Unfortunately, health experts will likely be debating the safety of sunscreens long after the FDA finally gets around to doing it. Case in point: A very public disagreement between the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and a trio of scientists over the safety of retinyl palmitate, a form of vitamin A, and an additive used, not only in sunscreens, but in dairy products and other processed foods.

The dispute stems from a recent analysis published in the Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology (no abstract link available), dismissing an advisory in the EWG's 2010 Sunscreen Guide that highlighted safety concerns about retinyl palmitate as a carcinogenic substance triggering cancer in humans.

The EWG feels the ongoing research by the FDA and the National Toxicology Program on animals has suggested retinyl palmitate may be carcinogenic when skin is exposed to sunlight. This, coupled with the fact that various forms of vitamin A can be found in 41 percent of the sunscreens in America, prompted the EWG to recommend avoiding retinyl palmitate.

Conversely, the scientists involved in the Journal report argue that retinyl palmitate isn't an active ingredient in sunscreens, and works in concert with other antioxidants "to alleviate the risk of free radical formation seen in these in vitro experiments." And, they were very skeptical that the results of an NTP study involving hairless and albino mice that developed tumors more quickly when coated with retinyl palmitate couldn't be easily linked to humans.

Interestingly, there's one thing, upon which, both groups agree: Limiting heavy exposure (look for the shade) and wearing protective clothing (hats, sunglasses and long-sleeve shirts and pants) -- but not sunscreens -- should be your primary strategy for protecting your skin from the sun.

Consulting Room August 10, 2010

Medscape August 13, 2010 Free Registration Required

Environmental Working Group August 11, 2010

Environmental Working Group August 2010

We've discussed many of the health problems associated with obesity so often in this space, you may be thinking, "I'm not obese… I've got a 'little' belly on me, but I workout. I'm good." Not so fast…

You may not be overweight or obese by some measures, but the more abdominal fat you have hugging your waist -- especially at middle age -- the greater your chances are of dying from any cause, according to researchers with the American Cancer Society who tracked the health of more than 100,000 men and women from 1997-2006 based on the association between waist circumference and mortality rates.

Patients with waist sizes exceeding 46 and 41 inches in men and women, respectively, nearly doubled their chances of dying, despite their BMI and weight. Even worse, this link between belly fat and higher mortality rates was strongest among women who maintained a normal weight. And, 4 extra inches of belly fat increased a patient's chances of death by 10 percent.

Just a reminder, obesity contributes greatly to various forms of cancer, but you can do a great deal to protect your health and that of your family in the gym and at the dinner table.

Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 170, No. 15, pp. 1293-1301, August 9/23, 2010

Yahoo News August 10, 2010

ScienceDaily August 9, 2010

At the same time cancer rates keep dropping in America, medical experts are beginning to realize what they don't know about this second leading killer of Americans. But they're beginning to catch up, as evidenced by a recent joint report by a group of health agencies, including the International Agency for Research on Cancer and American Cancer Society, identifying 20 "new" causes of cancer, including one you wouldn't expect.

Some of these culprits should be very familiar to you -- formaldehyde, lead, chloroform and PCBs. Then, there's relative newbies, like atrazine and indium phosphide, a binary semiconductor made of indium and phosphorus used in the production of flat-screen TVs.

Probably, the most interesting cancer concern comes straight out of left field, isn't a chemical or substance at all, and it's not the RF energy emitted by mobile phones either.

Think shift work, changing 24/7 schedules that often plays havoc with a patient's circadian rhythms, often leaving them sleep-deprived and vulnerable to a slew of health problems.

International Agency for Research on Cancer Technical Publication No. 42 Free Full Text PDF

Environmental Health Perspectives July 13, 2010 Free PDF Supplement

ScienceDaily July 15, 2010

Chicago Tribune July 15, 2010

For all the important news we've shared in this space at the intersection of Emotions Ave. and Cancer Blvd. -- from the importance of laughing at cancer to the toll caregiving can have on a loved one -- it's a bit embarrassing to admit that we haven't touched on one very important subject, until today. Namely, how to share the news that you're fighting cancer with your young children.

No question, the American Cancer Society provides many sources to guide parents who want and need to talk about their illness with their kids gently. But, for this daunting task, a parent needs age-specific guidance.

That's why one of the best ways to get the conversation going with your child also happens to be the easiest: Sharing a book written just for them. A recent book tackling this subject -- Let My Colors Out, lovingly written by Courtney Filigenzi and beautifully illustrated by Shennen Bersani -- has been on the receiving end of many kudos, all of them well-deserved.

Courtney shares her perspectives about cancer as a writer and Mom, along with what parents can do to prepare their children for this difficult journey.

Q: The hardest part of dealing with cancer -- separate from the toll it takes on a person's mind and body -- is how to share that information with loved ones, particularly their children, then observing how they deal with this knowledge. How did you develop the idea for Colors?

More...

More often than not, strong emotions can be problematic to one's health -- not to mention contagious -- and adding cancer to the mix will worsen things. So, why would doctors choose an impersonal way of conveying the news that their patients had X kind of cancer?

Imagine receiving that call, then your doctor hanging up before you could ask more questions. Or being left the most frightening news of your life on a 30-second voice-mail message…

Based on a recent study of 437 patients, just 54 percent of them were told about their cancer diagnosis in an office setting. Of the remaining 46 percent, however, 18 percent were told over the phone (sometimes, a very prudent thing to do depending on the situation) and the rest received the news at a hospital, with little-to-no privacy whatsoever. Arguably, the most damning number of them all: Thirty-nine percent of patients received the news by themselves.

No surprise, then, that 57 percent of the patients polled changed doctors after their diagnoses for multiple reasons, apart from distance or choosing an alternative treatment, like losing trust and general dissatisfaction. That said, doctors earned a median satisfaction score of 74 percent, and 16 percent of their patients expressed absolute trust in them.

Patients need and expect their oncologists, not only to have the necessary expertise to treat their cancer, but to possess the emotional intelligence that makes receiving this life-changing news simpler to digest intellectually AND emotionally.

Journal of Clinical Oncology July 6, 2010

Yahoo News July 7, 2010

For another year, cancer rates in America appear to be in decline, according to Cancer Statistics 2010, the latest annual deluge of numbers amassed every summer by the American Cancer Society (ACS).

While the general consensus is positive -- cancer-related mortality rates have declined by an estimated 767,000 Americans over the past two decades -- the ACS predicts some 1.5 million new cases will be diagnosed along with almost 570,000 cancer-related deaths this year. That's a very slight increase, compared to last year's 1.48 million new cases and 562,000 deaths.

Additionally, even though cancer rates among women are falling, as are those for men, it's happening a bit more slowly among the fairer sex, based on historical data. For example, the incidence of cancer among men fell 1.3 percent from 2000-06, but only 0.5 percent among women (albeit over a longer time frame from 1998-2006). And, after a 6 percent decrease in the incidence of breast cancer among women in 2002-03, rates from 2003-06 have remained flat.

Also, the news is worse for African-Americans. The mortality rate among black men and women is far greater, 34 and 17 percent respectively, than that of their white counterparts.

Fortunately, survival rates are much better among children with cancer than they were 35 years ago. Cancer survival rates among children have increased significantly from 58 percent in 1975-77 to 81 percent for kids diagnosed from 1999-2005.

Because the news is more of a mixed bag, depending on where you're looking for it, you can't stop being vigilant about all the variables that may contribute in a positive or negative way to your cancer risks. Which reminds me to remind you that making lifestyle changes is a great place to start.

CA, A Cancer Journal for Clinicians July 7, 2010 Free Full Text Study

ScienceDaily July 7, 2010

USA Today July 8, 2010

Knowledge and awareness are growing daily about the ways obesity triggers the aggressive damage cancer can do to your body. But that's not all…

Unfortunately, those extra pounds, higher BMIs and bigger belly fat that stem from fighting -- and losing -- to obesity at middle-age may foreshadow a greater risk of diabetes as folks reach their retirement years. Scientists observed the link between these diseases while tracking the health of some 4,200 patients (older than age 64) at three-year intervals.

Over the course of the 12-year study, 339 patients were diagnosed with diabetes. Seven factors -- among them BMI at age 50, fat mass, weight and waist circumference -- were all related to the heightened risk of diabetes.

High-risk patients who carried around the greatest amount of fat increased their chances of developing diabetes by as much as sixfold, regardless of age or race. Moreover, those who were already obese at age 50 (BMIs greater than 29) and had gained more than 20 pounds during their middle years were five times more likely to succumb to diabetes, compared to patients whose BMIs were lower than 25 and maintained a stable weight.

And, patients with the highest numbers in two specific categories -- BMI and waist circumference -- more than quadrupled their diabetes risks, compared to folks with the lowest numbers.

Another reason why you should incorporate better foods like these into your diet TODAY.

Journal of the American Medical Association, Vol. 303, No. 24, pp. 2504-2512, June 23-30, 2010

ScienceDaily June 24, 2010

The Heart.org June 23, 2010

Cancer detection may have gotten a whole lot easier, faster and cheaper, with the help of a $400 digital camera attached to fiber-optic cables that allowed researchers and bioengineers at Rice University and the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center to discern healthy cells from diseased ones.

Scientists captured images of three kinds of cells -- lab-grown cancer cells, tissue samples from tumors and healthy cells viewed from the mouths of patients -- with fiber-optic cables attached to an Olympus E-330 camera and a fluorescent dye that lit up cell nuclei. Even on a 2.5-inch LCD screen, the distorted nuclei of cancer cells and pre-cancerous cells were easy to distinguish from healthy ones.

Interestingly, these techniques used by researchers to spot cancer cells are the same ones used for a long time by pathologists on biopsied tissues, though never before with a device that handy, portable and battery-powered. And, how nifty would it be for your oncologist to be able to spot cancer cells immediately or to track how responsive your body is to your current treatment regimen?

All the more reason to get more knowledgeable about the technology that, one day, may be a life-saver for you and yours.

Image source: Rice University

PLOS One June 24, 2010 Free Full Text Study

Rice University June 24, 2010

CNET Health Tech June 24, 2010

We've discussed the value of probiotics, live microorganisms similar to the beneficial ones in the human gut that are contained in some foods before in this space. These are considered friendly or good bacteria.

The trick to good health is maintaining a healthy balance in all things, including bacteria. When bad bacteria outnumbers the good in your gut, however, that may signal a greater risk of colon cancer ahead, according to University of North Carolina scientists reviewing 45 samples from biopsies taken during colonoscopies.

Unfortunately, bad bacteria may be elevating a patient's colon cancer risks by generating waste products than harm colon tissues and make them more vulnerable to malignancies. By the same token, researchers say it's possible that adenomas, benign tumors that may serve as a warning sign of colon cancer, could be triggering the production of bad bacteria too.

Interestingly, you may be familiar with one group of bad bacteria, if you've been paying attention to our posts about food safety: The Proteobacteria made up of E.coli, salmonella and heliobacter, among others.

The good news: Scientists may be able to spot the signs of colon cancer faster and more accurately some day by detecting this bacterial shift from good to bad in fecal samples, than by a colonoscopy, a medical procedure many would prefer to avoid…

Image source: Nephron, GNU Free Documentation License Version 1.3

Gut Microbes, Vol. 1, No. 3, May/June 2010 Free Full PDF Study

PhysOrg.com June 22, 2010

The Suncoast News June 22, 2010

It was only a matter of time before the words Gulf oil spill and cancer were mentioned, almost in the same sentence. Even as the Gulf of Mexico bleeds oil, however, some of the nation's best health experts, speaking at a recent Institutes of Health panel in New Orleans, weren't willing to go out on a limb to predict the long-term physical health effects of this disaster, much less cancer risks (apart from the propensity of mental health problems) any time soon.

That said, University of Rhode Island professor Dr. Bongsup Cho, who has studied the effect of environmental toxins on DNA mutations for nearly two decades at the behest of the American Cancer Society and National Institutes of Health, believes some of the very same cancer-causing components in overcooked meats, cigarette smoke and diesel fumes are also present in the gooey tar balls and muck washing up on beaches and marshes along the Gulf Coast.

Dr. Cho may be just as cautious as his peers at the federal level about predictions, but he isn't shy about discussing his concerns with the aforementioned tar balls that contain "non-volatile, benzene-like, heavily unsaturated hydrocarbons with high boiling points." One of the components of these tarballs: Benzo[a]pyrene, a five-ring, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon that is mutagenic (meaning it can change the DNA of an organism) and carcinogenic. So, it should come as no surprise that scientists found damaged DNA in the blood of workers cleaning up after the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill too.

Another concern: The orange sheen you've seen on news reports floating on top of the Gulf waters is "the result of a chemical reaction involving the sun, the crude oil and the oil dispersants," Dr. Cho says. Nobody knows what that color is made from or how toxic it may be, largely due to the 35-year-old Toxic Substances Control Act that "protects" an unknown amount of chemicals from public and private scrutiny.

The EPA has been attempting to unravel and reform the act, and it can't come soon enough to help us deal with this toxic mess in the Gulf.

Image source: EPA photo by Eric Vance

University of Rhode Island June 21, 2010

New Scientist June 28, 2010

Medscape June 28, 2010 Free Registration Required

Scientific American June 24, 2010

Mindful that, sometimes, the treatment can be almost as hard as having the disease, a recent Swedish study demonstrated the advantages of watchful waiting as an alternative for doctors and their patients to handle low-risk (slow growth) or intermediate cases of prostate cancer, particularly for older men and those experiencing other serious health problems.

Researchers compared the long-term health and treatment choices of nearly 7,000 Swedish men with prostate cancer (younger than age 71). Of the 2,021 patients who opted for watchful waiting, 19.2 percent in the watchful waiting group died from competing causes -- reasons other than prostate cancer -- versus those in the radiation (10.9 percent) and prostatectomy (6.8 percent) groups.

Although the risk of death due to prostate cancer was higher among patients in the surveillance group than those who chose prostatectomy, the difference in risk between the two groups over a decade-long follow-up period was a small 1.2 percent.

Which reminds us to remind the men in your lives that stressing out about prostate cancer can be very bad for their health.

Journal of the National Cancer Institute June 18, 2010 Free Full Text Study

EurekAlert June 18, 2010

Bloomberg Businessweek June 18, 2010

Gail Sheehy is an American treasure and one of this nation's best writers, whose signature work Passages: Predictable Crises of Adult Life changed the way we look at the inner lives of adults forever more than three decades ago. She has written 11 more books since Passages in 1976, yet none of them have interested me more than her latest, Passages in Caregiving: Turning Chaos Into Confidence.

Her recent Newsweek column (hit the link below) describes this book's abrupt turn in focus from her 1995 sequel, New Passages, that urged women to celebrate their fiftysomething years as "the most liberating passage" in their lives, to warning Baby Boomers about "the Boomerang," the time in a middle-ager's life when she or he has to take on the role of a day-to-day caregiver all over again for a family member or parent whose life expectancy is far longer today than it has ever been.

In her latest, Sheehy chronicles the 17 years she spent as a caregiver for her husband Clay Felker (journalist and founder of New York Magazine) who eventually died of throat cancer in 2008, as well as the many life lessons she learned along the way, some of which we've discussed in this space, as well as many tips and resources for the caregiver.

The universal truth that keeps hitting home with me in stories written by or about Sheehy and her newest book: Because the task of caregiving is often a long and difficult one, you must take care of yourself as well as you would the person you're guiding through this impossible passage of life. Do something good for yourself every day, without guilt.

Receive Daily Health Updates from CNCA Subscribe to This Blog: RSS or Email

Newsweek June 18, 2009

San Francisco Chronicle June 21, 2010

AARP Magazine May 2010

Exercise is a wonderfully, dynamic tool that transforms the health of everyone and everything it touches, no matter how much (or how little) you use it. Anything and everything from a five-minute walk in the park that improves your state of mind to short-term, high-intensity interval training contributes to the greater good: A healthier life.

In light of the growing number of recent studies that have proven the value of exercise for cancer patients, a 13-member panel, led by associate professor Dr. Kathryn Schmitz of the University of Pennsylvania School of Medicine, has developed national guidelines to keep patients moving during and after their treatments.

Unfortunately, there's a dire exercise gap at work here that has everything to do with attitudes of doctors, not patients, says Dr. Schmitz. "We have to get doctors past the ideas that exercise is harmful to their cancer patients. There is still a prevailing attitude out there that patients shouldn't push themselves during treatment, but our message -- avoid inactivity -- is essential."

The panel suggests cancer survivors and patients strive to get 150 minutes of moderate-intensity aerobic exercise each week, the same recommended time allotment for everyone else. A reason some doctors may be hesitant about making such recommendations: An exercise program should be tailored to the individual patient's needs, accounting for the diagnosis, fitness level and variables specific to their disease that could affect their safety.

For example, a recent study led by Dr. Schmitz (published last year in the New England Journal of Medicine) demonstrated the value of gradual, supervised weight training for survivors of breast cancer-related lymphedema.

You'll also want to watch this short video interview with Dr. Schmitz discussing her Physical Activity and Lymphedema study at a research conference convened by the American Institute for Cancer Research late last year.

Penn Medicine May 28, 2010

Los Angeles Times: Booster Shots June 3, 2010

Living Beyond Breast Cancer May 28, 2010

American Institute for Cancer Research November 9, 2009

After a recent study in this space about the toxins left behind after cooking certain foods -- especially meat -- I wouldn't be surprised if you're thinking twice about firing up your gas or propane grill this summer. Thankfully, researchers may have found a way for you to cook meats, specifically hamburgers, a bit more safely while lowering your cancer risks by adding antioxidant-rich spices.

Linked to an increased risk of certain cancers (stomach, lung, colorectal, pancreatic, prostate and mammary), heterocyclic amines (HCAs) are harmful substances produced when the amino acids in muscle meats are cooked at high temperatures for long periods of time, according to the National Cancer Institute.

Past studies have shown that lowering the cooking heat to under 352 degrees Fahrenheit for less than four minutes can reduce HCAs sharply, to low or undetectable levels. The trick is not to undercook meats either, or risk the possibility of getting sick or worse from exposure to salmonella or E. coli.

Of the half-dozen spices high in antioxidants that were tested on ground beef, rosemary was the most effective, not a surprise since previous research had found that some commercial rosemary extracts had reduced the formation of HCAs by as much as 79 percent. (Fingerroot and turmeric were also notable in producing high levels of antioxidant activity.) Overall, spices applied to beef patties while cooking lowered HCA levels by an average 40 percent.

Look for more healthy grilling tips in our newest CNCA newsletter.

Receive Daily Health Updates from CNCA Subscribe to This Blog: RSS or Email

ScienceDaily May 18, 2010

healthfinder.gov May 20, 2010

We've compared the "burden" your lovable dog has on the environment to that of an SUV more than once to comedic effect in this space. The more realistic and serious question for your two- and four-legged family members, however, is what can you do to lessen Mr. Fido's cancer burden? Not as much as you'd assume, says Wall Street Journal writer Melinda Beck in her recent Health Journal column about dog breeds and their propensity for cancer.

It's a familiar subject for Beck. Her family recently lost their seven-year-old, golden retriever Cody, not a complete surprise because an amazing 60 percent -- more than double the average of any other breed -- die from cancer. And, if the variety of cancer a golden retriever has is hemangiosarcoma, the first sign (sudden death) may be the only one.

Perhaps, the key problem: Cancers usually crop up in dogs after their breeding years, which is why some non-profit groups like the Morris Animal Foundation are sponsoring research projects to identify specific genetic markers that can pinpoint signs of cancer long before any breeding. Still, whether pure-bred dogs are more prone to cancer than mixed breeds remains very much up in the air, although a few studies have given the latter a 10 percent lifespan bump.

The dog breeds with the highest probability of encountering cancer during their lifetimes: Boxer, Golden Retriever, Rottweiler and Bernese mountain dog (review the WSJ below for a fuller list of breeds).

The cancer risks are definitely real and not limited to dogs either. We lost our oldest boy cat, Mr. Fido, at age 12 nearly two summers ago, after an 18-month bout with fibrosarcoma, a condition in which cancerous tumors grow beyond control on patches of skin where a pet has been vaccinated.

Wall Street Journal: Health Journal May 4, 2010

New York Times: Well May 5, 2010