Filed under: All Cancers , Environment , Diets , Exercise , Smoking , Sunday Seven Who knows which pieces of cancer information floating around out there are actually true? I don't. Do cell phones cause cancer? Some say yes, some say no, I say I'm confused! Luckily, I happened upon this Discovery Health article that highlights a variety of myths and then offers the lowdown on each one. Here are seven of them: Myth #1. There is currently a cure for cancer, but the medical industry won't tell the public about it because they make too much money treating cancer patients. Chalk this up to urban legend. And consider this: doctors, laboratory scientists, and their families and friends die of cancer at the same rate as everyone else in the United States. How about this: medical breakthroughs happen all the time and are quickly applied. Think about antibiotics and vaccines -- like the polio vaccine -- that have transformed health care. How about this? Not too long ago, less than one in 10 kids with leukemia survived 10 years. Now, the cure rate is nearly 80 percent. Seems like progress to me. Myth #2. Electronic devices, like cell phones, can cause cancer in the people who use them. Although very few studies suggest a link between rare types of brain tumors and cell phone use, the consensus among most research is that there is no consistent association between the two. The same goes for microwaves and related appliances that emit low-frequency radiation. Myth #3. Treating cancer with surgery causes it to spread throughout the body. This belief may have started many years ago when most patients already had very advanced forms of cancer at the time of surgery. Doctors may have detected a widespread disease that could not be successfully treated. When the patient died a short time later, some may have believed the surgery caused the cells to spread and kill the patient. The truth, however, is that doctors have long known how to safely take biopsies and remove tumors without causing any spread. In many cases, surgery is essential for survival. In cases where cells could be dislodged, doctors take proper precautions. For example, in testicular cancer cases, the entire testicle is removed to prevent this scenario. Myth #4. Regularly eating meat cooked on a charcoal grill won't increase cancer risk. Chemists have determined that grilling meats creates chemicals linked to cancer in animals, and you can increase your cancer risk by eating too much grilled red meat or chicken -- or even meat pan-fried at a very high temperature. So stay away from meat or chicken that is well-done or burnt. And try to eat grilled meats only occasionally. Myth #5. The risk of dying from cancer in the United States is increasing. Nope. Sometimes cancer figures are reported out of context, but the actual number of people dying from cancer is dropping. Cancer diagnoses and deaths have been decreasing since the early 1990s -- and less than half of those diagnosed with cancer today will die of the disease. Myth #6. What someone does as a young adult has little impact on their chances of getting cancer later in life. Lifestyle choices that begin early in life can increase the risk of developing cancer. The use of tobacco, diet, exercise, and exposure to the sun all have a cumulative effect, and most cases of cancer are consequences of many years of engaging in risky behaviors. More than two-thirds of all fatal cancer cases could have been prevented with simple lifestyle changes. Clearly, what we do early in life can come back to haunt us. Myth #7. You can prevent skin cancer by putting on one application of sunscreen at the start of each day. Slathering on sunscreen on a daily basis can give a false sense of security. It simply must be reapplied -- and even then, it offers on a certain level of protection. To make sure your skin is safe from UV rays, keep that sunscreen around, but also gather up some hats, long-sleeved shirts, and sunglasses -- and use them. And try to hide from the sun between the hours of 10:00 AM and 4:00 PM.

Filed under: Prostate Cancer , Drug , Clinical Trials , Research There's good news for prostate cancer patients who've had the disease spread to other parts of the body -- a new treatments, currently being tried out on hundreds of patients with promising results. The drug is called GVAX and it's referred to as a vaccine, although it doesn't work like most vaccines in the sense that it is administered after diagnosis and progression of the disease. According to this news story , GVAX works by adding prostate cancer cells to the body, but these new cells are unable to replicate. Several members of my family have battled prostate cancer to varying degrees of success, and I know that it's really widespread. So this is great news, and I hope GVAX is the miracle the prostate cancer is looking for. By the way, if you have prostate cancer, they're recruiting patients for their clinical trials. Read     Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments

Filed under: Colon and Rectal Cancer , Liver Cancer , Politics , Daily news , Cancer Survivors White House Press Secretary Tony Snow , who on Friday asked the public not to jump to conclusions about a suspicious growth found on his abdomen, says the growth -- removed during surgery yesterday -- has been identified as cancer. Snow, 51, told White House officials that his cancer -- first found in his colon and treated in 2005 -- has spread to his liver. He is currently consulting with doctors about chemotherapy and is reported to be feeling well. "I'm gonna beat it again," says Snow who gave the White House deputy Press Secretary instructions for reporters. "Tell them not to bug me," he said. It is not clear when or if Snow, married with three young children, will return to his duties. Read     Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments

Filed under: Breast Cancer , All Cancers , Politics , Celebrity news , Cancer Survivors Elizabeth Edwards has been told the metastatic cancer found in her bones is considered stage four. And it's treatable. But not curable. Tricky stuff -- all this cancer terminology -- and a little hard to fully comprehend. I saw Sheryl Crow talking with Maria Shriver and Dr. Susan Love on Larry's King's CNN program the other night. Crow says her breast cancer was curable -- it was teeny tiny and had not spread and required a lumpectomy and radiation, but not chemotherapy. "I'm the walking poster child for early detection," she said. Her cancer was caught and treated swiftly. She is cured. Theoretically. Can Crow's cancer still return? Yep. We just aren't sure at the time of one cancer discovery if these deadly cells have drifted away from the main site and will later show up elsewhere, explained Dr. Love. All predictions would have Crow living a long life free of cancer. But they may have had Edwards in the same boat just two years ago when she was first diagnosed with breast cancer. So now Edwards' cancer is not curable. It is treatable. And this is a bit easier to understand. Her cancer will never go away. But doctors can keep it at bay. And Love says they can even make it better. But there is no cure for what Edwards has. So she will live with cancer for the rest of her life. I guess curable means: the cancer is gone and we hope it never comes back. And treatable means: the cancer is not gone and will never be gone but we will treat it for as long as we can. I think I get it. Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments

Filed under: Prostate Cancer , Drug , Chemotherapy , Clinical Trials Sanofi-Aventis , one of the world's leading pharmaceutical companies, issued a press release that stated Taxotere (docetaxel) improves survival in patients with metastatic prostate cancer.

Filed under: Testicular Cancer , Cancer by the Numbers Testicular cancer, cancer in one or both of the testicles, usually occurs in young men and will strike about 8,250 of these men this year. About 370 men will die. A man's lifetime risk of developing this cancer -- that typically shows up in only one testicle -- is 1 in 300, securing it as one of the less common cancers in the United States. The chances of dying from testicular cancer are 1 in 5,000, making it one of the most curable forms of cancer. Yet it is still the most common form of cancer in men ages 15-34. It is also a cancer commonly characterized by denial and embarrassment. As a result, it is one of the least mentioned cancers.

Filed under: Cancer by the Numbers All cancers are not treated equally. Some attract a frenzy of attention -- breast cancer -- and some receive not much attention at all -- gallbladder cancer. Some are vigorously researched and studied. Others sit by idly, rarely the subject of investigation. Some are feverishly funded. Some never prosper by way of financial support. Yet they all share something very important in common. They are all cancer. All cancers are marked by an uncontrollable division and spread of abnormal cells. And they are all capable of delivering shock and despair and even death to any one of us. And that makes each one -- brain cancer, cervical cancer, colon cancer, eye cancer, liver cancer, prostate cancer, stomach cancer, you name it -- worthy of equal attention. And so I bring to you Cancer by the Numbers, a series of posts that will feature the basics about all sorts of cancer, beginning with the numbers -- the statistics -- to help define the prevalence of each cancer, followed by important facts about screening, diagnosis, treatment, survival, and more. I will cover the well-known cancers, the sort-of-known cancers, the barely-known cancers. And while I can only offer what I can track down on each form of cancer, I intend to dish out every piece of data I can dig up -- so we all can become a little more informed, a little more prepared should we have to personally do battle with any one of the 100 possible cancers out there. The American Cancer Society reports that 1,399,790 new cancer cases will be diagnosed in 2006. This estimate does not include most carcinoma in situ (noninvasive cancer) cases and also does take into account the estimated one million cases of basal and squamous cell skin cancers that will be diagnosed this year. Of these predicted cases, about 564,830 will result in death -- that's more than 1,500 people each day. Cancer is the second most common cause of death in the United States, exceeded only by heart disease , and accounts for one of every four deaths. These numbers are staggering. But without further explanation, they are broad and all-encompassing and don't say much about how all the individual diseases add up. That's what I plan to do -- break it all down, cancer by cancer, until the numbers make sense. And the cancers do too. Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments

Filed under: Breast Cancer , Drug , Chemotherapy , Prevention , Research , Radiation In an international study involving 500,000 women, researchers concluded for every 2,000 women who had a mammogram, one will have her life prolonged, but ten will undergo unnecessary chemotherapy, radiotherapy and mastectomies. According to Nordic Cochrane Centre researchers , while mammograms do prevent breast cancer death in detecting early-stage breast cancer, it also leads to breast cancer diagnosis in women who would have survived without treatment. Professor John Toy, medical director of Cancer Research UK, is quoted as saying, "Researchers in the field all agree that breast screening saves lives although they differ in their views about the balance of the pros and cons. Benefits need to be balanced against any disadvantages, as is the case with all medical treatments. Certainly women invited for screening should be made aware of both potential benefits and downsides." This leaves women in a difficult position. As more women are encouraged to go in for breast cancer screening, more early-stage breast cancer is being discovered. The earlier a cancer is discovered, the better the chances of surviving cancer. That's a given. However, if they cannot predict how the cancer will behave when found in its earliest stage, or if it will ultimately be life-threatening -- and if, as this study suggests, one woman will be helped while ten women will undergo unnecessary chemotherapy, radiotherapy and mastectomies -- how does a woman decide which treatment or non-treatment path to go down? Chemotherapy, radiotherapy and mastectomies are not simple innocuous treatments. At this point, I am not certain what we should do with the findings of this study other than be confused, worried and uncertain. What do you think? Read     Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments

Filed under: Lung Cancer , Celebrity cancer diagnosis , Daily news , Celebrity in memoriam Grammy award winning country musician Freddy Fender died Saturday, just days after he had returned home from the hospital, seriously ill from treatment for lung cancer and a blood infection. Fender's wife, Vangie Huerta, announced in August that her husband, at the age of 69, was suffering from inoperable cancer and that he was hoping for a miracle. But his cancer spread, and his health declined. Yet his spirits remained high -- and he recently told one newspaper reporter, "I'm one year away from 70 and I've had a good run." Fender's career began when he returned from service in the Marine Corps in the late 1950s and created his stage name from a brand of guitar -- Fender. Success did not arrive for some time -- and not until after Fender experimented with a rock-country-Latin sound, served time for marijuana possession, and worked for a period of time as a mechanic did fame hit. Born Baldemar Huerta in 1937, Fender is know for his hits Before the Next Teardrop Falls, Wasted Days and Wasted Nights and You'll Lose a Good Thing. In 1999, Fender received his own Hollywood Walk of Fame star, and he won his third and last Grammy in 2002. Despite fame, Fender lived a hard life. He spoke openly about his battles with drug and alcohol abuse. He struggled with diabetes and Hepatitis C. And he received a kidney transplant in 2002 and a liver transplant in 2004. Fender, who passed away at his Corpus Christi home surrounded by family, is survived by his wife and four children. Read     Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments

Filed under: Breast Cancer , Prevention , All Cancers , Research , Services , Cancer Survivors Researchers have found a way to make cancer cells vibrate, and by using laser techniques from optics and ultrasound techniques from acoustics, listen for the sound of cancer cells . By taking blood samples from actual cancer patients, and listening for the sound, they were able to detect the presence of cancer when as few as ten cancer cells were present in a blood sample. The loud cracking sound that the cancer cells emit is caused by a process in which cancer cells absorb energy bursts from a blue-laser light, causing them to go through rapid cycles of expanding as they heat up and shrinking as they cool down. This new technique of identifying cancer cells through a simple blood sample will allow oncologists to detect very early signs of cancer spreading as the cancer cells are traveling before they settle into an organ in the body. According to the University of Missouri-Columbia researchers, current techniques to monitor cancer spread and recurrence have proven to be inaccurate, time-consuming and painful. This new blood-test procedure would eliminate some of those less-accurate procedures and could be done on a regular basis with immediate results. "It could take just 30 minutes to find out if there are any circulating cancer cells," stated John Viator, a biomedical engineer at Missouri-Columbia and a coauthor of the Optics Letters study. Read     Permalink     Email this     Linking Blogs     Comments