This week’s Natural News lead with an eye-pop ping headline that asked readers to think about CHEMO differently. I have to admit, I have been thinking about Chemo differently for several years. When Suzanne Summers announced that she was treating her breast cancer “naturally”– the media fire storm could not have been greater if the woman had clubbed baby seals to death while naked on live TV. Her announcement didn’t phase me as much as the medical establishment’s reaction to her statement concerning, what to me was, a personal choice. I’m of the ‘Cher-school of thought’ when it comes to boobs. “They are mine, and if I want to and am willing, and have the ability to pay for it, I can move them to my back if I want to.”  The move to the state decreed ‘Doctatorship’ is troubling. Should the medical profession have the right to dictate, backed up by the court system, a treatment for an individual, be that individual a child or an adult? Personally, I’m still thinking about the whole process of  “Public Health Decrees vs Personal Choice” In the mean time read what the writers at Natural News have to say about this new Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports (RADAR) pharmacovigilance program at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine has to say. Inconvenient Women, read all sides of an issue before making a medical decision.

(NaturalNews) Chemotherapy drugs used in standard cancer treatments are associated with a huge list of side effects, from hair loss and nausea to nerve pain, sexual problems and mouth sores. Now a new study from the Research on Adverse Drug Events and Reports (RADAR) pharmacovigilance program at Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine has identified another side effect caused by a commonly used chemotherapy drug — death.

A startling number of women have died from a severe allergic reaction after being injected with Cremophor-based paclitaxel, a solvent-administered taxane chemotherapy. What makes this extra tragic is that the researchers found some of the dead women had already been treated for early stage breast cancer and could well have been cured — if the chemo prescribed to prevent a theoretical recurrence of cancer in the future had not killed them.

The report, presented at the 45th Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology held recently in Orlando, Florida, found there were 287 unique cases of hypersensitivity reactions submitted to the FDA’s Adverse Event Report System between 1997 and 2007 in patients who received the solvent-laced chemo drug. Of these, an alarming 38 percent, 109, died. Because adverse event reports usually only document from one to 10 percent of the actual incidence of serious side effects, the number of hypersensitivity reactions as well as deaths is probably much greater.

The severe allergic reactions are believed to be caused by the chemical solvent used to dissolve some chemo drugs before they can be injected into the blood stream. Two of the women who died from an allergic reaction had early-stage breast cancer, which had already been surgically removed. They were being subjected to the Cremophor-containing paclitaxel to supposedly keep the cancer from returning.

Although both of these patients were given additional drugs before the chemotherapy to reduce the risk of hypersensitivity reactions, they still died. In fact, RADAR researchers found that 22 percent of all the deaths from the chemo drug occurred in patients who had been pre-treated with medications to prevent hypersensitivity reactions. Another 15 percent of these chemo patients experienced life-threatening respiratory arrest.

“The deaths of women with early-stage breast cancer are particularly disturbing because without the adverse reaction, they could have likely had 40 years of life ahead of them,” study leader Charles Bennett, M.D., RADAR program coordinator and a professor of hematology/oncology at Northwestern’s Feinberg School, stated in a media release.

“Patients receiving Cremophor-based paclitaxel should be given medications to prevent hypersensitivity reactions, but what is sobering, as the study has shown and as the black-box warning indicates, women suffer anaphylaxis despite receiving steroid premedication,” he added. “Physicians may also want to consider exploring other alternative chemotherapy options that do not include Cremophor.”

Cremophor-containing paclitaxel has been associated with a wide range of hypersensitivity reactions, ranging from mild skin irritations to cardiac collapse. “The results of our review suggest that physicians should be vigilant in monitoring the safety of their patients undergoing chemotherapy treatment,” said Dr. Bennett, who also is the A.C. Buehler Professor in Economics and Aging at the Feinberg School and a member of the Robert H. Lurie Comprehensive Cancer Center of Northwestern University.

For more information:
http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/…
http://www.oncolink.com/treatment/a…

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

A friend sent me this image yesterday, with the message, “From her cute lips to God’s ear.”

I smiled and sent the e-mail on to my writing partner, Leslie. But last night, as I fell asleep, I thought about the e-mail’s real message.

I asked myself, “Why do we keep looking for “Cures” in our various “wars against (name of disease here)?”

Of course we want to heal and save our moms, grandmothers, sisters and daughters from Breast Cancer, but what are we doing as a society to PREVENT Breast Cancer in the first place?

I realize that we have learned much of what to avoid, and what to embrace to remain Cancer free from the all of the past and current Cancer research. I am grateful for that research and to those who contributed ‘time, talent and treasure’ to vanquish a disease that has taken so many of our beloveds.

Maybe I’m just ready to think about the issue differently…ready to switch the problem around 180 and look at the situation as an opportunity for change. What if we women were able to refocus our intention from being ‘at war’ with a deadly enemy, to being ‘in harmony’ with our body and our planet?

Just maybe, by living in peaceful accord with our feminine cycle, and all the other natural cycles of Mother Earth, our bodies would find the balance to heal. Perhaps living in synchronicity with nature would prevent illness? I don’t know, but living in alignment with your natural cycle can’t hurt, and being at war with Mother Nature has proven to be a failed strategy.

I vote for a peaceful, gentle approach to appreciating the wonder of the female cycle and just maybe we could reach that state of balance before our little lady “Grows Boobs”.

Think of just one thing you can do for your self to live within your feminine cycle.

Just one, it is a start.

Live gently on this earth and treat your body with love and understanding.

Be as kind to your self as you are to others.

Love yourself and appreciate the miracle of your body, mind and spirit. Laugh, feel your inner joy, if only for a moment, it is a start.

I would love to credit the creative team who developed this thought-provoking image, but the e-mail did not include a credit line. If some one knows, please let me know so I can thank them for their creativity in my Blog.

My best hope for the little girl in the photo that she grows up with healthy boobs, a vibrantly healthy body and the spirit to be an Inconvenient Woman.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

Please take the time to visit the Sister Study web site.

The Sister Study is the only long-term study of women aged 35-74 whose sister had breast cancer.  It is a national study to learn how environment and genes affect the chances of getting breast cancer.  A total of 50,000 women will join the effort to find the causes of breast cancer

WHO CAN JOIN THE SISTER STUDY?

You may be eligible to join the Sister Study if —

• Your sister, related to you by blood, had breast cancer.
• You are between the ages of 35 and 74.
• You have never had breast cancer yourself.
• You are a woman living in the U.S. or Puerto Rico.

SISTERS ARE STILL NEEDED!

As we approach our goal of enrolling 50,000 diverse sisters, we want to make sure that groups not yet as well represented among participants have an opportunity to join. Unfortunately, this means turning away some women who are already very well represented in the study group. Caucasian women ages 35-64 with more than a high school degree will no longer be able to enroll, but can help the Sister Study in other ways.  This group is now very well represented among our current participants

We still need women from the following groups to enroll in the Sister Study:

• African Americans, Latinas, Asians and Pacific Islanders, and Native Americans between ages 35-74
• Caucasian women between the ages of 65-74 or with a high school degree or les

CAN YOU JOIN NOW?

If you need help determining whether you can join at this time, please call our toll free number 1-877-4SISTER or CLICK HERE to answer the screening questions at the Sister Study web site.

You can be a part of this landmark research effort to find the causes of breast cancer.

Join the Sister Study for your daughters, nieces,

granddaughters, and future generations!

Visit the Sister Study Homepage

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

Cook with Indian spices. These aromatic seasonings do more than add flavor and clear your sinuses: Hundreds of studies suggest curcumin— the ingredient in turmeric that turns curries yellow—can kill cancer cells by inhibiting the enzymes that cause inflammation in the body. For an easy way to use turmeric, click here.

Drink plenty of green tea. An antioxidant found in green tea shields cells from premature aging and greatly decreases the advancement of breast cancer in mice. Worried about getting too much caffeine from the recommended 5 cups? Click here for a DIY decaf tip.

Eat more Mexican food. Scientists find that following a traditional Mexican diet (which is rich in beans, soups, cheeses, and tomato-based sauces—and low in processed foods) may help shield you from breast cancer. Click here for the recipe for a healthy black bean dip.

Avoid bad fats. Women with higher levels of trans-fatty acids in their systems have almost twice the risk of getting breast cancer. Common trans fat-filled foods include processed cakes, cookies, chips, and fast food. But can you trust brands that advertise “0 grams of trans fat”? Click here to find out.

Curious about your natural treatment options? Adding complementary therapies to your breast cancer treatment plan can both improve your prognosis and help you feel better. When it comes to breast cancer, conventional therapies such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation may be unavoidable, but the holistic strategies listed here offer healing benefits.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

A mammogram is a safe, low-dose x-ray picture of the breast. It is currently the most effective method of detecting breast cancer in its earliest, most treatable stages.

Why should I have a mammogram?

A mammogram can find breast cancer that is too small to be seen or felt. If breast cancer is found early on a mammogram, it can be treated early when it is easiest to cure. In some cases, finding a breast lump early may mean that a patient can choose surgery to save her breast. Early detection also may mean that chemotherapy is unnecessary.

How is a mammogram done?

When you have a mammogram, you stand in front of a special x-ray machine. The radiologic technologist lifts each breast and places it on a platform that holds the x-ray film. The breast is then gradually pressed against the platform by a specially designed, clear plastic plate. Some pressure is applied for a few seconds to make sure the x-rays show as much of the breast as possible. This pressure is not harmful to your breast. Studies show that most women do not find a mammogram exam painful for the short time needed to take the picture.

Should women be concerned about radiation dose during mammography?

No. The risk of harm from radiation is very small when compared to the benefits of early breast cancer detection. MQSA has established a maximum radiation dose limit that is considered to be safe. There have been such improvements in mammography that women receive 50 times less radiation than they received 20 years ago, with the risk of long-term effects being almost zero.

What is a screening mammogram?

A screening mammogram is a quick, easy way to detect breast cancer early when treatment is more effective and survival is high. It is a x-ray of the breast that doctors use to look for breast changes in women with no symptoms of breast cancer. Usually, two x-ray pictures are taken of each breast. A physician trained to read the mammograms examines them later. Screening for breast cancer is best achieved by including both mammography and a clinical breast examination in the screening process.

What is a diagnostic mammography exam?

A doctor uses a diagnostic mammogram to help learn the cause of a woman’s breast problems such as a breast mass, skin changes, or nipple discharge. Diagnostic mammography takes a little longer than screening mammography because more x-rays are taken. A qualified physician may check the mammograms while you wait.

Notification of Mammography Exam Results

How will a patient get the results of her mammogram?

Her mammography facility must provide her with a written report of the results of the exam. The results can be handed to her at the time of the exam, or mailed to her within 30 days after the exam. The report must be in words she can easily understand. Her doctor will be sent a copy of the more technical version of the exam results.

How will patients who do not have a doctor get their results?

Her mammography facility will provide her with the patient’s version of the results and a copy of the technical report within 30 days of the exam. If necessary, the facility personnel will refer her to a doctor.

What should a patient do if she does not receive her written results within 30 days?

If she does not receive her results within 30 days, she should call the mammography facility or her doctor, and ask for the results of the exam. This is very important. The results of most mammograms are “normal” – but the patient should not assume the mammogram is normal if she does not receive her results!

Are there special considerations for reporting results when they are “suspicious” or “highly suggestive of a malignancy”?

Yes. In these cases, the facility is expected to contact the patient as soon as possible. Although it is impossible to establish a precise time frame, it is expected that such communication could ordinarily be accomplished within five business days. Some facilities may discuss the results with the patient following the exam, or contact her by phone. Even if the results are given to the patient verbally, she should receive a written notification within 30 days.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

July 8, 2008

Media Inquiries:

Karen Riley, 301-827-6242

Consumer Inquiries:

888-INFO-FDA

FDA Approves New Genetic Test for Patients with Breast Cancer

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration has approved a novel genetic test for determining whether patients with breast cancer are good candidates for treatment with the drug Herceptin (trastuzumab).

The SPOT-Light HER2 CISH kit is a test that measures the number of copies of the HER2 gene in tumor tissue. This gene regulates the growth of cancer cells.

A healthy breast cell has two copies of the HER2 gene, which sends a signal to cells, telling them when to grow, divide and make repairs. Patients with breast cancer may have more copies of this HER2 gene, prompting them to overproduce HER2 protein so that more signals are sent to breast cells. As a result, the cells grow and divide much too quickly.

“When used with other clinical information and laboratory tests, this test can provide health care professionals with additional insight on treatment decisions for patients with breast cancer,” said Daniel Schultz, M.D., director of the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health.

The SPOT-Light test counts the number of HER2 genes in a small sample of removed tumor. The removed piece is stained with a chemical that causes any HER2 genes in the sample to change color. This color change can be visualized under a standard microscope, eliminating the need for the more expensive and complex fluorescent microscopes required to read assays already on the market. Unlike existing tests, the SPOT-Light allows labs to store the tissue for future reference.

Patients who over-produce HER2 protein are typically treated with the drug Herceptin, which targets HER2 protein production. This helps to stop the growth of HER2 cancer cells.

The FDA based its approval of the SPOT-Light test on a study using tumor samples from patients with breast cancer in the United States and Finland. These studies confirmed that the test was effective in determining how many HER2 genes were in these patients.

SPOT-Light is manufactured by Invitrogen Corp. of Carlsbad, Calif. Herceptin is manufactured by Genentech, of San Francisco, Calif.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

FENTANYL (Duragesic®, E-TRANS® Fentanyl) relieves moderate to severe chronic pain. Fentanyl patches are commonly used to treat pain associated with cancer. Once the patch is applied, the medicine is slowly absorbed through your skin into the bloodstream to help control your pain. Generic fentanyl skin patches are available.

FDA Recalls and Safety Alerts

Actavis recalled all remaining lots of Fentanyl transdermal patches as a precautionary measure. This is an expansion of Actavis’s February 2008 recall of fourteen lots of Fentanyl patches. For more details, see “Additional Information” below.

Several brands of fentanyl transdermal patches are being recalled because they may have defects that could allow the fentanyl gel to leak out of the patch. If the gel touches patient’s or caregiver’s skin, it could cause respiratory depression and possibly death.

One recall affects all U.S. lots of 25 mcg/hr Duragesic patches sold by PriCara, and its generic equivalent sold by Sandoz. All these patches are manufactured by the ALZA Corporation and have expiration dates of December 2009 or earlier. Anyone who has the recalled Duragesic patches should call 800-547-6446 for instructions on how to return them. Those who have the recalled Sandoz fentanyl patches should call 800-901-7236.

The second recall affects over a dozen lots of Actavis fentanyl patches in all strengths. [See UPDATE above.] Note that the pouch containing the fentanyl patch may have an Abrika Pharmaceuticals label, whereas the outer carton has the Actavis logo. Lot numbers can be found under “Additional Information” below. Anyone who has Actavis patches from the recalled lots should call 1-877-422-7452 for information on how to return them.

If you have a defective patch, dispose of it immediately by flushing it down the toilet, but be sure not to handle it directly. Anyone who comes in contact with fentanyl gel should rinse the exposed skin thoroughly with water. Do not use soap, because this could increase the drug’s absorption through the skin.

As a reminder, fentanyl is a very strong opioid narcotic. The patches should only be used by opioid-tolerant patients with chronic pain that is not well-controlled by other shorter-acting analgesics.

In addition, patients and caregivers should be educated about the signs and symptoms of fentanyl overdose, which include respiratory distress, shallow breathing, fatigue, sleepiness, confusion, dizziness and fainting. And be sure that patients understand how to use the patches properly, including how often to apply the patch, reapplying a patch that’s fallen off, replacing a patch, and disposing of the patch.

Finally, remember to tell patients that heat can increase absorption of the drug to dangerous levels, and so they should avoid heating pads, electric blankets, hot baths, sunbathing and other heat sources while the wearing the patch. And they should be cautioned to contact their doctor immediately if they develop a temperature above 102 degrees.

Additional Information:

FDA MedWatch Safety Alert. Fentanyl transdermal system CII Patches. March 3, 2008.

FDA MedWatch Safety Alert. Duragesic 25 mcg/hr (fentanyl transdermal system) CII Pain Patches. Actavis Press Release. Actavis Recalls Remaining Fentanyl Patches in the U.S. as Precaution.

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

It’s a question many families are asking after reports last week that a chemical used to make baby bottles, water bottles and food containers is facing increasing scrutiny by health officials in Canada and the United States.

The substance is bisphenol-a, or BPA, widely used in the making of the hard, clear and nearly unbreakable plastic called polycarbonate. Studies and tests show that trace amounts of BPA are leaching from polycarbonate containers into foods and liquids.

While most of the focus is on products for children, including clear plastic bottles and canned infant formula, the chemical is also used in food-storage containers, some clear plastic pitchers used for filtered water, refillable water bottles and the lining of soft-drink and food cans.

While there is debate about how much of a health worry BPA really is, retailers including Wal-Mart have said they are withdrawing baby products made with it. Nalgene, the maker of a popular sports bottle, and the baby-products maker Playtex have announced they will stop using it.

Here are answers to some common questions about BPA.

What is the evidence that BPA is harmful?

It all comes from animal studies. Rat pups exposed to BPA, through injection or food, showed changes in mammary and prostate tissue, suggesting a potential cancer risk. In some tests of female mice, exposure appeared to accelerate puberty.

A draft report from the National Toxicology Program, part of the Department of Health and Human Services, notes that there is no direct evidence that human exposure to BPA harms reproduction or infant development. “I don’t think there’s anything in this brief that should lead to alarm,” said Dr. Michael D. Shelby, director of the Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction, who oversaw the report. “It means we’ve got a limited amount of evidence from some studies that were done in laboratory animals.”

The main concern is the possible risk to infants and pregnant women, although Canada has begun a study to monitor BPA exposure among about 5,000 people to assess any danger to adults.

How much BPA are we exposed to?

BPA migrates into food from polycarbonate plastic bottles or the epoxy resin coatings that line canned food. The typical adult ingests an estimated 1 microgram of BPA for every kilogram (2.2 pounds) of body weight. Babies who use polycarbonate bottles and formula from cans get more, an estimated 10 micrograms per kilogram of body weight. A microgram represents a trace amount. Consider this: a single M&M is about a gram. If you cut it into 100,000 slices, one slice would equal about 10 micrograms.

The 2003-4 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found detectable levels of BPA in 93 percent of urine samples collected from more than 2,500 adults and children over six.

How do I know if the plastic containers in my home contain BPA?

Any product made of hard, clear plastic is probably made from polycarbonate unless the manufacturer specifically states that it’s BPA-free. One way to check is to look for the triangle stamp on or near the bottom: polycarbonate plastics should have the numeral 7 in the triangle, sometimes with the letters PC.

Unfortunately, 7 is a catchall “other” category for a variety of plastics. In my own kitchen, I found just one product with a 7 — plastic fruit cups my daughter takes to school. But the plastic is soft and pliable, so it is probably not made with BPA.

I also found refillable water bottles without a stamp. Because they are hard, shatterproof and clear, it’s reasonable to assume they are made from polycarbonate.

What about canned food and drinks?

While much of the focus is on plastic bottles, most human exposure occurs through the lining of canned foods. Canned beverages appear to contain less of the chemical than canned foods like soup, pasta, fruits and vegetables, which are often processed at high temperatures. Virtually every canned product, even those labeled organic, has a liner with BPA. One brand, Eden Organic Baked Beans, says it uses a BPA-free can.

How do I lower my exposure?

Switch to frozen or fresh vegetables. Use glass, porcelain and stainless-steel containers, particularly for hot foods and liquids. If you don’t want to use a glass baby bottle, several companies, including the popular brand Born Free, now sell BPA-free baby bottles and sippy cups. For formula-fed babies, you can switch to powdered formula rather than liquid.

Although many plastic products claim to be microwave safe, some scientists warn against putting any plastic in the microwave. “There is such a wide variety now, from disposable containers to actual Tupperware,” says Dr. Anila Jacob, a senior scientist for the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based advocacy group. “I don’t know of anyone who has done definitive testing of all these different types of plastic containers to see what is leaching into food.

Source:  Tara Parker-Pope, New York Times

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

By Devra Davis, PhD, MPH

Review by Leslie Botha, Holy Hormones Honey!

In a recent interview on CSPAN Davis stated, “For much of its history, the cancer war has been fighting the wrong battles, with the wrong weapons, against the wrong enemies.”

The Secret History of the War on Cancer by Dr. Devra Davis shows, decade by decade, how the campaign has targeted the disease and left off the table the things that cause it—tobacco, alcohol, the workplace, and other environmental hazards. Conceived in explicitly military terms, the effort has focused on defeating an enemy by detecting, treating, and curing disease. Overlooked and suppressed was any consideration of how the world in which we live and work affects whether we get cancer. The result is appalling: over 10 million preventable cancer deaths over the past thirty years.

This has been no accident.

With each page of Davis’ carefully crafted book, readers will become more conscious of the obvious issues that have been ignored or marginalized and appalled by the attitude and actions of America’s medical profession, the American Cancer Society, the petrochemical industry and, “our” government. Many of us concerned with the health and wellness of women and girls knew something just wasn’t right; but Dr. Davis’s book moves us from inkling to awareness.

Filled with compelling personalities and never-before-revealed information. The Secret History of the War on Cancer is the gripping story of a major public health effort diverted and distorted for private gain. It carefully documents how, over time, the “WAR” on Cancer has come to be orchestrated by the leaders of those industries that made cancer-causing products, and who sometimes profited from drugs and technologies for finding and treating the disease.

Davis, driven by the conviction, writes with passion about premature deaths, and preventable illnesses resulting from exposure to industrial toxins and presents a powerful call to action. In the book she proposes a kind of truth-and-reconciliation approach to get industry and public health experts mutually involved; but notes that, based on the continued loss of life, change is simply not happening fast enough.

Among the Findings Described in The Secret History of the War on Cancer

— As early as 1936, the world’s leading cancer scientists understood that tobacco, diagnostic and solar radiation, benzene, and hormones caused cancer. The preparation and conduct of World War II with its focus on immediate survival effectively sidetracked these early findings of cancer hazards.

— Many more young people (those under 40 years of age) are getting cancer. One of the reasons may be the excessive use of x-rays in infants and children, and our failures to reduce exposures to other cancer hazards like those in urban air or agents that can leach from some plastics. Earlier this year, the American College of Radiology advised against unnecessary and excessive use of CT and other forms of diagnostic radiation in children, warning that this will further add to the growing cancer burden in young people today.

— When first reports emerged that coke oven workers had higher rates of lung cancer in the 1970s, some suggested that this was because most of them were black. Not until similar findings showed up in white Mormon workers five years later, was the link between coke oven work and lung cancer established. While one in eight Americans today is black, one in three works in a blue collar job, and one in five lives within two miles of a hazardous waste site. This increased environmental burden has never been considered when trying to understand why rates of prostate, breast, and colo-rectal cancer are so much higher in blacks than whites.

— Davis cited women chemist in Shanghai had a 14% increased incidence of breast cancer; chemists around the world also have a higher rate of cancer – due to poor protection in the laboratory.

— The life-saving test for cervix cancer, called the Pap smear, was not put into use for more than a decade after it was shown to save lives, because of fears that it would undermine the private practice of medicine. These delays led to the deaths or unnecessary surgery of millions of women, who succumbed to an illness that could have been avoided.

— Pasteur developed the germ theory of disease and was concerned about infectious disease. His dying words were; “remember the host; remember the host conditions” – in reference to milkmaids and their carrying infectious germs – without necessarily becoming ill from them.

— Old approach to curing cancer came out of WWII and the poison Gas Therapy

Leukemia – over abundance of white blood cells (weiss blut) chemotherapy was developed as a poison gas to fight the cells and was developed as secret army research.

—New paradigm of treating cancer includes boosting the immune system and the development of extracts from broccoli, chocolate and red wine to fight what many are coming to believe are cancers that are viral in nature.

Concerning Hormones and Cancer…

Davis reintroduces Barbara Seaman’s 1969 book, The Doctors’ Case Against the Pill, which was the basis for the Nelson Pill Hearings on the safety of the combined oral contraceptive pill. As a result of the hearings, a health warning was added to the pill, the first informational insert for any prescription drug. Robert Finch, Secretary of HEW, wrote Seaman “… THE DOCTORS’ CASE AGAINST THE PILL… was a major factor in our strengthening the language in the final warning published in the Federal Register to be included in each package of the Pill.” The dramatic events surrounding the hearings also brought together many soon-to-be prominent health feminists for the first time, and encouraged them to pursue further action. In 1975 Seaman co-founded the National Women’s Health Network with Alice Wolfson, Belita Cowan, Mary Howell, M.D., and Phyllis Chesler, Ph.D. According to Davis – we should have listened to Barbara’s warning thirty years ago. Dr Seaman is now celebrated in the same medical circles that blackballed her then. The government has finally confirmed that her warning about synthetic estrogen was correct.

— Davis cites studies showing HRT raises the risk of breast cancer, blood clots, heart attacks and dementia.

— About HPV …it is a factor in not just cervical cancer, but laryngeal and an anal — however the vaccine has not been fully tested as an agent against infectious disease.

—Questionable HPV Trail Methodology — Less than 20,000 girls between the ages of 15 – 25 were tested, and yet the CDC recommends the vaccine for girls as young as 11 and 12. Davis raised the question of what about the boys? And noted that two of three sexual encounters for teens less than 18 yrs old ARE NOT CONSENTUAL.

What People Are Saying

“A breathtaking, impeccably documented wake-up call for what we should have done and what we must do!”

— Teresa Heinz Kerry, co-author of This Moment on Earth

“With the mastery of a great writer, Devra Davis takes the reader inside the successes, the failures, and the ambiguity of research on cancer.”

— Lorenzo Tomatis, MD, Former Director,

International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization

“The Secret History of the War on Cancer is a masterful combination of scientific insights and investigative journalism. If you want to know why one in three Americans develops cancer, read this book.”

—Mitchell Gaynor, MD, President, Gaynor Integrative Oncology

About the Author

Devra Davis, Ph.D., M.P.H., is the Director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute and Professor of Epidemiology, Graduate School of Public Health. She was appointed by President Clinton to the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board in 1994 and also served as Scholar in Residence at the National Academy of Science. She works in Pittsburgh, and lives in Washington, D.C.

A portion of the profits from this book will go to support research on cancer prevention.

OK! OK! I’ve read it NOW WHAT!

This book is a timely, well-written, and stunning exposé — Share It.

• Request your local library ordered a copy of the book.
• If your local bookstore is not carrying the book, request that they order it.
• Start a reading group based at your local bookstore.
• Request that your local high school and college libraries order the book. If they don’t have the budget, buy it your self and donate the book to the library (Donations are a tax deductible action)
• Buy and send a copy to our congressional representative, and ask what he/she plans to do to stop the uncontrolled use and dumping of toxins into our environment and to protect the health of people who what to work with or around these chemicals and environmental toxins.
• Talk to your friends and family about the book and what it means to their health.

Inconvenient Women do not get Angry — We Get ACTIVE!

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.

Much research has shown that what you eat as well as your genetic make-up probably have some influence on your risk of breast cancer. The study reviewed here looked at how diet and genetics might combine to influence breast cancer risk.

More than 6,000 Chinese women participated in the study. The researchers found that:

• Women who ate the most cruciferous vegetables (cabbage, turnips, broccoli, cauliflower, and kale) were less likely to develop breast cancer after menopause than women who ate the least amount of cruciferous vegetables.
• Women who had a GSTP1 gene with what’s called a Val variant had a higher-than-average risk of post-menopausal breast cancer. But these women with a GSTP1 Val variant got more benefits from eating lots of cruciferous vegetables compared to women who didn’t have a GSTP1 Val variant and ate lots of cruciferous veggies.

Cruciferous vegetables have high levels of compounds that the body turns into isothiocyanates. Researchers think that isothiocyanates may help fight cancer. People with a Val variant of the GSTP1 gene flush the compounds that are turned into isothiocyanates out of their bodies faster than people who don’t have this variant. So, people with the Val variant are less likely to get the anti-cancer benefits of isothiocyanates. It’s possible that women with the Val variant can make up for this lack of isothiocyanates by eating a lot of cruciferous vegetables. This might be why women with the Val variant who ate lots of cruciferous vegetables had a reduced risk of breast cancer.

This research was done in China. Like other Asian countries, the number of breast cancer diagnoses in China has been increasing as more women adopt a typically Western diet and lifestyle. It’s possible that people now are eating fewer cruciferous vegetables, which may be contributing to higher numbers of breast cancer cases.

What you eat is just one of many choices you can make to help keep your breast cancer risk as low as it can be. Visit the breastcancer.org Changes You Can Make to Lower Your Risk page for more information.

NEW YORK (Reuters Health) – Cruciferous vegetables may help lower the risk of developing breast cancer, particularly for women who carry a particular gene variant linked to the disease, a new study suggests.

Researchers found that among more than 6,000 Chinese women, those with the highest intake of Chinese cabbage and white turnips had a somewhat lower risk of postmenopausal breast cancer than those with the lowest intake.

The findings, reported in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, add to evidence that compounds in cruciferous vegetables may help fight cancer.

Chinese cabbage and white turnips are two cruciferous vegetables common in the Chinese diet; in Western diets, the most common cruciferous vegetables include broccoli, cauliflower and kale. The vegetables contain certain compounds that the body converts into substances called isothiocyanates, which are thought to have anti-cancer effects.

In the current study, high consumption of Chinese cabbage and white turnips was linked to a moderately lower breast cancer risk. But the apparent benefit was stronger among women who carried two copies of a particular variant of a gene called GSTP1.

Among these women, those with the highest intake of any cruciferous vegetables had about half the risk of breast cancer as those who ate the fewest, according to the researchers, led by Dr. Sang-Ah Lee of Vanderbilt University in Nashville.

GSTP1 is an enzyme that helps detoxify the body of potentially cancer-causing substances. Some studies have suggested that having a particular form of the gene — the Val variant — may raise a woman’s risk of breast cancer.

The current study found that women who carried two copies of the Val variant did, in fact, have a higher risk of developing breast cancer before menopause than women who had other variants in the GSTP1 gene.

But the excess risk was cut substantially in those who ate the most cruciferous vegetables.

“We cautiously interpreted this as diet being a factor that may reduce the impact of genetic susceptibility in overall breast cancer risk,” Dr. Jay Fowke, one of the researchers on the work, said in a statement.

It’s possible, according to Fowke and his colleagues, that people who carry two Val variants of the GSTP1 gene excrete the beneficial isothiocyanates more quickly, and eating more cruciferous vegetables helps counter this.

More research, they conclude, is needed to better understand how cruciferous vegetables might modify breast cancer risk.

SOURCE: American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, March 2008

©2012 An Inconvenient Woman. All Rights Reserved.