Advanced Breast Cancer On the Rise in Younger Women....I wonder why

I've been trying to get people to acknowledge that there is a serious problem going on here; in the past 2 years I've known personally 4 women in their early 30's who are getting diagnosed with late stage breast cancer. 3 have already died, the 4th is currently fighting for her life.

www.nytimes.com...


So nothing is really mentioned as to what could be the causes, but I have a few theories and I'd love to hear what others have to say also. I'm just glad that I've finally seen this acknowledged.

I'm guessing hormones in non-organic dairy products and non-organic meat products probably play a big role in this. Throwing hormones off whack is never a good thing. Eating meat and dairy products pumped full of hormones and antibiotics is not a good thing and plays chaos on the hormonal balance.

I wish organic groceries were more available to a wider consumer population then it currently is. When I travel, depending on where I'm going sometimes I really need to plan ahead and bring more of my own snacks or plan on making time to get to a natural grocery store that sells organic and non gmo food.

What are their eating habits? Exercise habits?
Do they get their 8 to 10 servings of fruit and veggies every day? 30 minutes exercise daily?

Besides diet and exercise, there's stuff we have little or no control over, plastics, pollution, stress, unlabeled gmo products....
Organic food extremely expensive.
Our environment is in sad shape.

Parabens are a group of compounds widely used as antimicrobial preservatives in food, pharmaceutical and cosmetics products, including underarm deodorants. Parabens are absorbed through intact skin and from the gastrointestinal tract and blood.

Measurable concentrations of six different parabens have been identified in biopsy samples from breast tumors (Darbre, 2004). The particular parabens were found in relative concentrations that closely parallel their use in the synthesis of cosmetic products (Rastogi, 1995). Parabens have also been found in almost all urine samples examined from a demographically diverse sample of U.S. adults (Ye, 2006a).

www.breastcancerfund.org...

i wonder if the paraben folks make money from cancer cures?

ps
additional links
articles.mercola.com...
re parabens in young girls...and men:
www.wisegeek.com...

Read about Vitamin D deficiency and how it affects our immune system and it's link to breast cancer in premenopausal women. news.yahoo.com... We have been told to avoid the sun, we slather ourselves in sunscreen, when really we need the sun. Like every other living thing.. we need the sun. Take your vitamin D folks! D3 that is.

reply to post by Danbones


I forgot about all that.
Just look at the poisons absorbed through the skin with the lotions, makeup, hair dyes.
I heard somewhere that the average lipstick wearing woman, ingests a couple of tubes through their life. :shk:

Sun screens
People put on that crap, and then sweat, and the pores open and absorb the parabens.
Plus it blocks the vitamin d we need to prevent cancer.
Scary stuff.

reply to post by Imightknow


I've seen an increase in teens who have cellphones tucked underneath their bra's as if its a fashion statement. This generation coming out now will be hit hard with breast cancer for sure! I also think theres a nutritional deficiency related. The majority of city dewellers eat a fast food diet, microwaved foods, anti perspirants, cigarettes, alcohol, birth control pills, and whatever else you want to include into the pot.

Another interesting study regarding breast cancer is the deficiency of Iodine. There are some great studies about iodine deficiencies and the increase in breast cancer. natural news

Maybe wireless devices?

I can't count the number of times I see women put there mobile phones that they use for MP3 players tucked into their sports bras at the gym or out and about

It's anecdotal at best, but the same theories have been kicked around for testicular cancer in men with our phones in front pockets.

Our environment, air, water, and food is evermore saturated by chemicals. As these things have only been around since the fifties, we've no idea of their detriment to future generations. But I suspect mankind is poisoning itself, with blatant disregard to unborn generations.

reply to post by Imightknow


Birth control. I believe it may be that simple. Those most likely to get breast cancer are exposed to more estrogen, such as woman who start puberty earlier or have no pregnancies. We could go even farther to say the environmental estrogen's that we are exposed to. www.sciencedaily.com...
Also obesity causes an increase in systemic estrogen. www.sciencedaily.com...

I can think of a million reasons why they wouldn't want to link birth control to rise in breast cancer.

The devices for communication are also something to look at included also is make up and such.

b17

reply to post by Imightknow


Medical anthropologists Sydney Singer and Soma Grismaijer -- authors of Dressed to Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras -- conducted a study of over 4,000 women, and found that women who do not wear bras have a much lower risk of breast cancer.

Their findings included:

Women who wore their bras 24 hours per day had a 3 out of 4 chance of developing breast cancer
Women who wore bras more than 12 hour per day, but not to bed, had a 1 out of 7 risk
Women who wore their bras less than 12 hours per day had a 1 out of 52 risk
Women who wore bras rarely or never had a 1 out of 168 chance of getting breast cancer

Ill-Fitting BraThe overall difference between women who wore their bras 24-hours a day and those who did not wear bras at all was a 125-fold difference. Based on the results of this study, the link between bras and breast cancer is about three times greater than the link between cigarette smoking and cancer.

Singer and Grismaijer also found that about 90 percent of fibrocystic patients improve when they quit wearing bras. Says Dr. Michael Schacter, M.D. in his article, The Prevention and Complementary Treatment of Breast Cancer

Over 85 percent of the lymph fluid flowing from the breast drains to the armpit lymph nodes. Most of the rest drains to the nodes along the breast bone. Bras and other external tight clothing can impede flow.

The nature of the bra, the tightness, and the length of time worn, will all influence the degree of blockage of lymphatic drainage. Thus, wearing a bra might contribute to the development of breast cancer as a result of cutting off lymphatic drainage, so that toxic chemicals are trapped in the breast.Constricting bras have also been implicated in the rise of benign (non-cancerous) but often painful breast cysts and lumps. Says Dr. John McDougall, M.D.
After repeated bouts of inflammation, the breasts develop scar tissue in many places, and some of the milk ducts become plugged, forming cysts. Fibrocystic breast disease, not surprisingly, is associated with a higher risk of breast cancer Many physicians and researchers now agree that wearing a tight fitting bra can cut off lymph drainage, which can contribute to the development of breast cancer,as your body will be less able to excrete all the toxins you’re exposed to on a daily basis. Aluminum from antiperspirants, for example, is one potentially dangerous source of toxins that can accumulate if your lymph drainage is impaired.

A study published in the European Journal of Cancer studied factors for breast cancer such as breast size and handedness. They discovered that premenopausal women who do not wear bras are less than half as likely to get breast cancer that those who regularly wear a bra. A study conducted by researcher David Moth revealed that even the lightest bras place pressure on the lymphatic system.

Other research published in Chronobiology International in 2000 discovered that regular bra wearing decreases the production of melatonin, which is a potent natural antioxidant and the hormone that regulates sleep, boosts the immune system and, incredibly fights aging. Balanced melatonin levels are essential for the body to fight many types of cancer, including breast cancer.

These same researchers studied the indigenous populations of New Zealand and Australia. The Maoris, who are indigenous to New Zealand, are basically fully integrated into mainstream New Zealand life and interestingly have the same chances of developing breast cancer. The aboriginals of Australia on the other hand have not integrated into regular western society and do not regularly wear bras, and have practically no breast cancer. Japanese, Fijians, and many women from other cultures were found to have a significantly higher chance of developing breast cancer when they began wearing bras.

It may be interesting to note that a very small proportion of men do develop breast cancer, exactly the same amount as women who go braless!

European, Journal of Cancer 1991 ;27(2): 131-5.


Still don't believe it.Well tie a thread tightly around your little finger.SEE what happens.

Originally posted by Danbones
i wonder if the paraben folks make money from cancer cures?

If they don't, their mates probably do.

That's how business works these days. Lots of money to be made with cancer, and I'm sure those who make the money don't want to put themselves out of business...

reply to post by beckybecky


That's truly amazing!

I'm a firm believer that the main cause of cancer is not living a natural life. Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

Originally posted by paleorchid13
reply to post by Imightknow

 

Birth control. I believe it may be that simple. Those most likely to get breast cancer are exposed to more estrogen, such as woman who start puberty earlier or have no pregnancies. We could go even farther to say the environmental estrogen's that we are exposed to. www.sciencedaily.com...
Also obesity causes an increase in systemic estrogen. www.sciencedaily.com...

I can think of a million reasons why they wouldn't want to link birth control to rise in breast cancer.

edit on 28-2-2013 by paleorchid13 because: (no reason given)

This made me think of all of the progressive moms who put their 12-year-olds on birth control to avoid acne and the embarassment of teen pregnancy. When I was in high school (1985-1990) there was a very small number of teens on birth control. The handful I knew weren't even sexually active - it was for controlling what they perceived to be awful cramps. And it worked very well according to them.

When this hormonal augmentation is combined with inactivity, obesity, poor nutrition, the 8-year reign of estrogen-inducing soy, pharmaceuticals that haven't been tested on pre-teens, and increasing environmental pressures, this is completely understandable. Sad, but very understandable.

Critical thinking is the only thing that will save anyone.

ETA: And I forgot to add leaky microwaves at chest-height.

Originally posted by snowspirit
What are their eating habits? Exercise habits?
Do they get their 8 to 10 servings of fruit and veggies every day? 30 minutes exercise daily?

well, let me think this through for a second:

presuming an 8 hour work day add 2 hours for commute (which is generous, i'd wager 10+2 hours) and 7 hours of sleep leave 7 hours of disposable time, which doesn't mean you've got nothing to do, mind you, just that you can more easily choose what you do and when.

let's say you have 1 longer break where you can eat, leaves 8 (i'll presume 9 servings since you gave an interval) maybe you can even wedge another 2 in during work, but don't count on it, let's say this is a usable average. leaves SIX servings in 7 (wait, 30 minutes of exercise + showering, changing clothes will easily take another half hour) SIX hours - and you're definitely not supposed to eat shortly before going to bed, are you?.too bad it's already evening when the gorging begins....

in fact i consider regularly eating past 6 pm detrimental and i have the experience to confirm it, so, when exactly are these people going to eat and isn't it going to be one serving anyway if you're in effect continuously snacking? shouldn't the proportion of fresh food in your diet count for something, too?


IOW, spare us the innuendo, following all those types of recommendations is a full time job in and by itself when you throw it all together and a stressful if not insurmountable one at that, so all they serve as here is as an excuse to blame the victim, don't they?

Let me tell you something, when people inconveniently stumble upon a (wealthy, bored) lunatic who actually lives like this, who still got just as ill, guess what, it'll be chalked down to Murphy's law and ad-hoc excuses (probably drugs) or the old, tried and proven method of claiming narrow beneficial ranges, where exceeding your proscribed amount of goodness will be considered just as detrimental. either that or it'll be the 'wrong' salad, if in doubt it needs to be 'organic' or whatever fad comes next, 'holistic', 'centristic', 'haplophilistic', 'ballistic', or whatever.

i don't know what caused this surge in cancer cases, i just have a hunch about contributory factors but your type of thinking is a deliberate blind alley akin to flagellation to repent your real or imagined sins, if you're not hitting yourself hard enough you're still going to hell.


================================================================================

Originally posted by beckybecky


Women who wore their bras 24 hours per day had a 3 out of 4 chance of developing breast cancer
Women who wore bras more than 12 hour per day, but not to bed, had a 1 out of 7 risk
Women who wore their bras less than 12 hours per day had a 1 out of 52 risk
Women who wore bras rarely or never had a 1 out of 168 chance of getting breast cancer

OK, i can follow you, there is just a slight problem, namely:

What is the life of a woman who wears a bra 24/7 going to look like, i'd expect much different from one's who never used one and these statistics just won't separate these influences.

Let's try the following, varying cancer incidence with latitude, all within the same country and culture, of course. Next, level of skin pigment versus incidence of cancer, ie. do black women have a high breast cancer rate compared to whites... can one ask these questions without being labelled a racist nowadays? even find some acceptable answers ?

Originally posted by Long Lance

Originally posted by snowspirit
What are their eating habits? Exercise habits?
Do they get their 8 to 10 servings of fruit and veggies every day? 30 minutes exercise daily?

================================================================================

Originally posted by beckybecky


Women who wore their bras 24 hours per day had a 3 out of 4 chance of developing breast cancer
Women who wore bras more than 12 hour per day, but not to bed, had a 1 out of 7 risk
Women who wore their bras less than 12 hours per day had a 1 out of 52 risk
Women who wore bras rarely or never had a 1 out of 168 chance of getting breast cancer

OK, i can follow you, there is just a slight problem, namely:

What is the life of a woman who wears a bra 24/7 going to look like, i'd expect much different from one's who never used one and these statistics just won't separate these influences.

Let's try the following, varying cancer incidence with latitude, all within the same country and culture, of course. Next, level of skin pigment versus incidence of cancer, ie. do black women have a high breast cancer rate compared to whites... can one ask these questions without being labelled a racist nowadays? even find some acceptable answers ?

edit on 2013.3.1 by Long Lance because: compound post

The overall difference between women who wore their bras 24-hours a day and those who did not wear bras at all was a 125-fold difference.

The overall difference between women who wore their bras 24-hours a day and those who did not wear bras at all was a 125-fold difference.

The overall difference between women who wore their bras 24-hours a day and those who did not wear bras at all was a 125-fold difference.


People just DON'T understand 125 fold difference.maybe someone here can explain it in simple terms what 125 fold difference is.

Maybe their schooling is deficient.Maybe their attention span is short.Maybe they watch too MTV.People who watch too much MTV have very short attention spans lasting barely 5 seconds and they frequently forget the start of a sentence by the time they reach the end of a sentence.This is very sad.For them.

some people ramble on and on about food,diet,genetics,chemicals and toxins and it is true they have an effect but not a effect of 125 fold difference.

Could someone else explain a 125 fold difference in SIMPLE terms so that these people can understand it.


Keep it simple.

reply to post by Long Lance

let's say you have 1 longer break where you can eat, leaves 8 (i'll presume 9 servings since you gave an interval) maybe you can even wedge another 2 in during work, but don't count on it, let's say this is a usable average. leaves SIX servings in 7 (wait, 30 minutes of exercise + showering, changing clothes will easily take another half hour) SIX hours - and you're definitely not supposed to eat shortly before going to bed, are you?.too bad it's already evening when the gorging begins....

Breakfast for most people doesn't contain much in the way of fruit or veggies, when I was working it used to be toast with peanut butter and tea. Sometimes a small orange juice. Or a banana.

But then at work was a 15 min coffee break - snack time, a half hour lunch - salad, soup, or lettuce and tomato for sandwich, then another 15 min coffee break - another snack. So if you have fruit for coffee break and an orange juice (I count juice as a half serving), there's around 3 to 5 servings.

Depending on the serving size, and your size. They say a serving size is a small piece of fruit, or a small handful. A large apple would be like 2 servings. A large salad would also be like 2 servings.
Then something with dinner, or if you get off at an early time like 3:00 ish (most factories), then a snack before supper.

It all helps. Eat good 80% of the time, then the odd greasy burger isn't as hard on health.
Yeah, 5 servings is more realistic.

It is hard to do if you're not used to grabbing fruit a lot, or veggie sticks with dip. I was lucky to be raised around fruit orchards, so I used to pick a piece of fruit coming and going to school at an early age.
Plus I have a high metabolism, and need to eat every couple of hours when I'm active.

I've also met people that thing that don't get any fruit, to me that seems strange.

I have to agree with the hormones in milk idea. That was the first thing that came to mind. We drink a lot of milk and I worry about this. However, the local dairy that sells milk prices it at almost 3-4 times the cost of store bought milk. We just can't afford that.


Another thing that came to mind was an interview I saw on TV a few months ago. A hair dresser was talking about hair dryers causing cancer. They mentioned a high rate of hair stylists getting breast cancer. When they hold the dryer to dry a customer's hair, the back end of the dryer if pointed directly at their breasts. I'm not sure if there is any correlation, though.

reply to post by beckybecky

I looked into this a while back. The idea that bras cause breast cancer is an old idea. The problem is that it's not well supported. Few studies have been done. And most are contradictory.

When things are contradictory it tends to make me ignore them.

Now, isn't this a confusing one:
news.uk.msn.com - Squeezing breasts 'can stop cancer'...

I'd recommend to not wear a bra when you're in-private and to have your bra-size professionally measured. I've read that it's common for woman to wear the wrong bra size.

But I wouldn't go further than that until I had more evidence.

I've read that woman who haven't had pregnancies have higher rates of breast cancer. Not sure how it relates. But I saw that someone else in the thread mentioned this.

Try to have a balanced diet. Try not to eat too many processed foods. Processed foods are typically heated and chemically changed/preserved and supplemented with nutrients. The problem is that processed foods are our attempt at replacing nature, but we fail miserably at replicating all of the minutia. But even saying this I'll admit that nature isn't best for everything. You have to educate yourself about everything and know when to let nature do the thinking for you. I've seen numerous examples of how nature can kill. It amazes me how our civilization even exists. A lot of the things we learned to grow crops and how to store them and whatnot is so tricky!! Nature is not god.

Bread and added sugars are probably the worst offenders. Eat those (especially together) SPARINGLY. In fact, it'd be best to not eat them at all. Treat them like the plague. Carbs are best consumed in their natural form; rice, sweet potato, legumes, etc. No added sugar. Eat unrefined salt; comes naturally with potassium and other minerals. Eat lemons and blackberries. Etc.

Eat some meat. But not a lot. Try to eat a lot of things at least once every few weeks. We just don't know everything. This is why it's critical not to focus on eating the same things.

And did I say exercise and some (but not too much) sunlight? These're big too.

But I've read about woman who did most everything right but still died of cancer. Even if you eat a good diet and exercise a lot and get enough sunlight each day and manage stress and and do it all right you're still only REDUCING your chances of getting cancer, NOT ELIMINATING. So really I don't think anyone has all the answers. You just have to do your best and enjoy the moments you're given. Cancer has killed many good people who didn't deserve it. Just appreciate things.

3d chemotherapy looks promising. Cancer might be one of those things we cannot prevent completely. So to have a way to kill it that's effective is still every bit as necessary. And perhaps we will find other ways of targetting cancer cells in the body to neutralize and/or terminate.

Originally posted by snowspirit

you can increase and even maximise your intake of fresh food, but guess what it won't be ten meals. if i ate one cherry every hour would that count? shouldn't you say that around half (percentages may vary) of your food ought to be fresh?

Originally posted by beckybecky

The overall difference between women who wore their bras 24-hours a day and those who did not wear bras at all was a 125-fold difference.

(x7)

i understand one should look in that direction and i am sure that squishing your organs is bad for them but you have correlation and to investigate causation and that implies the examination of control groups, among other things.

how many of the 95% bra women will spend most of their time indoors? how many of the 3% bra wearing women will spend it outdoors instead? what IF dropping the bra only, while keeping their lifestyles the same reduced incidence only by a third or half or even less? wouldn't reducing all risk factors serve them better?

which requires understanding the causes rather than repeating one result and stopping there.