Several weeks ago a caretaker of a multiple myeloma patient e-mailed about a controversial, yet tried and true anti-cancer therapy called the Gerson protocol.
Gerson is an all encompassing dietary protocol which includes a number of supplements and cleansing rituals. In her e-mail, this woman describes personally knowing patients who should have died decades ago, but are still alive thanks to Dr. Gerson's principles.
I'm intrigued! All I know about the program is that it has been around for many years and what I have written above. I will do some research and write about the Gerson Protocol over the next few days.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Saturday, February 27, 2010
Nutritional Tip For Cancer Patients: Eat Raw Nuts!
Here is a short but meaningful nutritional recommendation I edited from a new cancer Website called True Cancer News:
Eating a handful of raw nuts every day is good for the heart and strengthen the immune system. Nuts should be on the list for cancer patients. In fact, an ounce of nuts (about 14 shelled walnut halves) is all that is needed to meet the recommended dietary Food Board of the Institute of Nutrition of the National Academies of Medicine of omega-3 fatty acids. A healthy diet is vital to the body of a person to work their best--this is especially important for cancer patients.
Eat lots of raw nuts and vegetables, people!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Eating a handful of raw nuts every day is good for the heart and strengthen the immune system. Nuts should be on the list for cancer patients. In fact, an ounce of nuts (about 14 shelled walnut halves) is all that is needed to meet the recommended dietary Food Board of the Institute of Nutrition of the National Academies of Medicine of omega-3 fatty acids. A healthy diet is vital to the body of a person to work their best--this is especially important for cancer patients.
Eat lots of raw nuts and vegetables, people!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Friday, February 26, 2010
Help The IMF Make Oral Chemotherapy Drugs More Affordable For Cancer Patients!
My posts the last two days were both about oral chemotherapy. I have written in the past about how the International Myeloma Foundation is fighting to help cancer patients save on their drug costs. Here is a post I wrote in December from my seven part series about the IMF's Cancer Patient Statement of Principles:
The International Myeloma Foundation's Cancer Patient Statement of Principles Number Three is short, simple and straightforward:
Equality of access to care is imperative!
This is the principle which directly affects cancer patient most. This is the principle used to help advocate equity for cancer patients between IV administered and oral chemotherapy medications. For the tenth time, why should a patient be charged more and punished for using oral medications vs those given at the hospital by IV? THEY SHOULDN'T!
My Revlimid should not cost me more out of pocket than if I was using Velcade--plain and simple!
Thanks to the IMF, there are currently bills proposing to clear this up in both the House and Senate.
Thanks, IMF!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Whether it involves Medicare's mysterious, expensive and frustrating "donut hole," or private insurance charging cancer patients a co-pay for oral chemotherapy medications--when they don't do the same for/to IV cancer patients--this is an important, yet simple and eminently solvable issue. Go to the IMF's Website to learn more.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
The International Myeloma Foundation's Cancer Patient Statement of Principles Number Three is short, simple and straightforward:
Equality of access to care is imperative!
This is the principle which directly affects cancer patient most. This is the principle used to help advocate equity for cancer patients between IV administered and oral chemotherapy medications. For the tenth time, why should a patient be charged more and punished for using oral medications vs those given at the hospital by IV? THEY SHOULDN'T!
My Revlimid should not cost me more out of pocket than if I was using Velcade--plain and simple!
Thanks to the IMF, there are currently bills proposing to clear this up in both the House and Senate.
Thanks, IMF!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Whether it involves Medicare's mysterious, expensive and frustrating "donut hole," or private insurance charging cancer patients a co-pay for oral chemotherapy medications--when they don't do the same for/to IV cancer patients--this is an important, yet simple and eminently solvable issue. Go to the IMF's Website to learn more.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Thursday, February 25, 2010
Australians Working On New Oral Chemotherapy For Ovarian Cancer
Researchers from all around the world are working hard to extend and improve the lives of cancer patients. Check-out Nick Miller's article in yesterday's Sidney Daily Herald, “Radical Ovarian Cancer Treatment Offers Hope:”
EARLY results from a new cancer treatment pioneered in Melbourne show that advanced ovarian cancer can be fought to a standstill - an against-the-odds result that could point to a radical new way of beating other cancers.
Researchers from the Royal Women's Hospital and Monash University say they are increasingly excited about the trial, which began last year.
The research comes as new national figures on ovarian cancer showed that almost two-thirds of Australians diagnosed with the disease will not be alive five years later.
Professor Michael Quinn, from the Royal Women's Hospital's cancer unit, is leading a team testing ''immune modulation'' therapy.
It works on the theory that the immune system has a 10 to 14-day cycle, during which it emits ''inhibitor cells'' that stop the body fighting cancer.
The team gives small, tightly targeted chemotherapy doses at exactly the right time in the cycle to block the inhibitor cells and boost the body's defence against the tumour.
Since last year they have given the therapy to seven women with advanced, recurrent ovarian cancer, while also working with Monash University's department of immunology to crack the secrets of the immune cycle.
Several of the women have responded positively to the treatment, Professor Quinn said. ''These are very, very promising results,'' he said. ''The tumours have stopped growing - that's all we had hoped for. I don't think this is the magic bullet yet but it's certainly enough for us to continue our work.''
The treatment avoids almost all the debilitating side effects of chemotherapy, allowing patients to live more normal lives. One of the patients is 44-year-old Melissa Campbell, who went to her doctor four years ago with back pain and a bloated tummy - and came back with a diagnosis of advanced ovarian cancer.
Since then, the cancer has recurred twice, putting her through surgery and excruciating chemotherapy and radiotherapy, as well as another experimental drug with severe side effects.
But she said the new treatment had been a totally different experience.
''It hasn't gotten rid of [the tumour],'' she said. ''But it hasn't gotten worse. It's keeping it under control, and fingers crossed it will get rid of it down the track.
''It's so much easier compared to the other times.''
The chemo comes in a simple pill a few days a fortnight, rather than a trip to hospital being hooked up to a drip. One drawback is having a blood test every two days.
I take an oral chemotherapy medication for my multiple myeloma. I'm sure ovarian cancer patients would appreciate that option as well.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
EARLY results from a new cancer treatment pioneered in Melbourne show that advanced ovarian cancer can be fought to a standstill - an against-the-odds result that could point to a radical new way of beating other cancers.
Researchers from the Royal Women's Hospital and Monash University say they are increasingly excited about the trial, which began last year.
The research comes as new national figures on ovarian cancer showed that almost two-thirds of Australians diagnosed with the disease will not be alive five years later.
Professor Michael Quinn, from the Royal Women's Hospital's cancer unit, is leading a team testing ''immune modulation'' therapy.
It works on the theory that the immune system has a 10 to 14-day cycle, during which it emits ''inhibitor cells'' that stop the body fighting cancer.
The team gives small, tightly targeted chemotherapy doses at exactly the right time in the cycle to block the inhibitor cells and boost the body's defence against the tumour.
Since last year they have given the therapy to seven women with advanced, recurrent ovarian cancer, while also working with Monash University's department of immunology to crack the secrets of the immune cycle.
Several of the women have responded positively to the treatment, Professor Quinn said. ''These are very, very promising results,'' he said. ''The tumours have stopped growing - that's all we had hoped for. I don't think this is the magic bullet yet but it's certainly enough for us to continue our work.''
The treatment avoids almost all the debilitating side effects of chemotherapy, allowing patients to live more normal lives. One of the patients is 44-year-old Melissa Campbell, who went to her doctor four years ago with back pain and a bloated tummy - and came back with a diagnosis of advanced ovarian cancer.
Since then, the cancer has recurred twice, putting her through surgery and excruciating chemotherapy and radiotherapy, as well as another experimental drug with severe side effects.
But she said the new treatment had been a totally different experience.
''It hasn't gotten rid of [the tumour],'' she said. ''But it hasn't gotten worse. It's keeping it under control, and fingers crossed it will get rid of it down the track.
''It's so much easier compared to the other times.''
The chemo comes in a simple pill a few days a fortnight, rather than a trip to hospital being hooked up to a drip. One drawback is having a blood test every two days.
I take an oral chemotherapy medication for my multiple myeloma. I'm sure ovarian cancer patients would appreciate that option as well.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Some States Considering Legislation To Help Oral Chemotherapy Patients
Here is an e-mail I recieved yesterday from Stephen Gendel, a PR operative who is helping the International Myeloma Foundation (IMF) with their effort to help cancer patients who take oral chemotherapy medications:
Pat,
I hope this finds you well. This is just a personal email, not an official communication on behalf of anyone. But I wanted to make sure you know about oral-drug reimbursement parity legislation pending in several states, not just at a federal level.
For example:
Colorado House Bill 1202 is authored by Representative Primavera and will next be heard in Senate Health and Human Services. Any offers to testify should be made to Representative Primavera or the bill’s sponsor, ACS-CAN. Letters of support should be directed to Senator Boyd as Chair of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee with a copy to Representative Primavera.
Contacts:
Representative Dianne Primavera T:
(303) 866-4667dianne.primavera.house@state.co.us
The Honorable Betty Boyd, Chair, Senate Health and Human Services Committee betty.boyd.senate@state.co.us
With a copy to Elizabeth Burger, Senate HHS Committee Staff.
There are similar bills in CT, MD, MA, CA, MI, AZ - I can send you a list but only if you find it useful. Let me know.
Thanks again for all you do
Stephen Gendel
Keep up the good work, Stephen! Cancer patients and caregivers everywhere appreciate your efforts.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Pat,
I hope this finds you well. This is just a personal email, not an official communication on behalf of anyone. But I wanted to make sure you know about oral-drug reimbursement parity legislation pending in several states, not just at a federal level.
For example:
Colorado House Bill 1202 is authored by Representative Primavera and will next be heard in Senate Health and Human Services. Any offers to testify should be made to Representative Primavera or the bill’s sponsor, ACS-CAN. Letters of support should be directed to Senator Boyd as Chair of the Senate Health and Human Services Committee with a copy to Representative Primavera.
Contacts:
Representative Dianne Primavera T:
(303) 866-4667dianne.primavera.house@state.co.us
The Honorable Betty Boyd, Chair, Senate Health and Human Services Committee betty.boyd.senate@state.co.us
With a copy to Elizabeth Burger, Senate HHS Committee Staff.
There are similar bills in CT, MD, MA, CA, MI, AZ - I can send you a list but only if you find it useful. Let me know.
Thanks again for all you do
Stephen Gendel
Keep up the good work, Stephen! Cancer patients and caregivers everywhere appreciate your efforts.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Tuesday, February 23, 2010
Making The Most Of Your "New Normal:" Living Life After A Cancer Diagnosis
I just read a well written article online titled "Living with Cancer", by Life Transition Coach Margot Larson. Here is a short excerpt from her article. See what you think:
The past represents memories. We must find the joy in the present now that we have a chance of seeing the future. We are allowed a little time to grieve but should not waste too much time there. We’ve learned that time is precious. Don’t get stuck – move on.
So what’s next? What can we do? If we are truly grateful to be alive, shouldn’t we focus on the present, the gift we received for a second chance? Let’s spend our time and energies on the choices we do have.
Make a list of your obstacles. What is standing in your way? What is causing you stress and really bugging you? Acknowledging these obstacles is the first step to finding the solution. Now, focus on what you can do. You’ve already shown a great deal of fortitude and courage in battling cancer. Don’t stop now.
Redefine yourself. Who are you? You are not somebody’s spouse or parent. You are not your job title. Find your identity, the real you. Accept that you used to be a great accountant or nurse and now you are something else. There is still time for something else and this is your first conscious choice.
I can relate to this article. Cancer changed my life. I have a new career as an author and medical writer. Helping others with cancer helps me see hope and meaning in my own diagnosis. You can read Margot's entire article by going to Living with Cancer/The Resident. And you can order my similarly titled book, Living with Multiple Myeloma, through our Help With Cancer.Org Bookstore here online.
Feel good, keep smiling and try to make the most of each and every day!
Pat
The past represents memories. We must find the joy in the present now that we have a chance of seeing the future. We are allowed a little time to grieve but should not waste too much time there. We’ve learned that time is precious. Don’t get stuck – move on.
So what’s next? What can we do? If we are truly grateful to be alive, shouldn’t we focus on the present, the gift we received for a second chance? Let’s spend our time and energies on the choices we do have.
Make a list of your obstacles. What is standing in your way? What is causing you stress and really bugging you? Acknowledging these obstacles is the first step to finding the solution. Now, focus on what you can do. You’ve already shown a great deal of fortitude and courage in battling cancer. Don’t stop now.
Redefine yourself. Who are you? You are not somebody’s spouse or parent. You are not your job title. Find your identity, the real you. Accept that you used to be a great accountant or nurse and now you are something else. There is still time for something else and this is your first conscious choice.
I can relate to this article. Cancer changed my life. I have a new career as an author and medical writer. Helping others with cancer helps me see hope and meaning in my own diagnosis. You can read Margot's entire article by going to Living with Cancer/The Resident. And you can order my similarly titled book, Living with Multiple Myeloma, through our Help With Cancer.Org Bookstore here online.
Feel good, keep smiling and try to make the most of each and every day!
Pat
Monday, February 22, 2010
Huffington Post Article Advocates Taking More Responsibility For Our Own Cancer Prevention & Treatment
Here is an excerpt from an article by David Servan-Schreiber, M.D., the author of Anticancer: A New Way Of Life, advocating taking more responsibility for our own anti-cancer choices:
1. Cleaning up our diet: reducing sugar -- which feeds cancer growth and inflammation. Refined sugar is abundant in desserts, soft drinks (one can of Coke contains 12 coffee-size packs of sugar...), sauces (Ketchup, ready-made salad dressing, etc.), white flour which is equivalent to sugar as far as the body is concerned (white bread, bagels, muffins, etc.), and reducing pro-inflammatory omega-6 fatty acids (red meats, dairy, corn, sunflower, soybean and safflower oils, and trans-fats).
2. Adding anti-cancer foods: including in our diet every day, three times a day, foods that help fight cancer. Such as anticancer herbs and spices (green tea, turmeric, ginger , thyme, rosemary, mint, basil, sage), omega-3 rich foods (salmon, sardines, mackerel, walnuts, green vegetables), cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage), garlic, onions and leeks, red berries, plums, blueberries for dessert, dark chocolate (more than 70 percent cocoa), and even a little bit of red wine.
3. Engaging in physical activity: it doesn't have to be marathon training, not even jogging. Just rapid walking 30 minutes six times a week already dramatically reduces the chances of a relapse after breast cancer treatment or the risk of advanced prostate cancer. And physical activity has been found to help survival with many different types of cancer. [13]
4. Managing our response to stress: we can't avoid stress in our life, but we can learn to respond differently than with clenched teeth, stone-hard back muscles and pressure in our chest. Basic breathing techniques that have been around as part of oriental mental and physical hygiene techniques for thousands of years (Yoga, Chi Gong, mindfulness meditation) can transform our response to stress and strengthen our resistance to disease. And simply reaching out to one or two friends during hard times can even reduce the risk of dying from breast cancer by a factor of four.
5. Cleaning up our immediate environment: in-door pollutants, parabens and phthalates in cosmetics, scratched Teflon pans, percholorethylene of dry-cleaning, PVCs and bisphenol A from liquids in contact with hard plastics, radiomagnetic fields of prolonged cell phone exposures are the leading and most easily controlled causes.
Read his excellent article, "We Can All Fight Cancer Better."
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
1. Cleaning up our diet: reducing sugar -- which feeds cancer growth and inflammation. Refined sugar is abundant in desserts, soft drinks (one can of Coke contains 12 coffee-size packs of sugar...), sauces (Ketchup, ready-made salad dressing, etc.), white flour which is equivalent to sugar as far as the body is concerned (white bread, bagels, muffins, etc.), and reducing pro-inflammatory omega-6 fatty acids (red meats, dairy, corn, sunflower, soybean and safflower oils, and trans-fats).
2. Adding anti-cancer foods: including in our diet every day, three times a day, foods that help fight cancer. Such as anticancer herbs and spices (green tea, turmeric, ginger , thyme, rosemary, mint, basil, sage), omega-3 rich foods (salmon, sardines, mackerel, walnuts, green vegetables), cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, cabbage), garlic, onions and leeks, red berries, plums, blueberries for dessert, dark chocolate (more than 70 percent cocoa), and even a little bit of red wine.
3. Engaging in physical activity: it doesn't have to be marathon training, not even jogging. Just rapid walking 30 minutes six times a week already dramatically reduces the chances of a relapse after breast cancer treatment or the risk of advanced prostate cancer. And physical activity has been found to help survival with many different types of cancer. [13]
4. Managing our response to stress: we can't avoid stress in our life, but we can learn to respond differently than with clenched teeth, stone-hard back muscles and pressure in our chest. Basic breathing techniques that have been around as part of oriental mental and physical hygiene techniques for thousands of years (Yoga, Chi Gong, mindfulness meditation) can transform our response to stress and strengthen our resistance to disease. And simply reaching out to one or two friends during hard times can even reduce the risk of dying from breast cancer by a factor of four.
5. Cleaning up our immediate environment: in-door pollutants, parabens and phthalates in cosmetics, scratched Teflon pans, percholorethylene of dry-cleaning, PVCs and bisphenol A from liquids in contact with hard plastics, radiomagnetic fields of prolonged cell phone exposures are the leading and most easily controlled causes.
Read his excellent article, "We Can All Fight Cancer Better."
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Regular Aspirin Use Lowers the Risk of Developing Ovarian Cancer
Here is a link to a study done my University of Minnesota researchers which found woman who take aspirin regularly have a reduced risk of developing ovarian cancer. Go to CancerConsultants.Com/ovarian cancer news article to learn more.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Saturday, February 20, 2010
Rituxan Approved For Combination Therapy Against Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia
I read this article today in the San Francisco Business Times about approval of the drug, Rituxan, for use against leukemia:
Regulators approved the use of the Genentech Inc. and Biogen Idec treatment Rituxan as part of a combination therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
South San Francisco-based Genentech, a biotech subsidiary of Swiss drug giant Roche Group, said the Food and Drug Administration approved use of Rituxan in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for patients starting treatment for CLL as well as for those who have tried other drugs.
Rituxan, an antibody treatment that works with the body’s own immune system, registered sales of $5.9 billion last year. Discovered by Biogen Idec, it also is approved for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and rheumatoid arthritis.
Read the entire article by going to: FDA approves Rituxan for form of leukemia.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Regulators approved the use of the Genentech Inc. and Biogen Idec treatment Rituxan as part of a combination therapy for chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
South San Francisco-based Genentech, a biotech subsidiary of Swiss drug giant Roche Group, said the Food and Drug Administration approved use of Rituxan in combination with fludarabine and cyclophosphamide for patients starting treatment for CLL as well as for those who have tried other drugs.
Rituxan, an antibody treatment that works with the body’s own immune system, registered sales of $5.9 billion last year. Discovered by Biogen Idec, it also is approved for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma and rheumatoid arthritis.
Read the entire article by going to: FDA approves Rituxan for form of leukemia.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Friday, February 19, 2010
HealthDay News Release Touts Garden-Grown, Baked Rhubarb As Having Anti-Cancer Properties
WEDNESDAY, Feb. 17 (HealthDay News) -- Good news for those looking for tasty ways to potentially improve their odds of staying healthy: baked rhubarb may help fight cancer.
Researchers found that baking British garden rhubarb for 20 minutes dramatically boosted levels of anti-cancer chemicals called polyphenols. Previous research has shown that polyphenols selectively kill or prevent the growth of cancer cells.
"Our research has shown that British rhubarb is a potential source of pharmacological agents that may be used to develop new anti-cancerous drugs," researcher Dr. Nikki Jordan-Mahy, of the Biomedical Research Center at Sheffield Hallam University, said in a university news release.
The findings were released online in advance of publication in the March 15 print issue of the journal Food Chemistry.
This is the first study to examine the benefits of British rhubarb, specifically a variety grown in South Yorkshire. Earlier research has studied Oriental medicinal rhubarb, which has been used in traditional Chinese medicine for thousands of years.
"Current treatments are not effective in all cancers and resistance is a common problem," Jordan-Mahy said. "It's very important to discover novel, less toxic treatments, which can overcome resistance."
Researchers now plan to study the effect of rhubarb's polyphenols on leukemia.
Yesterday celery--today rhubarb. As always, it is hard to quantify and identify exactly what food or compound is helping to fight cancer. But why take a chance? Eat them all!
Feel good, keep smiling and eat your veggies people! Pat & Pattie
Researchers found that baking British garden rhubarb for 20 minutes dramatically boosted levels of anti-cancer chemicals called polyphenols. Previous research has shown that polyphenols selectively kill or prevent the growth of cancer cells.
"Our research has shown that British rhubarb is a potential source of pharmacological agents that may be used to develop new anti-cancerous drugs," researcher Dr. Nikki Jordan-Mahy, of the Biomedical Research Center at Sheffield Hallam University, said in a university news release.
The findings were released online in advance of publication in the March 15 print issue of the journal Food Chemistry.
This is the first study to examine the benefits of British rhubarb, specifically a variety grown in South Yorkshire. Earlier research has studied Oriental medicinal rhubarb, which has been used in traditional Chinese medicine for thousands of years.
"Current treatments are not effective in all cancers and resistance is a common problem," Jordan-Mahy said. "It's very important to discover novel, less toxic treatments, which can overcome resistance."
Researchers now plan to study the effect of rhubarb's polyphenols on leukemia.
Yesterday celery--today rhubarb. As always, it is hard to quantify and identify exactly what food or compound is helping to fight cancer. But why take a chance? Eat them all!
Feel good, keep smiling and eat your veggies people! Pat & Pattie
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Celery May Help Fight Cancer/Leukemia
I eat a lot of celery. Articles like this one on HealthierTalk.Com help re enforce my habit!
Surprise vegetable could stave off leukemia
By Christine O'Brien on 02/17/2010
“Boring” vegetable could be a lifesaver!"
People say it’s boring, that there’s nothing to it but water. But they could be wrong — scientists say this ho-hum veggie could actually hold the key to fighting off leukemia.
After getting a bit worked up over recent news, I thought it might be best to lighten up with a little good news for a change!
It sounds silly, but I’ve always been a fan of celery. The satisfying crunch, the clean flavor…and when I was a kid, I thought it matched up beautifully with peanut butter and raisins for the classic treat “ants on a log.”
Of course, most people think it’s a boring vegetable. They just aren’t that impressed. Sure, they’ll throw it on a plate with some buffalo wings, but let’s be honest — it’s just there to catch the leftover blue cheese dressing.
Now, thanks to new findings, celery might start getting the respect I’ve always thought it deserves.
Scientists at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands recently found that eating foods like celery and parsley could help prevent leukemia.
Thanks to a compound called apigenin, celery packs more cancer-fighting power than previously thought. Apigenin halts the development and cuts the survival chances of two kinds of leukemia cells
Read the rest of Christine's article at Celery/Leukemia.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Surprise vegetable could stave off leukemia
By Christine O'Brien on 02/17/2010
“Boring” vegetable could be a lifesaver!"
People say it’s boring, that there’s nothing to it but water. But they could be wrong — scientists say this ho-hum veggie could actually hold the key to fighting off leukemia.
After getting a bit worked up over recent news, I thought it might be best to lighten up with a little good news for a change!
It sounds silly, but I’ve always been a fan of celery. The satisfying crunch, the clean flavor…and when I was a kid, I thought it matched up beautifully with peanut butter and raisins for the classic treat “ants on a log.”
Of course, most people think it’s a boring vegetable. They just aren’t that impressed. Sure, they’ll throw it on a plate with some buffalo wings, but let’s be honest — it’s just there to catch the leftover blue cheese dressing.
Now, thanks to new findings, celery might start getting the respect I’ve always thought it deserves.
Scientists at the University of Groningen in the Netherlands recently found that eating foods like celery and parsley could help prevent leukemia.
Thanks to a compound called apigenin, celery packs more cancer-fighting power than previously thought. Apigenin halts the development and cuts the survival chances of two kinds of leukemia cells
Read the rest of Christine's article at Celery/Leukemia.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Wednesday, February 17, 2010
Dr. Mercola Promotes Raw Diet & Supplements To Fight Cancer
Dr. Joseph Mercola has been a proponent of eating a predominantly raw diet for decades. I am not a necessarily a supporter, nor am I a detractor. His opinions on everything from the danger of using artificial sweeteners to cell phones can be over the top. So are his claims cancer can be prevented and cured through diet and supplementation. Even so, books and newsletter are definitely worth a look. Dr. Mercola's consumer protectionist activism is admirable—think of him as the “Ralph Nader of Nutrition and public health.” I agree with Dr. Mercola's premise that eating raw, unprocessed vegetables should be the cornerstone of everyone's diet—I'm just not convinced that over 80% of that diet needs to be raw vegetables, nuts, seeds and eggs.
Check out Dr. Mercola's news and views by going to Mercola.com.
Feel good, keep smiling and remember to eat lots of uncooked fruits and vegetables!
Pat
Check out Dr. Mercola's news and views by going to Mercola.com.
Feel good, keep smiling and remember to eat lots of uncooked fruits and vegetables!
Pat
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Nutrition Tip: Cancer Patients/Survivors Should Eat Low Carb Meal After Exercise To Max Recovery, Build Muscle & Burn Most Fat
I read and hear claims of increased muscle gain from protein supplement companies: Grow larger and stronger if you eat or drink our product after your work-out. Many cancer patients (including me!) have trouble regaining muscle mass during and after therapy. Since I almost always exercise after my evening meal, I had started drinking a vitamin and calcium enriched protein shake after exercise. Recently, a naturopathic advisor suggested this wasn't necessary--that it was better to eat protein early in the day--and since it takes so long for your body to break protein down, a high protein after work-out meal wasn't important. This excerpt from an article by a leading alternative nutritionalist, Dr. Mercola, supports the high protein/low carb meal or snack after exercising:
Many of the health benefits of aerobic exercise are due to the most recent exercise session. The nature of these benefits can be greatly affected by the food you eat afterwards.
Differences in what you eat after exercise produce different effects on your body's metabolism.
Specifically, the study found that exercise enhanced insulin sensitivity, particularly when meals eaten after the exercise session contained relatively low carbohydrate content.
Interestingly, when the research subjects in this study ate relatively low-calorie meals after exercise, this did not improve insulin sensitivity any more than when they ate enough calories to match what they expended during exercise.
This suggests that you don't have to starve yourself after exercise to still reap some of the important health benefits.
Enhanced insulin sensitivity means that it is easier for your body to take up sugar from your bloodstream into tissues like muscles, where it can be stored or used as fuel.
You can read the entire article, as well as subscribe to Dr. Mercola's free newsletter by clicking on the following link: What you eat after exercise matters!
I will comment further about Dr. Mercola's natural style of nutrition tomorrow. Feel good, keep smiling and eat lots and lots of vegetables! Pat
Many of the health benefits of aerobic exercise are due to the most recent exercise session. The nature of these benefits can be greatly affected by the food you eat afterwards.
Differences in what you eat after exercise produce different effects on your body's metabolism.
Specifically, the study found that exercise enhanced insulin sensitivity, particularly when meals eaten after the exercise session contained relatively low carbohydrate content.
Interestingly, when the research subjects in this study ate relatively low-calorie meals after exercise, this did not improve insulin sensitivity any more than when they ate enough calories to match what they expended during exercise.
This suggests that you don't have to starve yourself after exercise to still reap some of the important health benefits.
Enhanced insulin sensitivity means that it is easier for your body to take up sugar from your bloodstream into tissues like muscles, where it can be stored or used as fuel.
You can read the entire article, as well as subscribe to Dr. Mercola's free newsletter by clicking on the following link: What you eat after exercise matters!
I will comment further about Dr. Mercola's natural style of nutrition tomorrow. Feel good, keep smiling and eat lots and lots of vegetables! Pat
Monday, February 15, 2010
Experimental Leukemia Drug, Graspa, May Help Treat Solid Cancer Tumors As Well
Pat found this article today on Philadelphia Business Journal's Website:
Erytech Pharma entered into a collaborative research agreement Monday with the M.D. Anderson Center.
Under the partnership, Erytech, a specialty pharmaceutical company with offices in France and Philadelphia, and M.D. Anderson of Houston, will work together to study the potential use of Graspa — Erytech’s flagship new drug candidate — in treating patients with solid tumors.
Graspa is an experimental therapy that consists of red blood cell-encapsulated L-asparaginase, an enyzme used to treat leukemia by damaging cancer cells. By encapsulating the enzyme inside red blood cells, the company is seeking to make Graspa safer and have a broader range of clinical uses as compared to existing forms of L-asparaginase.
Dr. John Weinstein, chair of the department of bioinformatics and computational biology at M.D. Anderson will serve as principal investigator for the project.
Dr. Yann Godfrin, Erytech Pharma’s co-founder and CEO, said the collaboration with M.D. Anderson “provides us the opportunity to develop a clinically-compatible biomarker assay and to rationally prescribe Graspa to patients who are most likely to respond.”
Pat and I learn about so many promising cancer treatment advances each and everyday. I just wish they could finish testing and get to market faster! Pattie
Erytech Pharma entered into a collaborative research agreement Monday with the M.D. Anderson Center.
Under the partnership, Erytech, a specialty pharmaceutical company with offices in France and Philadelphia, and M.D. Anderson of Houston, will work together to study the potential use of Graspa — Erytech’s flagship new drug candidate — in treating patients with solid tumors.
Graspa is an experimental therapy that consists of red blood cell-encapsulated L-asparaginase, an enyzme used to treat leukemia by damaging cancer cells. By encapsulating the enzyme inside red blood cells, the company is seeking to make Graspa safer and have a broader range of clinical uses as compared to existing forms of L-asparaginase.
Dr. John Weinstein, chair of the department of bioinformatics and computational biology at M.D. Anderson will serve as principal investigator for the project.
Dr. Yann Godfrin, Erytech Pharma’s co-founder and CEO, said the collaboration with M.D. Anderson “provides us the opportunity to develop a clinically-compatible biomarker assay and to rationally prescribe Graspa to patients who are most likely to respond.”
Pat and I learn about so many promising cancer treatment advances each and everyday. I just wish they could finish testing and get to market faster! Pattie
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Are CT Scans Dangerous For Cancer Patients?
Here is part of a Canadian article from the Telegraph-Journal:
The use of CT scans (sometimes called CAT scans) has grown by leaps and bounds in the past 20 years. That's because they're painless, noninvasive and super-fast, and they give doctors detailed images of everything from brain injuries and cancers to fractures, kidney stones and ruptured appendixes. The scans are also credited with making exploratory surgery a thing of the past. So it's not hard to see why Americans and Canadians now get 75 million of them a year.
CT's dark side? A single scan can deliver 100 to 400 times more radiation than a traditional X-ray. A new National Cancer Institute study estimates that 29,000 cancers and 15,000 cancer deaths (more than the deaths from ovarian cancer) will be triggered by the CT scans done in 2007 alone. Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration is investigating more than 200 claims of scan-related radiation overdoses in California and elsewhere.
Does this mean you should avoid CT scans? No, don't swing from scan-a-mania to scan-a-phobia. These tests can be lifesavers, provided you and your doctor use them only when the benefits outweigh the risks.
I recently had a reader and multiple myeloma cancer patient on my other blog, www.MultipleMyelomaBlog.Com, express concern over this very issue. Pattie and I will keep our eyes and ears open for news, pro and con, on the subject of testing risk.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
The use of CT scans (sometimes called CAT scans) has grown by leaps and bounds in the past 20 years. That's because they're painless, noninvasive and super-fast, and they give doctors detailed images of everything from brain injuries and cancers to fractures, kidney stones and ruptured appendixes. The scans are also credited with making exploratory surgery a thing of the past. So it's not hard to see why Americans and Canadians now get 75 million of them a year.
CT's dark side? A single scan can deliver 100 to 400 times more radiation than a traditional X-ray. A new National Cancer Institute study estimates that 29,000 cancers and 15,000 cancer deaths (more than the deaths from ovarian cancer) will be triggered by the CT scans done in 2007 alone. Meanwhile, the Food and Drug Administration is investigating more than 200 claims of scan-related radiation overdoses in California and elsewhere.
Does this mean you should avoid CT scans? No, don't swing from scan-a-mania to scan-a-phobia. These tests can be lifesavers, provided you and your doctor use them only when the benefits outweigh the risks.
I recently had a reader and multiple myeloma cancer patient on my other blog, www.MultipleMyelomaBlog.Com, express concern over this very issue. Pattie and I will keep our eyes and ears open for news, pro and con, on the subject of testing risk.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
VGX-3100 Vaccine Against Cervical Cancer Making Progress
Check-out the last paragraph of Friday's press release from Inovio Biomedical:
Inovio Biomedical Corp., maker of VGX-3100--a DNA vaccine targeting the E6 and E7 proteins of human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 and is delivered via in vivo electroporation. Similar to previously reported data from the initial lowest dose cohort of this phase I trial, the vaccine was found to be generally safe and well tolerated. While previously reported data showed significant cellular and humoral immune responses, data from this second, intermediate dose group highlighted a significantly increased and dose-related immune response specific to the antigens targeted by the vaccine.
"We are extremely pleased with the safety and tolerability profile of VGX-3100. Furthermore, analyses of the vaccinated subjects from the first two cohorts indicate that this vaccine is highly immunogenic, generating antigen-specific T-cell and antibody responses that are amongst the highest reported from any previous human studies of DNA vaccines," said J. Joseph Kim, President and CEO.
"While recent HPV preventive vaccines have been successful in protecting against infections that may lead to cervical cancer, Inovio's therapeutic vaccine targets the millions of women already infected with HPV and is intended to treat pre-cancerous cells and cervical cancer caused by this virus. Current vaccines do not serve this group of women," Kim said.
I hope this stuff works! It could save a lot of woman a lot of pain--and possibly their lives. Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Inovio Biomedical Corp., maker of VGX-3100--a DNA vaccine targeting the E6 and E7 proteins of human papillomavirus (HPV) types 16 and 18 and is delivered via in vivo electroporation. Similar to previously reported data from the initial lowest dose cohort of this phase I trial, the vaccine was found to be generally safe and well tolerated. While previously reported data showed significant cellular and humoral immune responses, data from this second, intermediate dose group highlighted a significantly increased and dose-related immune response specific to the antigens targeted by the vaccine.
"We are extremely pleased with the safety and tolerability profile of VGX-3100. Furthermore, analyses of the vaccinated subjects from the first two cohorts indicate that this vaccine is highly immunogenic, generating antigen-specific T-cell and antibody responses that are amongst the highest reported from any previous human studies of DNA vaccines," said J. Joseph Kim, President and CEO.
"While recent HPV preventive vaccines have been successful in protecting against infections that may lead to cervical cancer, Inovio's therapeutic vaccine targets the millions of women already infected with HPV and is intended to treat pre-cancerous cells and cervical cancer caused by this virus. Current vaccines do not serve this group of women," Kim said.
I hope this stuff works! It could save a lot of woman a lot of pain--and possibly their lives. Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Saturday, February 13, 2010
Pattie & I Start Work On Cancer Project To Aid Newly Diagnosed Patients Today
It is already 9 PM Saturday night. Pattie and I have been busy consulting with a PR firm out of Los Angeles all day--and we are far from finished. The firm is producing a film designed to help newly diagnosed cancer patients cope with the wide variety of challenges associated with their disease. I'm excited about the project, but it is getting late and the crew needs to head back west Sunday morning. Since it is unlikely either one of us will get another chance to post until later tomorrow, I wanted to let all of our fellow cancer patients, survivors and caregivers know Pattie and I are thinking about you always!
Feel good, keep smiling!
Pat & Pattie
Feel good, keep smiling!
Pat & Pattie
Friday, February 12, 2010
Phase I Trial Shows Promise Against Ovarian Cancer
The University of Kansas newspaper, the University Daily Kansan, just ran the following article about a new ovarian cancer drug being tested at KU:
New ovarian cancer drug tested
By Tim Dwyer
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The University of Kansas Cancer Center began running a Phase I clinical trial of the anti-ovarian cancer drug Nanotax. Nanotax is a breakthrough drug because, unlike other anti-cancer drugs, it is water-soluble.
Charles Decedue, Valentino Stella, Bala Subramaniam and Roger Rajewski worked in the Higuchi Biosciences Center at the University, developing Nanotax, Last year the American Cancer Society estimated that there were just under 22,000 new cases of ovarian cancer and 14,600 deaths caused by it in the United States.
The clinical trial at the University comes nearly 15 year after Nanotax was first conceived. It is one of three active clinical trials for ovarian cancer treatment in Kansas, and it’s the only one still recruiting patients. The trial is classified as Phase I because it tests the drug in a small group.
Decedue said he wasn’t allowed to give out numbers because the clinical trial was not finalized, but he offered an optimistic analysis.
“The only thing I can tell you so far is that we have not seen any adverse effects to the drug or the procedure,” Decedue said. “That’s as good as it gets in a Phase I trial.”
Read the rest of the article by clicking on: Kansan.Com - Ovarian Cancer. I found it interesting they compared the results on mice with taxol--one of the chemo drugs that made me sick, and bald (but worked!) during my chemotherapy for ovarian cancer seven years ago. I hate the thought of animal testing, but my husband, Pat, tries to reassure me it is necessary--and that he and I are alive today because of it.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
New ovarian cancer drug tested
By Tim Dwyer
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The University of Kansas Cancer Center began running a Phase I clinical trial of the anti-ovarian cancer drug Nanotax. Nanotax is a breakthrough drug because, unlike other anti-cancer drugs, it is water-soluble.
Charles Decedue, Valentino Stella, Bala Subramaniam and Roger Rajewski worked in the Higuchi Biosciences Center at the University, developing Nanotax, Last year the American Cancer Society estimated that there were just under 22,000 new cases of ovarian cancer and 14,600 deaths caused by it in the United States.
The clinical trial at the University comes nearly 15 year after Nanotax was first conceived. It is one of three active clinical trials for ovarian cancer treatment in Kansas, and it’s the only one still recruiting patients. The trial is classified as Phase I because it tests the drug in a small group.
Decedue said he wasn’t allowed to give out numbers because the clinical trial was not finalized, but he offered an optimistic analysis.
“The only thing I can tell you so far is that we have not seen any adverse effects to the drug or the procedure,” Decedue said. “That’s as good as it gets in a Phase I trial.”
Read the rest of the article by clicking on: Kansan.Com - Ovarian Cancer. I found it interesting they compared the results on mice with taxol--one of the chemo drugs that made me sick, and bald (but worked!) during my chemotherapy for ovarian cancer seven years ago. I hate the thought of animal testing, but my husband, Pat, tries to reassure me it is necessary--and that he and I are alive today because of it.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Additional Cancer Risk High For Children With Hodgkin’s Lymphoma, Despite Low-Dose Radiation
HemOncToday.Com features a disturbing report about how some kids with lymphoma are at risk for developing a second malignancy. Here is the intro to the report, posted on February 11th:
Children with Hodgkin’s lymphoma remained at high risk for second malignant neoplasms, even when treated with low-dose radiation, according to the results of a long-term follow-up study. Researchers said patients treated with low-dose radiation developed sarcomas and breast and thyroid carcinomas with similar frequency and latency as patients treated with high-dose radiation.
Go to Children with Hodgkin's Lymphoma to read the entire report.
Dealing with cancer is always difficult, but especially so when kids are involved, don't you think?
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
Children with Hodgkin’s lymphoma remained at high risk for second malignant neoplasms, even when treated with low-dose radiation, according to the results of a long-term follow-up study. Researchers said patients treated with low-dose radiation developed sarcomas and breast and thyroid carcinomas with similar frequency and latency as patients treated with high-dose radiation.
Go to Children with Hodgkin's Lymphoma to read the entire report.
Dealing with cancer is always difficult, but especially so when kids are involved, don't you think?
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
Thursday, February 11, 2010
Proof Stress Can Speed Tumor Growth In Cancer Patients
I am close to completing a chapter in my new book about stress. Although it has yet to be proven chronic stress can cause cancer, few researchers dispute the fact stress can speed tumor growth.
Here is a British study I found on The Press Association site, claiming to confirm the direct link between stress and cancer for the first time:
Studies confirm stress-cancer link
(UKPA) – Jan 13, 2010
A direct connection between stress and cancer has been confirmed by scientists for the first time.
Researchers found stressed cells can generate tumour-inducing signals that affect their neighbours.
Although the study was carried out on fruit flies, the same genes and biological pathways involved are found in humans.
Chronic inflammation, a key cause of stress, is already known to be associated with tumour growth in human cancer patients.
Some experts believe negative emotions, stress hormones, inflammation and cancer may all be linked, but the evidence is not clear. Until now it was widely believed that cancer-causing genetic mutations only affected individual cells.
The new research shows this is not always the case. Different cancer mutations in separate cells can co-operate to promote the development of tumours.
Scientists in the US and China focused on the activity of two mutant genes known to be involved in human cancers. One, called RAS, has been implicated in 30% of cancers. The other, a tumour-suppressing gene called "scribble" allows cancers to develop when it becomes defective. However, neither a mutated RAS gene nor a mutant version of scribble can cause cancer on its own.
The researchers studied fruit flies carrying both gene mutations. They found that a cell with only mutant RAS can develop into a malignant tumour if assisted by a nearby cell with defective scribble.
Stress was the factor that linked them together, causing signalling proteins called cytokines to travel between the cells. The process of stress signalling, known as JNK, can be activated by a range of environmental influences.
Study leader Professor Tian Xu, from Yale University School of Medicine in Connecticut, US, said in the report for the journal Nature: "A lot of different conditions can trigger stress signalling: physical stress, emotional stress, infections, inflammation - all these things. Bad news for cancer."
Copyright © 2010 The Press Association. All rights reserved.
It is a fact: Chronic stress is bad for anyone's health—especially those of us with cancer. Just knowing this can be stressful! I don't know about you, but sometimes I get stressed just trying not to get stressed!
Feel good, keep smiling and try to live one moment—one day at a time! And after you learn how to do that, could you please share your secret with the rest of us? Pat
Here is a British study I found on The Press Association site, claiming to confirm the direct link between stress and cancer for the first time:
Studies confirm stress-cancer link
(UKPA) – Jan 13, 2010
A direct connection between stress and cancer has been confirmed by scientists for the first time.
Researchers found stressed cells can generate tumour-inducing signals that affect their neighbours.
Although the study was carried out on fruit flies, the same genes and biological pathways involved are found in humans.
Chronic inflammation, a key cause of stress, is already known to be associated with tumour growth in human cancer patients.
Some experts believe negative emotions, stress hormones, inflammation and cancer may all be linked, but the evidence is not clear. Until now it was widely believed that cancer-causing genetic mutations only affected individual cells.
The new research shows this is not always the case. Different cancer mutations in separate cells can co-operate to promote the development of tumours.
Scientists in the US and China focused on the activity of two mutant genes known to be involved in human cancers. One, called RAS, has been implicated in 30% of cancers. The other, a tumour-suppressing gene called "scribble" allows cancers to develop when it becomes defective. However, neither a mutated RAS gene nor a mutant version of scribble can cause cancer on its own.
The researchers studied fruit flies carrying both gene mutations. They found that a cell with only mutant RAS can develop into a malignant tumour if assisted by a nearby cell with defective scribble.
Stress was the factor that linked them together, causing signalling proteins called cytokines to travel between the cells. The process of stress signalling, known as JNK, can be activated by a range of environmental influences.
Study leader Professor Tian Xu, from Yale University School of Medicine in Connecticut, US, said in the report for the journal Nature: "A lot of different conditions can trigger stress signalling: physical stress, emotional stress, infections, inflammation - all these things. Bad news for cancer."
Copyright © 2010 The Press Association. All rights reserved.
It is a fact: Chronic stress is bad for anyone's health—especially those of us with cancer. Just knowing this can be stressful! I don't know about you, but sometimes I get stressed just trying not to get stressed!
Feel good, keep smiling and try to live one moment—one day at a time! And after you learn how to do that, could you please share your secret with the rest of us? Pat
More Aggressive Use Of Surgical Options May Help Prevent Ovarian Cancer In Some High Risk Patients
Here is part of an article about using surgery to help prevent ovarian cancer I read in a small newspaper from Texas called The Cherokeean Harold.
I'm not sure how I feel about this--sort of like removing your breast(s) if a woman has a genetically high risk of getting breast cancer. I do know I may have not gotten ovarian cancer, had my surgion removed my ovaries when I had surgery to stop my cervical/uterine cancer twelve years ago. But I was so young at the time (34), everyone we talked too thought it would be better to keep my ovaries. Read this and see what you think:
Surgery to treat, prevent an option for ovarian cancer
HOUSTON – (Feb. 8, 2010) – Women who have recently been diagnosed with ovarian cancer or who are at a high risk for developing the disease may benefit from having their ovaries removed, said a gynecologic oncologist at Baylor College of Medicine.
“For patients with a new diagnosis of ovarian cancer, surgery significantly impacts their survival,” said Dr. Concepcion Diaz-Arrastia, director of gynecologic oncology and an assistant professor at BCM. “For high-risk women – women who have previously had breast cancer or have a family history of ovarian cancer – surgical removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries significantly reduces her chances of developing the disease.”
Ovarian cancer is cancer of the ovaries, the female organs most important during a woman’s reproductive age. During a woman’s reproductive years, ovaries release eggs and the major female hormones estrogen and progesterone.
There are currently no screening methods, Diaz-Arrastia said. “There are tremendous efforts to explore identification of new biomarkers and development of new ovarian cancer screening methods.”
Diaz-Arrastia said symptoms of ovarian cancer are subtle and may include:
-Early satiety or feeling full sooner than usual or after eating less
-Upper gastrointestinal discomfort such as indigestion or heartburn
-Feeling bloated
-Pressure sensation in pelvis including the colon
-Urinary urgency
Family history of ovarian and breast cancer can increase a woman’s risk of developing ovarian cancer.
Additionally, women who have never had children are at a greater risk of developing the disease, Diaz-Arrastia said.
SURGERY TO TREAT
Treatment of ovarian cancer typically involves surgery by a gynecologic oncologist, followed by chemotherapy.
The role of surgery in ovarian cancer ranges from the removal of the ovarian mass and tissues where ovarian cancer typically spreads for surgical staging of early cancer to cancer debulking or removal of all visible cancer in the abdomen in women with advanced disease. This latter surgical approach for advanced ovarian cancer is unique, and more advantageous, than the surgical options for other cancers like breast, pancreatic and colon, said Diaz-Arrastia.
“The goal of surgery is to take out as much of the cancer as you physically can,” said Diaz-Arrastia. “While this may mean a longer surgery with removal of intestinal segments, it may directly impact survival.”
The remaining disease is effectively treated with chemotherapy after surgery. Since the ovarian cancer is very sensitive to chemotherapy, the treatment is administered intravenously or intraperitoneally (injection of a substance into the body cavity), she said.
SURGERY TO PREVENT
For women with a family history or those who test positive for a BRCA1 or 2 genetic mutations, preventive surgery is recommended at an age 10 years younger than the age at diagnosis of the family member with the disease, Diaz-Arrastia said.
BRCA mutations often lead to cancer.
The patients desire to have children should be taken into account when deciding on preventive surgery, Diaz-Arrastia said.
Most women will be diagnosed in their late 50s and 60s after childbearing is completed. However, some women are diagnosed much younger.
“With removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries, there is a great reduction in chances of developing the disease, but there remains a small chance,” said Diaz-Arrastia. “It’s a risk-benefit decision.”
OUTPATIENT PROCEDURE
Surgery typically includes removal of both ovaries and fallopian tubes, since cancers can also arise in the fallopian tubes, Diaz-Arrastia said.
It is an outpatient procedure – typically patients go home the same day with three band-aids. In young women, the most common side effects of surgery are the consequences of an early menopause, hot flashes, vaginal dryness and osteoporosis -- all treatable with medications.
OVARY HEALTH
Well-woman visits include a physical examination of the ovaries. “It’s important for women to keep up with these visits once a year even when cervical cancer screening with a pap smear or HPV test is not scheduled,” said Diaz-Arrastia.
Interesting. Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
I'm not sure how I feel about this--sort of like removing your breast(s) if a woman has a genetically high risk of getting breast cancer. I do know I may have not gotten ovarian cancer, had my surgion removed my ovaries when I had surgery to stop my cervical/uterine cancer twelve years ago. But I was so young at the time (34), everyone we talked too thought it would be better to keep my ovaries. Read this and see what you think:
Surgery to treat, prevent an option for ovarian cancer
HOUSTON – (Feb. 8, 2010) – Women who have recently been diagnosed with ovarian cancer or who are at a high risk for developing the disease may benefit from having their ovaries removed, said a gynecologic oncologist at Baylor College of Medicine.
“For patients with a new diagnosis of ovarian cancer, surgery significantly impacts their survival,” said Dr. Concepcion Diaz-Arrastia, director of gynecologic oncology and an assistant professor at BCM. “For high-risk women – women who have previously had breast cancer or have a family history of ovarian cancer – surgical removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries significantly reduces her chances of developing the disease.”
Ovarian cancer is cancer of the ovaries, the female organs most important during a woman’s reproductive age. During a woman’s reproductive years, ovaries release eggs and the major female hormones estrogen and progesterone.
There are currently no screening methods, Diaz-Arrastia said. “There are tremendous efforts to explore identification of new biomarkers and development of new ovarian cancer screening methods.”
Diaz-Arrastia said symptoms of ovarian cancer are subtle and may include:
-Early satiety or feeling full sooner than usual or after eating less
-Upper gastrointestinal discomfort such as indigestion or heartburn
-Feeling bloated
-Pressure sensation in pelvis including the colon
-Urinary urgency
Family history of ovarian and breast cancer can increase a woman’s risk of developing ovarian cancer.
Additionally, women who have never had children are at a greater risk of developing the disease, Diaz-Arrastia said.
SURGERY TO TREAT
Treatment of ovarian cancer typically involves surgery by a gynecologic oncologist, followed by chemotherapy.
The role of surgery in ovarian cancer ranges from the removal of the ovarian mass and tissues where ovarian cancer typically spreads for surgical staging of early cancer to cancer debulking or removal of all visible cancer in the abdomen in women with advanced disease. This latter surgical approach for advanced ovarian cancer is unique, and more advantageous, than the surgical options for other cancers like breast, pancreatic and colon, said Diaz-Arrastia.
“The goal of surgery is to take out as much of the cancer as you physically can,” said Diaz-Arrastia. “While this may mean a longer surgery with removal of intestinal segments, it may directly impact survival.”
The remaining disease is effectively treated with chemotherapy after surgery. Since the ovarian cancer is very sensitive to chemotherapy, the treatment is administered intravenously or intraperitoneally (injection of a substance into the body cavity), she said.
SURGERY TO PREVENT
For women with a family history or those who test positive for a BRCA1 or 2 genetic mutations, preventive surgery is recommended at an age 10 years younger than the age at diagnosis of the family member with the disease, Diaz-Arrastia said.
BRCA mutations often lead to cancer.
The patients desire to have children should be taken into account when deciding on preventive surgery, Diaz-Arrastia said.
Most women will be diagnosed in their late 50s and 60s after childbearing is completed. However, some women are diagnosed much younger.
“With removal of the fallopian tubes and ovaries, there is a great reduction in chances of developing the disease, but there remains a small chance,” said Diaz-Arrastia. “It’s a risk-benefit decision.”
OUTPATIENT PROCEDURE
Surgery typically includes removal of both ovaries and fallopian tubes, since cancers can also arise in the fallopian tubes, Diaz-Arrastia said.
It is an outpatient procedure – typically patients go home the same day with three band-aids. In young women, the most common side effects of surgery are the consequences of an early menopause, hot flashes, vaginal dryness and osteoporosis -- all treatable with medications.
OVARY HEALTH
Well-woman visits include a physical examination of the ovaries. “It’s important for women to keep up with these visits once a year even when cervical cancer screening with a pap smear or HPV test is not scheduled,” said Diaz-Arrastia.
Interesting. Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Wednesday, February 10, 2010
Cervical Cancer: New Drug Triapine Provides Both Significant Reduction in Cancer Disease and Cancer Control
Here is a ground-breaking announcement concerning cervical cancer treatment, released today on ScienceDaily.Com:
Published in the February issue of Clinical Cancer Research, the Phase One study found that a new chemotherapy medicine, Triapine, was well tolerated in combination with standard-of-care cisplatin chemotherapy and radiation treatment in women with cervical cancer. This regimen provided both significant reduction in cancer disease and cancer control.
Read the entire release at New drug combo featuring Triapine shows promise. Don't forget to temper your hope and enthusiasm by remembering these are only Phase One study results--there is still a long way to go until this treatment combination is proven and FDA approved.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Published in the February issue of Clinical Cancer Research, the Phase One study found that a new chemotherapy medicine, Triapine, was well tolerated in combination with standard-of-care cisplatin chemotherapy and radiation treatment in women with cervical cancer. This regimen provided both significant reduction in cancer disease and cancer control.
Read the entire release at New drug combo featuring Triapine shows promise. Don't forget to temper your hope and enthusiasm by remembering these are only Phase One study results--there is still a long way to go until this treatment combination is proven and FDA approved.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie
Watch For More About Cervical, Uterine, Ovarian Cancer Information Here Daily
As you probably know, my husband, Pat, has multiple myeloma, a cancer of the bone marrow. He endures monthly chemotherapy and lots and lots of bone pain each and every day. Somehow he finds the time and energy to write and post articles about cancer daily. I fill-in when I can or when he isn't feeling well. Pat's specialty are blood and bone marrow cancers—for example, he traveled to New Orleans last December and used his journalist credentials to report live from ASH—thanks to the International Myeloma Foundation, who payed his way.
What many of you may or may not know is, I am also a cervical, uterine and ovarian cancer survivor. Pat has agreed to help me write more about these cancers—my cancers.
Starting today, we are going to post more about these and other cancers, in addition to articles about leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma—along with stories about nutrition, alternative medicine and exercising to help our fellow cancer patients.
As Pat would say: Feel good and keep smiling—and thank you for reading! Pattie
What many of you may or may not know is, I am also a cervical, uterine and ovarian cancer survivor. Pat has agreed to help me write more about these cancers—my cancers.
Starting today, we are going to post more about these and other cancers, in addition to articles about leukemia, lymphoma and multiple myeloma—along with stories about nutrition, alternative medicine and exercising to help our fellow cancer patients.
As Pat would say: Feel good and keep smiling—and thank you for reading! Pattie
Tuesday, February 9, 2010
Press Release/Article About New Anti-Tumor, Bone Strengthening Drug, Denosumab, On www.MultipleMyelomaBlog.Com
Amgen, makers of Denosumab, released Stage 3 study results about Prostate Cancer Patients With Bone Metastases yesterday. You can find the study on our other site: www.MultipleMyelomaBlog.Com. We posted the article there because bone tumors and lesions are so common in multiple myeloma patients. Looks like the news is very positive!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
Beer May Be Good For Your Bones – Could Drinking Beer Help Cancer Patients With Bone Damage?
Fun article which ran yesterday on Yahoo News about benefit of beer for your bones:
LiveScience Managing Editor
LiveScience.com jeanna Bryner
livescience.com – Mon Feb 8, 12:05 am ET
If you downed one too many while watching the Super Bowl, here's at least one reason to hold your head high: Drinking beer can be good for your health.
But seriously, a new analysis of 100 commercial beers shows the hoppy beverage is a significant source of dietary silicon, a key ingredient for bone health.
Though past research has suggested beer is chockfull of silicon, little was known about how silicon levels varied with the type of beer and malting process used. So a pair of researchers took one for the team and ran chemical analyses on beer's raw ingredients. They also picked up 100 commercial beers from the grocery store and measured the silicon content.
The silicon content of the beers ranged from 6.4 mg/L to 56.5 mg/L, with an average of 30 mg/L. Two beers are the equivalent of just under a half liter, so a person could get 30 mg of the nutrient from two beers. And while there is no official recommendation for daily silicon uptake, the researchers say, in the United States, individuals consume between 20 and 50 mg of silicon each day.
However, other studies show that consuming more than one or two alcoholic beverages a day may be, overall, bad for health.
The take-home message for the casual drinker: "Choose the beer you enjoy. Drink it in moderation," lead researcher Charles Bamforth of the University of California, Davis, told LiveScience. "It is contributing silicon (and more) to your good health."
Bamforth and his colleague Troy Casey, both of the university's Department of Food Science and Technology, detail their findings in the February issue of the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture.
The silicon levels of beer types, on average:
Indian Pale Ale (IPA): 41.2 mg/L
Ales: 32.8 mg/L
Pale Ale: 36.5 mg/L
Sorghum: 27.3 mg/L
Lagers: 23.7 mg/L
Wheat: 18.9 mg/L
Light lagers: 17.2 mg/L
Non Alcoholic: 16.3 mg/L
Their research showed the malting process didn't affect barley's silicon content, which is mostly in the grain's husk. However, pale-colored malts had more silicon than the darker products, such as the chocolate, roasted barley and black malt, which all have substantial roasting. The scientists aren't sure why these darker malts have less silicon than other malts.
Hops were the stars of the beer ingredients, showing as much as four times more silicon than was found in malt. The downside: Hops make up a much smaller portion of beer compared with grain. Some beers, such as IPAs are hoppier, while wheat beers tend to have fewer hops than other brews, the researchers say.
"Beers containing high levels of malted barley and hops are richest in silicon," Bamforth said. "Wheat contains less silicon than barley because it is the husk of the barley that is rich in this element. While most of the silicon remains in the husk during brewing, significant quantities of silicon nonetheless are extracted into wort and much of this survives into beer."
(Wort is the sweet liquid that comes from mashing the grains and eventually becomes beer.)
Got beer?
While the researchers are not recommending gulping beer to meet your silicon intake needs, their study does add to others on the potential health benefits of this cold beverage.
The type of silicon in beer, called orthosilicic acid, has a 50 percent bioavailability, meaning that much is available for use in the body. Some foods, like bananas are rich in silicon but only 5 percent is bioavailable. This soluble form of silica found in beer could be important for the growth and development of bone and connective tissue, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Past research has suggested that moderate beer consumption may help fight osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone mass and deterioration of bone tissue.
Another past study involving nearly 1,700 women reported last year in the journal Nutrition showed participants who were light to moderate beer drinkers had much better bone density than non-drinkers. The researchers suggested the beer's plant hormones, not the alcohol, could be responsible for the bone boost.
Since I'm on a low, low carb diet, guess I need to drink several more of my low calorie/carb beers each week to get the same amount of dietary silicon as the rest of you!
Regardless, drink up, everyone--in the safety of your homes, of course!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
LiveScience Managing Editor
LiveScience.com jeanna Bryner
livescience.com – Mon Feb 8, 12:05 am ET
If you downed one too many while watching the Super Bowl, here's at least one reason to hold your head high: Drinking beer can be good for your health.
But seriously, a new analysis of 100 commercial beers shows the hoppy beverage is a significant source of dietary silicon, a key ingredient for bone health.
Though past research has suggested beer is chockfull of silicon, little was known about how silicon levels varied with the type of beer and malting process used. So a pair of researchers took one for the team and ran chemical analyses on beer's raw ingredients. They also picked up 100 commercial beers from the grocery store and measured the silicon content.
The silicon content of the beers ranged from 6.4 mg/L to 56.5 mg/L, with an average of 30 mg/L. Two beers are the equivalent of just under a half liter, so a person could get 30 mg of the nutrient from two beers. And while there is no official recommendation for daily silicon uptake, the researchers say, in the United States, individuals consume between 20 and 50 mg of silicon each day.
However, other studies show that consuming more than one or two alcoholic beverages a day may be, overall, bad for health.
The take-home message for the casual drinker: "Choose the beer you enjoy. Drink it in moderation," lead researcher Charles Bamforth of the University of California, Davis, told LiveScience. "It is contributing silicon (and more) to your good health."
Bamforth and his colleague Troy Casey, both of the university's Department of Food Science and Technology, detail their findings in the February issue of the Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture.
The silicon levels of beer types, on average:
Indian Pale Ale (IPA): 41.2 mg/L
Ales: 32.8 mg/L
Pale Ale: 36.5 mg/L
Sorghum: 27.3 mg/L
Lagers: 23.7 mg/L
Wheat: 18.9 mg/L
Light lagers: 17.2 mg/L
Non Alcoholic: 16.3 mg/L
Their research showed the malting process didn't affect barley's silicon content, which is mostly in the grain's husk. However, pale-colored malts had more silicon than the darker products, such as the chocolate, roasted barley and black malt, which all have substantial roasting. The scientists aren't sure why these darker malts have less silicon than other malts.
Hops were the stars of the beer ingredients, showing as much as four times more silicon than was found in malt. The downside: Hops make up a much smaller portion of beer compared with grain. Some beers, such as IPAs are hoppier, while wheat beers tend to have fewer hops than other brews, the researchers say.
"Beers containing high levels of malted barley and hops are richest in silicon," Bamforth said. "Wheat contains less silicon than barley because it is the husk of the barley that is rich in this element. While most of the silicon remains in the husk during brewing, significant quantities of silicon nonetheless are extracted into wort and much of this survives into beer."
(Wort is the sweet liquid that comes from mashing the grains and eventually becomes beer.)
Got beer?
While the researchers are not recommending gulping beer to meet your silicon intake needs, their study does add to others on the potential health benefits of this cold beverage.
The type of silicon in beer, called orthosilicic acid, has a 50 percent bioavailability, meaning that much is available for use in the body. Some foods, like bananas are rich in silicon but only 5 percent is bioavailable. This soluble form of silica found in beer could be important for the growth and development of bone and connective tissue, according to the National Institutes of Health.
Past research has suggested that moderate beer consumption may help fight osteoporosis, a disease characterized by low bone mass and deterioration of bone tissue.
Another past study involving nearly 1,700 women reported last year in the journal Nutrition showed participants who were light to moderate beer drinkers had much better bone density than non-drinkers. The researchers suggested the beer's plant hormones, not the alcohol, could be responsible for the bone boost.
Since I'm on a low, low carb diet, guess I need to drink several more of my low calorie/carb beers each week to get the same amount of dietary silicon as the rest of you!
Regardless, drink up, everyone--in the safety of your homes, of course!
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Monday, February 8, 2010
More About Raw Diets For Cancer Patients
Let's back-up a bit and take a more detailed look at raw diets. Here is more from the first draft of my yet to be named second book for cancer patients:
Hearing a cancer diagnosis for the first time is unnerving at best. Cancer patients tend to feel like they have lost control. Diet is one way to try and grab some of that control back.
I get it—been there, done that! But please be careful before embracing any extreme diet or exercise program—and a raw diet is the poster child of extreme diet plans!
A raw diet is a vegetarian diet made up of fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts, seeds, beans, sprouts, whole grains, dried fruit and sometimes seaweed, raw eggs and unpasturized milk.
The advantages of eating an all natural diet like this for a cancer patient should be obvious—but that doesn’t make it an easy thing to do!
The principle sounds good—very little sugar to “feed cancer.” No meat to clog the intestines and introduce added carcinogens into the body. No processed foods, which tend to be composed of mostly empty calories, devoid of nutrients.
So the argument goes, cooking foods depletes, destroys or alters vitamins, minerals and amino acids. Organic foods restrict the use of pesticides. Cooking meat can make much of the fat and protein undigetible. Worse yet, cooked meat can have a cumulative congesting and clogging effect on your body.
An additional benefit may be controlling one’s insulin levels by limiting processed sugar and other foods, like potatoes, grains, bread and rice—foods high in simple carbohydrates. Many researchers believe high carb foods “feed cancer.”
Ultimately, the most common argument for eating a predominantly raw diet comes down to enzymes. Nutritionists agree your body needs natural enzymes found in fruits and vegetables to aid in digestion and to help your body maximize foods nutritional benefits. Eating lots of cooked foods not only destroys these enzymes, it places a burden on your pancreas and other organs.
Raw diet proponents point out that cooking food destroys these important enzymes. This argument is countered by more traditional researchers who point out the body produces its own enzymes for digestion—and that cooking actually makes some nutrients easier to absorb.
For example, lycopene in tomatoes and beta-carotene in carrots are absorbed best by your body after they are cooked.
One of the most visible supporters of eating raw foods, Dr. Joseph Mercola, seems to contradict his pro-raw diet position when he writes: “The best source of alpha-lipoic acid, an important and powerful antioxidant, is found in grass-fed red meat and organ meats.”
But is this a contradiction? Remember, no one, not even Dr. Mercola, who claims to consume a diet made up of 90% raw foods, advocates human beings should eat all of their food raw—leaving room to supplement one’s raw food diet with carefully selected cooked fish, meats or poultry, like free-range chicken.
I subscribe to Dr. Mercola’s weekly newsletter. One of my favorite quotes is “Don’t fall into the classic American strategy when it comes to nutrition: if a little is good, then more is even better.”
Dr. Mercola’s emphasis has always been for a person to keep their insulin levels as low and even as possible, thus helping prevent cancer and a number of other health problems. He believes in powerful anti-cancer flavonoids, like those found in the skins of grapes and in red wine, as well as other antioxidants—just not at the expense of elevated insulin levels. Dr. Mercola’s advice on the best way to stabilize your body’s insulin levels: “Ingest less sugar, including limiting your intake of sugary fruits—and eat a raw diet, made up of vegetables, free-range, organic eggs, milk and a small amount of nutrient and antioxidant dense fruits like blueberries and bilberries.” He also advocates eating raw ostrich or other lean, organically grown meats.
Raw eggs and milk? Raw ostrich meat? What about salmonella or other poisoning attributed to eating raw or undercooked food? Perhaps this may be a good time to cover some of the obvious disadvantages to diving-in and eating a raw diet.
Meal planning can be challenging, especially if you are away from home a lot. Raw diets don’t offer a lot of variety when compared to a traditional, well rounded food plan which includes countless cooked food options. What about protein? Sure, you can get the protein you need from a raw diet. But careful consideration must be given to which foods are eaten together and in which order to maximize nutritional efficiency, especially where protein is concerned. Other nutrients can be more difficult to ingest as well. There is also some disagreement among nutritionists over the effect cooking has on enzymes. Many would say it is a natural function for your body to produce its own enzymes. These scientists argue eating cooked meals does not place any extra burden on your pancreas or other organs, since providing this function is what they are designed to do.
Finally, what about taste and texture? Raw food diet guru’s will argue this isn’t the case, but a life without the tastes, textures and aroma of cooked foods is impractical for all but the most dedicated. And giving up sugar? That’s a deal-breaker for me!
Still, the inconveniences and sacrifices associated with eating a raw diet might be worth it—if there was proof a raw diet prevented, cured or slowed the growth of cancer. Sorry, but there really isn’t any definitive evidence supporting this theory. The before-mentioned Dr Mercola would disagree. So would Victoria Boutenko, author of 12 Steps to Raw Foods. Ms Boutenko’s book treats eating cooked foods like it is an addiction or dependency. This author, like many others, claims a raw food diet strengthens the immune system and can improve or even cure depression, asthma, diabetes and high blood pressure. Why should cancer be any different?
If you, my fellow cancer patient, would like to try and do something--anything to improve your overall health and try to fight your cancer using nutrition, a raw diet may be one of your best options. Radical and difficult--yes. Unproven--yes. But if you are careful, what do you have to lose?
Health permitting, I should be finished with my second book about nutrition and financial guidance for cancer patients before year's end.
In the meantime, feel good, keep smiling and eat more raw vegetables! Pat
Hearing a cancer diagnosis for the first time is unnerving at best. Cancer patients tend to feel like they have lost control. Diet is one way to try and grab some of that control back.
I get it—been there, done that! But please be careful before embracing any extreme diet or exercise program—and a raw diet is the poster child of extreme diet plans!
A raw diet is a vegetarian diet made up of fresh fruits and vegetables, nuts, seeds, beans, sprouts, whole grains, dried fruit and sometimes seaweed, raw eggs and unpasturized milk.
The advantages of eating an all natural diet like this for a cancer patient should be obvious—but that doesn’t make it an easy thing to do!
The principle sounds good—very little sugar to “feed cancer.” No meat to clog the intestines and introduce added carcinogens into the body. No processed foods, which tend to be composed of mostly empty calories, devoid of nutrients.
So the argument goes, cooking foods depletes, destroys or alters vitamins, minerals and amino acids. Organic foods restrict the use of pesticides. Cooking meat can make much of the fat and protein undigetible. Worse yet, cooked meat can have a cumulative congesting and clogging effect on your body.
An additional benefit may be controlling one’s insulin levels by limiting processed sugar and other foods, like potatoes, grains, bread and rice—foods high in simple carbohydrates. Many researchers believe high carb foods “feed cancer.”
Ultimately, the most common argument for eating a predominantly raw diet comes down to enzymes. Nutritionists agree your body needs natural enzymes found in fruits and vegetables to aid in digestion and to help your body maximize foods nutritional benefits. Eating lots of cooked foods not only destroys these enzymes, it places a burden on your pancreas and other organs.
Raw diet proponents point out that cooking food destroys these important enzymes. This argument is countered by more traditional researchers who point out the body produces its own enzymes for digestion—and that cooking actually makes some nutrients easier to absorb.
For example, lycopene in tomatoes and beta-carotene in carrots are absorbed best by your body after they are cooked.
One of the most visible supporters of eating raw foods, Dr. Joseph Mercola, seems to contradict his pro-raw diet position when he writes: “The best source of alpha-lipoic acid, an important and powerful antioxidant, is found in grass-fed red meat and organ meats.”
But is this a contradiction? Remember, no one, not even Dr. Mercola, who claims to consume a diet made up of 90% raw foods, advocates human beings should eat all of their food raw—leaving room to supplement one’s raw food diet with carefully selected cooked fish, meats or poultry, like free-range chicken.
I subscribe to Dr. Mercola’s weekly newsletter. One of my favorite quotes is “Don’t fall into the classic American strategy when it comes to nutrition: if a little is good, then more is even better.”
Dr. Mercola’s emphasis has always been for a person to keep their insulin levels as low and even as possible, thus helping prevent cancer and a number of other health problems. He believes in powerful anti-cancer flavonoids, like those found in the skins of grapes and in red wine, as well as other antioxidants—just not at the expense of elevated insulin levels. Dr. Mercola’s advice on the best way to stabilize your body’s insulin levels: “Ingest less sugar, including limiting your intake of sugary fruits—and eat a raw diet, made up of vegetables, free-range, organic eggs, milk and a small amount of nutrient and antioxidant dense fruits like blueberries and bilberries.” He also advocates eating raw ostrich or other lean, organically grown meats.
Raw eggs and milk? Raw ostrich meat? What about salmonella or other poisoning attributed to eating raw or undercooked food? Perhaps this may be a good time to cover some of the obvious disadvantages to diving-in and eating a raw diet.
Meal planning can be challenging, especially if you are away from home a lot. Raw diets don’t offer a lot of variety when compared to a traditional, well rounded food plan which includes countless cooked food options. What about protein? Sure, you can get the protein you need from a raw diet. But careful consideration must be given to which foods are eaten together and in which order to maximize nutritional efficiency, especially where protein is concerned. Other nutrients can be more difficult to ingest as well. There is also some disagreement among nutritionists over the effect cooking has on enzymes. Many would say it is a natural function for your body to produce its own enzymes. These scientists argue eating cooked meals does not place any extra burden on your pancreas or other organs, since providing this function is what they are designed to do.
Finally, what about taste and texture? Raw food diet guru’s will argue this isn’t the case, but a life without the tastes, textures and aroma of cooked foods is impractical for all but the most dedicated. And giving up sugar? That’s a deal-breaker for me!
Still, the inconveniences and sacrifices associated with eating a raw diet might be worth it—if there was proof a raw diet prevented, cured or slowed the growth of cancer. Sorry, but there really isn’t any definitive evidence supporting this theory. The before-mentioned Dr Mercola would disagree. So would Victoria Boutenko, author of 12 Steps to Raw Foods. Ms Boutenko’s book treats eating cooked foods like it is an addiction or dependency. This author, like many others, claims a raw food diet strengthens the immune system and can improve or even cure depression, asthma, diabetes and high blood pressure. Why should cancer be any different?
If you, my fellow cancer patient, would like to try and do something--anything to improve your overall health and try to fight your cancer using nutrition, a raw diet may be one of your best options. Radical and difficult--yes. Unproven--yes. But if you are careful, what do you have to lose?
Health permitting, I should be finished with my second book about nutrition and financial guidance for cancer patients before year's end.
In the meantime, feel good, keep smiling and eat more raw vegetables! Pat
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Does A Raw Food Diet Help Control Or Cure Cancer? (Part Two)
Yesterday I posted a concise, yet comprehensive article about raw diets and cancer. I also mentioned I have been researching the topic for my second book. Here in a portion of my book's first draft on the subject:
There are a number of smaller independent studies which seem to support the argument that eating more raw vegetables reduces the risk from a number of different cancers. As you might expect, sites such as HealingCancerNaturally.Com and NaturalNews.Com list a number of vegetables, including broccoli, cabbage, kale, cauliflower, peppers, spinach and carrots, to name just a few, all proven to be more effective in preventing and slowing cancer when eaten raw.
But what about more neutral, mainstream sources? World champion cyclist and cancer survivor Lance Armstrong’s foundation, Live Strong, hosts a popular Website of the same name. To quote an article from their Website of the same name, dated November 13th, 2009: “Like other vegetables, green vegetables lose vitamins and nutrients after they’ve been cooked.”
The American Cancer Society is not so specific. I counted at least a dozen recommendations to eat five or more servings of fruits and vegetables daily on the organization’s www.Cancer.Org site. I could not find any specific reference or recommendation which encouraged patients to eat their veggies raw.
Similarly, the government funded National Cancer Institute’s Website, www.cancer.gov., is even more vague, posting: “Some studies show that fruits and non-starchy vegetables—for example broccoli, carrots, celery, peppers, tomatoes and zucchini—may protect against cancers of the mouth, esophagus and stomach.”
The American Cancer Society and National Cancer Institute are the country’s two largest cancer related organizations. Why couldn’t I find anything about the anti-cancer properties found in raw fruits and vegetables other groups claim help fight cancer?
Cynics would argue the American Cancer Society doesn’t want to upset contributors, while the government funded National Cancer Institute doesn’t want to alienate any large constituencies. My opinion: In a country where one half of the citizenry considers ketchup a vegetable, the nutritional bar isn’t raised very high! I consume five servings of vegetables before 10 am everyday! These two groups are just trying to get people to substitute a small lettuce salad for a large serving of French fries!
I will post Part Three tomorrow, then we can move on to other issues.
Feel good, keep smiling and, you guessed I might add, eat lots of raw fruits and vegetables! Pat
There are a number of smaller independent studies which seem to support the argument that eating more raw vegetables reduces the risk from a number of different cancers. As you might expect, sites such as HealingCancerNaturally.Com and NaturalNews.Com list a number of vegetables, including broccoli, cabbage, kale, cauliflower, peppers, spinach and carrots, to name just a few, all proven to be more effective in preventing and slowing cancer when eaten raw.
But what about more neutral, mainstream sources? World champion cyclist and cancer survivor Lance Armstrong’s foundation, Live Strong, hosts a popular Website of the same name. To quote an article from their Website of the same name, dated November 13th, 2009: “Like other vegetables, green vegetables lose vitamins and nutrients after they’ve been cooked.”
The American Cancer Society is not so specific. I counted at least a dozen recommendations to eat five or more servings of fruits and vegetables daily on the organization’s www.Cancer.Org site. I could not find any specific reference or recommendation which encouraged patients to eat their veggies raw.
Similarly, the government funded National Cancer Institute’s Website, www.cancer.gov., is even more vague, posting: “Some studies show that fruits and non-starchy vegetables—for example broccoli, carrots, celery, peppers, tomatoes and zucchini—may protect against cancers of the mouth, esophagus and stomach.”
The American Cancer Society and National Cancer Institute are the country’s two largest cancer related organizations. Why couldn’t I find anything about the anti-cancer properties found in raw fruits and vegetables other groups claim help fight cancer?
Cynics would argue the American Cancer Society doesn’t want to upset contributors, while the government funded National Cancer Institute doesn’t want to alienate any large constituencies. My opinion: In a country where one half of the citizenry considers ketchup a vegetable, the nutritional bar isn’t raised very high! I consume five servings of vegetables before 10 am everyday! These two groups are just trying to get people to substitute a small lettuce salad for a large serving of French fries!
I will post Part Three tomorrow, then we can move on to other issues.
Feel good, keep smiling and, you guessed I might add, eat lots of raw fruits and vegetables! Pat
Saturday, February 6, 2010
More Nutritional Questions - Does A Raw Food Diet Help Control Or Cure Cancer?
I have been researching this topic recently for my second book. There is little, if any proof eating a predominantly raw food diet helps fight cancer. There is, however, a great deal of anecdotal evidence pointing to the effectiveness of eating a nutritional diet packed with raw fruits and vegetables. Theoretically, eating a raw diet makes sense--and proponents make a persuasive argument supporting dropping most cooked and processed foods from a cancer patients diet. But so far, that's all it is--theory and speculation. Read this article about the subject I found on TheHealthGuide.Org:
February 4, 2010
Raw Food Cancer Treatment: Is It A Cure?
Raw food cancer treatments are becoming popular with some people although they are generally not supported by the mainstream medical world. Some people are taking up a raw food diet in the hope that this will help their body overcome cancer or recover from the effects of surgery and medications. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some people have found raw food helpful in their battles against cancer. These are usually just individual reported cases.
For most people on a standard American or other western diet, switching to raw food may be very beneficial simply because you will be cutting out most of the processed and refined foods loaded with fats and sugar that place such a burden on our digestive systems and add to our weight.
A raw food diet is usually vegetarian and often vegan, although some people use unpasteurized milk and cheese if available. Indeed there are some people who eat raw meat but if you wish to do this you should avoid pork and poultry and try to find grass reared organic beef so that you are not taking in large quantities of the hormones that are fed to most farmed cattle. Be aware that raw animal products can carry bacteria and are never recommended for pregnant women.
The raw vegan diet is the type that is most often followed by cancer patients. This involves eating only unprocessed and uncooked fruits, vegetables, seeds etc. No animal products are consumed at all. You can use cold pressed oils but most other foods that come in a package will be heat treated in some way. Note that the vegan diet does not contain vitamin B12 and you may need to supplement this, although most people have enough stored to see them through for several years.
If you feel that adopting the raw food cancer diet 100% of the time is simply too much, try replacing one or two meals a day with raw. A green smoothie makes a great breakfast. Simply put a couple of bananas or other fruit in the blender with a little water and some green leaves such as spinach or lettuce, or perhaps some celery.
For lunch you could try a raw salad of chopped cucumber, carrot and other vegetables with a dressing made from blended avocado and tomato, followed by fresh fruit. Add a few seeds for protein if you wish. Pumpkin seeds are particularly rich in zinc.
Raw food is generally much higher in antioxidants than cooked, and is believed by its advocates to be accepted by the body in a much more simple way. Raw food supporters claim that eating cooked food sets off an antibody response in the body which causes more stress to the digestive system. Therefore, they argue that following a raw food diet will free up a lot of the body’s energy for dealing with the physical challenges of cancer. In some cases people have reported reduction of tumor sizes. In other cases, improving your nutrition may help your body handle the medications that you are probably taking to fight the cancer.
Most people have difficulty following a 100% raw food diet for a very long period. However, if you are suffering from cancer you might want to try it for a few months or even a year. Alternatively, try increasing your consumption of raw foods or limiting cooked foods to one meal a day. When you do eat cooked foods, try to avoid sugar, white flour products and other highly refined or processed foods. Go for as natural as possible.
Of course you should consult with your medical advisor before taking up any special diet, especially if you are suffering from cancer or other medical conditions. If your current doctor is very unsympathetic you could try seeking out one who is more attuned to natural health treatments. Do not try to apply raw food cancer treatment alone, but follow your doctor’s advice.
More about this tomorrow. Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
February 4, 2010
Raw Food Cancer Treatment: Is It A Cure?
Raw food cancer treatments are becoming popular with some people although they are generally not supported by the mainstream medical world. Some people are taking up a raw food diet in the hope that this will help their body overcome cancer or recover from the effects of surgery and medications. Anecdotal evidence suggests that some people have found raw food helpful in their battles against cancer. These are usually just individual reported cases.
For most people on a standard American or other western diet, switching to raw food may be very beneficial simply because you will be cutting out most of the processed and refined foods loaded with fats and sugar that place such a burden on our digestive systems and add to our weight.
A raw food diet is usually vegetarian and often vegan, although some people use unpasteurized milk and cheese if available. Indeed there are some people who eat raw meat but if you wish to do this you should avoid pork and poultry and try to find grass reared organic beef so that you are not taking in large quantities of the hormones that are fed to most farmed cattle. Be aware that raw animal products can carry bacteria and are never recommended for pregnant women.
The raw vegan diet is the type that is most often followed by cancer patients. This involves eating only unprocessed and uncooked fruits, vegetables, seeds etc. No animal products are consumed at all. You can use cold pressed oils but most other foods that come in a package will be heat treated in some way. Note that the vegan diet does not contain vitamin B12 and you may need to supplement this, although most people have enough stored to see them through for several years.
If you feel that adopting the raw food cancer diet 100% of the time is simply too much, try replacing one or two meals a day with raw. A green smoothie makes a great breakfast. Simply put a couple of bananas or other fruit in the blender with a little water and some green leaves such as spinach or lettuce, or perhaps some celery.
For lunch you could try a raw salad of chopped cucumber, carrot and other vegetables with a dressing made from blended avocado and tomato, followed by fresh fruit. Add a few seeds for protein if you wish. Pumpkin seeds are particularly rich in zinc.
Raw food is generally much higher in antioxidants than cooked, and is believed by its advocates to be accepted by the body in a much more simple way. Raw food supporters claim that eating cooked food sets off an antibody response in the body which causes more stress to the digestive system. Therefore, they argue that following a raw food diet will free up a lot of the body’s energy for dealing with the physical challenges of cancer. In some cases people have reported reduction of tumor sizes. In other cases, improving your nutrition may help your body handle the medications that you are probably taking to fight the cancer.
Most people have difficulty following a 100% raw food diet for a very long period. However, if you are suffering from cancer you might want to try it for a few months or even a year. Alternatively, try increasing your consumption of raw foods or limiting cooked foods to one meal a day. When you do eat cooked foods, try to avoid sugar, white flour products and other highly refined or processed foods. Go for as natural as possible.
Of course you should consult with your medical advisor before taking up any special diet, especially if you are suffering from cancer or other medical conditions. If your current doctor is very unsympathetic you could try seeking out one who is more attuned to natural health treatments. Do not try to apply raw food cancer treatment alone, but follow your doctor’s advice.
More about this tomorrow. Feel good and keep smiling! Pat & Pattie
Friday, February 5, 2010
The Nutritional Supplement Debate Continues: If Vitamin D Isn't A "Sure Thing," What Is?
Two years ago, my very conservative and traditional Oncologist, Dr. Suzanne Hayman, recommended I begin taking 1000 IU's of vitamin D, along with my 500 mg of calcium daily. The vitamin D "helps the calcium work" Dr. Hayman said. A well known nutritional guru and author, Dr. Andrew Weil, only recommends people take a few nutritional supplements: A high quality multi-vitamin, 1000 IU's of vitamin D and omega-3 fish oil. Dr. Arcola, promoter of the raw diet, raves about the health benefits of vitamin D. I believe them! But then you read an article like the one I posted here yesterday from the New York Times about vitamin D and it leaves lots of room for doubt! Taken in moderation, vitamin D should be very safe. It is relatively inexpensive and shouldn't cause any side effects. So what's the harm in taking some? Nothing! Take it! Little risk for significant possible reward. That's how I have come to view most vitamins and supplements. Go ahead--take some! But use common sense and don't go overboard or the scale tips back the other way--now the risk may outweigh the reward.
But that isn't my point. I have written here before about the disappointing results from nutritional studies about the benefits of selenium and vitamins E and C. Years and years of recommendations and assumptions proved to be wrong! Selenium doesn't help prevent prostate cancer. Vitamin E doesn't help prevent breast cancer. Does vitamin D help improve bone health? Maybe. Probably.
Feel good, keep smiling and eat lots and lots of fresh fruits and vegetables! The rest is just inexpensive insurance that may or may not work! Pat
But that isn't my point. I have written here before about the disappointing results from nutritional studies about the benefits of selenium and vitamins E and C. Years and years of recommendations and assumptions proved to be wrong! Selenium doesn't help prevent prostate cancer. Vitamin E doesn't help prevent breast cancer. Does vitamin D help improve bone health? Maybe. Probably.
Feel good, keep smiling and eat lots and lots of fresh fruits and vegetables! The rest is just inexpensive insurance that may or may not work! Pat
Thursday, February 4, 2010
Balanced Article About Pros & Cons Of Using Vitamin D Supplements
Excellent New York Times article I read today about vitamin D:
Vitamin D, Miracle Drug: Is It Science, or Just Talk?
By TARA PARKER-POPE
Published: February 1, 2010
Imagine a treatment that could build bones, strengthen the immune system and lower the risks of illnesses like diabetes, heart and kidney disease, high blood pressure and cancer.
Some research suggests that such a wonder treatment already exists. It’s vitamin D, a nutrient that the body makes from sunlight and that is also found in fish and fortified milk.
Yet despite the health potential of vitamin D, as many as half of all adults and children are said to have less than optimum levels and as many as 10 percent of children are highly deficient, according to a 2008 report in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
As a result, doctors are increasingly testing their patients’ vitamin D levels and prescribing daily supplements to raise them. According to the lab company Quest Diagnostics, orders for vitamin D tests surged more than 50 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009, up from the same quarter a year earlier. And in 2008, consumers bought $235 million worth of vitamin D supplements, up from $40 million in 2001, according to Nutrition Business Journal.
But don’t start gobbling down vitamin D supplements just yet. The excitement about their health potential is still far ahead of the science.
Although numerous studies have been promising, there are scant data from randomized clinical trials. Little is known about what the ideal level of vitamin D really is, whether raising it can improve health, and what potential side effects are caused by high doses.
And since most of the data on vitamin D comes from observational research, it may be that high doses of the nutrient don’t really make people healthier, but that healthy people simply do the sorts of things that happen to raise vitamin D.
“Correlation does not necessarily mean a cause-and-effect relationship,” said Dr. JoAnn E. Manson, a Harvard professor who is chief of preventive medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.
“People may have high vitamin D levels because they exercise a lot and are getting ultraviolet-light exposure from exercising outdoors,” Dr. Manson said. “Or they may have high vitamin D because they are health-conscious and take supplements. But they also have a healthy diet, don’t smoke and do a lot of the other things that keep you healthy.”
Dr. Manson is leading a major study over the next five years that should provide answers to these questions and more. The nationwide clinical trial is recruiting 20,000 older adults, including men 60 and older and women 65 and older, to study whether high doses of vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids from fish-oil supplements will lower risk for heart disease and cancer. (Learn about taking part in the study at www.vitalstudy.org.)
Dr. Manson said fish-oil supplements were included in the study because they are another promising treatment that suffers from a dearth of clinical trial evidence. In addition, both vitamin D and fish oil are known to have an anti-inflammatory effect, but each works through a different pathway in the body, so there may be an added health benefit in combining them.
Study participants will be divided into four groups. One will take both vitamin D and fish oil pills. Two will take either a vitamin D or a fish-oil supplement and a placebo. The fourth will take two placebo pills.
Vitamin D is found throughout the body and acts as a signaling mechanism to turn cells on and off. Right now, the recommended dose from food and supplements is about 400 international units a day for most people, but most experts agree that is probably too low. The Institute of Medicine is reviewing guidelines for vitamin D and is expected to raise the recommended daily dose.
Study participants will take 2,000 I.U.’s of vitamin D3, believed to be the form most easily used by the body. The study will use one-gram supplements of omega-3 fish oil, about 5 to 10 times the average daily intake.
The vitamin D dose is far higher than what has been used in other studies. The well-known Women’s Health Initiative study, for instance, tracked women taking 400 units of vitamin D and 1,000 milligrams of calcium. The study found no overall benefit from the supplements, although women who consistently took their pills had a lower risk of hip fracture. Even so, many experts think 400 units is far too low for any additional health benefits.
Another study, of 1,200 women, looked at the effects of 1,500 milligrams of calcium and 1,000 units of vitamin D. Women who took both supplements showed a lower risk for breast cancer over the next four years, but the numbers of actual cases — seven breast cancers in the placebo group and four in the supplement group — were too small to draw meaningful conclusions.
Although consumers may be tempted to rush out and start taking 2,000 I.U.’s of vitamin D a day, doctors warn against it. Several recent studies of nutrients, including vitamins E and B, selenium and beta carotene, have proved disappointing — even suggesting that high doses do more harm than good, increasing risk for heart problems, diabetes and cancer, depending on the supplement.
Despite the promise of vitamin D in observational studies, research into other supplements shows it’s difficult to document a benefit in otherwise healthy people, and virtually impossible to predict potential harms, notes Dr. Eric A. Klein, chairman of the Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute at the Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Klein recently worked as national coordinator for Select, a study of vitamin E and selenium for prostate cancer. The study seemed promising, but in the end it showed no benefit from the supplements and a potentially higher risk for diabetes in selenium users.
“My sentiment is that the lesson we have learned form large trials with other vitamin supplements, including Select, is that there is no proven health or preventative benefit for dietary supplements in nutritionally replete populations, which accounts for most of the people who enter this sort of clinical trial,” Dr. Klein said. “It makes more sense to me to study dietary supplements or vitamins in populations who are deficient.”
People most at risk for vitamin D deficiency are older, have diabetes or kidney disease, stay indoors or have darker skin. African-American teenagers are at particularly high risk, possibly because in addition to their dark skin, they are less likely at that stage in life to drink milk or play outside.
The scientific community continues to debate the optimum level of vitamin D. In general, people are considered to be deficient if they have blood levels below 15 or 20 nanograms per milliliter. But many doctors now believe vitamin D levels should be above 30. The ideal level isn’t known, nor is it known at what point a person is getting too much vitamin D, which can lead to kidney stones, calcification in blood vessels and other problems.
People’s vitamin D levels are influenced by whether they have light or dark skin, where they live, how much time they spend outdoors and by fish and milk consumption. To raise vitamin D without supplements, a person could increase sun exposure for 10 to 15 minutes a day. Eating more fish can help — a 3.5-ounce serving of wild fresh salmon has 600 to 1,000 I.U.’s of vitamin D — but it would take a quart of milk a day to get the recommended dose of vitamin D.
“What we know is that there are a lot of people who are vitamin D deficient based on estimates from national surveys,” said Dr. Michal L. Melamed, assistant professor of medicine at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx. “But we don’t know what happens when the curve shifts to the other end. There probably is a risk to having too much vitamin D in the system.”
Since I still have many, many "holes in my bones," caused by my advanced multiple myeloma, my oncologists have always stressed taking 1000 IU's of vitamin D daily, along with my calcium. Does it make a difference? More about this tomorrow. Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Vitamin D, Miracle Drug: Is It Science, or Just Talk?
By TARA PARKER-POPE
Published: February 1, 2010
Imagine a treatment that could build bones, strengthen the immune system and lower the risks of illnesses like diabetes, heart and kidney disease, high blood pressure and cancer.
Some research suggests that such a wonder treatment already exists. It’s vitamin D, a nutrient that the body makes from sunlight and that is also found in fish and fortified milk.
Yet despite the health potential of vitamin D, as many as half of all adults and children are said to have less than optimum levels and as many as 10 percent of children are highly deficient, according to a 2008 report in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition.
As a result, doctors are increasingly testing their patients’ vitamin D levels and prescribing daily supplements to raise them. According to the lab company Quest Diagnostics, orders for vitamin D tests surged more than 50 percent in the fourth quarter of 2009, up from the same quarter a year earlier. And in 2008, consumers bought $235 million worth of vitamin D supplements, up from $40 million in 2001, according to Nutrition Business Journal.
But don’t start gobbling down vitamin D supplements just yet. The excitement about their health potential is still far ahead of the science.
Although numerous studies have been promising, there are scant data from randomized clinical trials. Little is known about what the ideal level of vitamin D really is, whether raising it can improve health, and what potential side effects are caused by high doses.
And since most of the data on vitamin D comes from observational research, it may be that high doses of the nutrient don’t really make people healthier, but that healthy people simply do the sorts of things that happen to raise vitamin D.
“Correlation does not necessarily mean a cause-and-effect relationship,” said Dr. JoAnn E. Manson, a Harvard professor who is chief of preventive medicine at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston.
“People may have high vitamin D levels because they exercise a lot and are getting ultraviolet-light exposure from exercising outdoors,” Dr. Manson said. “Or they may have high vitamin D because they are health-conscious and take supplements. But they also have a healthy diet, don’t smoke and do a lot of the other things that keep you healthy.”
Dr. Manson is leading a major study over the next five years that should provide answers to these questions and more. The nationwide clinical trial is recruiting 20,000 older adults, including men 60 and older and women 65 and older, to study whether high doses of vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids from fish-oil supplements will lower risk for heart disease and cancer. (Learn about taking part in the study at www.vitalstudy.org.)
Dr. Manson said fish-oil supplements were included in the study because they are another promising treatment that suffers from a dearth of clinical trial evidence. In addition, both vitamin D and fish oil are known to have an anti-inflammatory effect, but each works through a different pathway in the body, so there may be an added health benefit in combining them.
Study participants will be divided into four groups. One will take both vitamin D and fish oil pills. Two will take either a vitamin D or a fish-oil supplement and a placebo. The fourth will take two placebo pills.
Vitamin D is found throughout the body and acts as a signaling mechanism to turn cells on and off. Right now, the recommended dose from food and supplements is about 400 international units a day for most people, but most experts agree that is probably too low. The Institute of Medicine is reviewing guidelines for vitamin D and is expected to raise the recommended daily dose.
Study participants will take 2,000 I.U.’s of vitamin D3, believed to be the form most easily used by the body. The study will use one-gram supplements of omega-3 fish oil, about 5 to 10 times the average daily intake.
The vitamin D dose is far higher than what has been used in other studies. The well-known Women’s Health Initiative study, for instance, tracked women taking 400 units of vitamin D and 1,000 milligrams of calcium. The study found no overall benefit from the supplements, although women who consistently took their pills had a lower risk of hip fracture. Even so, many experts think 400 units is far too low for any additional health benefits.
Another study, of 1,200 women, looked at the effects of 1,500 milligrams of calcium and 1,000 units of vitamin D. Women who took both supplements showed a lower risk for breast cancer over the next four years, but the numbers of actual cases — seven breast cancers in the placebo group and four in the supplement group — were too small to draw meaningful conclusions.
Although consumers may be tempted to rush out and start taking 2,000 I.U.’s of vitamin D a day, doctors warn against it. Several recent studies of nutrients, including vitamins E and B, selenium and beta carotene, have proved disappointing — even suggesting that high doses do more harm than good, increasing risk for heart problems, diabetes and cancer, depending on the supplement.
Despite the promise of vitamin D in observational studies, research into other supplements shows it’s difficult to document a benefit in otherwise healthy people, and virtually impossible to predict potential harms, notes Dr. Eric A. Klein, chairman of the Glickman Urological and Kidney Institute at the Cleveland Clinic. Dr. Klein recently worked as national coordinator for Select, a study of vitamin E and selenium for prostate cancer. The study seemed promising, but in the end it showed no benefit from the supplements and a potentially higher risk for diabetes in selenium users.
“My sentiment is that the lesson we have learned form large trials with other vitamin supplements, including Select, is that there is no proven health or preventative benefit for dietary supplements in nutritionally replete populations, which accounts for most of the people who enter this sort of clinical trial,” Dr. Klein said. “It makes more sense to me to study dietary supplements or vitamins in populations who are deficient.”
People most at risk for vitamin D deficiency are older, have diabetes or kidney disease, stay indoors or have darker skin. African-American teenagers are at particularly high risk, possibly because in addition to their dark skin, they are less likely at that stage in life to drink milk or play outside.
The scientific community continues to debate the optimum level of vitamin D. In general, people are considered to be deficient if they have blood levels below 15 or 20 nanograms per milliliter. But many doctors now believe vitamin D levels should be above 30. The ideal level isn’t known, nor is it known at what point a person is getting too much vitamin D, which can lead to kidney stones, calcification in blood vessels and other problems.
People’s vitamin D levels are influenced by whether they have light or dark skin, where they live, how much time they spend outdoors and by fish and milk consumption. To raise vitamin D without supplements, a person could increase sun exposure for 10 to 15 minutes a day. Eating more fish can help — a 3.5-ounce serving of wild fresh salmon has 600 to 1,000 I.U.’s of vitamin D — but it would take a quart of milk a day to get the recommended dose of vitamin D.
“What we know is that there are a lot of people who are vitamin D deficient based on estimates from national surveys,” said Dr. Michal L. Melamed, assistant professor of medicine at Albert Einstein College of Medicine in the Bronx. “But we don’t know what happens when the curve shifts to the other end. There probably is a risk to having too much vitamin D in the system.”
Since I still have many, many "holes in my bones," caused by my advanced multiple myeloma, my oncologists have always stressed taking 1000 IU's of vitamin D daily, along with my calcium. Does it make a difference? More about this tomorrow. Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Understanding Leukemia - Outline By Mark Williams
Suite101.Com just posted the following outline,Understanding Leukemia. Good, basic and an easy read:
Leukemia: Common Types, Symptoms and Treatment
Jan 29, 2010 Mark Williams
Leukemia is a cancer of the bone marrow and blood that is characterized by an uncontrolled accumulation of blood cells. There are four major types of leukemia.
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)
CLL affects lymphoid cells and usually grows slowly. It accounts for more than 15,000 new cases of leukemia each year. Most often, people diagnosed with the disease are over age 55. It almost never affects children. Many people with CLL live good-quality lives for years with medical care. There are a number of treatments for CLL. In recent years new therapies have been approved and other possible new treatments are being studied in clinical trials. Progress toward a cure is underway.
Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML)
CML affects myeloid cells and usually grows slowly at first. It accounts for nearly 5,000 new cases of leukemia each year. It mainly affects adults. It is estimated that approximately 22,475 people in the United States are living with CML (SEER, National Cancer Institute, 2009). Three new CML drugs (Gleevec®, Sprycel® and Tasinga®) have been approved since 2001. Other new treatments are being studied in clinical trials. Progress toward a cure is under way and the number of people with CML who are living well today is growing.
Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL)
Other names for ALL are acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute lymphoid leukemia. About 5,430 people in the United States are expected to be diagnosed with ALL in 2008. It is the most common type of leukemia in children under age 15. The risk of getting ALL increases in people ages 45 and older. However, people can get ALL at any age.Most children with ALL are cured of their disease after treatment.
Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)
AML affects myeloid cells and grows quickly. It accounts for more than 13,000 new cases of leukemia each year. It occurs in both adults and children. AML starts with a change to a single cell in the bone marrow. With AML, the leukemic cells are often referred to as blast cells. Medical researchers are working to understand the cell changes that lead to AML. Down syndrome and other uncommon genetic disorders such as Fanconi anemia and Shwachman-Diamond syndrome and others are associated with an increased risk of AML.
This helps me! I always mix-up the different leukemia types.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Leukemia: Common Types, Symptoms and Treatment
Jan 29, 2010 Mark Williams
Leukemia is a cancer of the bone marrow and blood that is characterized by an uncontrolled accumulation of blood cells. There are four major types of leukemia.
Chronic Lymphocytic Leukemia (CLL)
CLL affects lymphoid cells and usually grows slowly. It accounts for more than 15,000 new cases of leukemia each year. Most often, people diagnosed with the disease are over age 55. It almost never affects children. Many people with CLL live good-quality lives for years with medical care. There are a number of treatments for CLL. In recent years new therapies have been approved and other possible new treatments are being studied in clinical trials. Progress toward a cure is underway.
Chronic Myeloid Leukemia (CML)
CML affects myeloid cells and usually grows slowly at first. It accounts for nearly 5,000 new cases of leukemia each year. It mainly affects adults. It is estimated that approximately 22,475 people in the United States are living with CML (SEER, National Cancer Institute, 2009). Three new CML drugs (Gleevec®, Sprycel® and Tasinga®) have been approved since 2001. Other new treatments are being studied in clinical trials. Progress toward a cure is under way and the number of people with CML who are living well today is growing.
Acute Lymphocytic Leukemia (ALL)
Other names for ALL are acute lymphoblastic leukemia and acute lymphoid leukemia. About 5,430 people in the United States are expected to be diagnosed with ALL in 2008. It is the most common type of leukemia in children under age 15. The risk of getting ALL increases in people ages 45 and older. However, people can get ALL at any age.Most children with ALL are cured of their disease after treatment.
Acute Myeloid Leukemia (AML)
AML affects myeloid cells and grows quickly. It accounts for more than 13,000 new cases of leukemia each year. It occurs in both adults and children. AML starts with a change to a single cell in the bone marrow. With AML, the leukemic cells are often referred to as blast cells. Medical researchers are working to understand the cell changes that lead to AML. Down syndrome and other uncommon genetic disorders such as Fanconi anemia and Shwachman-Diamond syndrome and others are associated with an increased risk of AML.
This helps me! I always mix-up the different leukemia types.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Tuesday, February 2, 2010
Red Meat May Not Be Bad For Prostate Cancer Patients
In an attempt to be "fair and nutritionally balanced" in my reporting, here is an article I read yesterday in the Health and Science section of GroundReport.Com:
Surprising Diet Study Result: Red meat not the bad guy this time
By Leo Kretzner, 1/30/2010
Many a medical study is done on diet and cancer. Some search for eating patterns among groups of people who do and don’t get cancer. Or they may determine if dietary changes made within the study have measurable positive effects in people.
A new study by Dr. Erin Richman of the Harvard School of Public Health is less commonly seen: She and colleagues followed the diets of 1,294 men already diagnosed with and treated for prostate cancer, focusing on disease recurrence or progression – essentially asking ‘who came out of remission and what did they eat?’
The researchers, both at Harvard as well as colleagues at the University of California, San Francisco, found men who ate the most eggs or poultry with the skin had a two-fold greater risk for their cancers to recur or progress than men who ate the least of these.
Prior studies have shown greater intake of saturated fat in red meat is associated with advanced prostate cancer and overall prostate cancer mortality. Others have shown that fish consumption is related to lower chances of cancer progression. Neither of those associations was found this time.
The new study followed only men who had been treated for their cancer and provisionally ‘cured’, with no detectable levels of prostate specific antigen (PSA). Patient information came from twenty-five study centers across the United States.
Men were allowed to eat whatever they wanted and were simply followed for an average of two years, answering detailed food questionnaires every six months. A patient’s cancer was judged to recur or progress if there was a consistent rise in PSA, a re-emergence of other symptoms such as urinary problems, or evidence of metastases.
The Good News
The good news was that 90% of the men had no sign of cancer progression during the course of the study. However, for those who did, there was a significant dietary association with eggs and poultry with skin.
The link to chicken or turkey specifically with the skin was teased out by looking closely at a non-statistically significant yet suggestive tendency for poultry in general to be associated with progression. When broken down to ‘usually with’ versus ‘usually without’ skin, there was a clear two-fold higher risk of progression for skin-eaters over those who preferred their bird skinless.
This association was particularly true for men whose cancer was considered higher risk to begin with, by multiple criteria including high PSA level and pathological grade. For these patients, high consumption of poultry with skin was associated with a four-fold greater incidence of cancer recurrence.
These correlations held true when researchers controlled for multiple differences between the groups, such as the type of treatments received, whether a person smoked, other items in their diets, and various socioeconomic indicators. Even adjusting for the total amount of saturated fat consumed did not diminish the association of prostate cancer progression with a diet high in eggs and poultry with skin.
The scientists speculated that carcinogens called heterocyclic amines may be involved. These compounds are known to cause mutations in DNA and are found at higher concentrations in well-done poultry than in other meats. Some previous studies have shown an association between grilled meats in general and various cancers, including prostate.
As to the association with eggs, a compound called choline may play a role. It is found in abundance in egg yolks, and although an essential nutrient in small amounts, high blood levels of it have been associated with higher risk for prostate and colon cancer. The direct involvement of choline or heterocyclic amines in this case remains speculative.
The study is online and will be in an upcoming issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, a publication of the American Society for Nutrition. (http://www.nutrition.org/ )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Leo Kretzner is a molecular biologist and science writer in Claremont, CA.
I have written before that my naturopathic MD suggested I eat lean red meat three or four times a week to help keep my bone marrow strong in order to withstand my chemotherapy. My only advice: Eat a moderate, well balanced diet. Fresh fruits, vegetables (organic if you can) and yes, even red meat. (Have you tried bison?)
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Surprising Diet Study Result: Red meat not the bad guy this time
By Leo Kretzner, 1/30/2010
Many a medical study is done on diet and cancer. Some search for eating patterns among groups of people who do and don’t get cancer. Or they may determine if dietary changes made within the study have measurable positive effects in people.
A new study by Dr. Erin Richman of the Harvard School of Public Health is less commonly seen: She and colleagues followed the diets of 1,294 men already diagnosed with and treated for prostate cancer, focusing on disease recurrence or progression – essentially asking ‘who came out of remission and what did they eat?’
The researchers, both at Harvard as well as colleagues at the University of California, San Francisco, found men who ate the most eggs or poultry with the skin had a two-fold greater risk for their cancers to recur or progress than men who ate the least of these.
Prior studies have shown greater intake of saturated fat in red meat is associated with advanced prostate cancer and overall prostate cancer mortality. Others have shown that fish consumption is related to lower chances of cancer progression. Neither of those associations was found this time.
The new study followed only men who had been treated for their cancer and provisionally ‘cured’, with no detectable levels of prostate specific antigen (PSA). Patient information came from twenty-five study centers across the United States.
Men were allowed to eat whatever they wanted and were simply followed for an average of two years, answering detailed food questionnaires every six months. A patient’s cancer was judged to recur or progress if there was a consistent rise in PSA, a re-emergence of other symptoms such as urinary problems, or evidence of metastases.
The Good News
The good news was that 90% of the men had no sign of cancer progression during the course of the study. However, for those who did, there was a significant dietary association with eggs and poultry with skin.
The link to chicken or turkey specifically with the skin was teased out by looking closely at a non-statistically significant yet suggestive tendency for poultry in general to be associated with progression. When broken down to ‘usually with’ versus ‘usually without’ skin, there was a clear two-fold higher risk of progression for skin-eaters over those who preferred their bird skinless.
This association was particularly true for men whose cancer was considered higher risk to begin with, by multiple criteria including high PSA level and pathological grade. For these patients, high consumption of poultry with skin was associated with a four-fold greater incidence of cancer recurrence.
These correlations held true when researchers controlled for multiple differences between the groups, such as the type of treatments received, whether a person smoked, other items in their diets, and various socioeconomic indicators. Even adjusting for the total amount of saturated fat consumed did not diminish the association of prostate cancer progression with a diet high in eggs and poultry with skin.
The scientists speculated that carcinogens called heterocyclic amines may be involved. These compounds are known to cause mutations in DNA and are found at higher concentrations in well-done poultry than in other meats. Some previous studies have shown an association between grilled meats in general and various cancers, including prostate.
As to the association with eggs, a compound called choline may play a role. It is found in abundance in egg yolks, and although an essential nutrient in small amounts, high blood levels of it have been associated with higher risk for prostate and colon cancer. The direct involvement of choline or heterocyclic amines in this case remains speculative.
The study is online and will be in an upcoming issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, a publication of the American Society for Nutrition. (http://www.nutrition.org/ )
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~`
Leo Kretzner is a molecular biologist and science writer in Claremont, CA.
I have written before that my naturopathic MD suggested I eat lean red meat three or four times a week to help keep my bone marrow strong in order to withstand my chemotherapy. My only advice: Eat a moderate, well balanced diet. Fresh fruits, vegetables (organic if you can) and yes, even red meat. (Have you tried bison?)
Feel good and keep smiling! Pat
Monday, February 1, 2010
Radiation Offers New Cures and Ways to Do Harm - A New York Times Article
Over the weekend I received an e-mail from a fellow cancer patient, concerned about how radiation from his scans and potential therapy might--in effect--speed his cancer growth. An article I found in the New York Times, Radiation Offers New Cures, and Ways to Do Harm, addresses some of these issues. Interesting, because you hear ads for new "Cyber Knife" type radiation therapy machines in the main stream media a lot lately.
One thing I love about the New York Times is how extensive and detailed their articles can be--in this case, much too long to post here in it's entirety.
Feel good, keep smiling and read this article when you get a chance--especially if you are considering radiation cancer therapy!
Pat & Pattie
One thing I love about the New York Times is how extensive and detailed their articles can be--in this case, much too long to post here in it's entirety.
Feel good, keep smiling and read this article when you get a chance--especially if you are considering radiation cancer therapy!
Pat & Pattie
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
