HT and early diagnosis of breast cancer: If you have no family history of the disease, you’ve probably been encouraged to get your first mammogram by age 40 and every one to two years after that to help ensure that any tumor is caught early, when it’s most treatable. That’s good advice, but taking HT may complicate things. "Estrogen-and-progestin HT can lead to increased mammographic density"—denser breast tissue—"that can obscure breast tumors and delay diagnosis," says Dr. Manson. Denser breasts are believed to be an independent risk factor for breast cancer, but they also make it harder to accurately read a mammogram and that "can lead to abnormal mammograms that may require extensive follow-up and anxiety about repeat testing and even unnecessary biopsies," Dr. Manson adds.

HT and risk for benign breast disease: In April 2008, the Journal of the National Cancer Institute found that postmenopausal women who’d taken estrogen on its own doubled their risk of a noncancerous type of breast disease, but one that’s associated with a higher risk of breast cancer. A September 2008 study led by the same author, Thomas E. Rohan, MD, PhD, an epidemiologist at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, in New York City, found similarly disturbing evidence in a study of women taking estrogen and progestin: Combined HT raised a woman’s risk of benign breast disease by 74%.


View the original article here

Tuesday 19 April 2011

Breast Cancer Risk and Estrogen Alternatives

estrogen-hormone-breast-cancer Taking estrogen may increase a woman's risk of getting breast cancer.Getting relief from menopause symptoms doesn’t need to mean estrogen-only treatments or combined hormone therapy (HT), which may increase your risk of breast cancer. If you can, consider nondrug remedies first, says JoAnn Manson, MD, a professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and the author of Hot Flashes, Hormones & Your Health.

Dr. Manson has several suggestions for managing hot flashes and night sweats:

Wear layered clothing.Lower the thermostat.Use portable fans.Avoid dietary triggers such as caffeine, spicy foods, and alcohol.Avoid tobacco.Increase your intake of soy-based foods.Consider trying the herb black cohosh.A low dose of a selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitor (SSRI) or the antiseizure medication gabapentin may also be useful, according to Kala Visvanathan, MBBS, assistant professor of epidemiology and oncology at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, in Baltimore. Alternative Therapy for Side Effectsacupuncture-woman-cancerMore than 80% of breast cancer patients have tried complementary therapies.  Read more"If a woman has only vaginal dryness and discomfort with intercourse and no other symptoms, she can use a topical estrogen or a vaginal estrogen ring, which have a much lower absorption of estrogen," adds Dr. Manson, who notes that relaxation and breathing techniques have worked for some women as well. "I would encourage women to try lifestyle modifications before going with estrogen, especially if they have mild symptoms," she says.

Dr. Visvanathan agrees: "You definitely want to try simple things first, then go to [HT] if you need to. It used to be that hormones were the first thing you tried, but the paradigm is changing because we’ve determined the long-term breast cancer and cardiovascular risk associated with HT, and because the benefits of HT have been shown to be less effective than previously thought. Women with modest menopausal symptoms can often treat their symptoms effectively with nonmedical therapies."

Have you tried estrogen alternatives for hot flashes?If you end up needing estrogen or combination HT, though, and you want to keep your breast cancer risk low while still keeping menopause symptoms in check, ask your doctor about transdermal patches, gels, and sprays, which deliver low doses of estrogen through the skin and may have fewer risks than pills. "Transdermal estrogen may be less likely to cause blood clots and gallbladder disease," Dr. Manson explains. "And lower doses may be less likely to increase the risk of breast cancer or other cancers."

The bottom line: Consider alternative approaches to see if one or several together can control your menopause symptoms before turning to oral estrogen or combination HT.


View the original article here

Drugs Help Prevent Breast Cancer but Pose Risks Too

metastatic-breast-cancer THURSDAY, Sept. 17, 2009 (Health.com) — Women at high risk of breast cancer can often lower that risk by taking medication, including drugs like tamoxifen or the osteoporosis drug raloxifene (Evista).

Now, a new analysis suggests that women and their doctors need to weigh the dangers of the drugs’ side effects—which can include blood clots, cataracts, and cancer of the uterine lining—against the benefits of breast cancer prevention.

More about metastatic breast cancerThe analysis, funded by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Service’s Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, was published in the September 15 issue of Annals of Internal Medicine.

However, the bigger problem may be that not enough women who are candidates for the drugs are actually taking them. About 2% of U.S. women are at high risk for breast cancer, but many don’t take tamoxifen or raloxifene, according to Christy Russell, MD, an American Cancer Society spokesperson who chairs the organization’s breast cancer advisory committee.

“That’s extremely unfortunate, because we have 200,000 new cases of invasive breast cancer every year and we could potentially reduce that number by half using drugs that are already approved by the [Food and Drug Administration] for this specific purpose,” she says. Dr. Russell says the drugs are underused due to a lack of education among both patients and physicians as to their safety and effectiveness.

“As a culture, it’s a very hard sell to convince us to take drugs for a disease we don’t already have,” she adds.


View the original article here

Study: Soy May Benefit Breast Cancer Survivors

soy-breast-cancer TUESDAY, December 8, 2009 (Health.com) — Women with breast cancer who eat more soy are less likely to die or have a recurrence of cancer than women who eat few or no soy products, according to a new study.

In the past, physicians have often warned breast cancer patients not to eat soy. The new research represents "a complete turnaround" from the previous understanding about the link between soy consumption and breast cancer, says Sally Scroggs, a registered dietician and senior health education specialist at M.D. Anderson's Cancer Prevention Center in Houston.

"We have gone from saying, 'No soy for breast cancer survivors' to, 'It's not going to hurt,'" Scroggs says. "Now it looks like we can say, 'It may help.'"

The study followed more than 5,000 women in China who had undergone a mastectomy for about four years. The women who consumed the most soy protein (about 15 grams or more a day) had a 29% lower risk of dying and a 32% decreased risk of breast cancer recurrence compared to the women who consumed less than about 5 grams of soy protein a day, according to the study, which appears in the December 9 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association. The National Cancer Institute and the U.S. Department of Defense's Breast Cancer Research Program funded the study.

Women who ate between 9.5 and 15 grams of soy protein saw nearly the same decrease in risk as the women who ate more than 15 grams. In fact, the researchers found no additional benefits to eating more than 11 grams of soy protein a day. (An 8-ounce glass of soy milk and a cup of shelled edamame contain about 7 and 14 grams of soy protein, respectively.)

In all, 534 women had a breast cancer recurrence or died from breast cancer during the study period.

Soy foods—such as milk, tofu, and edamame—are rich in naturally occurring estrogens (especially isoflavones) that can mimic the effects of estrogen in the female body. Because the most common types of breast cancer depend on estrogen to grow, experts once feared that soy isoflavones could stimulate the estrogen receptors in breast-cancer cells, even though the estrogens in soy are much weaker than those produced by the body.

The current study suggests the exact opposite: Soy may actually reduce the amount of estrogen that's available to the body.

"Soy isoflavones may compete with estrogens produced by the body. Soy isoflavones may also reduce the body's production of estrogen, and increase clearance of these hormones from the circulation—all of which together reduce the overall amount of estrogen in the body," says the lead author of the study, Xiao Ou Shu, MD, PhD, a cancer epidemiologist at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center of Vanderbilt University Medical Center in Nashville, Tenn.

Dr. Shu says, however, that factors beyond estrogen may be at work. Other components of soy foods, such as folate, protein, calcium, or fiber (or some combination thereof) may also be responsible for the health benefits reported in the study, she says.


View the original article here

Products That May Reduce Your Risk of Breast Cancer

breast-cancer-products There is no proven link between breast cancer and household products, whether they be soap or water bottles. But many consumers, activists, and experts are concerned that a variety of goods contain hormone disruptors, chemicals that when absorbed into the body can mimic or interfere with hormones such as estrogen. Some researchers believe that chemicals with estrogenic characteristics can cause normal breast cells to divide.

"Each time they divide, they have the risk of copying DNA incorrectly and creating mutations in key genes, which may lead to increased breast cancer risk," says Suzanne Snedeker, PhD, the associate director for translational research for the Program on Breast Cancer and Environmental Risk Factors at Cornell University. Chemicals that mimic estrogen might also enable an existing breast tumor to keep growing, because most tumors depend on estrogen to grow.

Individual products contain only small amounts of these questionable chemicals, if they do at all. But there is growing concern that the ubiquity of such agents in cosmetics, household products, and certain plastics, may have a cumulative estrogenic effect. "We are not saying if you use a certain product with estrogenic ingredients it will cause breast cancer," Snedeker says. "But the science suggests your risk may be reduced if you avoid these ingredients." Here are a few ways to play it safe.

View the slideshow


View the original article here

Nearly Half of Breast Cancer Survivors Have Lingering Pain

breast-cancer-survivors TUESDAY, Nov. 10, 2009 (Health.com) — Almost half of women who have breast cancer surgery still have pain or numbness two to three years later, according to a new study. Women younger than 40 who receive lumpectomies are at the greatest risk.

In general, women are most likely to have pain or a loss of sensation in the breast region, followed by the armpit, the arm, and their sides. However, 40% of women with lingering symptoms have pain in parts of the body not affected by treatment, according to a report in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

“This is a very well-done study by very well-respected surgeons in Denmark,” says Allen Burton, MD, a professor and the chair of the department of pain medicine in the division of anesthesiology and critical care at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, in Houston.

“This is a known phenomenon,” says Dr. Burton, who wasn’t involved in the study. “These women have pain and huge numb patches in their chest, underarm, down their arm, and in their back that never feels normal again.”

None of the women in the study had reconstructive breast surgery, which is commonplace in the United States. “It would be interesting to see if that changes the outcome,” Dr. Burton says. “Would they have more pain? Less pain? Different kinds of pain?”

In the study of 3,754 breast cancer survivors ages 18 to 70, 47% had pain in one or more area, and 58% reported problems in the treated breast, including burning and a loss of sensation for one to three years after their surgery. Overall, 13% of women with lingering problems said their pain was severe, 39% said it was moderate, and 48% reported light pain. And 76% of patients with severe pain said they ached every day.

Women at the greatest risk for chronic pain were ages 18 to 39 and had undergone breast-conserving surgery, or lumpectomy, in which doctors remove only the tumor and some surrounding tissue. Other risk factors for persistent pain included radiation therapy, which is directed at the breast area to destroy any remaining cancer cells after surgery.


View the original article here

Monday 18 April 2011

Panel Says Women Should Start Mammograms at 50, Not 40

mammogram-breast-cancer Women should have a mammogram every two years starting at age 50—not 40, according to an expert panel’s new breast cancer screening guidelines, which are sure to cause confusion among women, particularly those in their 40s who routinely schedule a mammogram each year.

However, a number of prominent groups say they strongly disagree with the new advice, which was issued by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) on Monday.

The USPSTF panel has backed off a 2002 statement advising women to have a routine mammogram every year or two beginning at age 40. The panel now recommends that women undergo mammography screening every two years starting at age 50 and continue being screened through age 74.

The USPSTF concluded that the benefit gained by starting screening at 40 versus 50 is “small” and that the decision to start screening before 50 should be an individual one.

The new guidelines would seem to reopen a debate that raged in the 1990s, but seemed to have been settled years ago. The American Cancer Society (ACS) now recommends that women get an annual mammogram and have a clinical breast examination beginning at age 40.

Otis W. Brawley, MD, the chief medical officer of the ACS, said in a statement that the ACS would stick to its current guidelines.

Mammograms are the “one screening test I recommend unequivocally, and would recommend to any woman 40 and over, be she a patient, a stranger, or a family member,” Dr. Brawley said. The USPSTF is an independent panel, sponsored by the federal Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, whose members make recommendations about preventive-care services and published the new recommendations in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

The panel’s recommendations are based, in part, on a review of the latest scientific evidence on the benefits and harms of breast cancer screening. The pooled data show that mammography screening does reduce breast cancer death—by 15% for women ages 39 to 49. To prevent one cancer death in this group, 1,904 women would have to be screened. Among women 50 to 59, one death is avoided per 1,339 screenings.

Because breast cancer risk increases with age, younger women are at a somewhat lower risk of developing the disease, explains George W. Sledge Jr., MD, a professor of oncology at Indiana University’s Melvin and Bren Simon Cancer Center, in Indianapolis, and president-elect of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

They’re also somewhat more likely to have a false-positive mammogram—a test result that triggers a biopsy or other tests, but turns out not to be cancer—because they tend to have denser breasts, he says.

“No one is saying, or no one should say, that screening mammography has no value for younger women,” he says.

What the task force is saying is that the absolute reduction in breast cancer deaths is much greater in an older population.

But the American Cancer Society’s Dr. Brawley reasoned that “the USPSTF is essentially telling women that mammography at age 40 to 49 saves lives; just not enough of them.”


View the original article here

Can Twitter and Facebook Help Fight Breast Cancer?

twitter-facebook Twitter and other social media sites are often perceived as the ultimate navel-gazing tools. Seemingly a narcissist’s dream, many think that Facebook status updates and the 140-character Twitter messages (known as “tweets”) are really just boring play-by-plays of daily life—I had granola for breakfast! I’m stuck in traffic!

But Laurie Brosius, 31, isn’t buying it. Brosius, a business analyst in Dallas, used Twitter to raise $6,000 for a walk for breast cancer research in 2008. “Fifty percent of that came from online strangers,” she says. She was able to reach those people in part because her Twitter followers re-tweeted her messages.

In 2004, Brosius started blogging about her upcoming wedding. But after she married, she felt a key person was missing from the happy picture—her husband’s mother, who had died of breast cancer at age 48 when her husband was 20 years old. “I felt like I missed out on having her in my life,” says Brosius. “I felt cheated.”

She wanted to raise money for breast cancer research, so she participated in a three-day walk and fund-raiser, but felt she could do more. She had used Twitter to raise a small sum for that first walk, but for the second walk she relied mainly on tweets to direct people to the donation website.

(Anyone can see breast cancer–related tweets by typing #breastcancer into Twitter’s search field.)

Brosius still blogs and says that breast cancer organizations’ websites are great places to donate. However, Brosius says, they only reach a specific crowd—those already interested in the topic.

“[Social media sites] are reaching people who might not be specifically looking for that kind of information,” she explains. “They’re reaching everyone.”



View the original article here

Study: Moderate Drinking Ups Risk of Breast Cancer Return

liquor-breast-cancer
THURSDAY, Dec. 10, 2009  (Health.com) — Breast cancer survivors who have just a few alcoholic drinks per week are more likely than women who drink little or no alcohol to see their breast cancer return, according to research presented today at an annual meeting of breast cancer specialists.

The study, which followed about 1,900 early-stage breast cancer survivors for eight years, found that women who consumed an average of at least three to four alcoholic drinks in a week had a 34% higher risk of breast cancer recurrence. (One drink equals a 5-ounce glass of wine, a 12-ounce beer, or a 1.5-ounce shot of liquor.)

The increased risk was more pronounced among breast cancer survivors who had gone through menopause and those who were overweight or obese, the study found.

Wine was by far the most common drink among women in the study, followed by liquor and beer, but no one type of alcohol was found to be significantly more or less associated with the risk of recurrence.

In all, there were 349 breast cancer recurrences and 332 deaths during the follow-up period. Alcohol use was not linked to the risk of death from breast cancer, however.

“More research should be done, but there is a growing body of evidence which suggests that women previously diagnosed with breast cancer should speak with their doctor about possibly limiting their consumption of alcohol,” says the lead researcher on the study, Marilyn L. Kwan, PhD, a staff scientist at Kaiser Permanente in Oakland.

Previous research has suggested that alcohol consumption may increase the risk of developing breast cancer in the first place. Kwan's research extends these findings to include the risk of recurrence among women who have already been diagnosed and treated for breast cancer, a population that numbers about 2.5 million in the United States, according to the American Cancer Society.

“Cutting back on alcohol represents a real step that a breast cancer survivor can take to reduce her risk of recurrence,” says Marisa Weiss, MD, the president and founder of the advocacy group Breastcancer.org. “You don’t have to give up alcohol, but use it more carefully and in moderation,” she says.

Limiting alcohol intake can improve the overall health of breast cancer survivors, according to Dr. Weiss, the author of the forthcoming book Living Beyond Breast Cancer. “Alcohol is liquid calories, and being overweight is a risk factor for breast cancer,” she says.  “If you consume a lot of alcohol, you tend to be less physically active and/or smoke. So, for a number of reasons, that one step of cutting back on alcohol does have a number of health benefits."

Exactly how alcohol consumption affects breast cancer risk is not fully understood, says Kwan, although estrogen, which fuels the growth of most types of breast cancer, is likely involved.

“It has been suggested that alcohol could increase the risk of breast cancer by increasing estrogen metabolism and circulating levels of estrogen, thus promoting growth of the tumor,” she says.  “A similar mechanism might be responsible for increasing the risk of breast cancer recurrence.”

Drinking-related weight gain could also play a role, Kwan adds. “Obesity may…promote estrogen production and breast cell proliferation, in addition to the direct effect alcohol can have on estrogen metabolism and levels in the body,” she explains.

The study, which was funded by the National Cancer Institute, was presented at the San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, an annual meeting for oncologists, surgeons, and other breast cancer specialists. The symposium is co-hosted by the American Association for Cancer Research and the Cancer Therapy & Research Center at the University of Texas Health Science Center at San Antonio.


View the original article here

Use of Dietary Supplements on the Rise

Study Shows Multivitamins Are the Most Commonly Used Supplementvarious vitamin supplements

April 13, 2011 -- More than one-half of U.S adults take dietary supplements, according to the CDC.

The new report, which appears in the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics’ Data Brief, looked at dietary supplement use among adults from 2003 to 2006, and compared it to use in 1988 to 1994.

“Dietary supplement use has increased in adults over age 20 since 1994, and we have over one-half of Americans taking one or more supplements a day,” says study researcher Jaime Gahche, MPH, a nutrition epidemiologist at the National Center for Health Statistics in Bethesda, Md.

“This information is important because such a high prevalence of people take dietary supplements. So we need to make sure we capture this information when assessing nutritional status,” she says. “If we only include food and beverages, we are missing out on a big proportion.”

Multivitamins were the most commonly used supplement, with 40% of men and women reporting that they take a daily multivitamin from 2003 to 2006, the new data show.

More women older than 60 took calcium supplements between 2003 and 2006, compared to the 1988 to 1994 survey, 61% vs. 28% respectively. Calcium is essential for optimal bone health and reducing risk for the brittle bone disease osteoporosis.

The use of folic acid supplements remained the same between the two surveys. Folic acid is known to help prevent neural tube birth defects among women of child-bearing age. Folate (a natural form of folic acid) is found in many foods including green leafy vegetables, beans, and legumes. Many breads, cereals, flours, corn meals, pastas, rice, and other grain products are now fortified with folic acid.

Use of vitamin D supplements increased in women from 2003 to 2006. In recent years, many studies have linked vitamin D  deficiency to a host of health problems, including cancer and heart disease. Often called the “sunshine vitamin” because our bodies produce vitamin D when exposed to the sun, it is also found in milk and some other foods.

“The new report is consistent with what we are seeing, and the numbers have probably increased since 2006,” says Tod Cooperman, MD, the president of ConsumerLab.com, an independent organization that evaluates dietary supplements.

These increases are due in part to the down economy, he says, “More people are self-treating with vitamins and other supplements, so the numbers are higher.”

”It’s important that we continue to monitor dietary supplement use to make sure that we are not going over the recommended amounts and not reaching the upper limits of intake for any vitamin or mineral,” Gahche says. The upper limit refers to the upper level of intake that is considered to be safe.

“Americans and health care providers need to factor in all the source of nutrients including vitamin waters and nutrition bars because they do add up and can exceed upper limits,” Cooperman says. “You can definitely get too much of a good thing.”


View the original article here

Use of Dietary Supplements on the Rise

Study Shows Multivitamins Are the Most Commonly Used Supplementvarious vitamin supplements

April 13, 2011 -- More than one-half of U.S adults take dietary supplements, according to the CDC.

The new report, which appears in the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics’ Data Brief, looked at dietary supplement use among adults from 2003 to 2006, and compared it to use in 1988 to 1994.

“Dietary supplement use has increased in adults over age 20 since 1994, and we have over one-half of Americans taking one or more supplements a day,” says study researcher Jaime Gahche, MPH, a nutrition epidemiologist at the National Center for Health Statistics in Bethesda, Md.

“This information is important because such a high prevalence of people take dietary supplements. So we need to make sure we capture this information when assessing nutritional status,” she says. “If we only include food and beverages, we are missing out on a big proportion.”

Multivitamins were the most commonly used supplement, with 40% of men and women reporting that they take a daily multivitamin from 2003 to 2006, the new data show.

More women older than 60 took calcium supplements between 2003 and 2006, compared to the 1988 to 1994 survey, 61% vs. 28% respectively. Calcium is essential for optimal bone health and reducing risk for the brittle bone disease osteoporosis.

The use of folic acid supplements remained the same between the two surveys. Folic acid is known to help prevent neural tube birth defects among women of child-bearing age. Folate (a natural form of folic acid) is found in many foods including green leafy vegetables, beans, and legumes. Many breads, cereals, flours, corn meals, pastas, rice, and other grain products are now fortified with folic acid.

Use of vitamin D supplements increased in women from 2003 to 2006. In recent years, many studies have linked vitamin D  deficiency to a host of health problems, including cancer and heart disease. Often called the “sunshine vitamin” because our bodies produce vitamin D when exposed to the sun, it is also found in milk and some other foods.

“The new report is consistent with what we are seeing, and the numbers have probably increased since 2006,” says Tod Cooperman, MD, the president of ConsumerLab.com, an independent organization that evaluates dietary supplements.

These increases are due in part to the down economy, he says, “More people are self-treating with vitamins and other supplements, so the numbers are higher.”

”It’s important that we continue to monitor dietary supplement use to make sure that we are not going over the recommended amounts and not reaching the upper limits of intake for any vitamin or mineral,” Gahche says. The upper limit refers to the upper level of intake that is considered to be safe.

“Americans and health care providers need to factor in all the source of nutrients including vitamin waters and nutrition bars because they do add up and can exceed upper limits,” Cooperman says. “You can definitely get too much of a good thing.”


View the original article here

Women's Voices Unaffected by Menstrual Cycle

Hormonal Variations During Menstrual Cycle Do Not Alter Women’s Voices, Researchers Saywoman on phone talking

April 11, 2011 -- Contrary to what some people think, women’s voices don’t change at different points of time over their menstrual cycle.

A new study shows that women’s voices remain steady throughout the hormonal changes associated with their menstrual cycle and don’t become any higher or more shrill at certain times during the cycle.

Researchers say the results contradict previous studies that suggested the tone of women’s voices rises as ovulation approaches.

"Previous studies were subjective [in their assessments] or measured only three or four parameters," researcher Neal S. Latman, PhD, associate professor of biology at West Texas A&M University, says in a news release. "Or they analyzed single vowel tones, but people don't speak in single vowels. They speak in sentences."

For the study, presented at the Experimental Biology 2011 meeting in Washington, D.C., researchers analyzed 175 voice samples provided by 35 female study participants.

The women kept diaries to track their menstrual cycles in the month leading up to the study. Then the women recorded voice samples at four points over their next two menstrual cycles.

For each voice sample, the women recorded the same question: “Yesterday, did the kindergarten children watch television after breakfast?” Researchers say the question was selected because it is voice rich and provides a variety of voice characteristics.

At the end of the study, the voice samples were analyzed by voice analysis software to measure eight different voice parameters, such as degree of voice breaks, fundamental frequency, and shimmer (which measures varying degrees of loudness).

The results showed no differences in these eight voice parameters between the different menstrual cycle changes for each woman.

In addition, there were no differences in voice characteristics for each woman from menstrual cycle to cycle or between women who were using hormonal contraceptives and those who were not.

This study was presented at a medical conference. The findings should be considered preliminary as they have not yet undergone the "peer review" process, in which outside experts scrutinize the data prior to publication in a medical journal.


View the original article here

Use of Dietary Supplements on the Rise

Study Shows Multivitamins Are the Most Commonly Used Supplementvarious vitamin supplements

April 13, 2011 -- More than one-half of U.S adults take dietary supplements, according to the CDC.

The new report, which appears in the CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics’ Data Brief, looked at dietary supplement use among adults from 2003 to 2006, and compared it to use in 1988 to 1994.

“Dietary supplement use has increased in adults over age 20 since 1994, and we have over one-half of Americans taking one or more supplements a day,” says study researcher Jaime Gahche, MPH, a nutrition epidemiologist at the National Center for Health Statistics in Bethesda, Md.

“This information is important because such a high prevalence of people take dietary supplements. So we need to make sure we capture this information when assessing nutritional status,” she says. “If we only include food and beverages, we are missing out on a big proportion.”

Multivitamins were the most commonly used supplement, with 40% of men and women reporting that they take a daily multivitamin from 2003 to 2006, the new data show.

More women older than 60 took calcium supplements between 2003 and 2006, compared to the 1988 to 1994 survey, 61% vs. 28% respectively. Calcium is essential for optimal bone health and reducing risk for the brittle bone disease osteoporosis.

The use of folic acid supplements remained the same between the two surveys. Folic acid is known to help prevent neural tube birth defects among women of child-bearing age. Folate (a natural form of folic acid) is found in many foods including green leafy vegetables, beans, and legumes. Many breads, cereals, flours, corn meals, pastas, rice, and other grain products are now fortified with folic acid.

Use of vitamin D supplements increased in women from 2003 to 2006. In recent years, many studies have linked vitamin D  deficiency to a host of health problems, including cancer and heart disease. Often called the “sunshine vitamin” because our bodies produce vitamin D when exposed to the sun, it is also found in milk and some other foods.

“The new report is consistent with what we are seeing, and the numbers have probably increased since 2006,” says Tod Cooperman, MD, the president of ConsumerLab.com, an independent organization that evaluates dietary supplements.

These increases are due in part to the down economy, he says, “More people are self-treating with vitamins and other supplements, so the numbers are higher.”

”It’s important that we continue to monitor dietary supplement use to make sure that we are not going over the recommended amounts and not reaching the upper limits of intake for any vitamin or mineral,” Gahche says. The upper limit refers to the upper level of intake that is considered to be safe.

“Americans and health care providers need to factor in all the source of nutrients including vitamin waters and nutrition bars because they do add up and can exceed upper limits,” Cooperman says. “You can definitely get too much of a good thing.”


View the original article here

Sunday 17 April 2011

New Drug May Slow MS Progression

Study Shows Oral Drug Laquinimod Is Safe and Effectiveyoung adult man

April 12, 2011 -- The experimental oral multiple sclerosis (MS) drug laquinimod delayed disease progression, reduced relapse rates, and was safe and well tolerated by patients in a two-year study.

Details of the study were announced Monday by the drug’s developer, Teva Pharmaceutical Industries, at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology in Honolulu.

A company spokesman tells WebMD that the drug met four key goals for an MS treatment by slowing disease progression, reducing relapse rates, showing a good safety profile with little evidence of immune system suppression, and being easy for patients to take.

Until recently, all the available MS drugs were given by injection. That changed last fall when the FDA approved the first oral treatment for multiple sclerosis -- Novartis’ Gilenya (fingolimod).

About 400,000 Americans and 2 million people worldwide are estimated to have MS, a neurologic disease affects the brain and spinal cord. It causes symptoms such as muscle weakness, loss of vision, and problems with balance. MS is most often diagnosed in adults under age 50.

The study of laquinimod originally included 1,106 MS patients from 24 countries who took either a once-daily 0.6-milligram dose of laquinimod or placebo for two years.

Compared to the placebo-treated patients, the patients who got the MS drug had:

 23% reduction in annual relapse rates, a key indicator of drug effectiveness in MS36% reduction in progression in confirmed disability33% reduction in brain atrophy

Jon Congleton, who is vice president of Teva’s U.S. subsidiary Teva Neuroscience, says laquinimod’s overall profile has advantages over other approved and experimental MS drugs.

Congleton says the main consideration for most doctors and patients is slowing disease progression. He says laquinimod did this and was well tolerated.

“When people in the prime of life get hit with MS, all they can envision is that wheelchair out there waiting for them,” he tells WebMD. “The best way to keep them out of that wheelchair is by slowing disease progression. This drug did this in a safe way.”

In a written statement provided to WebMD, study researcher Giancarlo Comi, MD, agrees that slowing disease progression without compromising safety is a long-standing goal of MS treatment.

Comi directs the Institute of Experimental Neurology at Milan, Italy’s Scientific Institute and University Vita-Salute San Raffaele.

“These significant results, combined with the fact that we didn’t see any safety concerns, indicate that laquinimod has the potential to be a key treatment option for MS patients,” he notes.

Neurologist Karen Shabbir-Blitz, MD, who did not participate in the study, agrees that laquinimod’s overall profile looks good, especially the safety data.

Shabbir-Blitz directs the North Shore/Long Island Jewish MS Care Center at Glen Cove Hospital, N.Y.

Given its safety profile and the fact that it is taken orally, laquinimod might be a good first treatment for newly diagnosed patients, she adds.

Teva is expected to present results from another study of laquinimod later this year. The company plans to file for FDA approval for the treatment of relapsing/remitting MS after that.

Congleton says the drug could be on the market by late next year or early 2013.


View the original article here

New Drug May Help Control Epilepsy Seizures

Study Shows Perampanel May Be Effective in Hard-to-Treat Epilepsy Patientsyoung adult man

April 13, 2011 -- An experimental epilepsy drug may help reduce seizures in as many as one-third of people with epilepsy who either don’t tolerate or don’t respond adequately to existing seizure drugs.

The finding is slated to be presented at the 63rd Annual Meeting of the American Academy of Neurology in Honolulu.

The new drug, perampanel, works by blocking chemical receptors in the brain that may play a role in epilepsy. The new study was supported by perampanel manufacturer Eisai Inc.

Of 387 people with uncontrolled epilepsy who were taking one to three other seizure drugs, those who took 8 or 12 milligrams of the new agent for 19 weeks along with their regular treatment showed a greater reduction in seizures, compared with those who received a placebo pill in addition to their regular treatment.

Those who took the 12-milligram dose of perampanel had a 14% reduction in seizures in a 28-day period compared to those who took placebo. Those who took the 8-milligram dose of the new drug reduced their seizure frequency by nearly 6% compared to those who took the placebo.  

Perampanel side effects included dizziness, drowsiness, irritability, headache, falls, and ataxia (lack of muscle coordination).

The company plans to submit the drug for FDA approval this year. “If this drug is approved by the FDA, it will be another tool in our arsenal for combating or reducing seizures in people with difficult-to-treat epilepsy,” says study researcher Jacqueline French, MD, a neurologist at New York University in New York City, in a news release.

This drug may prove to be a valuable addition for people with hard-to-treat epilepsy, says Steven Pacia, MD, chief of neurology at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City.

“If we can demonstrate efficacy, safety, and tolerability, it’s worthwhile to have another drug that works in difficult patients with difficult seizures,” he says.

“This will be the first group of people it is used on, if approved,” Pacia says. “If it has a broader role, we will find out after that when it has been used by more people for longer periods of time.”

“While the reduction in seizures seen in the new study was small percentage-wise, it can mean the difference of having a seizure that causes falling and one that doesn’t, and that can be a big difference,” he says.

This study was presented at a medical conference. The findings should be considered preliminary as they have not yet undergone the "peer review" process, in which outside experts scrutinize the data prior to publication in a medical journal.


View the original article here

Late Doses of HPV Vaccine May Still Be Effective

Study: Girls Still Get Protection When Shots Are Given Months Later Than RecommendedBy Brenda Goodman
WebMD Health News12 year old girl

April 12, 2011 -- Delaying doses of a vaccine that protects against cervical cancer doesn’t appear to make it any less safe or effective, a new study shows.

The vaccine against human papilloma virus (HPV) is given in three shots over a period of six months.

Research has shown that the vaccine is highly effective at blocking the strains of HPV responsible for causing about 70% of all cervical cancer cases.

But several recent studies have shown that most women and girls who start the shots don’t get them on time, if they finish the series at all.

“This study should be very reassuring,” says Kathleen M. Neuzil, MD, MPH, clinical associate professor of allergy and infectious diseases in the department of global health at the University of Washington in Seattle. Neuzil is also the senior advisor for immunizations at the international nonprofit organization PATH, which is also based in Seattle.

“Certainly clinicians and parents can be reassured that if there are delays, as we know occur, this vaccine still works very well,” says Neuzil.

Other experts who have studied the problem of HPV vaccine compliance agree.

“About half of those who start the HPV series actually complete it, and really, only a quarter are completing it on time,” says Emmanuel B. Walter, MD, MPH, professor of pediatrics at Duke University in Durham, N.C.

“This gives us hope that it’s OK if girls get their doses late,” says Walter, who published a study on HPV vaccine compliance in the March 2011 issue of Vaccine. “I say that with the caveat that we don’t know exactly what protection is or how effective the vaccine is only after two doses or one dose of the vaccine.”

For the study, Neuzil and her team enrolled 903 girls between the ages of 11 and 13 at 21 different schools in rural Vietnam.

The schools were randomly assigned to give three doses of the HPV vaccine to the girls participating in the study on one of four different dosing schedules:

The recommended schedule at 0, 2, and 6 months.A timetable where the shots were spaced over the school year: 0, 3, and 9 months.A shot every six months for one year: 0, 6, and 12 months.A shot every 12 months for two years: 0, 12, and 24 months.

More than 800 girls completed all three doses, and researchers gave them blood tests after each shot to measure levels of antibodies against two cancer-causing HPV strains.

Compared to girls who got their doses on the recommended six-month timetable, researchers found that girls on the 9- and 12-month dosing schedules had only slight dips in their antibody levels, which weren’t expected to be clinically meaningful.


View the original article here

Bisphenol A (BPA): Answers to Questions

Answers to Frequently Asked Questions About the Plastic Chemical Bisphenol ABisphenol A FAQ

Bisphenol A, or BPA, is a chemical compound used to make polycarbonate plastics, epoxy resins, and other materials.

Virtually everyone in the U.S. comes across BPA every day. Among other things, BPA is used to make:

shatterproof polycarbonate hard plastic bottles and containerseyeglass lensesCD and DVD caseslinings for canned foods and beverages

Not all plastic products contain BPA. You may want to check the recycle codes within the "chasing arrows" on the product.

"In general, plastics that are marked with recycle codes 1, 2, 4, 5, and 6 are very unlikely to contain BPA," the FDA's web site states. "Some, but not all, plastics that are marked with recycle codes 3 or 7 may be made with BPA." 

BPA is also used to coat thermal paper, so it is found on cash register receipts. A March 2011 study by the Washington Toxics Coalition and the advocacy group Safer Chemicals found “very large” quantities of BPA on about half of receipts collected from stores in 10 states and Washington, D.C. Because BPA on receipts isn’t bound to the product, it easily sloughs off onto the skin when the receipts are handled.

The study also found lower amounts of BPA in 21 of 22 dollars tested. Dollar bills aren't made with BPA; it's theorized that the BPA may have gotten onto dollar bills as a result of coming into contact with cash register receipts and other sources of BPA.

Derived from petroleum, BPA is known to mimic the hormone estrogen. There is a growing body of research indicating that BPA may pose health hazards to humans in several ways.

The chemical is an endocrine disruptor, meaning that it can interfere with the body’s endocrine system and potentially cause damaging developmental, reproductive, neurological, and immune effects in humans and other mammals.

Research has linked BPA to breast and prostate cancer in animals and obesity, thyroid problems, reproductive abnormalities, and neurologic disorders in humans.

In January 2010, a study published in the online journal PLoS One found that people with the highest levels of BPA in their body had the highest risk of heart disease. Laboratory studies have also suggested that BPA may interfere with the effectiveness of chemotherapy drugs.

However, much of the research on BPA has been done on lab animals or has come from observational studies in people, which don't prove cause and effect. BPA has not been proven to be responsible for any disease or condition.

The National Toxicology Program reports that it has “some concern” for effects on the brain, behavior, and prostate gland in fetuses, infants, and children at current human exposures to bisphenol A.

Companies that use BPA in their products, as well as industry organizations, including the American Chemical Society, insist that BPA is safe. The North American Metal Packaging Alliance, a trade organization representing canned food and beverage makers, credits BPA linings for the elimination of contamination and foodborne illness from canned goods.

Further research is ongoing. In total, the National Institutes of Health has about $30 million in funded research investigating BPA, which may help answer some of the ongoing questions about its safety.


View the original article here

Elderly Sleep Problems May Be Tied to Hormones

Sleep Disruptions Associated With Hormonal Changes With Aging May Be Treatableelderly couple sleeping

April 11, 2011 -- Elderly people's reputation as early birds may have a biological and potentially treatable cause.

A new study suggests that sleep problems associated with aging, such as going to bed and waking early, may be caused by hormonal changes.

Researchers say if further studies confirm these results, some sleep problems among the elderly may eventually be treatable with drugs.

Although a person's daily circadian or sleep/wake rhythm is controlled by the brain, researchers say its mechanism is encoded by circadian clocks operating in nearly every cell of the body.

In the study, researchers compared the internal circadian cycles of skin cells taken from both elderly and young donors in two different experiments.

When both sets of skin cells were grown in bovine serum, a standard nutrient solution used by researchers to culture cells in the lab, there were no differences in their circadian rhythms.

But when the skin cells were cultured in human serum taken from older donors, the circadian rhythms shifted in the same manner seen among the elderly.

Researchers say the results suggest that changes in hormone levels circulating in the blood of older adults may play a role in early bedtimes and waking times, as well as other sleep problems commonly seen among the elderly.

"Our results suggest that hormonal changes can alter cellular clocks and these changes in turn might underlie the differences in circadian behavior caused by aging," write researcher Lucia Pagani, of the University of Zurich, Switzerland, and colleagues in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.


View the original article here