 |
 |
| Author |
Message |
havana8
Moderator
 
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3451
|
|
 |
Sun Oct 13, 2013 10:27 am  |
Thanks for sharing this, Annie. I was actually looking for more information about it and came across another vaccine study that has just entered its final set of trials:
| Quote: |
Military research yields new tool in cancer fight
Military researchers have developed a vaccine that appears to protect women against a recurrence of breast cancer — a disease diagnosed in female troops at a rate 20 percent to 40 percent higher than in the civilian population.
The researchers recently completed a 10-year study of the vaccine, known as E75, which was tested on more than 100 female soldiers recovering from breast cancer along with a similar number of civilian women.
Army Col. George Peoples, who founded the Cancer Vaccine Development Program — an Army research network studying vaccines’ potential to fight breast, ovarian, uterine and prostate cancers — said the trial indicated the vaccine halves the risk that a woman’s breast cancer will return.
The Army has licensed the vaccine to pharmaceutical company Galena Biopharma, which is conducting a final set of trials with the goal of producing an approved drug within four years, he said.
The E75 vaccine targets a protein expressed in breast cancer cells.
“It is the same protein targeted by the (cancer) drug Herceptin,” Peoples said, adding that the protein is expressed in several other types of cancer cells, including prostate cancer.
Herceptin, however, is most effective in treating cancers with high levels of a certain protein, HER2, Peoples said. The new vaccine is able to treat all common cancers, such as breast, prostate, ovarian, colon and lung, he said.
E75 also is proving equally effective at protecting people against those diseases, he said.
Read more here: http://www.stripes.com/military-research-yields-new-tool-in-cancer-fight-1.217233 |
There was also this about another breast cancer vaccine that has just started clinical trials for women who have already been diagnosed with breast cancer. In terms of prevention, the oncologist working on the vaccine said that the main thing we can do right now is lifestyle modification including exercise, diet and maintaining a healthy weight.
| Quote: |
Clinical trial for vaccine that could help breast cancer survivors' bodies fight cancer recurrence
"We're very excited that we just started our clinical trial at George Washington Medical Faculty Associates. The vaccine is for women who are breast cancer survivors, but who are at high risk to recur," said McGrail.
She added, "It's for women who have already been diagnosed with breast cancer but at the time of the diagnosis, the cancer had spread to maybe a stage two are a stage three but they're living with sort of the risk that this could come back sometime in the future."
How does the vaccine work? McGrail told us, "The vaccine is a peptide, which is a small part of a protein that is found in about 70% of breast breast cancer cells. The idea behind the vaccine is that when we give the vaccine to a woman, the body recognizes that as foreign or as evil and develops an immunity to it, develops antibodies so it's a way for a woman's own body to fight the cancer should it ever return in the future."
Read more here: http://www.wusa9.com/news/article/278111/373/Vaccine-could-help-survivors-fight-recurrence-of-breast-cancer |
| Kath91 wrote: |
(Comment Section/Conversation is, also a worthwhile read > insights from those w/1st hand exp, and some w/ other thoughtful perspectives)
|
Definitely some thoughtful perspectives in the comment section, Kath. |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 13, 2013 7:24 pm |
| Quote: |
| What is disheartening is the simple fact that even young women get breast cancer, and in order to defeat it harsh measures need to be taken. That is the best modern medicine can do; surgery, radiation, chemotherapy (or some combination of the 3). Further research into causes and prevention is needed; maybe some day there will be better solutions, but for now, this is the best science can do given the level of knowledge. |
So what you're saying is that even though its been twenty-one years since the inception of "Breast Cancer Awareness Month", you are satisfied with this as *the best* we have to offer women? Wow. I find that incredible, particularly since there is evidence that chemo sets up the body for recurrence of cancer. So the young woman was correct in her assumption that *there's no guarantee* that her cancer won't return. In fact, it's entirely possible that it might crop up elsewhere in the body since she had mastectomy.
| Quote: |
| Aprile, who are you to judge another person's decision? The young woman in the video obviously made her decisions based on what she believed were best for her, after discussing it with medical personnel. She has a family history of breast cancer which may mean a genetic/inherited mutation which may cause breast cancer. The mastectomy wasn't absolutely necessary (it was described as prophylactic), but it was what she chose to do and was within her comfort level. Stage 1 breast cancer is not just pre-cancerous lesions, DCIS or fibrocyctic "disease" (which isn't a disease BTW); it is cancer. Either she had a tumor that was confined to the breast and was 2 cm or smaller in size (stage 1A) or she had Stage 1B, where a small cluster of cells (0.2 mm - 2.0 mm in size) were found in the lymph nodes (possibly with a tumor less than 2 cm in the breast). Either way, the choice of treatment (surgery, chemo, radiation) is hers to make. |
Actually, I'm not judging her *decision* so much as I'm judging the doctor who validated her choice and supported those methods , especially knowing it would not guarantee her anything. Certainly it would not guarantee that she would remain cancer free. Further, the methods used could set the stage for a lifetime of poor health.
To your point:
| Quote: |
| I find your statements regarding the significance of a breast perplexing. After all, as mature and grown women haven't we gotten past the superficial and immature attitude that breasts are a necessary part of our womanhood and identity? |
I find YOUR point of view perplexing. shm. The breast is not/should not be the bane of your existence! In fact, it is a vastly misunderstood *body part*. "Many doctors assume that the breasts have no function until the birth of a baby at which point the breasts become functional for a period of time, after which they return to their natural dormant state. There is virtually no other part of the body that only has function for so limited a period of time. We also have very little information about the role of hormones in non-lactating breast tissue as well as which hormones are present in any given concentrations and what concentrations are healthy. For instance, a study in the American Journal of Pathology found that breast tissue contains large numbers of receptors for gastrin-releasing peptide, although we have no idea why. GRP is released by the vagus nerve to stimulate the G cells of the stomach to release gastrin for digestion. Why would the breast tissue contain such high volumes of receptors for GRP? In fact, GRP receptors also seem to be sensitive to bombesin, which is a hormone that is crucial in the nerve signals that stop you from eating. It is interesting that breast carcinomas contain a high concentration of bombesin-like peptides, which may be a sign that there is a relationship between the number of GRP receptors in breast tissue and the ability of carcinomas to proliferate. And is this somehow related to overeating or eating disorders?" http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1866930/
The human body is created by *design*, whether you believe in the theory of evolution, creation or a combination of both. Yes, of course breast cancer is more aggressive in younger women. This is primarily due to higher estrogen levels, because higher than normal estrogen levels can stimulate proliferation of cancer cells. This is certainly a setup for disaster when iodine is not residing at receptor sites. It's interesting though that not even the American Cancer Society considers fibrocystic breast disease as early stage breast cancer, yet you do. This is Dr. Derry's theory or opinion, and I tend to agree. HOWEVER, since you support mainsteam science, I find it curious that you concur with him. However, Dr. Derry believes that FBD is the first phase of breast cancer. Anyway, if that's the case, WHY don't doctors acknowledge this? Every doctor I've spoken with considers it a benign condition, until proven otherwise. Interestingly, although I've had fibrocystic breasts for 30 years -- I'm still alive. The medical profession still has nothing to offer in the way of *treatment* other than avoidance of caffeine from all sources, take vitamin e and the reassurance that "after menopause it will get better."
| Quote: |
| As "sickening" as the treatment is to you, she is cancer free (for now) and will continue with follow-up examinations to determine if she remains that way. Since breast cancer in young women is so aggressive and often fatal, I completely understand her decision. Her doctor offered full support, so I am sure it was the right thing to do in her case. Prophylactic mastectomy reduces the risk of cancer returning (as much as 90% reduced rate) so no, I am not "ashamed" in any way at her sacrifice. BTW, what makes you think she wants to have children in the future? What's wrong with alternative feeding choices, if she ever does decide to have a child? |
Sickening indeed. Well, I have NO idea whether she does or doesn't want to have a child Lacy. But let's assume she does... should she be robbed of that joy? Also, I find your cavalier *assumption* ludicrous that alternative feeding choices are fine. You can't replicate nature. Breastfeeding fills the immunity gap until the baby's own immune system kicks in. Not to mention, these days most forumulas are suspect at best, and more than likely contain GMOs. What a great start to life! Research has shown that breastfed babies have higher IQs, stronger immune systems and are generally healthier than their bottle fed contemporaries. This of course, was not something that was well publicized or even known until more recently. As a woman, I find your statement odd at best. "Honestly, who really cares about breasts; bits of hanging flesh which are completely unnecessary to the individual's survival or true happiness." The fact of the matter is that *is* their main purpose. Studies have shown that the longer babies are nursed affects IQs, immune systems, allergic tendencies, less propensity towards obesity, etc. Of course, this was not something that was well publicized until recently.
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/solr/searchresults.aspx?q=breastfeeding&fd_JournalID=75&f_JournalDisplayName=JAMA%20Pediatrics&SearchSourceType=3&exPrm_qqq=
| Quote: |
| Dr. Sircus, Dr. Brownstein, Dr. Northrup and many others in the alternative world have contributed nothing to furthering our understanding of what causes breast cancer or what prevents it. They have done no laboratory research, run no clinical trials, contributed no new literature to the medical world and have saved no lives. They offer a rehash of others true work in the field and often offer unproven treatments which have no scientific basis. They may be your personal heroes but have no credibility in the real world of cancer medicine. You can't prevent something unless you completely understand the cause(s) of it. Your internet heroes have added nothing to the medical knowledge and understanding of breast cancer or cancer in general. They may disseminate information discovered by others, but nothing is novel and little is medically proven. You may champion the treatment of Dr. Sircus and state that it "should be studied" but I would counter that argument by saying it should have been properly tested for efficacy prior to being offered to the general public (because that's the way real science is done). |
That is all well and good for you to say Lacy. So do you think that mainstream science is up to the challenge to study and test all of the modalities these doctors advocate? The *science* is there, it's just not tied to research. Hey I have an idea... why not use all the money collected at Breast Cancer Walks, contributions to Breast Cancer research, the American Cancer Society and put it towards some real research? Let's find out for *sure* whether there is a direct coerlation between low Vitamin D levels, low thyroid function, iodine and magnesium deficiency and breast cancer. Now that *would* be something~ Nah.... NEVER happen.
Anyway, this is the last time I will post on this thread. There is no use, there is not a shred of understanding nor a desire to understand anything other than current protocols. I only hope my participation and input has opened some eyes and been helpful to some who are seeking alternative options for cancer prevention and quite possibly the *real cure*. ~ Aprile |
|
|
|
|
|
Sun Oct 13, 2013 9:52 pm |
| aprile wrote: |
| Actually, I'm not judging her *decision* so much as I'm judging the doctor who validated her choice and supported those methods , especially knowing it would not guarantee her anything. Certainly it would not guarantee that she would remain cancer free. |
Patients are ultimately responsible for their own health, and any patient who chooses a legitimate option or options is always supported by their medical team. Paternalism in medicine is dead; patients are provided with a complete explanation of all their choices and the individual's decision is the final word. To ignore a patient's decision(s) would be a violation of medical ethics. There are no guarantees in real medicine, ever.
| aprile wrote: |
| It's interesting though that not even the American Cancer Society considers fibrocystic breast disease as early stage breast cancer, yet you do. This is Dr. Derry's theory or opinion, and I tend to agree. HOWEVER, since you support mainsteam science, I find it curious that you concur with him. However, Dr. Derry believes that FBD is the first phase of breast cancer. |
No, you are misinterpreting what I said. I never said fibrocystic breast disease was an "early stage of breast cancer" at all; I said it's not even a disease. To clarify, it's nothing more than a common condition, benign, and is not a precursor of breast cancer. In other words, just because you have the condition does not mean you are more likely to get cancer. I think Dr. Derry is deliberately misleading you, which causes you to follow his unproven iodine procotol (fear is a great motivator to try unproven cures). I did say Stage 1 breast cancer is (real) cancer though.
http://www.mayoclinic.com/health/fibrocystic-breast-changes/AN00715
| aprile wrote: |
| Well, I have NO idea whether she does or doesn't want to have a child Lacy. But let's assume she does... should she be robbed of that joy? Also, I find your cavalier *assumption* ludicrous that alternative feeding choices are fine. |
Women are able to get pregnant after breast cancer treatment, although most doctors prefer they wait 2 years after treatment is complete. I primarily read medical literature; I am well aware that alternative feeding is completely acceptable when a mother or parent is unwilling or unable to nurse. Because this young woman had a bilateral mastectomy, she is unable to breast feed; I am sure her doctor advised her of that prior to her surgery. Millions of babies are not breast fed; they do thrive. I guess you read information from different sources. BTW, not all women see children and/or breast feeding as a "joy" either.
| aprile wrote: |
| So do you think that mainstream science is up to the challenge to study and test all of the modalities these doctors advocate? The *science* is there, it's just not tied to research. Hey I have an idea... why not use all the money collected at Breast Cancer Walks, contributions to Breast Cancer research, the American Cancer Society and put it towards some real research? |
It is not up to mainstream science to validate the modalities promoted by alternatives; it is up to alternative practitioners to prove scientifically that their treatments work. There is no "science there"; all they have is theories and a handful of anecdotes. Similarly, it is not up to organizations to prove something used in alternative healthcare works. There is a branch of the NIH that does do alternative treatment studies (NCCAM). Since inception, they have funded over $2 billion worth of research; nothing has been found to work as a medical treatment that is better than or even equal to real medicine, and some things don't work at all (other than as a placebo).
http://nccam.nih.gov/about/ataglance |
_________________
Born 1953; Blonde-Blue; Normal skin |
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 14, 2013 12:11 am |
Lacy i know for FACT that human being is starving for iodine nowdays.
BUT i dont trust the chemicals form of iodine aka Lugol's ,white iodine,iosol,sski and the like.
BUT EVEN THEN ,the body can make use of them which proves to me that is REALLY STARVING FOR IODINE.
Thats why i suggest people looking into iodine rich fruits such as pineapple and make a diet consisting a high % of those fruits.
When i was on iodine painting some days ,it was ridiculously amazing.I felt spirituality LOL. Eyes full of vibration ,open to anything in the world.Even the people with bad vibrations couldnt affect me.
My eyes were shooting fire. Was really amazing.WAS LIKE DOPE.
Now that i remembered of those days(i had to stop due to being afraid of the chemical form which i am sure its being made from sludge and waste) i paint some remnants of a burn scar below the wrist and the skin can use the iodine to remove gradually the scar.Which proves you can use it and IT DOESNT BURN YOU .So am sure skin starves for iodine/iodide.
Also we really need natural form of it since we get bromine and bromide potassium from baked foods(they use the latter to make them cooked faster)>Add to these the chlorinated contaminated water EVERYDAY WE BATH AND DRINK and the fluoride in the toothpastes which some people use EVERYDAY.I MEAN EVERY SINGLE DAY ,IT CREATES A PERFECT HALOGEN IMBALANCE. |
_________________
We shall not cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time. |
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:28 am |
Anastasia has announced that she has had a double mastectomy after her second bout of cancer:
| Quote: |
Speaking about the disease recently, she said: "In light of Breast Cancer Awareness Month I wanted to take the opportunity to support a cause particularly close to my heart… l was diagnosed with breast cancer for the second time earlier this year and am currently in the final stages of recovery after undergoing a double mastectomy.
She added: "It has been an intense journey but l am feeling great and ready to start the next chapter. Breast Cancer Awareness Month gives all who are facing this disease a chance to gain strength and support from each other… Early detection has saved my life twice. I will continue to battle and lend my voice in any way I can."
http://www.glamourmagazine.co.uk/news/celebrity/2013/02/28/anastacia-diagnosed-with-breast-cancer |
What I find really annoying on this thread is the judgmental attitude of some people who have not been placed in this situation. Sis asked me earlier what I would do - and I replied that I really didn't know. I would have to be in that situation before I could begin to know how I would react. If you are at a point where a mastectomy is probably the only viable option for saving your life - then I think it's a reasonable decision (if not an obvious one).
Personally, I would like to hear from Deb as to how she handled her own recovery. It's all very well for people to postulate - but let's hear from someone who has actually been through it.
Further, I think the decision has been made much easier because of the fact that breasts can now be reconstructed. It really wasn't that long ago that if you had this surgery you would be deformed - fortunately, that is no longer the case, and I'm sure that makes the decision easier for many women.
I would also like to point out that studies have also determined that one of the reasons for breast cancer continuing to be so prevalent is the fact that women are choosing to have babies much later in life. The optimum age for having your first child is before the age of 25. Women who give birth in this age group are far less lightly to contract the disease. But, as we know, there are so many factors that add up to the equation. Emphasising optimum health and diet is all very well - but it's only the tip of the iceberg. |
_________________
Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 14, 2013 9:34 am |
One of my close friends Sherry, had a double mastectomy and just recently had her reconstructive surgery completed. Not a regret one. Saved her life and she has fantastic new TaTas (so she says). Just the shape and size she wanted and they are perky like her, haha. In a choice between my life or breast, I would not hesitate in a nanosecond. I came to that conclusion during my scare but I didn't have to get to that point. But if I ever do or did, I will and I would have then.
Since October is Breast Cancer Awareness month, Sherry proudly leads the parade. As a survivor and mentor for others navigating that journey, her joy in living is truly her blessing to others. We are also huge advocates and donators. Our company has a public awareness ad on the radio this whole month.
I have extreme fiber-cystic breast tissue and mammograms are not comfortable for me, but necessary. Dense tissue is hard to read and feel any lumps so I stay on it. Living with the condition is not fun, especially with natural DD's. Ugh. But it is not a precurser to cancer and I have discussed that with my doctor. I just want to set that record straight.
But since this is breast cancer awareness month, lets use this chance to support a good cause in a POSITIVE manner. And bickering isn't it.
One of my favorite quotes is actually from a silly 1996 movie with Pauly Shore called Biodome. "If you are not part of the solution, you are part of the problem". I say that often and in many situations. This is one of them. |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:31 pm |
Just read this posted by a breast cancer survivor, and thought it might be an interesting perspective for people...please note that I am NOT advocating any side, but just noting that there are multiple ways to support breast cancer awareness other than just through pink purchases.
| Quote: |
Q. Breast Cancer Remission: I have been in remission for breast cancer for about four years now. I was fortunate to have good health insurance and a supportive network or friends and family during my treatment and recovery. Every October I grapple with the same problem: I feel no loyalty or desire to help out with breast cancer awareness funds. To be quite blunt, I find most national campaigns to be impersonal, they do not score very highly on the charity calculator, and they were not there for me when I was suffering. I am also not particularly interesting in doing any of the 5Ks or other events in October. I find the best way to help breast cancer sufferers is to donate and volunteer at the local level. Every year I get a lot of inquiries if I am participating in different campaigns or activities and when I say no, there is always a bit of an awkward pause. I don't really want to get into why I choose to support the local level more than national, and I don't want people to think I am insensitive to the needs of those with breast cancer. What is a good response to their inquiries?
A: Thank you for standing against this pink ribbon oppression. Both my grandmother and mother had breast cancer, and I, too, have no interest in buying pink ribbon yogurt, or participating in walks for the purpose of handing a big chunk of cash to overpaid executives. You might like the books Pink Ribbon Blues and Bright-Sided, which explore both the dark side of big breast cancer charities and the incessant cheerleading imposed on breast cancer survivors. Mostly, you need a way to shrug off the inquiries. "I give to cancer organizations that help people in this community," should be enough to shut up most people. But if you're up for it, you could do a little breast cancer education of your own and say that unfortunately, some of the big breast cancer charities do not use their money effectively.
...
Q. Re: Breast cancer funds: My boyfriend's mother had breast cancer about seven years ago, and thankfully is in remission also. He was obsessively purchasing pink ribbon yogurts, items, etc., and pretty much mandated I do the same. I sat him down with some research about where the funds go to some of the better known breast cancer foundations and pointed out to him the, in my opinion, criminal way many of the donations are handled. I volunteer at hospitals for breast cancer patients to help. He jumped on board with me. You don't need to justify your choice of not walking around with a pink ribbon tattooed on your head.
A: Exactly. Follow the money is excellent and sobering advice. Peggy Orenstein wrote a fabulous story in the New York Times Magazine a few months ago exposing the dark side of the major breast cancer organizations. But it's also true that just because someone has been diagnosed with a disease, they are not now obligated to pour all their energy into it. If someone has had breast cancer but her charitable passion is habitat protection or vaccinations in developing countries, she should not be pressured to spend her life on pink ribbons.
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/dear_prudence/2013/10/dear_prudence_i_m_a_breast_cancer_survivor_who_thinks_national_breast_cancer.html?wpisrc=newsletter_rubric
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:31 pm |
Many companies probably jump on the charitable bandwagon for tax purposes. Plus, if we knew what percentage of donations go to running costs we'd probably be horrified. It's one of the reasons that it took me so long to adopt a World Vision Child - I was always worried that the money didn't end up where it was supposed to. But after the Bali bombings, it was revealed that the Indonesian doctor who was integral in saving the lives of many of the Australian victims was actually a World Vision baby sponsored by an Australian family. He said without their help he would not have ended up a doctor - so this is an example of what goes around, comes around. It changed my mind about sponsoring.
Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater. It's also Breast Cancer Awareness Month here - and everywhere is awash with pink ribbons. But "awareness" is the key. It's the same with Red Nose Day which brings awareness to SYDS.
I find this statement ridiculous: "Thank you for standing against this pink ribbon oppression". I have never thought of Breast Cancer Awareness Month as "oppressive" - but maybe there is a whole different dynamic taking place in the US. |
_________________
Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 14, 2013 7:23 pm |
This was brought to my attention recently and I had mentally filed it under *ya never know*.
I do think it’s semi-optimistic, but, yet, it's a truly novel comprehensive and collaborative research strategy that could enhance translational research > lowering costs & time to find possibly even *the big C* cure(s.
<ya never know>
Drug Repurposing: A Path to Faster Cures?
Posted by Stephen Dewhurst • October 4, 2013
The process of “translating” new basic science discoveries into practical applications that improve health is a long and costly one – averaging 13 years and over $1 billion for brand new drugs. This is in large part because of the need for extensive safety testing before a new drug can be administered to people.
An alternative approach is to start with a drug that has already been approved for the treatment of one disease or condition – and to use that drug to treat another disease. This kind of “drug repurposing” can shave years (and $ millions) off the time needed to bring a new treatment to market.
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a big believer in this idea, and with good reason – it is already showing strong promise.
For example: University of Rochester researcher Dr. Damian Krysan, has identified off-patent drugs can kill the deadly fungal pathogen, Cryptococcus neoformans. This raises the possibility of a new and affordable cure for an infection that kills as many as 500,000 people each year in resource-limited countries.
Similarly, stem cell scientist Dr. Mark Noble has identified an existing drug that can eliminate the toxic effects of tamoxifen on central nervous system progenitor cells. The ultimate hope is that this will prevent “chemo-brain” - the cognitive impairment that many cancer patients suffer from, as a result of their treatment.
Drug repurposing is an exciting area of research that just might turn out to be a key
to faster cures.
http://blogs.democratandchronicle.com/rocnext/2013/10/04/drug-repurposing-a-path-to-faster-cures/#more-6695 |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:48 am |
Kath, use of existing drugs or out-of-patent drugs for different indication than the original one has been and is a very normal practice in the pharma industry. No doubt that if a drug has been approved for certain therapy, the pharma company will not leave out the opportunity to expand the use of the drug on new patient groups. This is a normal practice in the medicine developing area.
Light |
_________________
52 years, sagging sucks |
|
havana8
Moderator
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3451
|
|
|
Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:59 am |
| bethany wrote: |
Just read this posted by a breast cancer survivor, and thought it might be an interesting perspective for people...please note that I am NOT advocating any side, but just noting that there are multiple ways to support breast cancer awareness other than just through pink purchases.
| Quote: |
Q. Breast Cancer Remission: I have been in remission for breast cancer for about four years now. I was fortunate to have good health insurance and a supportive network or friends and family during my treatment and recovery. Every October I grapple with the same problem: I feel no loyalty or desire to help out with breast cancer awareness funds. To be quite blunt, I find most national campaigns to be impersonal, they do not score very highly on the charity calculator, and they were not there for me when I was suffering. I am also not particularly interesting in doing any of the 5Ks or other events in October. I find the best way to help breast cancer sufferers is to donate and volunteer at the local level. Every year I get a lot of inquiries if I am participating in different campaigns or activities and when I say no, there is always a bit of an awkward pause. I don't really want to get into why I choose to support the local level more than national, and I don't want people to think I am insensitive to the needs of those with breast cancer. What is a good response to their inquiries?
A: Thank you for standing against this pink ribbon oppression. Both my grandmother and mother had breast cancer, and I, too, have no interest in buying pink ribbon yogurt, or participating in walks for the purpose of handing a big chunk of cash to overpaid executives. You might like the books Pink Ribbon Blues and Bright-Sided, which explore both the dark side of big breast cancer charities and the incessant cheerleading imposed on breast cancer survivors. Mostly, you need a way to shrug off the inquiries. "I give to cancer organizations that help people in this community," should be enough to shut up most people. But if you're up for it, you could do a little breast cancer education of your own and say that unfortunately, some of the big breast cancer charities do not use their money effectively.
...
Q. Re: Breast cancer funds: My boyfriend's mother had breast cancer about seven years ago, and thankfully is in remission also. He was obsessively purchasing pink ribbon yogurts, items, etc., and pretty much mandated I do the same. I sat him down with some research about where the funds go to some of the better known breast cancer foundations and pointed out to him the, in my opinion, criminal way many of the donations are handled. I volunteer at hospitals for breast cancer patients to help. He jumped on board with me. You don't need to justify your choice of not walking around with a pink ribbon tattooed on your head.
A: Exactly. Follow the money is excellent and sobering advice. Peggy Orenstein wrote a fabulous story in the New York Times Magazine a few months ago exposing the dark side of the major breast cancer organizations. But it's also true that just because someone has been diagnosed with a disease, they are not now obligated to pour all their energy into it. If someone has had breast cancer but her charitable passion is habitat protection or vaccinations in developing countries, she should not be pressured to spend her life on pink ribbons.
http://www.slate.com/articles/life/dear_prudence/2013/10/dear_prudence_i_m_a_breast_cancer_survivor_who_thinks_national_breast_cancer.html?wpisrc=newsletter_rubric
|
|
That's so true, Bethany. Since this thread started, I've read many comments from breast cancer survivors who share similar perspectives. Here's a link shared by Emily (the 28 year old cancer survivor in the viral video posted earlier) in one of her blog posts:
Friends, don't pink and drive. Think before you pink, from Breast Cancer Action.
http://thinkbeforeyoupink.org
A couple of articles with other perspectives: http://afterfiveyears.com/2013/10/04/pink-sizzle/ + http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lara-huffman/pinkwashing-breast-cancer_b_4064965.html
Here was another suggestion:
As this year's tide of pink rolls out, remember the victims of other cancers who are still waiting for some measure of hope and consider adding another ribbon to the pink ones plastered everywhere. You have lots of choices. You could select a cancer that has benefited from recent research. Colon cancer, perhaps? Get a dark blue ribbon. Lymphoma? Lime green. Or you could choose to complement your pink ribbon with that of an embattled or orphan cancer. Lung: pearl. Pancreatic: purple. Mesothelioma: blue. Unfortunately, pink is not the only color.
Apparently September was Ovarian Cancer Awareness Month which is a teal ribbon and October is also Liver Cancer Awareness Month which is green. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/os-pink-fatigue-beth-kassab-20131004,0,1701725.column |
|
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:10 am |
I like Keliu's comment "Awareness is the key". That is the core purpose of this month to me. Coming together for a common cause, that is the theme of our radio ad.
Our business donates to a local support group and resource center in my home town. It helps educate those in need. They are completely dependent on donations and public funding. I don't wear a pink ribbon and I don't buy a product for the "pink" association. I want to know where my money went and see it in action. I support local and familial. We don't do it for the write off, since we are to limited how much we can write off to charity anyway. We do it because these are my friends and neighbors and could easily be family.
More research is needed and more lives need to be saved. Someday it may be our own. One life lost is one too many. |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 15, 2013 9:28 am |
And here's a story that runs the gamut of high's and low's:
http://news.yahoo.com/cancer-beyond-frightened-exhilarated-214800568.html |
_________________
Joined the 50 club several years back, blonde w/ fair/sensitive skin, Texas humidity and prone to rosacea, light breakouts and sunburns, combo skin type, starting to see sundamage and fine lines |
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 15, 2013 3:00 pm |
Maybe we should just blend colors... What do you get when you mix PINK and YELLOW? Two survivors in my family... Mom and Husband. Wow... some crazy stuff...
Regarding Big Pharma...this article just came across one of my pages... It's problems like this that make everyone including doctors quite learly of company sponsored studies... and Big Pharma in general. They are businesses watching out for their bottom lines. http://www.naturalnews.com/042493_drug_companies_criminal_wrongdoing_medical_fraud.html
Now I think... wow really? I don't even remember hearing about the 3 BILLION fine GlaxoSmithKline was hit with... let's check that out... BINGO: http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2012/July/12-civ-842.html |
_________________
Claudia of FlexEffect... 43, fair skin, occasional breakout, Using ECO FROG (my own=disclaimer), and TrueScience (I also sell this)... Happy with that...Come visit on FB! |
|
|
|
|
Tue Oct 15, 2013 5:54 pm |
| light123 wrote: |
Kath, use of existing drugs or out-of-patent drugs for different indication than the original one has been and is a very normal practice in the pharma industry. No doubt that if a drug has been approved for certain therapy, the pharma company will not leave out the opportunity to expand the use of the drug on new patient groups. This is a normal practice in the medicine developing area.
Light |
Thx. Light, re ongoing drug research/investigation strategies using re-purposed drugs
Does make a lot of sense that it would be standard practice - esp even within the research/discovery protocols of for-profit-big-pharma monopolies.
Why sure, if a Plan *A* doesn’t work, then you need a Plan *B*. Meaning that if the original aim, Plan *A*, doesn’t succeed, then conventional wisdom says that it would be prudent to develop an alternate, Plan *B*. And if Plan *B* doesn’t work, then a Plan *C*, consisting of re-engineering both Plan *A* and “B* - thinking outside the box to come up with alternative and innovative ideas that were not originally considered.
I’m not a research lab director etc – (as is the author of the posting that I shared ) - but, in reality, Light, I do still view *drug/compound re-purposing*, not as breakthrough science, but as an exciting ongoing research endeavor that could help accelerate the development of, maybe, even a *cure* for cancer someday.
Thx again |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 17, 2013 3:44 am |
It looks like there are some options available for women at risk of breast cancer to reduse the risk. Although it is not prevention, still an option to consider.
| Quote: |
UK recommends high risk women take Tamoxifen
You may have seen some media attention recently about a recommendation in the UK that women at a high risk of developing breast cancer should take tamoxifen.
The UK’s National Institute of Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) has released a consultation paper asking for feedback from interested stakeholders, which includes a draft recommendation that tamoxifen could be given to high risk women for up to five years.
The paper states that ‘’high risk women’’ includes women with a sister and a mother or aunt diagnosed with breast cancer before the age of 50. Emerging research suggests that taking tamoxifen could reduce their risk of developing breast cancer.
Tamoxifen is not routinely prescribed as a preventative drug in Australia. The benefits of taking tamoxifen may not outweigh the risks of taking this drug for all women. If you think a member of your family may be interested in taking tamoxifen to reduce their risk of developing breast cancer, she may like to discuss this with her doctor.
The final recommendations from the NICE are expected to be released later this year. BCNA will keep up to date with the progress of this issue and its relevance to Australian women in the future.
To read more, visit the NICE website.
http://www.bcna.org.au/about-breast-cancer/breast-cancer-family/research-news-and-issues-women-family-history-breast-cancer |
Light |
_________________
52 years, sagging sucks |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 17, 2013 5:49 am |
The article goes on to say:
| Quote: |
| In an insurance based system such as the US, restricting insurance cover for CPM to patients with risk factors for second primary tumours such as BRCA mutations should also reduce the number of unnecessary operations performed. |
So this would explain why some women are refused insurance coverage - they are not considered high risk of secondary tumours. |
_________________
Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
|
Thu Oct 17, 2013 6:00 am |
| Yep, seems to be the case pretty much globally. |
_________________
52 years, sagging sucks |
|
havana8
Moderator
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3451
|
|
|
Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:58 am |
A couple of interesting recent tidbits:
| Quote: |
Researchers in China reviewed the results of more than 20 studies involving data on nearly 900,000 women around the world, including 20,000 women who had breast cancer. They found that breast cancer risk was 14 percent lower among those who had the highest intake of omega-3s compared to women who had the lowest intake. The researchers reported that for every 0.1-gram increase in omega-3 consumed daily, breast cancer risk dropped by five percent. You typically get about four grams of omega-3s in a single serving of salmon or other oily fish. This isn’t the first time omega-3s have been linked with a decline in breast cancer risk. A 2002 French study found that women whose diet provided a balanced ratio of omega-3s to omega-6s, another type of polyunsaturated fatty acid, were less likely to develop breast cancer. The new study was published in the July 27, 2013 issue of the British Medical Journal.
Read more here: http://www.drweilblog.com/home/category/science-and-supplement-news/ |
| Quote: |
Tuesday, October 15, 2013--The journal Breast Cancer Research and Treatment published an article this month which reported a lower risk of mortality from invasive breast cancer among patients who used multivitamin/mineral supplements. "Our study offers tentative but intriguing evidence that multivitamin/mineral supplements may help older women who develop invasive breast cancer survive their disease," commented lead author Sylvia Wassertheil-Smoller, PhD, who is a distinguished university professor emerita of epidemiology and population health at Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University.
Dr Wassertheil-Smoller and her associates analyzed data from 7,728 women diagnosed with invasive breast cancer following enrollment in the Women's Health Initiative. The subjects' use of nutritional supplements was ascertained upon enrollment and at the visit closest to the time of diagnosis. The women, who were between the ages of 50 and 79 years at enrollment, were followed for 7.1 years after diagnosis, during which 518 deaths were documented.
Adjusted analysis of the data uncovered a 30% lower risk of dying from invasive breast cancer among women who used multivitamin/mineral supplements in comparison with those who did not report their use. Further adjustment for additional factors failed to significantly modify the association. "Controlling for these other factors strengthens our confidence that the association we observed – between taking multivitamin/mineral supplements and lowering breast-cancer mortality risk among postmenopausal women with invasive breast cancer – is a real one," stated Dr Wassertheil-Smoller. "But further studies are needed to confirm whether there truly is a cause-and-effect relationship here."
Here's the link: http://www.lef.org/newsletter/2013/1015_Multivitamin-supplement-use-associated-with-reduced-risk-of-invasive-breast-cancer-mortality.htm |
|
|
|
|
|
|
havana8
Moderator
Joined: 09 Sep 2005
Posts: 3451
|
|
|
Mon Oct 21, 2013 4:54 pm |
| What was Dr. Mercola's rationale, Keliu? I think six provinces in Canada have banned youth under 18 (19 for some) from using tanning beds and one requires written parental consent. |
|
|
|
|
|
Mon Oct 21, 2013 6:12 pm |
| havana8 wrote: |
| What was Dr. Mercola's rationale, Keliu? I think six provinces in Canada have banned youth under 18 (19 for some) from using tanning beds and one requires written parental consent. |
He basically said that if there is no access to natural sunlight, UVB tanning beds are a good option and are also better than taking a Vitamin D supplement.
Here is a statement by Dr. Oz on the subject:
|
_________________
Born 1950. There's a new cream on the market that gets rid of wrinkles - you smear it on the mirror!! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Sun Mar 02, 2025 11:39 am |
If this is your first visit to the EDS Forums please take the time to register. Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest, send private messages to other users, participate in Gift Certificates draws and enjoy automatic discounts for shopping at our online store. Registration is free and takes just a few seconds to complete.
Click Here to join our community.
If you are already a registered member on the forums, please login to gain full access to the site. |
|
 |
|
|
