Pinktober Revolution
Comments
-
If exercise, teetotaling and diet were all it took for someone without a family bc history to prevent getting it, NOBODY would ever get breast cancer. We can do what we need to to possibly reduce the odds but not eliminate them. People get cancer for no apparent reason. What about little kids who get leukemia? Did they bring it on themselves? Sula, you nailed it when you said “shit happens.” (I’m so glad we don’t get censored here). Nobody knows exactly what it is that makes that first cell decide it’s too awesome to die like all your other cells and instead keep dividing and dividing. If we knew what causes mutations, we’d be inducing the beneficial ones to help evolution along to conform to the modern world and advances in science (such as getting our bodies to stop acting as if famine were around the corner and the future of the human race were in peril unless even postmenopausal women have enough body fat to be fertile)!
0 -
Who cares if u r a pita
AND ASHLEY IS ACTING LIKE THEY NEVER never did it before.Who did the fonate to last year
Also missing from that list is Thr breast cancer society, this is the organization that had f the warehouses. there was one j in my area and I went for about three or four years. The justice dept. Was supposed to leave it opened bit I went last week m t they said the justice dept closed it , the think we should b able to afford everything we need with the funds we get.
Also, wish I had the every to help you guys u r doing great work,
0 -
Hello Chi Sandy welcome here
Hi blondie Happy Thoughts
Jackb, went to the link thanks, But couldn't see where to leave a message. Also, saw nothing about them pinking except product. No donation info. Did they take it down?
To all, this is the first year I've read so much reference to the sexualization of BC. That will shut it down faster than anything. It's not politically correct. Just a reminder to use that phrase frequently in getting a company to change what they are doing. that is if they aren't foing it legitimately.
Also, anyone have the energy to find out who the source is on the Healthy Lifestyle garbage. That's new this year too. We should take them on with a writing campaign. For all the reasons mentioned in the last few pages. I haven't picked up that they are doing it with other cancers.
Divine, put a link to your article here and I'll put it in the topic box. Thanks
0 -
Googled this question: "who started Healthy Lifestyle promotion for breast cancer"
Susan B Koman
http://ww5.komen.org/BreastCancer/HealthyWeightampDiet.html
American Cancer Society-link broken
This study from 2009 is a retrospective review. Probably the source of the garbage. The study will take some review to figure out if it's biased.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC238387...In 2007, an estimated 1.6 million North Americans will be diagnosed with cancer. Given significant improvements in early detection and treatment, increasing numbers of patients can expect to be alive in five years. With improving longevity, the late-occurring adverse effects of cancer and its treatment are becoming increasingly apparent. As in other clinical populations, healthy lifestyle behaviors encompassing weight management, a healthy diet, regular exercise, and smoking cessation have the potential to significantly reduce morbidity and mortality in cancer survivors. This review will address: (1) the strength of evidence for recommendations in areas of weight management, diet, exercise and smoking cessation; and (2) the current evidence examining the efficacy of various intervention approaches to promote health behavior changes among adult cancer survivors.
Summary
Currently, there is scant evidence regarding the direct impact of post-diagnosis behavioral change on cancer-related progression, recurrence or survival. Indeed, much more research is necessary, not only to determine proof of concept (i.e., that behavior change can make an impact on cancer-specific outcomes and overall health), but also to arrive at interventions that are well-accepted and that reach cancer survivors who are most vulnerable. Research is ongoing and data are beginning to accumulate. In the interim, oncologists should not lose sight of the fact that there exists a significant body of research that shows the benefit of a healthful diet, regular exercise and smoking cessation for reducing risk for many of the comorbid conditions (i.e., other cancers, CVD, diabetes and osteoporosis) and side effects (i.e., fatigue and depression) for which cancer survivors are especially prone. Thus, oncology care providers can assist their patients by endorsing existing health guidelines and encouraging their patients to take active roles in pursuing general preventive health strategies.
///////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Just as I feared, this should not have been produced as having a connection to BC, because they haven;t proved it. The bolding and italics are my emphasis. This is a retrospective study, it shouldn't be given the status of a prospective study
0 -
A study from Mexico. 2011. It was not hard science. It was based on questionnaire.
0 -
http://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/womens....
Can a healthy diet prevent breast cancer?
Eating a diet rich in fruits and vegetables hasn't been consistently shown to offer protection from breast cancer. In addition, a low-fat diet appears to offer only a slight reduction in the risk of breast cancer.
However, eating a healthy diet may decrease your risk of other types of cancer, as well as diabetes, heart disease and stroke. A healthy diet can also help you maintain a healthy weight(italics mine) — a key factor in breast cancer prevention.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Can't get the bold button off--sorry. This is an example of perpetuating what hasn't been proven. Someone reading this will/can interpret that weight is a direct causality to BC. It hasn't been proven.0 -
This might be relevant. From a publishing industry newsletter I received earlier this month, a notice about a book deal:
Health
Director of the Integrative Medicine Program at MD Anderson Cancer Center, America's top cancer hospital, Lorenzo Cohen, Ph.D. and educational psychologist Alison Jefferies's ANTICANCER LIVING, presenting the research showing that 50 to 70 percent of cancer is preventable and outlining a practical, step-by-step plan to increase the likelihood of avoiding cancer, or surviving and ultimately thriving after a diagnosis, drawing on a pioneering five-year study created by Cohen and David Servan-Schreiber...Has anyone seen any information about the study this refers to?
0 -
I have surmised for a long time that it was important to find the seminal study that said weight was related to breastcancer. That study started all the garbage to follow. Studies can be biased, but once that biased study is published from then on it's held as gospel. To track that study would be very difficult---any takers?
Just recently ( last few weeks)in the psychiatric publishing community a seminal work was debunked. They're were 50 studies based on that study. They have all had to retract their publications. This announcement was made on a Saturday. I saw nothing after that. It was debunked by a researcher that tried multiple times to reproduce the original researchers results. That researcher is a whistleblower.
If we could get that seminal work on weight and BC and see if it's a solid piece of scientific work, it would help.
Look closely at the first ten articles, studies, and teaching pages i.e.Mayo, you will find that all say that connections have been made to other diseases, but not definitively to BC.
I will link to a thread I did on how to research. One of the postings is on a tutorial on bias. It's excellent.
this link is to the thread page
https://community.breastcancer.org/forum/73/topic/834695?page=1#idx_9
link to bias tutorial:
http://familymed.uthscsa.edu/facultydevelopment/elearning/biasinresearch.htm
0 -
Hi Rainny, nice to see you. Haven't seen the work you referenced, but it goes along with what I've just said. Think of all the work we did on Toradol. Our Toradol group knows it's not been proved, but docs are already using it. The three of you risked it b/c nothing better was offered. The problem is--it could become a matter of fact by use. That's why I say this Healthy Lifestyles promulgation is very nice, but the untoward outcome is cancer patients are being "blamed for their cancer", science hasn't proved beyond a doubt that what they are pushing is fact.
0 -
A medical example: Sliding scale insulin was studied by Wylie out of John's Hopkins in 1998. He traced the practice back the to the earliest origin of it's use. He determined 1. that it appeared somewhere in New England---sorry I forget year, but early 1980's. 2. it had never been studied 3. it became the standard of care throughout the USA and outside the USA
DUH?
0 -
Director of the Integrative Medicine Program at MD Anderson Cancer Center, America's top cancer hospital, Lorenzo Cohen, Ph.D. and educational psychologist Alison Jefferies's ANTICANCER LIVING, presenting the research showing that 50 to 70 percent of cancer is preventable and outlining a practical, step-by-step plan to increase the likelihood of avoiding cancer, or surviving and ultimately thriving after a diagnosis, drawing on a pioneering five-year study created by Cohen and David Servan-Schreiber...
Rain: could this be in reference to David Servan-Schreiber's book? Anti-Cancer: A new way of life.
I don't believe that cancer is preventable. Yes, there are things you can do to decrease your chances,, the biggest of them being to not smoke. But there are plenty of people out there who get lung or throat cancer who never smoked,, so again,, I say, it is a crapshoot. There are way too many women on here who did "everything right." Vegan, vegetarian, marathon runners, breast fed their babies that they had before age 30,,, and they still got BC. So I say, screw anyway who thinks it is our fault at all. They deserve a junk punch.
0 -
Hi Glennie any chance of getting a link?
0 -
Just to clarify, the book I referenced above based on the MD Anderson study has not been published yet: it has been sold to a trade (not academic) publisher and presumably will be published in a year or two, depending on how much actually has been written. Coming soon to a Barnes & Noble near you...
0 -
Sas,,, I have to edit to make hotlinks or copy/paste,, not sure what is up with my computer. One sec,, and I'll find a link to the book.
ah,,,, I see Rain's latest post,, so there is a book forthcoming.
The book I mentioned, describes David Servan-Schreiber's "journey" with brain cancer. He went thru conventional treatment but then also did a lot of dietary changes and other holistic practices, that he believes extended his life. He lived 17 years after his diagnosis, which was considered terminal at the time. Below is the link to the book I referenced. It was published in 2009.
0 -
Glennie, no, we're talking about two different books. But maybe drawing on some of the same material?
It's also hard to tell from the language of this blurb exactly what "preventable" means. The cancers caused by environmental factors (i.e. clusters that can be related to environmental carcinogens) are certainly preventable, but only in retrospect. If the book is all about how vegetarian lifestyles and staying fit prevent cancer, well, then, show me the study.
Anyway, hope it's not about blaming the victim, but we'll see what the finished book looks like.
0 -
sas, I glanced at your great link on doing research, and any oncology study published in a peer reviewed journal (or funded by the NIH, which means it was also peer reviewed before a decision was made to fund it, usually with significant pilot results required for NIH funding) should be able to be tracked in PubMed (which you mention):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed
Edited to add: nearly any federally funded project that resulted in a peer reviewed publication related to oncology is likely to be in PubMed. Take a look at Department of Defense funded research also: they are a big funder of breast cancer research. I think they could be the largest federal funder for bc after NIH.(? not sure but they are big, much bigger than many folks would think)
One you find the study, If you lookfor subsequent articles that cite it (PubMed will list those) you can read those studies to see if others have had similar results, different results, refute it, support it, whatever. If it isn't much that is a red flag that it isn't considered to be important, or that perhaps it wasn't peer reviewed. (which is considered a critical part of the scientific process at least in the US, and by the NIH.)
I am three days post chemo round three and honestly I have to do a lot of this type of thing at work, so I am not doing nearly as much research as I should on my own behalf right now, but if I have time I will see if I can find the study by author's name, unless someone else gets to it first. I do have access through work to a few paid databases which may have pubs not in the ones you mention, although I have to say, if it is in any respected medical journal, pubmed or one of the other ones you mention (I also use Google scholar a fair amount) should be able to find it....
sorry I don't have the bandwidth to do more, but by next Pinktober I will be all over it for myself, and for others.
Octogirl
0 -
I just wanted to point out something about David Servan-Schreiber's book? Anti-Cancer: A new way of life, which I think is a very useful book for people with cancer. He emphasizes at every turn that what he is proposing is meant as a complementary approach to standard cancer treatment (surgery, radiation, chemotherapy), NOT as a replacement for standard treatment. I read it when I first became a cancer patient, so I don't have a good feel about whether he says his approach will "prevent" cancer (I was not reading it for that), but I think he did a good job of qualifying the potential usefulness of his ideas for existing cancer patients. I learned about combining tumeric, black pepper and a fat from him, which I have read in many other places and contexts. On the other hand, he also recommends eliminating sugar from your diet, and while I have reduced my sugar intake (I have always watched my sugar intake), I personally don't believe that a complete abstinence from sugar is essential (all cells feed on sugar, including cancer cells; many foods are turned into some kind of sugar for digestion, etc.). But to each his own.
0 -
I will be emailing them today!
0 -
Hi Scrunchie and Octo welcome here
Thanks, regarding your comment on the thread I'll itemize so I don't forget something Please,
1. add all your goodie researching stuff to the EBR thread.
2. The search to find the seminal study on weight is going to be very time consuming and frustrating. I have read say 8-10 studies on weight. The language within the studies ranges from "likely" to "statistically significant"(SS). I have always been frustrated when I see this happen. To often people squeak by with reading the abstract. Often a different picture can be drawn when the whole study is read. Another thing I've learned to be wary of is the conclusion may not synch with the abstract.
No concern if something is SS. Obviously then it needs to be verified by further research, but then becomes dogma. What I have serious issue with and likely you do too, is in the discussion section of a study. When a researcher starts surmising what some information means, and another researcher uses it as dogma. Then it is perpetuated as truth.
That's why I used Wylie's study on sliding scale insulin as an example. When his study was published, docs were flummoxed as to what to do. Some had been using sliding scale for a very long time. Almost two decades. Yet it was simply something, someone in a hamlet in New England, thought was a nice thing to do.
3. This Healthy Lifestyle(HL) thing is going to gain steam like a locomotive. We may hate pink, but HL is going to be worse. We are on the defensive already b/c it is already all over. Perhaps I should take it to the science forum b/c it's going to be a major amount of work tracking it. Frankly, I don't know that I'm up to it. I could start the topic box and see who comes to help. I could float it and see what happens. I haven't finished my last project and feeling guilty about that one.
4. I did a weight thread, it is my own hypothesis. While waiting for folks to find it, I did get into reading on the microbiome. My conclusion is science has already identified the cause of obesity and it's in the biome research. Medical docs haven't gotten into the biome yet. Otherwise, we would have different recommendations. Until they do all we will here is "change your diet, lose weight, and exercise". Probably minimum 5 years before it's assimilated into the medical community with workable approaches.
5. The Microbiome research does define the diet. The info on that is at the end of the thread. My conclusion was that it lead to the Paleo diet. Likely the Mediteranean and Japenese diet too. I stopped before I got that far. I'm not ready to commit to change yet. Plus, I'd have to switch to hard cider and give up my wine.
Thanks for joining us
I'll bring the link for the weight thread.
https://community.breastcancer.org/forum/73/topic/832722?page=1
0 -
Off to be responsible and buy some insulation
Have a fun day. Changing the world can be fun. Don't let the chit get you angry, just work to make things better. 
0 -
Just like with the whole PINK thing,, we will have to get the word out on "healthy lifestyle". How many here were vegetarian/vegan at their diagnosis? How many exercised regularly? How many were ideal weight? And yet,,,, still got cancer.
0 -
Meanwhile, in the just-gets-weirder department....
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/gwyneth-paltro...
So if you were walking around before BC with your cell phone tucked into your underwire bra, it's your fault!
0 -
Jackbirdie!! I see you on FB on Breast Cancer Action's post! Excellent job!!!
0 -
sas- I posted my comment as a post under their "pink" dove bracelet where it says we are stronger than cancer or some misleading bs like that
And yes- just to show one letter can make a difference - I never thought it would come to this:
http://bcaction.org/2015/10/21/im-outraged-i-was-g...
ETA- I just checked and my FB post is still there under their picture for pink dove bracelet. They have not responded to me.
0 -
and:
0 -
Well I've not heard back from Ashlet Bridget (surprise, surprise). Out of curiosity, I checked out the three bracelets and guess who gets the money? No not the National Breast Cancer Associations! They did change all three to the American Breast Cancer Foundation, grrrr
0 -
glennie, yes, HL is dangerous in that the implication which is almost subliminal is that if we don't meet the promulgated list of Hl, we caused our BC. Dangerous. It puts all BC patients under everyone's microscope. Did you do this that and the other thing.? When we know some factors are known, but factors like Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons(PAH's) being found in breast tissue isn't. PAH's are petroleum related(see the my hypothesis thread). Bacteria has been found in the breast. We live together in a symbiotic relationship.
When I first saw the HL stuff this year, I want to get a spray can to carry with me. Spraying as a mad woman about to be arrested "Hasn't been proven"
Rainy the Huffington post publishing such jibberish. People read that and even though it is being discounted. A certain portion will think it must be true. Based on nothing. They in turn go out and public and say the same jibberish.
Back to the dangers of HL. The medical establishment has latched unto HL and BC. Please, keep an eye on other cancers. or randomly google "healthy lifestyle and ___________cancer'. If it is NOT being promulgated with all other cancers, then they are pulling it out of their ass, b/c it hasn't been proved. Hence the spray can.
JackieB Yay you changed the world. But you cried and were angry. This chit is all around us. Think--"I'll fix it". AND you did. You shook up a whole bunch of people on every level
Go Birdie. Is that pic of you?0 -
Kathy, don't dismay, you also changed a small part of the world. YAY, they took your info and possibly mine, did a damage control meeting. Made a change on the web site.
"A pebble thrown into a pond creates ripples, we may never know how far the ripple went or how a bend in the ripple changed the pond"
LOL each time I use that analogy, I changed it a bit.
We like to be remembered for the things we do. But when we aren't directly involved other than instigating, just smile and think I had a part in that. They changed the source of their donation. That didn't happen in a vacuum. It happened in a damage control meeting. They will likely get back to you.
jackb, you are going to frown at me. Leaving the message on the add for the jewelry wasn't the right place. Sorry. They likely don't review those adds daily. They will chit when they see it though. Then it will be included in damage control.
Part of the damage control meeting 1. are we under attack 2. who 3. competitors? Why us? what did we do wrong? etc. They are pretty paranoid right now. AND some folks had a really bad day.
There is a world of difference between your letter and the post.
Letter to the right agency made a big splash in the pond
.0 -
I alluded to it earlier about how the use of the word "sexulaization" will shut breast use down fast in the whole pinking thing. I started this thread in August 2012. I could be wrong, but I think this is the first year the word sexualization has been used.
I think Sula was the first to use it, but if I'm wrong whomever pop up and say "Me". It was the missing word. We needed that word for years. It's so PC incorrect. And any guys(men in charge of pinking adds) involved are just so afraid of breasts, they will do whatever we want them too, so, they seem normal i.e. not lecherous.
MinI, Divine, Spookie do you remember? Sorry, if I missed someone
0 -
Going to play Hugs
0
