Why no discussion of broccoli sprouts?
1
The most important lesson I learned from my oncologist is that beating breast cancer centers on early detection. The earlier you can catch breast cancer, the higher your survival rate. I have spent the last year fighting breast cancer and currently, I am cancer free. Every day, I worry about recurrence. I was 46 when I learned I had breast cancer. I have no family history of breast cancer, I eat a healthy diet, i excercise regularly and I breastfed both children like a champ. However, I am 10-20 lbs overweight and I drink 1-2 glasses of wine every day. It's possible that the extra poundage and wine drinking caused my cancer. I think the author is absolutely right. Eat more fruits and vegetables, be at a healthy BMI and drink less. But I think the single most important thing anyone can do centers on early detection. Get your mammogram, your colonoscopy, your annual physical, etc. and be proactive about your health checkups. My cancer covered over 5cm of my breast, but fortunately, we caught it before it had spread to my lymph nodes. Had I waited longer, I would have had a harder time fighting and beating breast cancer. Women constantly put their family, friends, job, etc. first and they put themselves last. Don't do that. I know it's inconvenient but it could save your life like it did mine.
5
Why does the author precisely avoid recommending a vegan diet to avoid breast cancer. Chicken, beef and pork are loaded with all kinds of growth hormones and dairy is packed with hormones intended for a calf’s expedient growth. If she cannot be unbiased about diet I have a hard time taking her recommendations seriously.
4
Breastfeeding if you have babies will change your breasts forever and prevent breast cancer.
1
Whaaaat? I and many, many other breast-feeding mothers who now have breast cancer beg to differ.
16
aaargh. This is precisely the kind of untested claim that causes people to decide they don't know what to believe, so why make any effort at all. Please either cite a source, or stop.
12
What about the link between dairy products and breast (and other) cancer? How can anyone believe that consuming the fluid produced by a bovine to nourish its offspring is "nutritious" for humans? Cow's milk is designed to help a baby cow grow as rapidly as possible. It is not food meant for humans, whether it is in its liquid form, fermented into cheese, clotted into yogurt or frozen into ice cream. The American Cancer Society knows full well that dairy products are linked to breast cancer, yet they still suggest "low fat" options as part of a "healthy diet." Let's stop this nonsense of eating dairy products, especially for women concerned about breast cancer!
8
Hindu cultures ate dairy products for a long time....
I am always worried about absolutes.....
2
Shame on you for ignoring the science on weight loss--published in the New York Times--proving that your claims about weight being within someone's control are untrue.
5
The problem with all studies looking at risk factors is they contribute to cause-and-effect thinking. We see a study looking at BMI and breast cancer and think okay, so lower my BMI, lower my risk. But BMI is complex and just changing yours won't necessarily change anything around risk for your specific case. That being said, I will never discourage anyone from eating well, not smoking and getting exercise - all things that can help you feel better in general in life, but we have got to let go of this lifestyle = disease or no disease diatribe. These are population studies and they mean just about nothing to do with actual risk in individual cases.
7
It's obviously very frustrating for women who did "all the right things" and nonetheless developed breast cancer. I'd rant about it, too.
But the title of the article is NOT "You Can Prevent Breast Cancer," NOR is it "Women Cause Their Own Breast Cancers"!
The title is, "You Can Take Steps to LOWER your breast cancer RISK."
We ALL can lower our risks of many different poor health outcomes by leading a healthy life. But that NEVER amounts to any kind of guarantee.
Commenters are reacting to Ms. Brody's piece AS IF she said there was a guarantee. Apparently, she needed to insert several disclaimers about this throughout the article.
Everyone CAN "lower their risk." But NObody is able to purchase a guarantee, nor was Ms. Brody offering one.
But the title of the article is NOT "You Can Prevent Breast Cancer," NOR is it "Women Cause Their Own Breast Cancers"!
The title is, "You Can Take Steps to LOWER your breast cancer RISK."
We ALL can lower our risks of many different poor health outcomes by leading a healthy life. But that NEVER amounts to any kind of guarantee.
Commenters are reacting to Ms. Brody's piece AS IF she said there was a guarantee. Apparently, she needed to insert several disclaimers about this throughout the article.
Everyone CAN "lower their risk." But NObody is able to purchase a guarantee, nor was Ms. Brody offering one.
18
Articles like these imply that victims are to blame for their disease. Cancer can strike any person, healthy habits or not. Like my pristinely healthy mother who died of lung cancer (non-smoker) at 69. Live life to the fullest and then no matter what happens it will have been worth it.
16
Thank you Ms. Brody for your truth telling. Judging from the push back, people aren't wanting to hear it. It's statistics and science people! Yes, there may be an exception of a woman who had the best possible eating and exercise habits but still died of breast cancer, but the overwhelming evidence is...overwhelming. Our diets and sedentary habits are killing us. And I'm willing to bet if we look more closely at what those outliers were eating, we would find it wasn't so healthy after all. What people think is healthy (dairy, chicken) continues to amaze me. I try to eat like the earlier generation of Okinawan women to improve my odds. I don't know why so many others reject that option.
11
As a young survivor of breast cancer (diagnosed at 26), I found it disappointing that this article lumps (no pun intended) risk factors for pre and post-menopausal women together. For example, yes having a higher BMI is a risk factor for post-menopausal women, due to fat providing the primary source of estrogen after menopause. However, research shows that for pre-menopausal women, who are expose to estrogen via their ovaries, weight does not have the same impact on risk. I would love to see more about the difference in risk factors for these populations. The types of tumors found in both can be very different in terms of pathology, treatment, and outcomes, and putting the two groups together is just more of the same.
15
It's also the case that not all breast cancers are estrogen-fed. So, do choices that elevate estrogen raise the risk for ALL forms of breast cancer? Maybe not. Would like to see that research broken out instead of lumped together, too.
3
Reading the comments, I'm beginning to think eating well, not drinking, being thin, and exercising is a risk factor for breast cancer! :-)
As my breast surgeon just told me last week, some of these studies are blown out of proportion and just can't be applied generally to every individual. I had post-menopausal breast cancer four years ago. Had chemo, lumpectomy and radiation. Always fearing a return -- one of the every day stresses of cancer that, ironically, is probably a risk factor for cancer. Ah! The human condition! My heart goes out to all the women who wrote - and their families. I hope we can find a cure for this epidemic and soon.
As my breast surgeon just told me last week, some of these studies are blown out of proportion and just can't be applied generally to every individual. I had post-menopausal breast cancer four years ago. Had chemo, lumpectomy and radiation. Always fearing a return -- one of the every day stresses of cancer that, ironically, is probably a risk factor for cancer. Ah! The human condition! My heart goes out to all the women who wrote - and their families. I hope we can find a cure for this epidemic and soon.
13
Read Dr Margaret McCartney's book "The Patient Paradox" to learn why most breast screenings and self-examination in healthy women save very few lives overall and in fact can cause harm through false positives, radiation, unnecessary surgery and prolonged anxiety.
12
The comments are so sensible here -- it is reassuring.
To me, we all will die somehow. I have know too many who have survived and who have died with breast cancer, so I do not say it lightly. One of the things that made me sad was my friend who died but spent the 3 years post-diagnosis thinking only about ways to fight the cancer. She was emaciated and miserable by the time she finally said she would eat whatever she wanted. Unfortunately she was also too often nauseated to eat much of anything by then.
How about living the life you want to live for the time you get to live it?
To me, we all will die somehow. I have know too many who have survived and who have died with breast cancer, so I do not say it lightly. One of the things that made me sad was my friend who died but spent the 3 years post-diagnosis thinking only about ways to fight the cancer. She was emaciated and miserable by the time she finally said she would eat whatever she wanted. Unfortunately she was also too often nauseated to eat much of anything by then.
How about living the life you want to live for the time you get to live it?
9
Stop. Please do not publish any more of this nonsense.
Yes, watching your weight, your alcohol, your diet, you exercise is all good. But it will have NO effect on your chances of getting or not getting breast cancer.
Even getting regular screenings will not help.
We are ALL at risk. There is nothing you can do but play your hand as it is given to you.
Signed, Stage IV Breast Cancer patient
Yes, watching your weight, your alcohol, your diet, you exercise is all good. But it will have NO effect on your chances of getting or not getting breast cancer.
Even getting regular screenings will not help.
We are ALL at risk. There is nothing you can do but play your hand as it is given to you.
Signed, Stage IV Breast Cancer patient
15
Yes, we are all at risk, but some more than others based on things we can control. Why not encourage people to do the things they can do to lower their risk? Obviously, some things aren't in our control, but it's not one absolute or the other.
11
Sorry, but the science says it has a *significant* effect on your chances of getting breast cancer. While there are no iron-clad guarantees one way or the other, it's the difference between playing Russian roulette with one chamber loaded or three chambers loaded. There is no avoiding pulling the trigger, but I'd rather stack the odds as much in my favour as I could.
So could you (and some others here) please stop with the anti-science nonsense? Scientists really do know better than lay people about this stuff. It's what they do.
So could you (and some others here) please stop with the anti-science nonsense? Scientists really do know better than lay people about this stuff. It's what they do.
4
The thing I find so frustrating about these types of articles is that they include no indication of the actual likelihood of getting the disease. If eating a certain food "doubles" your chance of getting a type of cancer, that could mean it increases the odds from .01 in 100 to .02 in 100. Or it could mean it increases them from 25 in 100 to 50 in 100. That is a hugely consequential difference! Unless they provide THESE kinds of statistics, I find articles like this to be pretty useless.
32
September 2016 was year 6 following surgery of perhaps a world record tiny invasive malignant tumor (2 mm). I had been vegetarian since age 12 (I am 51); I swam/swim laps; regularly, I walk a dog. Another important detail about having breast cancer no matter how tiny the malignancy (it could return, size does not matter) is that at the time I learned a tremendous amount about menopause. The average age for the occurrence of hormone receptor positive invasive in ductal carcinoma is the same for the average age for menopause: 50-54. I happened to have gone through menopause early and that is when the cell began to die on the receptor. Once the majority of estrogen bolts, the body loses its youthful ability to shed pounds. In fact, weighing in at 120 at 5"7 for an eternity, I have bulked up in the past six years by 8 lbs no matter how much more I exercise (and I do regularly because there's little else to do in my town). Another caveat of having had breast cancer, something I have questioned for those for whom it has returned, is when can we call it "cancer of the liver" in place of "breast cancer of the liver"? When is it no longer breast cancer?
7
I asked my oncologist about this. She said they look at the cells in the new tumor and can tell what kind of tissue they originally started as. So if they look like breast cells it is breast cancer that has spread, if they look like liver cells, it's liver cancer, or whatever.
2
Are we reading the same article? This article is about risk factors...? Not once did the author say that if you follow all these rules, you're guaranteed to be cancer free. Nor did it suggest that this is a comprehensive list of all factors -- my understanding is that it's only about the things that you can control to improve your odds (genetics and luck, for example, cannot be controlled).
10
Ok, so I did all that. BMI in the 'good' range. Exercise all my life. A lifetime of eating 5 servings a day of mostly organic produce. Limited meat consumption. Breast fed 2 babies until they were 12 months old. Guess what? At 39 I discovered a 7 cm tumor in my breast. There is no magic formula, and although I'm all about prevention, this kind of article leads to magical thinking and self blame.
21
Aurora, I'm so sorry you had to go through BC. I was a little older at 49 when I was diagnosed (stage 2). I'm also a lifelong healthy vegetarian and organic eater. Exercise has kept my weight was on the low end of the index all of my life. I was tested for 18 genetic markers linked to cancer and don't have any of them. However, because of my health, I recovered quickly from treatment. You are absolutely correct - there is no silver bullet. But f women read this article and take steps to be healthier, statistically someone will be spared and others may have a better prognosis.
11
All of things listed should be how people lower health insurance rates--men and women. I'm 53, eat a cleaner diet that is heavy in veggies and lean meats with no gluten, dairy or minimal processed sugars, exercise heavily, drink moderately and occasionally smoke marijuana. I've eliminated inflammation (no pain or aches), have excellent weight (5'10" 175lb) and am not on any medications. I see a Dr twice a year and have excellent results including a 125 cholesterol, low normal blood pressure and resting heart rate of 62. All other numbers in metabolic panel are good. The benefits of a cleaner lifestyle far outweigh the negatives. Thank you
4
@Michael Kelley:
All of this assumes that we know exactly what a "clean lifestyle" is for populations and individuals. The recent history of nutrition science tells us that we have gotten many things wrong about fat, cholesterol, carbohydrates, sugar, eggs, butter, margarine, coffee, etc.
Cholesterol is a homeostasis, too low is just as dangerous as too high. If 125 is your _total cholesterol_, this is at the very low end. You may have decreased your risk of heart disease, but increased your risk of some cancers, depression, and infectious disease.
All of this assumes that we know exactly what a "clean lifestyle" is for populations and individuals. The recent history of nutrition science tells us that we have gotten many things wrong about fat, cholesterol, carbohydrates, sugar, eggs, butter, margarine, coffee, etc.
Cholesterol is a homeostasis, too low is just as dangerous as too high. If 125 is your _total cholesterol_, this is at the very low end. You may have decreased your risk of heart disease, but increased your risk of some cancers, depression, and infectious disease.
13
Good for you. And I mean that. Glad you have a "clean" lifestyle. You may still have cancer, heart disease, diabetes and a host of auto-immune diseases at some point. Or an auto accident and need intensive medical care.
Your correlating medical insurance cost with lifestyle choices is sinister and disgusting.
Healthcare and insuring everyone equally is important because anyone with any moral code or ounce of compassion or empathy knows this.
Glad you are healthy and sad that you are morally bankrupt.
Your correlating medical insurance cost with lifestyle choices is sinister and disgusting.
Healthcare and insuring everyone equally is important because anyone with any moral code or ounce of compassion or empathy knows this.
Glad you are healthy and sad that you are morally bankrupt.
6
Ms Brody, I am going to get constructive. Lots of negative comments about this article which has an annoying headline and offers nothing new.
Yes, overweight women who smoke and drink are at risk for cancer and lots of other stuff. Old news.
Here are some of the topics I would like to see reported on:
1. what is the economic impact of breast cancer? Not just the cost of treatment, but the cost of all of these women having to leave the work force (or cut back) often for months of treatment, sacrifice forward progress in their careers or get help for childcare duties which they cannot perform full time during treatment?
My suspicion is it is enormous.
2. Why is incidence geographic? Sure seems like environmental factors must be playing a role. I have heard mainstream toxicologists express concern about the estrogen mimics in our environment i.e. BPAs. I have never heard that anyone is investigating geographic distribution of this or any other carcinogen that may be playing a role (particulate matter from air pollution? causes heart disease due to inflammatory response as per the EPA). Would love to read about this.
3. IS there ANY money going into number (2)? What are the economics of study of breast cancer prevention (OTHER than screening or life style modification)?? Lets eradicate BC, not only cure it.
4. Long term health impacts of BC treatment? Early menopause, cognitive decline after chemo, etc etc. I never read about this. This also plays into number 1 above.
Yes, overweight women who smoke and drink are at risk for cancer and lots of other stuff. Old news.
Here are some of the topics I would like to see reported on:
1. what is the economic impact of breast cancer? Not just the cost of treatment, but the cost of all of these women having to leave the work force (or cut back) often for months of treatment, sacrifice forward progress in their careers or get help for childcare duties which they cannot perform full time during treatment?
My suspicion is it is enormous.
2. Why is incidence geographic? Sure seems like environmental factors must be playing a role. I have heard mainstream toxicologists express concern about the estrogen mimics in our environment i.e. BPAs. I have never heard that anyone is investigating geographic distribution of this or any other carcinogen that may be playing a role (particulate matter from air pollution? causes heart disease due to inflammatory response as per the EPA). Would love to read about this.
3. IS there ANY money going into number (2)? What are the economics of study of breast cancer prevention (OTHER than screening or life style modification)?? Lets eradicate BC, not only cure it.
4. Long term health impacts of BC treatment? Early menopause, cognitive decline after chemo, etc etc. I never read about this. This also plays into number 1 above.
21
This article highlights what type of lifestyle will reduce your risk of cancer. So many people argue about the exception to the rule, friends and family getting cancer. It is all about statistics and medical studies, statistically speaking people who are not overweight, eat lots of fruits and vegetables, exercise, avoid smoking and drinking alcohol are healthier and at lower risk than those who do not. She did not mention the role of stress and stress hormones which are a factor, but statistically she is right -people need to look at the health studies regarding heart disease and cancer-too many personal stories and not enough review of the medical data.
4
Please stop reporting correlation studies as if they are causal. The fact that the behaviors listed were correlated with higher instances of breast cancer does not mean that the behaviors themselves caused the cancer. And a majority of people with these behaviors don't get breast cancer. American reporting is consistently misrepresenting this type of analysis - which leads to individuals believing that they are responsible for this type of illness or, worse, feel superior if they don't get it while others do.
As a general rule - people will feel better if they do the things you noted - but they won't guarantee that they won't get cancer which is what you imply.
As a general rule - people will feel better if they do the things you noted - but they won't guarantee that they won't get cancer which is what you imply.
26
The jury does seem to be out on many of these recommendations. It makes sense to eat the way you suggest, and so many of us who have been through breast cancer do. I always enjoyed a glass or two of wine with dinner--I also take three or four ballet and tap dance classes weekly, walk and move regularly. I'm anything but overweight and I don't smoke. I breast-fed three kids. I asked my surgeon (lumpectomy, follow-up operation removing stray cancer cells) about alcohol and all these studies; I asked a prominent researcher at a cancer institute. They both said the connection between alcohol and cancer hadn't been proven. Nobody's saying go get drunk, and nobody's saying eat junk food, but what the heck is really going on with cancer? Is there a soul out there who knows?
http://www.thecriticalmom.blogspot.com
http://www.thecriticalmom.blogspot.com
9
I am in my late 40s tall, slim, don't smoke, and have always eaten a vegetable-heavy diet, in fact I love and eat beans, diverse vegetables and spinach on an almost daily basis. I do enjoy a glass of wine or two with dinner, but since my late 20s I have been a runner who clocks between 20 and 30 miles each week, and I breast-fed my daughter for the first year of her life.
Yet this past year I was diagnosed with breast cancer ... in the last 10 months I had a double mastectomy, 20-weeks of chemo followed by radiation. I was also tested for the Bracha genes which I don't have ...
So while it might be somewhat worthwhile to make these kinds of general healthy living recommendations, it certainly doesn't account for all the women (and in my circle of acquaintance it seems to be approaching some kind of near epidemic level) who will be diagnosed with breast cancer.
There has to be so much more to the story. It strikes me as a disservice to let women think if they make these kinds of lifestyle choices that they will not have to worry about this disease.
We owe it to ourselves and our daughters to really get to the bottom of this. I wish there were some real reporting around this issue.
Yet this past year I was diagnosed with breast cancer ... in the last 10 months I had a double mastectomy, 20-weeks of chemo followed by radiation. I was also tested for the Bracha genes which I don't have ...
So while it might be somewhat worthwhile to make these kinds of general healthy living recommendations, it certainly doesn't account for all the women (and in my circle of acquaintance it seems to be approaching some kind of near epidemic level) who will be diagnosed with breast cancer.
There has to be so much more to the story. It strikes me as a disservice to let women think if they make these kinds of lifestyle choices that they will not have to worry about this disease.
We owe it to ourselves and our daughters to really get to the bottom of this. I wish there were some real reporting around this issue.
30
Breast cancer is not one disease. There are many types, and many influencers. Doing all the things you mentioned, such as choosing more fruits and vegetables, low intakes of meats high in saturated fats, exercising, will make you healthier for the long run. My risk factors included HRT for 10 years combined with a tumor which was 95% ER . I am 2 weeks out from a mastectomy, and will not need chemo or radiation, I will, however, for 5 years need to be on treatment that will prevent me from making estrogen in my fat cells.
Don't stop doing things that you know are healthy, just because they didn't prevent every possible disease. But do get regular mammograms. The new 3D mammograms can catch the cancer when it is very small and hasn't spread. I am very grateful for this development.
Don't stop doing things that you know are healthy, just because they didn't prevent every possible disease. But do get regular mammograms. The new 3D mammograms can catch the cancer when it is very small and hasn't spread. I am very grateful for this development.
10
@Marla Heller:
Saturated fats from naturally fatty foods have never been demonstrated to have any negative effects. This was tested in a huge randomized trial, the Women's Health Initiative, the low fat/low sat fat diet had _no beneficial effects_ on heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, or overall mortality. This trial is rarely mentioned because it was such a definitive refutation of the predominant low fat/low sat fat dietary advice.
Saturated fats from naturally fatty foods have never been demonstrated to have any negative effects. This was tested in a huge randomized trial, the Women's Health Initiative, the low fat/low sat fat diet had _no beneficial effects_ on heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, or overall mortality. This trial is rarely mentioned because it was such a definitive refutation of the predominant low fat/low sat fat dietary advice.
6
I have dense breast tissue and was in a study at the Seattle Cancer Care Alliance a few years ago which resulted in 3D mammograms now being the default screening tool there.
I'm now in another study, longer this time, one that is assessing the effectiveness of short MRIs in addition to a 3D scan. My most recent 3D mammogram was normal, but they found two very small masses in one of my breasts which they believe are benign in the MRI images. I go back in six months for another MRI. Not fun, but these technological advances are indeed encouraging.
I'm now in another study, longer this time, one that is assessing the effectiveness of short MRIs in addition to a 3D scan. My most recent 3D mammogram was normal, but they found two very small masses in one of my breasts which they believe are benign in the MRI images. I go back in six months for another MRI. Not fun, but these technological advances are indeed encouraging.
2
Thank you for this article.
2
Please stop telling people to avoid saturated fats. Saturated fat is the type of fat that our own bodies store as adipose tissue for our own use. Why would our bodies store saturated fat if it isn't good for us? Of course it is good to pay attention to food quality, as not all saturated fat is created equal, and even if you are a Vegetarian or Vegan, the saturated fats found in plants are much better for you than the highly processed poly-unsaturated ones in most processed foods. The research that used to tell us to avoid saturated fats is outdated and has been proven wrong. The comment in the article was for avoiding dairy for the estrogenic effects, which is a separate issue anyway. All around, I feel like this article was poorly cited, poorly written, and too general, giving it a condescending tone. Most of us are trying to live as healthy of a life as possible, and like has been stated in many of the other comments, even if you do everything "right" you could still get breast cancer.
14
My comment refers to the image chosen to accompany the article. While careful to represent women of various ages, religions, and hues, the image depicts women's size as only thin. I understand that this is a stylized graphic, but given the other sensitivities, why keep sending the message that only thin women exist?
8
So you consume frequently zero wine or alcohol or less than two drinks per week? Well brag brag. That is the way it sounds Jane!!
Most of us have one or two 4 oz glasses of wine per night and it has not lead to runnaway mass breast cancer in the US, or In Europe either.
Please stop exaggerating and pontificating about reasonable amounts of alcohol. Many of us have very stressful lives and need a small relaxing let down, enjoy ones partner, family or a nice dinner. I lived in Europe for 8 years this is normal life.
Most of us have one or two 4 oz glasses of wine per night and it has not lead to runnaway mass breast cancer in the US, or In Europe either.
Please stop exaggerating and pontificating about reasonable amounts of alcohol. Many of us have very stressful lives and need a small relaxing let down, enjoy ones partner, family or a nice dinner. I lived in Europe for 8 years this is normal life.
14
Heaven forbid anyone suggests cutting back on alcohol. Having to drink every night is a sign of alcohol dependency and it's not healthy physically or mentally. Too many women are not dealing with their life stresses and simply drowning them in booze which is a vicious cycle.
Here is the issue that is rarely discussed in polite company and poo-pooed by too many in the Western medical community: Every illness and injury has emotional and spiritual root causes that trigger it to manifest. There are people who do everything opposite of what is in this article and yet have no cancer. There are others who do everything "right" according to the latest published research and blame "bad luck" for their disease. Many ignore the emotional and spiritual triggers because they are challenging to study and seem woo woo rather than scientific. Others think that this is about blaming the victim. It's not. It's about how humans do life. Illnesses and injuries are signals that something has to change. This article well lays out certain lifestyle changes that are cookie cutter in nature. There is that X factor in all of us that can keep us well or take us down the pathway of disease.
Doctors are doing a disservice to patients to blame "bad luck" rather than address the other factors that are associated with disease. Dr. Valerie Hunt who researched bioenergetics demonstrated that a disease is in one's energy field long before it's outward physical manifestations.
More work is desperately needed in the area of emotional and spiritual root causes. It will be a long time before this happens since there are zero funds for research that will not make trillions from pills and potions and devices.
Physiology, Structure and Emotions must all be addressed to be well.
Doctors are doing a disservice to patients to blame "bad luck" rather than address the other factors that are associated with disease. Dr. Valerie Hunt who researched bioenergetics demonstrated that a disease is in one's energy field long before it's outward physical manifestations.
More work is desperately needed in the area of emotional and spiritual root causes. It will be a long time before this happens since there are zero funds for research that will not make trillions from pills and potions and devices.
Physiology, Structure and Emotions must all be addressed to be well.
20
Thank you SO much for this comment. When I was diagnosed with breast cancer 17 years ago, I was a 47 yr old divorced mother of two, trying to raise two children, work, assist with educational research in addition, drive an ill mother back and forth to Boston (because my dad was "uncomfortable" doing it), cook, clean, etc. etc. To put it simply, I imploded. I have always been convinced the cancer was directly connected to the emotional stress and lack of time to devote to my own spiritual health. While I did carry 30 extra pounds at the time (also stress related?), I saw only thin women in the waiting room during my scheduled visits! Few people stop to consider the word: "dis-ease."
5
This article infuriates me. It is general, cliched, and incomplete. I am 39 years old and live a healthy lifestyle and followed all of this advice. 6 weeks ago I was diagnosed with breast cancer while 37 weeks pregnant. At the same time, another woman I know found a lump also. She is much older than me, drinks all day (probably 10 drinks per day), smokes 2 packs of cigarettes per day and has for years, and eats the most disgusting processed food. Her tumor was benign.
44
Amen! I am a non-smioker, vegetarian for 30 years, distance runner. I ran the Boston Marathon on Monday and had a double mastectomy the following Tuesday. Articles like this are infuriating bc they don't include the most basic sentence... you can follow all these rules and still get breast cancer. Best of luck to you in your future treatments and the birth of your baby.
12
Do you realise these are suggestions for reducing the probability of getting breast cancer, not for eliminating the risk altogether? I appreciate articles like this one because they help reinforce my motivation to eat well and exercise. I suppose having a baby at 39 is a risk factor (I had my one and only at 40) as the hormones cause everything to grow.
3
This is an excellent article, and nicely summarizes what I tell my high risk patients for prevention and my breast cancer patients for recurrence. Please add breastfeeding and avoiding hormone replacement! Obviously, life must be lived, moderation must be acceptable, and you can do everything "right" and still develop cancer, but if more women adopted these principles, I would happily have fewer patients.
12
Stupid article, common sense. I had breast cancer enjoy some alcohol every day. Try to eat well but I love a nice pork chop. Live your life with passion be happy. That is the best battle against cancer all of life's disappointments. Save us from sanctimonious pieces like this.
10
It's always good to know how to reduce risks, so this is helpful. Still, I would have liked to see information about vitamin D levels reducing risk, and some discussion of inflammation, probiotics, and healthy fats vs. grains. These are topics my girlfriends and I discuss when doing healthy activities: going to wellness fairs, walking for exercise, laughing and preparing meals and sharing conversations over a girlfriends' weekend, etc.
I also believe that seeing breasts as ticking time bombs that will betray you with the family curse is an unhealthy way of thinking perpetuated not in this column but in a lot of messaging about breast cancer. I personally try to avoid negative projections about anything bad in my own genetic history. I have no evidence that reduces risk of gene expression, but I know it reduces my anxiety, helps me avoid depression. Plus, it keeps me optimistic, positive, and creative in my approach to life's challenges. And of course, among those challenges is a completely broken health care system and a lack of a political will to fix problems instead of just looking at cutting costs and crossing fingers people won't die. (News flash: They will.)
I also believe that seeing breasts as ticking time bombs that will betray you with the family curse is an unhealthy way of thinking perpetuated not in this column but in a lot of messaging about breast cancer. I personally try to avoid negative projections about anything bad in my own genetic history. I have no evidence that reduces risk of gene expression, but I know it reduces my anxiety, helps me avoid depression. Plus, it keeps me optimistic, positive, and creative in my approach to life's challenges. And of course, among those challenges is a completely broken health care system and a lack of a political will to fix problems instead of just looking at cutting costs and crossing fingers people won't die. (News flash: They will.)
6
Does reducing dairy products really make a difference, if one's tumor wasn't Estrogen receptive, though?
While these are all good suggestions -- for anyone -- how do genetics fit into the picture?
While these are all good suggestions -- for anyone -- how do genetics fit into the picture?
4
This this is not a peer reviewed column. It leaves out a lot of things, such as ingesting HRT. Hormone replacement. Women can follow all this good advice for general health and still get breast cancer.
11
My husband's mother was diagnosed with Stage IV breast cancer while training for a marathon. She never smoked, didn't drink, didn't eat red meat, and had a BMI that would have been impressive for a woman in her twenties. The other women that I knew who died from breast cancer were hard-working, job-holding, active women that did the best they could to live healthy, productive lives. They definitely didn't deserve to be retroactively told that they didn't try hard enough to to ward off their cancer.
This article offends me because the title offers hope that there is something out there unheard of that could actually lower the chance of getting breast cancer. I feel fairly confident that every person reading this article knows that smoking or drinking excessively, having a high BMI, eating unhealthy food, and not exercising are all grounds for poor health conditions in the future. The reputation of the NYT is one of an upstanding, serious news source- one that wouldn't purposely peddle pedantic information, which is why I clicked on the article with a sincere desire to learn something.
I sincerely hope that Jane E. Brody can find it in her heart to offer more compassion than the assertion that "Certainly, women have ample reason to worry about breast cancer." I also hope that if she decides to write about this topic again, that she looks for real information that could help others, rather than shaming them for habits that they might not even practice.
This article offends me because the title offers hope that there is something out there unheard of that could actually lower the chance of getting breast cancer. I feel fairly confident that every person reading this article knows that smoking or drinking excessively, having a high BMI, eating unhealthy food, and not exercising are all grounds for poor health conditions in the future. The reputation of the NYT is one of an upstanding, serious news source- one that wouldn't purposely peddle pedantic information, which is why I clicked on the article with a sincere desire to learn something.
I sincerely hope that Jane E. Brody can find it in her heart to offer more compassion than the assertion that "Certainly, women have ample reason to worry about breast cancer." I also hope that if she decides to write about this topic again, that she looks for real information that could help others, rather than shaming them for habits that they might not even practice.
44
Thanks. I needed more guilt, shame and blame for potentially leaving my three breastfed (8 years total) kids motherless. Hopefully, they can blame me as well and add that to their anger once cancer has killed me. 1 in 8 women get breast cancer. And I'd wager that most of them already follow this advice.
37
Another good measurement tool is waist to hips ratio. There are ideals for both sexes. In some cases BMI can give a false reading due to muscle mass from exercise and outliers with regards to height measurement. Aging can also affect BMI applicability. The nice thing about the waist to hip ratio is that the healthy number remains constant over the lifespan and will thus enhance BMI measurements to verify normal changes of aging and warn of other issues. One can not rule out diabetic and pre-diabetic conditions as a risk factor. Additionally, some carbohydrates have a high glycemic index and high glycemic load. Together these are a recipe for disaster. An example would be excessive juicing of fruits as the whole fruit has high glycemic index, but low glycemic load. When you juice, you create a high glycemic load. Certain starch based staple foods have this problem as well. Unfortunately this is a long debate as when fat is replaced in a diet, it must be replaced with something else to yield adequate caloric intake. Notice the obesity crisis anyone?
Another risk factor missing from the article is the immense load of carcinogenic chemicals that females are exposed to through personal care products and cosmetics. The personal exposure to toxins and heavy metals exceeds OSHA limits by an unbelievably large factor in all industries. This is never addressed as this hits at the heart of a major lifestyle standard.
Another risk factor missing from the article is the immense load of carcinogenic chemicals that females are exposed to through personal care products and cosmetics. The personal exposure to toxins and heavy metals exceeds OSHA limits by an unbelievably large factor in all industries. This is never addressed as this hits at the heart of a major lifestyle standard.
10
Amen. I have never used cosmetics for aesthetic rather than health reasons, but I have always wondered how their use affects the 99% of American females who do use them.
A 30-year vegetarian, 4 year vegan, lifetime athlete, non-smoker, non-drinker, not overweight woman, I got a diagnosis of breast cancer last fall. More than one person involved in my treatment remarked that I was the healthiest person they'd ever seen get breast cancer. So I don't know what to make about an article like this. My cancer doctor said the biggie is environment, and what do we do about that? Guess I should have moved out of NJ a long time ago.
27
And yet food-related causes cannot be discarded. Would you tell me what you eat in detail? I could help you figure out what's wrong perhaps...
1
Enough is enough. The pressure on women to take steps to prevent breast cancer implies culpability on those who are afflicted by it. We never do see reminders to men that regular checkups, losing weight, quitting smoking and reducing alcohol consumption mitigate risk of prostate cancer, as if, for men, it's just bad luck.
28
Mmm really? My mother is Asian, doesn't smoke or drink, exercise regularly and not overweight, and a survivor of 2
bouts of breast cancer. A friend's mother also Asian - Japanese, and ditto to the above - did not survive breast cancer. Perhaps breast cancer is not as discerning as one thinks.
bouts of breast cancer. A friend's mother also Asian - Japanese, and ditto to the above - did not survive breast cancer. Perhaps breast cancer is not as discerning as one thinks.
15
I was fine with the recommendations until the advice about avoiding sugar. Not gonna happen.
4
But you don't understand. Sugar makes food taste better. Actually it tastes good itself. So of course the Health People are going to decide that it's bad, our former Puritanism having been reborn in this form. Ditto a glass of wine. Soy, on the other hand, which tastes awful, is said to be good for you. Of course it is, you knew that already didn't you? Suffering improves you as a person.
They make a try here with ice cream, a good-tasting food if ever there was one, but they just couldn't quite make it work. And the statement "it's also best to avoid saturated fats," a statement now largely discredited, is put out there without a reason. But we all know what the reason is, don't we. Fat tastes good, can't have that. Also ice cream.
If we all lived on kale, apparently, we'd all live forever. At least it might seem like forever.
I've lived long enough to see all these recommendations swing all over the map. Remember when sugar was OK but fat wasn't? Wasn't that long ago. Perhaps these people don't know much about what they are talking about.
They make a try here with ice cream, a good-tasting food if ever there was one, but they just couldn't quite make it work. And the statement "it's also best to avoid saturated fats," a statement now largely discredited, is put out there without a reason. But we all know what the reason is, don't we. Fat tastes good, can't have that. Also ice cream.
If we all lived on kale, apparently, we'd all live forever. At least it might seem like forever.
I've lived long enough to see all these recommendations swing all over the map. Remember when sugar was OK but fat wasn't? Wasn't that long ago. Perhaps these people don't know much about what they are talking about.
6
Many women who never smoked or drank heavily, who watched their diet and exercised get breast cancer. This article tries to blame the patient for the disease. Very harmful. A diagnosis of cancer leaves a person very vulnerable. Instead of blame, we should be talking about how to live a rich and full life after a cancer diagnosis.
23
From the National Cancer Institute:
"Studies have shown that some factors do not affect the risk of breast cancer.
The following do NOT NOT NOT NOT affect the risk of breast cancer:
Having an abortion.
Making diet changes such as eating less fat or more fruits and vegetables.
Taking vitamins, including fenretinide (a type of vitamin A).
Cigarette smoking, both active and passive (inhaling secondhand smoke).
Using underarm deodorant or antiperspirant.
Taking statins (cholesterol -lowering drugs).
Taking bisphosphonates (drugs used to treat osteoporosis and hypercalcemia) by mouth or by intravenous infusion."
https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/patient/breast-prevention-pdq#sectio...
There are a few thing that you can do that may lower your risk somewhat, but the author clearly does not have her facts straight.
"Studies have shown that some factors do not affect the risk of breast cancer.
The following do NOT NOT NOT NOT affect the risk of breast cancer:
Having an abortion.
Making diet changes such as eating less fat or more fruits and vegetables.
Taking vitamins, including fenretinide (a type of vitamin A).
Cigarette smoking, both active and passive (inhaling secondhand smoke).
Using underarm deodorant or antiperspirant.
Taking statins (cholesterol -lowering drugs).
Taking bisphosphonates (drugs used to treat osteoporosis and hypercalcemia) by mouth or by intravenous infusion."
https://www.cancer.gov/types/breast/patient/breast-prevention-pdq#sectio...
There are a few thing that you can do that may lower your risk somewhat, but the author clearly does not have her facts straight.
19
I have never smoked, but smoking is said to be pleasurable, which is enough reason to ban it right there. Don't confuse these people with the facts.
2
Too right, Tim0. I've had women in my family affected by breast cancer and they led what Jane E. Brody would call lives that minimized risk factors. As another reader pointed out, this article is not peer-reviewed; it would not pass the test.
Methinks that Ms. Brody should consider retirement soon as she spins mainly opinion-driven drivel such as this article.
Methinks that Ms. Brody should consider retirement soon as she spins mainly opinion-driven drivel such as this article.
5
This is a painful article with a false headline. There may be correlations between lifestyle and developing breast cancer but there are no definitive answers as to the causes of various forms of breast cancer. The headline implies if you have breast cancer it's your fault. Jone Body needs to be cautious about the implications the kinds of studies she cites. We know people that live in certain zip codes are healthier. She doesn't suggest people move to a healthier zip code. This does not belong in the Science Times.
31
I completely agree this is all very good general advice about trying to be as healthy as possible. That being said, we don't control environmental or genetic factors, or the pure bad luck of mutations during cell division.
This article doesn't mention that most studies on prevention are done on post-menopausal women, who are the vast majority of the patients. Risk factors are different in the smaller group of younger women who get breast cancer. These include risk factors that no one is likely to try to prevent - age of having kids, or having kids at all. Not having kids is a risk factor, as is having them after 30. Many women with breast cancer under 45 are within 5 years of a birth and many many studies show this is linked to breast cancer - changes in the breast during pregnancy and lactation create an environment that promotes cancer. No one is going to not have wanted pregnancies to avoid breast cancer because risk goes up in your 30s.
But there you go - I have four friends diagnosed between 38 and 41 either pregnant or within a few years of having a child. I had a 2 year old & 5 year old when I was diagnosed. We were all young, fit, slim and exercised. None of us smoked. None of us were big drinkers. We were all too young for regular screening. I wish I had known about this risk factor - I might have gone to the doctor faster about breast changes I thought were related to breast feeding.
This article doesn't mention that most studies on prevention are done on post-menopausal women, who are the vast majority of the patients. Risk factors are different in the smaller group of younger women who get breast cancer. These include risk factors that no one is likely to try to prevent - age of having kids, or having kids at all. Not having kids is a risk factor, as is having them after 30. Many women with breast cancer under 45 are within 5 years of a birth and many many studies show this is linked to breast cancer - changes in the breast during pregnancy and lactation create an environment that promotes cancer. No one is going to not have wanted pregnancies to avoid breast cancer because risk goes up in your 30s.
But there you go - I have four friends diagnosed between 38 and 41 either pregnant or within a few years of having a child. I had a 2 year old & 5 year old when I was diagnosed. We were all young, fit, slim and exercised. None of us smoked. None of us were big drinkers. We were all too young for regular screening. I wish I had known about this risk factor - I might have gone to the doctor faster about breast changes I thought were related to breast feeding.
24
Here! Here!
Dr Pepper Schedin is researching PABC -- pregnancy associated breast cancer -- in Oregon.
https://www.ohsu.edu/xd/education/schools/school-of-medicine/departments...
About 12,000-15,000 young mothers each year develop PABC out of 3,000,000 annual births in the US.
Dr Pepper Schedin is researching PABC -- pregnancy associated breast cancer -- in Oregon.
https://www.ohsu.edu/xd/education/schools/school-of-medicine/departments...
About 12,000-15,000 young mothers each year develop PABC out of 3,000,000 annual births in the US.
7
Recent study about lifestyle choices and breast cancer showed increased risk if you dyed your hair regularly and ate contraceptive pills.
3
Once again an article from the times about breast cancer without one word about breastfeeding? Are there any current statistics on breastfeeding mothers and cancer? Does nursing a baby reduce cancer by even a small percent? Then why do say so? Woman can choose to breastfeed, or not, but they can make the choice if they have a baby. When an article completely ignores the breast itself, that it has a function, that it does lactate and that it make a difference in women's health, then this can be an article about anything and anyone
14
Writing as a woman who is five years out from diagnosis and treatment, I am unhappy with this article.
For example, even Komen admits that "although findings on a possible link to breast cancer remain mixed, there is growing evidence that smoking may slightly increase the risk of breast cancer."
Slightly.
Interestingly, regular mammograms may also slightly increase the risk of breast cancer.
The primary risk factor for developing breast cancer is womanhood. Plain and simple. Articles like this need to add the caveat that you can do everything right, and you may still end up in the chemo suite.
Overweight is another one. It's not so much the excess fat as it is blood sugar and insulin issues. This is why metformin looks so good as a cancer preventive.
And exercise is great. I fast walk 5k every day, and it helps both my mental and physical health. But don't think it'll keep cancer at bay for a woman who is BRCA2 positive, okay?
I can assure you that breast cancer patients are up to their teeth with people who want to tell them how they caused their own cancer. It's a load of horse puckey, and articles like this one do not help us or those who think these notions will help them avoid a similar diagnosis.
For example, even Komen admits that "although findings on a possible link to breast cancer remain mixed, there is growing evidence that smoking may slightly increase the risk of breast cancer."
Slightly.
Interestingly, regular mammograms may also slightly increase the risk of breast cancer.
The primary risk factor for developing breast cancer is womanhood. Plain and simple. Articles like this need to add the caveat that you can do everything right, and you may still end up in the chemo suite.
Overweight is another one. It's not so much the excess fat as it is blood sugar and insulin issues. This is why metformin looks so good as a cancer preventive.
And exercise is great. I fast walk 5k every day, and it helps both my mental and physical health. But don't think it'll keep cancer at bay for a woman who is BRCA2 positive, okay?
I can assure you that breast cancer patients are up to their teeth with people who want to tell them how they caused their own cancer. It's a load of horse puckey, and articles like this one do not help us or those who think these notions will help them avoid a similar diagnosis.
68
Allow me to refine your statement about the highest risk of getting breast cancer. Women of course get more breast cancer but age is the highest factor for the dreaded diagnosis according to my surgeon.
I truly don't understand the anger at the writer of this piece. A healthier diet, exercise, and not smoking certainly won't assure that one won't get cancer, but it has to increase the odds of survival. I think the article provided valuable information.
I truly don't understand the anger at the writer of this piece. A healthier diet, exercise, and not smoking certainly won't assure that one won't get cancer, but it has to increase the odds of survival. I think the article provided valuable information.
1
Another risk-factor that needs to be explored more thoroughly is the impact of environmental estrogen-mimetics (xenoestrogens), chemicals introduced via processed foods, plastics, etc. that may have an even greater affinity for breast estrogen receptors than estrogen itself.
29
It's surprising how many posters seem to resist/resent the commonsense advice of the article and want to insist that cancer is totally random, supplying anecdotes about the proverbial vegetarian marathon runner who gets cancer. The data do not lie. Multiple and large studies show consistently that a vegetable-heavy, low-sugar/low-alcohol diet and daily exercise very significantly reduce your cancer risk. Following these steps can be challenging but is not impossible, even for those of us who are, like me, low-income. Of course there are additional factors in cancer, but why not control those you can?
22
@Cynthia Williamson:
The observational studies tell us that healthful habits, real or perceived, tend to cluster together. There are very few randomized experimental trials on this stuff, and most the data in these studies comes from self-reported surveys. If a lifestyle that is "vegetable-heavy, low-sugar/low-alcohol diet and daily exercise" reduces risk, then what factor or combination of factors did the trick? Was it the presence of vegetables? The exercise? The absence of sugar, smoking, or alcohol? None of the above? Three out of six? What about a diet that contains meat and vegetables but excludes sugar, a diet that contains vegetables and alcohol but excludes meat, etc, etc?
The observational studies tell us that healthful habits, real or perceived, tend to cluster together. There are very few randomized experimental trials on this stuff, and most the data in these studies comes from self-reported surveys. If a lifestyle that is "vegetable-heavy, low-sugar/low-alcohol diet and daily exercise" reduces risk, then what factor or combination of factors did the trick? Was it the presence of vegetables? The exercise? The absence of sugar, smoking, or alcohol? None of the above? Three out of six? What about a diet that contains meat and vegetables but excludes sugar, a diet that contains vegetables and alcohol but excludes meat, etc, etc?
13
In addition to the other comments -- it's a short hop in some people's minds from correlation (which does not mean causation) or studied with limited applicability (self-reported food/activity, studies of one demographic applied to all demographics) to (1) a false sense of security or (2) blaming the victim. Neither is helpful.
13
Totally agreed. My mother died from breast cancer, so I'm at higher risk myself. I can choose to be proactive about my health and lowering my risk as much as possible, by limiting alcohol, eating healthfully and exercising, or I can complain instead. I choose to do what I can to reduce my risk, while being fully aware that I may one day get cancer too... or simply get hit by a bus.
4
The take-away seems to be the usual advice for healthy eating and living: plenty of fruits, vegetables and whole grains, low added sugar and low saturated fat, along with exercise. I've been doing this with success for over 20 years, since I found I couldn't take statins to lower my LDL cholesterol. Not only is my cholesterol fairly stable, but I find that a mostly vegetarian diet allows for a lot of creativity and interesting dishes from many cuisines. It doesn't take long to get away from the meat-and-potatoes and a side mentality.
7
I have tried to maintain a good, healthy life style throughout my life and still had not one, but two diagnosis for cancer-one for ovarian cancer at age 23 and the other for breast cancer 5 years ago. My mother had a very healthy diet and life style and was diagnosed with breast cancer in her late 50s. My father died of pancreatic cancer. Interestingly, many people on the street that I grew up on and where my parents spent most of their married life were diagnosed with cancer, in a number of instances, it was fatal and there was some discussion of an environmental cause. Most of the women I have known with a cancer diagnosis were very health conscious, aware of their diets, were not overweight. Yes, these are good guidelines for maintaining health and hopefully, someone may not get this diagnosis, but I am not sure how much you can lower your chances at this point-clearly there is a lot that is environmental that is at play here as well. Don't assume anything, and remain vigilant always, that is my plan.
14
Risk of breast cancer rises with overweight and obesity. For about 20 years, high BMI and waist circumference have been linked in the social epidemiologic literature with chronic structural stress (having no control over work or life because of grossly imbalanced power relations). Feeling threatened or insecure economically on a continual basis leads to derangement of the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis and to metabolic dysfunction. There is a large literature on this process. This article neglects this population-wide public health impact. It implies that we are all in control of our lives and have perfect agency in keeping ourselves healthy. In a society where the wealth and power accumulate in a very few hands, that implication is a false picture that leads to blaming victims.
27
In the particular case of hormone-positive breast tumors, the risk is increased by peripheral estrogens, i.e. estrogens of non-ovarian origin. Fat cells contain an enzyme, aromataze, which reduced androgens (which women have too) to estrogens. This is added to the risk factor obesity and hyper-insulinemic/insulin-resistant states have for all cancers.
6
The comments are bizarre.
This article is excellent. The most important steps you can take to reduce your risk of breast cancer are the same things you would do to reduce your risk of Heart Disease and Type 2 Diabetes. Doing so will reduce risk of several kinds of cancers.
This article is excellent. The most important steps you can take to reduce your risk of breast cancer are the same things you would do to reduce your risk of Heart Disease and Type 2 Diabetes. Doing so will reduce risk of several kinds of cancers.
7
@Catherine:
The dietary advice (eat more carbohydrate, avoid fat and saturated fat) has been wrong since the beginning. This advice has already been tested, in a massive randomized trial (40,000+ women, 7 years) called the Women's Health Initiative. The low fat diet failed to produce any results, following a low fat/low sat fat diet produced _no benefits_ for avoiding heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, or overall mortality.
The dietary advice (eat more carbohydrate, avoid fat and saturated fat) has been wrong since the beginning. This advice has already been tested, in a massive randomized trial (40,000+ women, 7 years) called the Women's Health Initiative. The low fat diet failed to produce any results, following a low fat/low sat fat diet produced _no benefits_ for avoiding heart disease, cancer, diabetes, obesity, or overall mortality.
10
Are you a cancer patient or survivor?
3
Yes, I wondered why Ms. Brody neglected to mention that study. Eating increased servings of fruits and vegetables did not influence risk.
4
Let's see...1938. I am a DES baby from my mother being prescribed the drug while pregnant with me; at 5 months of age I had my thymus x-rayed (while x-rays were in its infancy) because it was believed if the baby had a tongue beyond a certain size they could die from Sudden Death Syndrome and the treatment would prevent it.
X-raying a tiny child where the thymus is located finally stopped but is considered high-risk for breast cancer in later years.
I have never had breast cancer protection from having a child or breastfeeding one because I never had a child, fall-out from being a DES daughter was infertility /miscarriage.
I was not the only child who had these back-then new-age treatments rendered upon them; and DES drugs were still being prescribed into the 1970's even as the risks were known. Many do not know these treatments are in their history.
And yes, last December I was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer but no, I don't waste time over what-ifs or causes.
Considering what happened/happens to others in concentration camps, on 9/11, in Syria now I just decided life is a crap-shoot for the most part and I do my best to get on with it.
X-raying a tiny child where the thymus is located finally stopped but is considered high-risk for breast cancer in later years.
I have never had breast cancer protection from having a child or breastfeeding one because I never had a child, fall-out from being a DES daughter was infertility /miscarriage.
I was not the only child who had these back-then new-age treatments rendered upon them; and DES drugs were still being prescribed into the 1970's even as the risks were known. Many do not know these treatments are in their history.
And yes, last December I was diagnosed with metastatic breast cancer but no, I don't waste time over what-ifs or causes.
Considering what happened/happens to others in concentration camps, on 9/11, in Syria now I just decided life is a crap-shoot for the most part and I do my best to get on with it.
26
When I went through my testing I focused on the same thing. "I'm not in Aleppo right now." I'm not complaining. I wish you the best. My babysitter as a child was a DES baby. Cancer is a business and until it gets called out and the money goes to telling the truth, we all need to do our own research! Be well and take care. There is a great metavivor support group on instagram.
3
Someone's comment re: "the concept of blaming the victim for getting cancer."
archives.chicagotribune.com
Chicago Tribune March 7, 1974
Ex-patients hunted
2d hospital seeks cancer-risk cases
By Brenda Stone
"A preliminary study of Northwestern Memorial Hospital records shows about 100 children received the X-ray treatments between 1938 and 1957.
The therapy, mainly used in children as an alternative surgical removal of infected tonsils, also was given to shrink enlarged adenoids, thymus glands, lymph odes in the neck, and to combat acne.
It was discontinued at Reese and elsewhere in the mid-1950's because of increasing evidence of potentially harmful effects from extensive radiation."
As a variation of Tina Turner's "What's Love Got To Do With It?" for little people growing up in 1938-1957;
by the time they reached adulthood they could have been facing various cancers-breast cancer among them.
Not eating fruits and veggies, not exercising, continuing to smoke, drinking alcohol too much, eating saturated fats, getting fat might well have nothing to do with it.
archives.chicagotribune.com
Chicago Tribune March 7, 1974
Ex-patients hunted
2d hospital seeks cancer-risk cases
By Brenda Stone
"A preliminary study of Northwestern Memorial Hospital records shows about 100 children received the X-ray treatments between 1938 and 1957.
The therapy, mainly used in children as an alternative surgical removal of infected tonsils, also was given to shrink enlarged adenoids, thymus glands, lymph odes in the neck, and to combat acne.
It was discontinued at Reese and elsewhere in the mid-1950's because of increasing evidence of potentially harmful effects from extensive radiation."
As a variation of Tina Turner's "What's Love Got To Do With It?" for little people growing up in 1938-1957;
by the time they reached adulthood they could have been facing various cancers-breast cancer among them.
Not eating fruits and veggies, not exercising, continuing to smoke, drinking alcohol too much, eating saturated fats, getting fat might well have nothing to do with it.
4
Before I went for my biopsy I Googled: Why in 1938 did they x-ray the thymus gland of babies?
I had never known why and never thought about it after my mother told me-until the lump in my breast last November.
I wanted to give a novel approach to the customary background information that I was required to send in before the biopsy.
I thought DES and x-rayed thymus might be important.
Little did I know when I started the research.
Somewhere in the literature I have is the part about the baby's tongue, in the meantime I offer:
✦American Cancer Society,Inc
Radiated on purpose as an infant in the 1950's, cancer developed years later|Cancer Survivors Network
✦www.ratical.org
*Chapter 11, Ending the Era of Radiation Therapy for Enlarged Thymus, PREVENTING BREAST CANCER
*PART 4. Everything Is Connected to Everything, in Medicine as in Ecology in General
"The thymus story is a fascinating one---
An idea developed that the thymus gland might be enlarged and cause respiratory difficulties, even sudden death of infants---
Roentgen's discovery of x-rays made it possible for the idea to be tested both as to diagnosis and treatment---The idea is now long dead, with many saying the marvelous results seen by physicians were never really seen---
Many thousands of women, whose breasts intercepted some of the x-rays used in this idea's lifetime, are now dead of breast-cancer, others are dying, and more will still die---unintended consequences of an idea".
I had never known why and never thought about it after my mother told me-until the lump in my breast last November.
I wanted to give a novel approach to the customary background information that I was required to send in before the biopsy.
I thought DES and x-rayed thymus might be important.
Little did I know when I started the research.
Somewhere in the literature I have is the part about the baby's tongue, in the meantime I offer:
✦American Cancer Society,Inc
Radiated on purpose as an infant in the 1950's, cancer developed years later|Cancer Survivors Network
✦www.ratical.org
*Chapter 11, Ending the Era of Radiation Therapy for Enlarged Thymus, PREVENTING BREAST CANCER
*PART 4. Everything Is Connected to Everything, in Medicine as in Ecology in General
"The thymus story is a fascinating one---
An idea developed that the thymus gland might be enlarged and cause respiratory difficulties, even sudden death of infants---
Roentgen's discovery of x-rays made it possible for the idea to be tested both as to diagnosis and treatment---The idea is now long dead, with many saying the marvelous results seen by physicians were never really seen---
Many thousands of women, whose breasts intercepted some of the x-rays used in this idea's lifetime, are now dead of breast-cancer, others are dying, and more will still die---unintended consequences of an idea".
7
What irks me most about this article is when you think of the hundreds of thousands of women that run, walk, or donate for "the cure", raising billions of dollars - this is the best we get? Make no bones about it, breast cancer is an industry. You would think by now, we would have accurate forms of prevention as well as modern cures. While yes, I know progress has been made, albeit slowly, does it make sense that we are still subjected to archaic mammograms subjection us to cancer causing radiation? Breast cancer should be wiped out by now with all the money poured into its research...yet here we are.
30
I disagree with this all too common misconception that there is a "cancer industry" with the sole mission of increasing profits and revenues. Cancer is a very personal condition with a wide variety and combination of factors. Research for breast cancers alone has evolved to provide an increased number of targeted diagnoses and treatments, once again in combination and personalized to the patient. We had excellent diagnoses, surgery, and treatment for DCIS for a family member but not so good diagnosis and treatment for stomach cancer (playing statistics for chemo sessions for less-risk surgery rather than doing the surgery first).
1
Totally agree! Thought so before I had breast cancer and think so now. The industry of breast cancer is manipulative. How about putting all of that 'fight for the cure' money into 'fight for finding and eliminating' the environmental factors that increase risk. Incidence is not going down. Where I live it is 1:7 women!
Meanwhile, the advice in this article is fine but it's a fluff piece that is not comprehensive nor rigorous and I would expect to see it in 'Self' rather than the NYT.
Meanwhile, the advice in this article is fine but it's a fluff piece that is not comprehensive nor rigorous and I would expect to see it in 'Self' rather than the NYT.
4
Joan~You said cancer is an industry while another poster REB disagreed. I completely agree with you. The cancer industry has abysmal results and continues to use drugs proven to have extremely low results for many decades. Bowls of candy in the chemo rooms--sugar is food for cancer cells. A quick diagnosis and patients rushed into surgery without a chance to think about what is happening or able to do research. Polls which show 90% of oncologists would never subject themselves, family members or friends to chemo or radiation. It is all about the money, not the cure for so many cancers. Check out Chrisbeatcancer dot com or Ty Bollinger's Truth about cancer series for expert information to research.
3
I enjoyed reading this article of possible ways of not to gain breast cancer by maintaining a healthy lifestyle. However, it isn't a guarantee that you wouldn't get breast cancer from something else or randomly. But it doesn't hurt to give it a try and prevent yourself from getting it.
Great article!
Great article!
2
As noted by many of the comments below, this article was a long synopsis about what many think are general strategies for good health. These concepts have been part of the dialogue for at least 3 decades now. There is sadly nothing new here and when your readers see a large article on such an important topic, they expect and deserve more and newer information. This also reminds me of the concept of blaming the victim for getting cancer. I am much more interested in the latest science on the topic.
25
Regarding the link with alcohol, what a pity the research looked at women who drank "two to five" drinks a day. I imagine that, like me, many women have a couple of glasses of wine a night - but FIVE?! To lump together women who drink two drinks and those who drink five makes the risk analysis meaningless. I'm going to assume the risk is at the upper end and I'll continue to enjoy my two glasses of wine a night -- one while I cook and one while I eat. Cheers!
21
Catherine, you make good points about lumping together women who drink 2 glasses of wine a day with women who drink 5 "drinks" (wine? beer? whisky?). Researchers too often don't think about how real women use alcohol, and if they're self-reporting, are they being accurate in their reporting or fudging the numbers out of embarassment?
Also, while you may enjoy your two glasses of wine and maybe science will show that your drinking and enjoying them is protective, my feeling is if they cause you to lose sleep in the middle of the night, you have to pause and consider how that lost sleep might affect your health. Many women I know rarely drink mostly because they don't want to lose the sleep and start cutting down so often that they actually forget that wine is an option.
Also, while you may enjoy your two glasses of wine and maybe science will show that your drinking and enjoying them is protective, my feeling is if they cause you to lose sleep in the middle of the night, you have to pause and consider how that lost sleep might affect your health. Many women I know rarely drink mostly because they don't want to lose the sleep and start cutting down so often that they actually forget that wine is an option.
2
It is important to remember that only 70% of all breast cancers are fueled by estrogen. The estrogen-receptor negative breast cancers, which are prevalent in women of color, do not respond to estrogen. As such, there is no evidence that foods that naturally contain estrogen have any impact on mortality in this subclass of breast cancer patients.
When discussing risk factors for getting and surviving breast cancer, it would be beneficial and educational if the NYTimes could differentiate between those breast cancers that are fueled by estrogen and those that are not.
When discussing risk factors for getting and surviving breast cancer, it would be beneficial and educational if the NYTimes could differentiate between those breast cancers that are fueled by estrogen and those that are not.
2
The article did NOT say doing these would ensure you to not get cancer, it did NOT blame anybody, it simply said doing these can reduce the chance of getting cancer. Reducing even 7% chance is still worth trying. It's good medical advice for many. If you got cancer don't feel guilty about it, your own guilty, or anybody trying to make you feel guilty are simply irrational, and wrong, cancer happens out of bad luck. Please don't be offended by articles like this.
3
I wonder if some women are offended by the article that gives advice on how to reduce (not eliminate) risk in part because women are constantly receiving the message "Be perfect at all times, and if anything goes wrong, it's because you are imperfect?" We should all reject that sexist notion.
Also, I think women are angry and reactive right now because of non-empathetic legislators who are saying some absolutely astonishingly ignorant and judgmental garbage about people and their health conditions.
Also, I think women are angry and reactive right now because of non-empathetic legislators who are saying some absolutely astonishingly ignorant and judgmental garbage about people and their health conditions.
6
This article is too cliche. No news here. Believe breast cancer is random. I'm a runner, vegetarian and also drink Guinness daily, which I will continue to do into the future. Why? Because I enjoy it.
Living a joyless life can also create breast cancer.
Face it, Jane: The U.S. desperately needs single-payer healthcare.
Living a joyless life can also create breast cancer.
Face it, Jane: The U.S. desperately needs single-payer healthcare.
19
Reading comments here, it seems that most health conscious women are fatalistic toward breast cancer, a metabolic disease. Similar reaction occurs toward Alzheimer's or dementia, another metabolic disease. Recent researches almost all conclude that Alzheimer's, cancer, atherosclerosis, type-2 diabetes are caused by the damaged mitochondria of our cells whatever the initial triggers are. Initial triggers are (1) chemicals,(2) poor lifestyle, (3) infection, (4) gene, (5)hormone disruption, (6)autoimmune diseases etc. Most us are not informed how our mitochondria are damaged. This is the reason why a large number of informed women become fatalistic as conventional medical advises rarely touch this subject. It happens when our cells are exposed to the aggressive attack by free radials (O-1 not O-2). Excess blood sugar (glucose or fructose) causes glycation (sugar molcule attaches to protein or lipoprotein), this leads to oxiddation by 50 times more than usual free radicals, then cells are inflammated, then our immune system works by the powerful cytokines. Where free radicals come from? They are coming from our damaged mitochondria. Other factors that damage mitochondria are triggers that I listed above.
Most biochemists are convinced that our lifestyle change controls expression of genes such as BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53. Read and listen to doctors like David Perlmutter, Mark Hyman, Jill Carnahan, Joe Mercola, Russell Jaffe, Dale Brredesen, Thoms Seyfried, Robert Lustig, etc.
Most biochemists are convinced that our lifestyle change controls expression of genes such as BRCA1, BRCA2 or TP53. Read and listen to doctors like David Perlmutter, Mark Hyman, Jill Carnahan, Joe Mercola, Russell Jaffe, Dale Brredesen, Thoms Seyfried, Robert Lustig, etc.
8
Jane
Stop, just stop. I am tired of the endless stream of articles from you and others who make a living throwing fear headlines out there and then rigid rules as how to avoid the big "C". What have you said that is new? Yes, we all have to watch our weight and all the components therein, but enough already. Sure focus on the smoking but for the rest of us, why not just dump some more fear into the lives of women: lose weight, get that exercise, pick up those strange veggies at the market your kids won't eat, squeeze this in around getting kids out the door to school, going to work, traffic, bills, stress, (skip that glass of wine, it's a killer!) and then fall into bed hoping to get the latest recommended amount of sleep.
Stop, please stop. All this advice comes from women who have a LOT of time on their hands and a superior sense of diet and living so that if that day comes when you do find you have breast cancer, see, it really is your fault.
Next up: totally different diet for heart disease and dementia. Ladies, stay tuned.
Stop, just stop. I am tired of the endless stream of articles from you and others who make a living throwing fear headlines out there and then rigid rules as how to avoid the big "C". What have you said that is new? Yes, we all have to watch our weight and all the components therein, but enough already. Sure focus on the smoking but for the rest of us, why not just dump some more fear into the lives of women: lose weight, get that exercise, pick up those strange veggies at the market your kids won't eat, squeeze this in around getting kids out the door to school, going to work, traffic, bills, stress, (skip that glass of wine, it's a killer!) and then fall into bed hoping to get the latest recommended amount of sleep.
Stop, please stop. All this advice comes from women who have a LOT of time on their hands and a superior sense of diet and living so that if that day comes when you do find you have breast cancer, see, it really is your fault.
Next up: totally different diet for heart disease and dementia. Ladies, stay tuned.
24
No Pat, YOU stop. And get used to the endless stream of articles. Because they're the one thing we can count on in this bizarre medical situation that this country is in these days. I can proudly say articles such as this saved my life several years ago when I had breast cancer (have YOU????!!! Okay, then sit down). I am endlessly grateful to the Jane Brodys of the world who continue to ferret out the less dramatic but no less effective, ways of combating disease. Without going into my own story I can safely say this type of article directed my treatment, doctors were so surprised at the outcome I was the topic at the "tumor board" one month. Plus I've cured myself of 8 years with Type 2 Diabetes and my doctor has said she's going to start sending people to me (I hope she was kidding..) Nobody's getting rich off this type of advice, but thankfully some people (like Jane Brody) are cluing us in.
3
I agree - this is nothing new. It does not merit space in the NY Times. Give us real information! The diet, exercise, alcohol & smoking routine is bull. Its all about environmental factors. We are surrounded by toxins and endocrine disrupters. All we can do is keep the toxins out of our homes and hope for the best.
6
Excellent article, but I wish a man had been included in the artwork, as well as a note that men also suffer from breast cancer. That fact is not as widely known as it should be.
11
I'm trying to get my head around the increased risk seen in smokers, as nicotine and estrogen are metabolized through the same hepatic microsomal pathway. In smokers, this pathway is upregulated leading to chronically low estrogen, which is why smoking is such a risk-factor for osteoporosis. As one of the main breast-cancer risks is the duration of exposure to unopposed estrogen (i.e. early menses, late menopause), one would think smoking ever so slightly protective.
1
The human body is in a continual state of repair & healing. Smoking hampers the body's own ability to get well. If there were a protective benefit, it would not be offset by the overall negative consequences of sucking in tar, nicotine & smoke.
1
Nicotine also diminishes the risk of high cholesterol. But this "benefit" is more than offset by the fact that smoking hardens the arteries without the aid of high cholesterol. Given that smoking also causes heart and lung disease, is there ANY question that smoking is BAD, BAD, BAD??
Just watching a (cancer-free) smoker hack up his lungs and, as he ages, struggle for breath should be enough to put anyone off cigarettes.
Just watching a (cancer-free) smoker hack up his lungs and, as he ages, struggle for breath should be enough to put anyone off cigarettes.
3
I just found those findings surprising, given the connection between estrogen exposure and breast-cancer risk, a basic science question. I'm certainly not advocating smoking if only because far more little old ladies die from broken hips than from breast cancer. Which brings up my other bete noir, the disproportionate press-coverage and funding cancer gets over other, possibly greater public health problems. People hear cancer and they open their check-books. Diabetes (a huge cancer risk-factor)? Cardiovascular disease? Cancer has become such a big business that I often wonder if the research community has been disincentivized to actually cure it. Was it Lewis Thomas who said, upon his retirement from Sloane "more of us live off cancer than ever died from it"?
1
Is this really an article about breast cancer?
These suggestions seem like good general advice for promoting health. I wonder how much they apply to breast cancer specifically as opposed to other forms of cancer or even other health conditions, e.g. heart problems.
These suggestions seem like good general advice for promoting health. I wonder how much they apply to breast cancer specifically as opposed to other forms of cancer or even other health conditions, e.g. heart problems.
2
We all like to feel we have some control over our health, and there's certainly nothing wrong with doing your best to live a healthy lifestyle. It won't hurt, and it may help. It's important to realize, however, that there is also a random element to cancer. I've had two friends with similar, reasonably healthy lifestyles diagnosed with breast cancer around the same time, and treated in the same healthcare system. One is doing well; the other is fighting a recurrence and possible spreading. Why?
A recent study from Johns Hopkins suggests that most cancer mutations are due to "random DNA copying 'mistakes'". http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/new_study_finds_that_...
So, do what you can, but don't assign blame if it goes wrong.
A recent study from Johns Hopkins suggests that most cancer mutations are due to "random DNA copying 'mistakes'". http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/news/media/releases/new_study_finds_that_...
So, do what you can, but don't assign blame if it goes wrong.
20
I am shocked by the vehemence and ignorance of many of the comments here, from the person who claims "all French food is pretty much organic" to those who blame the author for suggesting a diet that's "no fun" and is not worth living for. There is not much new information here, but the comments show that even people who think they're smart because they read the NYT food section really don't understand how and why to eat in a mindful way, nor are they willing to explore why doing so makes you feel great. God forbid you try to take away their sugar. The NYT magazine has run articles explaining how sugar feeds cancer. That's not news--it's just news people don't want to hear, so they attack the messenger instead.
12
Overall, Ms. Brody raises evidence-based points, but her comments on soy and breast cancer require some clarification. She correctly points out that soy foods have been found to be more protective against breast cancer in Asian studies than in Western populations; however, that difference has been attributed to the fact that in Western studies, women tend to consume less soy than in Asian studies, and don’t consume it as early in life.
Furthermore, among breast cancer survivors, soy does appear to be protective against breast cancer recurrence and survival, both in Asian and US populations (Zhang et al, Dietary isoflavone intake and all-cause mortality in breast cancer survivors: The Breast Cancer Family Registry. Cancer 2017; Chi et al. Post-diagnosis soy food intake and breast cancer survival: A meta-analysis of cohort studies. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013; Nechuta et al. Soy food intake after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: an in-depth analysis of combined evidence from cohort studies of US and Chinese women. Am J Clin Nutr 2012).
Most importantly, soy foods do not appear to increase the risk of breast cancer, contrary to popular belief; indeed, the American Cancer Society states that “moderate consumption of soy foods appears safe for both breast cancer survivors and the general population, and may even lower breast cancer risk,” and agrees that soy supplements should be avoided until more research is done.
Furthermore, among breast cancer survivors, soy does appear to be protective against breast cancer recurrence and survival, both in Asian and US populations (Zhang et al, Dietary isoflavone intake and all-cause mortality in breast cancer survivors: The Breast Cancer Family Registry. Cancer 2017; Chi et al. Post-diagnosis soy food intake and breast cancer survival: A meta-analysis of cohort studies. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev 2013; Nechuta et al. Soy food intake after diagnosis of breast cancer and survival: an in-depth analysis of combined evidence from cohort studies of US and Chinese women. Am J Clin Nutr 2012).
Most importantly, soy foods do not appear to increase the risk of breast cancer, contrary to popular belief; indeed, the American Cancer Society states that “moderate consumption of soy foods appears safe for both breast cancer survivors and the general population, and may even lower breast cancer risk,” and agrees that soy supplements should be avoided until more research is done.
13
My sister lived an incredibly healthy life and did not smoke or drink, was a runner, gardened extensively, and breast-fed her 3 children. Despite all of that and the best treatment that medical science could offer, she died of metatastic breast cancer. While a healthful lifestyle is certainly better than an unhealthful one, sometimes there is no cure.
18
Please see my earlier post below. Soy consumption correlational research has the confounding variable of genetics: Asian women who consume soy may have inherited an ability to counteract the effects of soy on breast cancer or they may have inherited an ability to utilize soy to combat breast cancer. Other women with different genetics (Caucasian, of Color, Latino, etc.) may not have this inheritance. What is true of Asian women may not apply to the rest of us.
The "protective" influence of soy in Asian and US women on cancer recurrence could be attributed to something else: maybe women who eat soy take lots of vitamin K and that accounts for the "effect". Or maybe they don't eat much meat. Or maybe they don't live in polluted cities, or.... It's impossible to know without doing experiments which would be unethical if people were used. Animals could be used in experiments but some folks would claim that this would be unethical plus hard to generalize to humans.
There are lots of other reasons to eat soy and behave ourselves (don't drink, exercise, etc.) but observational/correlational research on breast cancer isn't one of them. And if you get breast cancer it might not be your own fault for not behaving yourself. So far as we know. That it might be your fault is only suggested by this research. It is by no means a fact.
The "protective" influence of soy in Asian and US women on cancer recurrence could be attributed to something else: maybe women who eat soy take lots of vitamin K and that accounts for the "effect". Or maybe they don't eat much meat. Or maybe they don't live in polluted cities, or.... It's impossible to know without doing experiments which would be unethical if people were used. Animals could be used in experiments but some folks would claim that this would be unethical plus hard to generalize to humans.
There are lots of other reasons to eat soy and behave ourselves (don't drink, exercise, etc.) but observational/correlational research on breast cancer isn't one of them. And if you get breast cancer it might not be your own fault for not behaving yourself. So far as we know. That it might be your fault is only suggested by this research. It is by no means a fact.
1
Non-GMO soy is best, especially natural soy products such as tofu and tempeh.
Thanks for sucking all the fun out of my wine and sedentary lifestyle.
19
Just re-read the article. THIS breast cancer survivor is going to continue with (similar to a commenter above) one glass of wine as I cook, one with dinner. Cheers!
2
Ms. Brody should clarify that risk for only one type of diabetes is reduced with lower BMI. Weight is not a relevant risk factor for Type 1 diabetes or monogenic diabetes. It is not difficult to be medically accurate.
7
Wow...I read every response..and I feel like I really knew nothing about this..I am a male 64..at my correct weight..walk 2.5 miles a day..have a large garden..
and ..well Your responders..and your article shocked me...what is the soluton?..some magic pill?..your diet..size..etc?..it seems to me there is an enormous amount of information on it...but no perfect answer..
and ..well Your responders..and your article shocked me...what is the soluton?..some magic pill?..your diet..size..etc?..it seems to me there is an enormous amount of information on it...but no perfect answer..
1
How about this idea, enjoy your life, enjoy your food, enjoy your wine. Go out and walk around your neighborhood, be grateful for everything you have, enjoy the loyalty and love of your pets, just live. If you get sick, go get help.
This constant attention on what can or may kill you is not healthy and causes stress, life is beautiful, just live.
This constant attention on what can or may kill you is not healthy and causes stress, life is beautiful, just live.
39
This relates to Citibank's Los Angeles Food Festival and of the 'Los Angeles Times"-related "burger crawl" taking place this May 2017. Today nearby in Azusa at the end of the Gold Line and right near the L.A. County Fair 2017 fairgrounds, there are to be found in the trash huge boxes that once had Modelo Beer. Moreover, in Pasadena itself not too far away from Azusa is the cooking school called Cordon Bleu on Colorado Blvd. where this morning there were"savory" and unsavory so-called "dog fish" snacks for those who stepped up for breakfast and wanted cooked dog meat for breakfast--Mongol gang related dog urine filled snacks each of which was served up for a very cheap prix fixe price. And at the Target on Colorado that is right beside an Office Depot and near a bunch of banks--Bank of the West, Citibank, a Comerica or Commerica flagship 'banking' building and Bank of America and Wells Fargo, the smell of raw and of cooked dog meat mixed in with dog urine was palpable right around eight thirty a.m. Pacific Time. Isn't "dogfish" or "dog fish" a pseudonym for dog meat here? At the aforementioned Target, moreover, there were a bunch of marked down from Cinco de Mayo (Mexican Independence Day 2017) tequila mixers, rum, and rum mixers that ostensibly contain things like citrus and coconut, but that actually contain citrus & coconut smelling tolulene-the same kind of coconut smelling tolulene that could be found on the false force majeure road projects near Azusa yesterday.
1
Might I suggest breast feeding, should one have children for a minimum of one year. Of course, I am suggesting, if one has the ability and time to breast feed. An old male GYN told me that because I breast fed for about 18 mnths, that 9 chances out of ten, no lumps, no bumps, no errors and no breast cancer. So far, so good knock wood. I am 67 years old and will be 68 in October 2017. My mother never breast fed me and she also never developed breast cancer. My mother suffered a few miscarriages and still didn't develop breast cancer. Needless to say, contrary to some ignorance floating round, abortions do not cause a woman to develop breast cancer. Thanks to the Republicans, I guess, women are on their own.
6
Sadly my wife breast fed for 1 year and was diagnosed w breast cancer 3 months after our child was weaned.
6
Happened to me too. Breastfed children; got cancer, twice.
5
Between the ages of 26 and 27, I breastfed my daughter for 18 months.
At the age of 52, I was diagnosed with triple positive breast cancer.
Oh well.
At the age of 52, I was diagnosed with triple positive breast cancer.
Oh well.
3
Why isn't there one man in the illustration? about one per cent of men get it. not much statistically but still....
6
I knew a man whose father had died from breast cancer. My friend was very open about it, and I could see how much it affected him and how emotional it made him feel--not to mention scared for his own health.
With few exceptions, most cancers, including those of the breast, are unavoidable and the result of bad luck. Nothing wrong with a healthy diet and exercise but what the author discusses here are the results of correlative studies not a preventative prescription - with the exception of smoking avoidance. Unfortunately, to justify their own greed and moral bankruptcy, some on the hard right have begun blaming the patient - it's your poor lifestyle choices that brought on your malignancy. If only you'd - please insert moralizing zinger. What we really need is more support for cancer research - something I used to think everyone was behind.
30
A number of years ago, a good friend died of breast cancer. She knew it was genetic for her since her mother had (if I remember correctly) also died young from it (my friend was in her early 50's). She almost overcame it, but had a recurrence and that was it.
I remember being with her one time when she was very upset because some idiot had brought up the idea that "we choose cancer in order to learn a lesson." I'll never forget how a group of us tried to tell my friend with breast cancer that this was utter baloney. There really is no reason to tell someone that "you caused your cancer or serious illness because you chose it to enhance your spiritual understanding" or some such ridiculous nonsense. Equally destructive is telling someone they got sick because they didn't eat right when they were twelve years or something like that.
I remember being with her one time when she was very upset because some idiot had brought up the idea that "we choose cancer in order to learn a lesson." I'll never forget how a group of us tried to tell my friend with breast cancer that this was utter baloney. There really is no reason to tell someone that "you caused your cancer or serious illness because you chose it to enhance your spiritual understanding" or some such ridiculous nonsense. Equally destructive is telling someone they got sick because they didn't eat right when they were twelve years or something like that.
6
As a cancer survivor, I've been subjected to this thinking. And now that my cousin is suffering profoundly from Alzheimer's a "friend" said "I have no sympathy for her" because she drank. I no longer speak to that "friend." Blaming the sick happens far too often, and articles like this feed on it.
7
gee, 2 drinks a week,max, lots of vegetables and very little meat, exercise like a maniac... sounds like fun! I'd rather take my chances eating French food (which is pretty much organic, regardless of the label), French or Italian wine, and walk my dog- even if it shaves 10 years off my life. If I can't have pleasure now, whats the point of living to 90?
7
The comments here don't seem to be about the same article. It is titled "how to avoid breast cancer risk" it doesn't say people can avoid breast cancer. it says some things MIGHT reduce your risk. Cancer is still a big mystery. We are almost clueless. Certainly cancer patients are not to blame. I've been stage 4 for five years. I didn't do anything outrageously risky. I might have had too much sugar. But nobody ever said in those days that sugar was carcinogenic. They still don't. This is life. Let's take care of one another without blame. Nobody gets cancer because they want it. And if they did I'm not sure anybody knows how to surely get it!
12
I always read Jane E. Brody and have for years, but this article makes me very uncomfortable. I had breast cancer, twice. I eat well, I'm a runner, I don't smoke, and drink a glass of wine with dinner only occasionally. I think statistics actually show that most people who get cancer are NOT in the "at risk" category.
When I had breast cancer (twice), my friends and family tried to figure out what I had done WRONG! Only people who don't eat right, don't exercise, smoke, drink too much, or those under stress (caused of course by themselves) -- only these people get cancer.
Not true.
When I had breast cancer (twice), my friends and family tried to figure out what I had done WRONG! Only people who don't eat right, don't exercise, smoke, drink too much, or those under stress (caused of course by themselves) -- only these people get cancer.
Not true.
56
Zejee -- how obnoxious to have people decide you did something to cause your cancer! I've heard those obscure theories how supposedly people "choose" illness to learn something in life. Ridiculous.
My feeling is that some prefer to think that sick people bring it on themselves and therefore, they themselves will never bet sick because they can "control" their health. People just don't want to believe that most of the time cancer or other illness is random and the luck of the draw.
My feeling is that some prefer to think that sick people bring it on themselves and therefore, they themselves will never bet sick because they can "control" their health. People just don't want to believe that most of the time cancer or other illness is random and the luck of the draw.
4
But don't you hear politicians telling us that good living people don't get sick and so good living people shouldn't have to pay for health care for those people who don't live well? It's a trend.
2
OK, eat healthy foods and get exercise.
Do we need more studies and articles to tell us that this is the key to good health?
Do we need more studies and articles to tell us that this is the key to good health?
Provide readers with new studies on DCIS prognostic outcomes when looking at nuclear grading (high, intermediate or low)..
8
There was a previous article about how DCIS is over diagnosed and over treated. Had my 7cm of DCIS not been removed, we wouldn't have known that the DC (ductal carcinoma) was no longer IS (in situ.. in the duct).
I am thin, healthy, eat a high alkaline diet and believe my cancer came from a period of very high stress and panic. A 3D mammo found my cancer. I am a staunch advocate for a non-toxic lifestyle and believe that the environmental toxins of which we are going to be exposed to more and more with 45, are the biggest contributors. Let's not forget, the dairy council, big pharma, beef council and lobbies are all pushing and advertising foods that are known carcinogens. Until someone shines a real light on the business of cancer, we all need to be our own best advocates and look at the research and who sponsored it!!! Susan G Komen sponsored by the dairy industry. Research is showing that dairy has a causative effect on breast cancer recurrence. Government agencies are sponsored by big lobbies and businesses. Do your own research!!! Plant based diets are best.
I am thin, healthy, eat a high alkaline diet and believe my cancer came from a period of very high stress and panic. A 3D mammo found my cancer. I am a staunch advocate for a non-toxic lifestyle and believe that the environmental toxins of which we are going to be exposed to more and more with 45, are the biggest contributors. Let's not forget, the dairy council, big pharma, beef council and lobbies are all pushing and advertising foods that are known carcinogens. Until someone shines a real light on the business of cancer, we all need to be our own best advocates and look at the research and who sponsored it!!! Susan G Komen sponsored by the dairy industry. Research is showing that dairy has a causative effect on breast cancer recurrence. Government agencies are sponsored by big lobbies and businesses. Do your own research!!! Plant based diets are best.
4
I think providing readers with new studies on DCIS is very important. A few year ago, an article in the NYT said it was over diagnosed and over treated. Having had a recent double mastectomy and learning that my "ductal carcinoma in situ" was no longer "in situ" but invasive.
What upset me about the current article is that it chose not to recommend people not eat meat and dairy. Research is showing that meat and dairy are causally related to breast cancer. After watching "What the Health" documentary, it was really easy to become a vegan learning that the dairy and beef councils sponser many of the government agencies that are " supposed" to protect us. Of course this is a moot point under the current administration.
What upset me about the current article is that it chose not to recommend people not eat meat and dairy. Research is showing that meat and dairy are causally related to breast cancer. After watching "What the Health" documentary, it was really easy to become a vegan learning that the dairy and beef councils sponser many of the government agencies that are " supposed" to protect us. Of course this is a moot point under the current administration.
4
I'm currently participating in a clinical trial for which I was recruited after my DCIS diagnosis. My oncotype dx score was in the medium range so I chose a lumpectomy with no radiation or chemo. Hope my small contribution helps guide future treatments of DCIS. This article reminded me that it wouldn't hurt to east more fruits and vegetables and I thank the writer for that.
Nowhere does this article say that if you clean up your habits, then you will not get breast cancer. It does report research suggesting a correlation with certain lifestyles and cancer. It is unfortunate that most of us don't learn these things till we have an oncologist in our lives.
This article fails to explore the effect of carcinogenic cosmetics--shampoos, lotions, lipsticks, etc--we slather on our bodies, and the effect of pesticides in our foods. Or chemicals we use in our homes and gardens and on the furniture we sit in. These are things we can readily control for and help reduce the risk.
This article fails to explore the effect of carcinogenic cosmetics--shampoos, lotions, lipsticks, etc--we slather on our bodies, and the effect of pesticides in our foods. Or chemicals we use in our homes and gardens and on the furniture we sit in. These are things we can readily control for and help reduce the risk.
12
My mom died at the age of 46 from breast cancer. She wasn't a smoker, and she had lived on a Mediterranean diet all her life. My paternal grandmother who had smoked since the age of 14, and barely left her home for a walk, never exercised, died when she was in her late 80s.
No, this isn't an ad for smoking, or lifestyle as couch potato, but genetics has a lot to do with these things.
No, this isn't an ad for smoking, or lifestyle as couch potato, but genetics has a lot to do with these things.
12
Mayo Clinic notes that very few cancer patients have cancer because of their genetics. Th e message delivered by a conference of doctors and health insurance professionals a few years ago is to clean up our environment. clean up our air and water, be more vigilant, like Europe, and start banning chemical useage. The answer is not cancer cures but to clean up our toxic environment.
17
But blaming cancer on personal lifestyle habits is much more convenient.
5
This is slightly misleading and will give a number of women a false sense of comfort. I know this because I had that similar sense of comfort. anecdotes are not evidence, but at 41 I was diagnosed with stage 4 (incurable) breast cancer. I have never smoked, never drank alcohol, I have never been overweight and have always been physically active. I also have no family history of breast cancer. If you are living a healthy, clean life and are thinking that will protect you from cancer?Sometimes cancer just happens. Terminal cancer just happened to me.
19
While all the lifestyle factors may help you, neither will they necessarily protect you. Many women commenting here are proof of that, and it's also been my experience. One important thing about BC that I didn't know before I got it, is that 80% of women who are diagnosed with it, have NO FAMILY HISTORY of it. That was the shocker - there are some cancers in my family, but not a single female in 3 generations has had it.
I believe it has more to do with our contaminated environment, than anything else. I grew up in a rust-belt eastern US city in the 50's and 60's - lots of air and water pollution, and god knows what was being sprayed on our food. Then there's all the hormone disruptors in personal care products, plastics, and seemingly everywhere. Whenever I read about fracking, or how the EPA and state regs are going to "really control" the pollution from coal transport terminals, and the use of "biosolids" on farms and woodlands, I just shudder - people don't know what they're being set up for.
Eat your brussels sprouts, ladies, but don't let articles like this one make you feel responsible, or fool you into thinking you can't get it because you're a skinny, right-living active type. Put the blame where it belongs: pervasive corporate pollution and a gov't in collusion. The environmental movement has ben a flaming failure, and the continuing increase in hormone-driven cancers, is proof.
I believe it has more to do with our contaminated environment, than anything else. I grew up in a rust-belt eastern US city in the 50's and 60's - lots of air and water pollution, and god knows what was being sprayed on our food. Then there's all the hormone disruptors in personal care products, plastics, and seemingly everywhere. Whenever I read about fracking, or how the EPA and state regs are going to "really control" the pollution from coal transport terminals, and the use of "biosolids" on farms and woodlands, I just shudder - people don't know what they're being set up for.
Eat your brussels sprouts, ladies, but don't let articles like this one make you feel responsible, or fool you into thinking you can't get it because you're a skinny, right-living active type. Put the blame where it belongs: pervasive corporate pollution and a gov't in collusion. The environmental movement has ben a flaming failure, and the continuing increase in hormone-driven cancers, is proof.
63
Great point!! I believe that BC is now classified as either environmental or genetic
2
Surprisingly, no one mentioned the use of raloxifine or tamoxifen for prevention of breast cancer in high risk women. These may reduce risk of breast cancer by 40% or more. This information has been out there for several years, but many doctors are unaware and do not advise patients of their options. There is a questionnaire to determine if your risk level is high. It is something high risk women (early menarche, family history, late or no pregnancies) should be aware of and learn more about. http://www.uptodate.com/contents/medications-for-the-prevention-of-breas... , http://www.cancer.net/research-and-advocacy/asco-care-and-treatment-reco....
3
But that is only if you have hormone positive breast cancer. If you end up with a tumor (like mine) that is hormone negative, of which at least 30% are, then those drugs won't help. And they have harsh side effects of their own. So I think taking a harsh drug they may be useless (or potentially harmful in its own right) is not a good idea.
6
And take iodine.
4
While she mentions that sugar and sugary drinks are a risk factor, the 'whole grain is healthy' myth still prevails. They are basically broken down to sugar in our bodies and hence raise blood sugar and Insulin levels, both of which are bad for us and cause inflammation (=rising cancer risk) amongst many other undesirable things. Mankind has eaten animal foods forever and there is no scientific evidence that saturated fat is bad for us. In fact, the real villain are very likely the carbohydrates, refined sugar and highly processed vegetable! oils. I only discovered all of this about a year ago, which is sad enough as I am a doctor, but if you really look at the science...that's where it's at!
27
They're not saying that healthy people never get breast cancer. They're also not saying that un-healthy people always do. They're simply noting a connection between overall health and the incidence of the disease. Inability to read and think clearly and critically is exactly how we ended up with a president who wants to make sure you die of breast cancer if you do get it -- regardless of whether you were healthy or not at the time of diagnosis.
22
This article is better than many I have seen in the Times regarding health advice, but it still falls short on a few points.
First, according to one of the recent best-selling nutrition guide books, "How Not to Die," there is no safe limit for alcohol: "In 2010, the official World Health Organization body that assesses cancer risks formally upgraded its classification of alcohol to a definitive human breast carcinogen. In 2014, it clarified its position by stating that, regarding breast cancer, no amount of alcohol is safe."
I think it is telling that the author of this article admits to consuming alcohol regularly, admits to having developed breast cancer, but still counsels that an occasional drink is OK, without providing any evidence.
The article suggests there is no link between dairy consumption and breast cancer. However, the Susan G. Komen organization, an organization focused on breast cancer, notes, "data from the Nurses’ Health Study II found women who ate a lot of high-fat dairy products (like whole milk or butter) had an increased risk of breast cancer before menopause."
A web site called BreastCancer.org says, "A study done by Kaiser Permanente researchers suggests that women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer who eat full-fat dairy products after diagnosis are more likely to die from breast cancer than women who eat low-fat dairy products after diagnosis."
First, according to one of the recent best-selling nutrition guide books, "How Not to Die," there is no safe limit for alcohol: "In 2010, the official World Health Organization body that assesses cancer risks formally upgraded its classification of alcohol to a definitive human breast carcinogen. In 2014, it clarified its position by stating that, regarding breast cancer, no amount of alcohol is safe."
I think it is telling that the author of this article admits to consuming alcohol regularly, admits to having developed breast cancer, but still counsels that an occasional drink is OK, without providing any evidence.
The article suggests there is no link between dairy consumption and breast cancer. However, the Susan G. Komen organization, an organization focused on breast cancer, notes, "data from the Nurses’ Health Study II found women who ate a lot of high-fat dairy products (like whole milk or butter) had an increased risk of breast cancer before menopause."
A web site called BreastCancer.org says, "A study done by Kaiser Permanente researchers suggests that women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer who eat full-fat dairy products after diagnosis are more likely to die from breast cancer than women who eat low-fat dairy products after diagnosis."
5
Dr. Lissa McKinley was a fit, healthy, strong, athletic Middlebury grad who devoted her life to studying breast cancer rates in rural North Carolina when she discovered a lump in her breast in her 30s. With no family history of the disease, with the optimal lifestyle (see article above), she assumed it was not cancer. In fact, it turned out to be a virulent pre-menopause form that changed her career forever and, most impressive, changed the way many oncologists handle cancer patients AFTER their treatment is finished. She died 20 years later, shortly after the New York Times did a feature on her amazing achievements.
On behalf of Lissa and on behalf of all women facing this erratic, cruel and often treatable disease, please ditch these "pop" articles and focus on what really works for women's health: access to affordable 3D mammograms and quality health care. Until then, a certain segment of the female population is doomed to death. Just ask Angelina Jolie whose story of intense diagnosis and monitoring is both championing and disheartening since so few of us will receive the same high-end treatment.
BTW, Lissa's widower is a renowned radiologist and in his opinion the difference between 3D screening and regular mammograms is night and day. The old, and inaccurate, line that mammograms don't save lives does not reflect this technology. Just ask my friends whose lives have been saved by them.
On behalf of Lissa and on behalf of all women facing this erratic, cruel and often treatable disease, please ditch these "pop" articles and focus on what really works for women's health: access to affordable 3D mammograms and quality health care. Until then, a certain segment of the female population is doomed to death. Just ask Angelina Jolie whose story of intense diagnosis and monitoring is both championing and disheartening since so few of us will receive the same high-end treatment.
BTW, Lissa's widower is a renowned radiologist and in his opinion the difference between 3D screening and regular mammograms is night and day. The old, and inaccurate, line that mammograms don't save lives does not reflect this technology. Just ask my friends whose lives have been saved by them.
40
I would be interested to see this article you refer to and to know more about Lissa's "optimal lifestyle." Did she drink alcohol? Eat meat? Consume dairy? How much did she exercise? I don't know any of the answers to these or many other diet and lifestyle related questions. Breast cancer may be cruel, but it is probably not nearly as erratic as many people seem to think. There are concrete things that we can do to greatly reduce the risk. I believe (and I believe the evidence supports, not drinking alcohol) for instance. I adhere to a strictly vegan diet, partly because I believe the evidence shows a significant protective benefit when it comes to cancer. The problem is that most people, including Jane E. Brody, who wrote this article, don't want to give up drinking or otherwise significantly change their diet or lifestyle. Most people don't want to take personal responsibility for their health, or lack thereof. It is easier to believe it is out of our hands, and in the hands of some erratic force, like our genes, or God, or our ethnicity. But that is not the case. To a remarkable degree, we have the power to change our health destiny with the choices we make every day.
1
@Dan Frazier:
If a strict vegan diet works for you, that's great. Vegans/vegetarians usually give up sugar and processed foods, get more exercise, are less likely to smoke and drink, more likely to go to the doctor for preventative care, etc, there is a lot more going on than simply presence/absence of meat. Humans (in general) are adapted to be omnivores, and vegans/vegetarians can still get cancer.
If a strict vegan diet works for you, that's great. Vegans/vegetarians usually give up sugar and processed foods, get more exercise, are less likely to smoke and drink, more likely to go to the doctor for preventative care, etc, there is a lot more going on than simply presence/absence of meat. Humans (in general) are adapted to be omnivores, and vegans/vegetarians can still get cancer.
1
I know that I don't need to echo the many women who have posted before me... but I will anyway. I was diagnosed in 2014 at age 34 after breastfeeding my first child, as a young, thin, healthy runner. A few months after completing chemo and surgery, I ran another marathon and a few more races and half marathons after that. The cancer came back this past December. It's disappointing to have my favorite newspaper say that there are proven ways to "help keep it at bay". This article is why I feel guilty ordering a burger when I go out to eat without wearing my wig... or buying ice cream during chemo when it's the only thing I feel like eating. This is why I dress in my running clothes when I go out, so people don't look at me and think that I caused my cancer by being "unhealthy". While I appreciate a good article about healthy living, this just makes me feel more guilty. We need to be more careful about the words we use when claiming that we know how to "keep it at bay" with "protective living habits"... breast cancer is much more complicated than that.
142
Very sorry you feel guilty, but don't know why the article should have made you feel guilty for getting cancer. I have had two relatively minor forms of cancer, both cured by minor surgery, but I don't feel guilty, and I do want to be able to make choices to reduce the chance of cancer in the future. You and I understand that there are many incremental choices we all make which add up. The occasional burger or ice cream won't tip the balance, but a lifetime of such choices clearly does. Congratulations to those of us who try to make many better choices! And continuing to try to make many more.
4
Exactly. You've said what I have felt since 2003. There is something wrong in our environment and likely our food that has caused the high incidence of BC. Placing guilt on women who have the odd ice cream or glass of wine is wrong.
Janet Mackey
Janet Mackey
7
I agree with previous posters re ACES research and clearly, correlation does not mean causation? This is really important to clarify when reported in a National Newspaper. wat too simplistic in this article!
6
My sister who died of Breast Cancer lived the healthiest of life styles. I on the other hand am over-weight, sedentary and have never ate something because it was good for me. Go figure !
7
Overlooked in the article is any mention of sunlight (solar UVB) and vitamin D in reducing risk and increasing survival. Up until about 2000, breast cancer mortality rates were lowest in the southwestern states, highest in the northeastern states. The reason was that solar UVB doses were highest in the southwest, lowest in the northeast. Since then, differences are much less, probably due to sun avoidance, sunscreen in cosmetics, and treatment. Vitamin D has also been found protective against breast cancer and many other types of cancer. Those with lowest vitamin D (25-hydroxyvitamin ) concentrations are African Americans, who have the lowest concentrations. The optimal concentration is 40-60 ng/mL (100-150 nmol/L), which can be reached with daily sun exposure near noon in the summer or by taking 1000-5000 IU/d vitamin D3. For more information, search pubmed.gov and the vitamin D organizations grassrootshealth.net and vitaminDcouncil.org as well as vitaminDwikie.com
13
Thanks very much for adding the factor of sunlight and vitamin D to factors which help prevent breast cancer, at least in moderation. Very helpful!
2
Not backed up by analysis from the Institutes of Health.
Choose your parents well.
8
I agree with many readers on the content of this article- smug, elitist and nothing new!! We dont need to read an insipid article and how our personal habits affect our health. Maybe you had 5 minutes to produce something the NYT would publish
13
Quite an offensive comment. Jane Brody has been writing on health for decades, giving good advice to thousands of NYT readers. If you find the article of little value to you, that's fine. Many readers would differ. Personally, Ms. Brody's column is one of my favorite pieces, and I look forward to it each Tuesday.
16
I was 47 years old when I was diagnosed with stage 2 breast cancer: A slim, fit, veggie eating mama who was also a non smoker/non drinker. What I didn't know was that starting my menses at an early age (10 years old) and having children later in life ( first child at age 38) were risk factors that trumped all the other beneficial steps that I was doing to keep myself healthy. I was angry at first, feeling that I did all the right things yet I still developed breast cancer. However after going through surgery, chemotherapy and radiation, I realized that being in the best shape of my life was probably what got me through my treatments. I was able to bounce back quite readily & I am now 10 years cancer free! I am still physically active and so happy to be here to raise my children.
31
Sure, sure, it's always about personal responsibility, that great lie of contemporary capitalism. If you don't shoehorn your life into the conventional medical wisdom of the day, it'll only be your own fault if you get cancer. We never seem to discuss wider social and environmental factors - like the shocking concentration of heavy metals found in mother's milk, i.e. in breasts - because then we'd have to take this conversation outside our own bedrooms and hospital rooms and into the chambers of our 'elected representatives'. Who of course are busy tearing down Planned Parenthood, health care in general, and environmental protection.
This is not a personal issue, Jane Brody, and you and the NYT should know better than than publiishing clickbait like this. I'm sure you've seen, as I have, many people leading perfectly health lives and yet getting cancer.
I will acknowledge, however, that there is one way in which not smoking, eating well and exercising does help: if you are fit you can better withstand whatever medical science needs to throw at you to make you well.
This is not a personal issue, Jane Brody, and you and the NYT should know better than than publiishing clickbait like this. I'm sure you've seen, as I have, many people leading perfectly health lives and yet getting cancer.
I will acknowledge, however, that there is one way in which not smoking, eating well and exercising does help: if you are fit you can better withstand whatever medical science needs to throw at you to make you well.
52
Your recommendations are perfectly sensible but you raise false hopes. My mother preferred vegetables to meat, was never overweight, never smoked or drank alcohol, and hardly needed to go to the gym because the work she did was physically hard. She died of breast cancer at 54. The truth is that there's no way to prevent breast cancer because after 75 years of research, scientists are not sure why one woman gets it and another does not, and why one woman dies from it and another does not. To blame it on lifestyle permits politicians crafting health care law to blame the victim.
72
All of the studies cited are correlational/observational. None is experimental. Only experiments allow us to draw conclusions about cause and effect. For instance, maybe all the heavy drinkers also happen to take aspirin to relieve hangovers and it's actually the aspirin that causes breast cancer. Maybe people who don't get regular exercise are too stressed out to find time to exercise and it's really the stress that causes breast cancer, not the lack of exercise.
This is VERY BASIC scientific reasoning and I sure wish science journalists could educate the general public about it. But I guess that doesn't go along with the new puritanism: avoid all the things you take pleasure in and do all the boring, effortful things you'd rather avoid. I'm surprised that no one has found an association between chocolate consumption and breast cancer. Yet.
This is VERY BASIC scientific reasoning and I sure wish science journalists could educate the general public about it. But I guess that doesn't go along with the new puritanism: avoid all the things you take pleasure in and do all the boring, effortful things you'd rather avoid. I'm surprised that no one has found an association between chocolate consumption and breast cancer. Yet.
24
Well said. Breast cancer is so prevalent that a suitable education in prevention ought to start in school, so good habits become ingrained...as opposed to being forced on us by adverse circumstances. This, apart from a periodic thorough physical exam and echography/mammogram/scans as indicated by age/risk, genetic and acquired/physical findings. Moderation in life's offerings seems a predictor for enjoying it to its fullest... and the added years to talk about it.
3
I always wonder if the subjects in these studies that warn us against consuming red meat are eating the typical feedlot beef available in supermarkets, or if they are eating pasture-raised, grass-fed beef. There is a very big difference. (I recognize that most people cannot afford this higher-quality meat, but if it is a factor, it should be studied.)
9
Correlation is not causation.
Take a look at the ACE (Addverse Childhood Events) study, and you will see that cancer rates rise in populations who have experienced early childhood trauma. So do obesity, alcoholism, and smoking.
Maybe these impacts cluster together (alcohol intake, breast cancer) but do not cause one another?
Another way to avoid breast cancer might be not being an abused child...
Take a look at the ACE (Addverse Childhood Events) study, and you will see that cancer rates rise in populations who have experienced early childhood trauma. So do obesity, alcoholism, and smoking.
Maybe these impacts cluster together (alcohol intake, breast cancer) but do not cause one another?
Another way to avoid breast cancer might be not being an abused child...
15
I had breast cancer twice, with no history or risk factors. Different pathology each time. My biggest regret is caving in to male doctors who told me to
"save" my second breast. I requested, and wrote on the op consent, that I want both breasts removed. The surgeon decided to save one. After I recovered from a nosocomial infection (Beta Strep and staph) courtesy of the operating room, I was reluctant to fight to have the second breast removed. I then developed a second breast cancer, Stage 3, 9 years later, which developed in 8 weeks. Stuff happens
"save" my second breast. I requested, and wrote on the op consent, that I want both breasts removed. The surgeon decided to save one. After I recovered from a nosocomial infection (Beta Strep and staph) courtesy of the operating room, I was reluctant to fight to have the second breast removed. I then developed a second breast cancer, Stage 3, 9 years later, which developed in 8 weeks. Stuff happens
9
I find this article so out of touch with the average American woman that it sounds smug and elitist. Who is going to parent my children and attend my 40+ hour/week job while I am exercising and cooking all these plant-based meals from scratch? America is doomed if this is what it takes to be healthy.
Also, please acknowledge heritability of breast cancer which probably accounts for more than 50% of risk.
Also, please acknowledge heritability of breast cancer which probably accounts for more than 50% of risk.
23
Actually, only about 10% of breast cancer cases come from those who have had breast cancer in their families.
8
I absolutely despise articles like this, where the 18 year cancer-free survivor self-congratulates herself because she's done all the right things, and she's cancer free, and thereby helps to perpetuate the awful notion that cancer is all under your control. It's not.
May the author continue to be cancer free, and if she does, the largest reason will be because her initial cancer was slow growing, and had less chances to multiply before being taken out: more chances to multiply mean more chance of little cells breaking off and traveling elsewhere in the body. The woman on her right will, despite her lifestyle choices, also be cancer free, but for the woman on her left, whose cancer had already microscopically metastasized before the primary site was found, will not remain cancer free.
May the author continue to be cancer free, and if she does, the largest reason will be because her initial cancer was slow growing, and had less chances to multiply before being taken out: more chances to multiply mean more chance of little cells breaking off and traveling elsewhere in the body. The woman on her right will, despite her lifestyle choices, also be cancer free, but for the woman on her left, whose cancer had already microscopically metastasized before the primary site was found, will not remain cancer free.
54
Let's not forget genetics. This type of article makes me feel badly, like I did something wrong. I was diagnosed with breast cancer after years of making healthy and good choices. I won't lower myself to list them. Should I have eaten one more vegetable per week? Oh please... Can you please write articles that promote health in general and leave us breast cancer survivors alone? Or promote our survival and how we've managed and how when you get the news - breast cancer diagnosis - the last thing you want to think about is fault or why you didn't take steps to lower your risk.
20
Veggies save. It is written again and again. Cheaper than meat, cheaper than packaged foods, cheaper than even a can of soda (one apple certainly costs less), vegetables save lives. Yet still meat, dairy and junk food reign. And now that the Affordable Care Act is being ravaged, the members of the Third Estate (an estate that consists of the non-millionaire/no-billionaire club or 98% of Americans) better eat vegetables. Since mammograms and other preventive screening programs will be a thing of the past, our only salvation lies in veggies.
So, women of the world unite and eat your vegetables. The current state of government doesn't really care about our breast health, especially now that the white man's burden has been lightened by shifting government subsidies to rich men at the expense of the middle and working folk, women and minorities.
And change those bumper stickers. I know that long-haired gentle soul saves but before heaven, only veggies save.
So, women of the world unite and eat your vegetables. The current state of government doesn't really care about our breast health, especially now that the white man's burden has been lightened by shifting government subsidies to rich men at the expense of the middle and working folk, women and minorities.
And change those bumper stickers. I know that long-haired gentle soul saves but before heaven, only veggies save.
19
@Liz:
Humans are adapted to be omnivores, meat + veggies. (Or fish + veggies.) Meat/fish/shellfish/eggs are whole, nutrient dense foods which humans have eaten since forever.
Humans are adapted to be omnivores, meat + veggies. (Or fish + veggies.) Meat/fish/shellfish/eggs are whole, nutrient dense foods which humans have eaten since forever.
12
I think these "preventive" measures help women feel in control but are overstated and don't definitively prevent cancer or a recurrence. A friend recently passed due to a recurrence of ovarian cancer. She followed a strict vegan diet for 10 years, had a personal trainer, ran every day. No one in her family had ovarian cancer and genetic testing was negative. She felt her diet and exercise routine did nothing to prevent cancer. Early screening is more important. Assuming early detection is possible....ovarian cancer symptoms are hard to catch. I also ask myself ..did my friend not see those symptoms because she led a healthy lifestyle and thought she'd never get cancer. This article Is too simplistic.
12
Thanks for this article on a subject of life or death importance.
See NIH List of Known Carcinogens at
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/listed_substances_508.pdf
See NIH List of Known Carcinogens at
https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/listed_substances_508.pdf
9
According to City of Hope, studies are showing that women survivors who eat soy are doing better long term than those who don't. I believe the soy equation and research has traveled further than this article mentions.
4
Can you please provide a link to the City of Hope studies showing survivors who eat soy have lower reoccurrence rates? Thank you.
1
I would like this article to have the quantitative reduction in risk. ie The risks of getting breast cancer is x number of women/1000. it is reduced to x/1000 by: and list for each of the behaviors promoted as risk reducers.
11
I think that fewer people would find this article offensive if Ms. Brody acknowledged that:
1. Everyone knows (or think they know) all or most of what she says already. There is nothing surprising here.
2. It is hard, hard, hard for many people to maintain the lifestyle she describes. Ms. Brody is pretty smug in her tone. Maybe it is easy for her. Economics matter. Have you tried working 3 minimum wage jobs and taking a nice brisk walk through your urban neighborhood when you are done for the day? Who is watching your kid? Have you tried maintaining a semi-vegetarian lifestyle with little money and no time?
Economics isn't all that matters. Unhealthy food is marketed and distributed constantly. In the course of a week, my son's classroom and childcare might give out 2-3 cupcakes heaped with frosting for birthdays or holidays. Every time he behaves well in school or even in a grocery story he is offered a lollipop. Merchandising related wrappers on foods tempt as much as the actual food. For adults it is the same, although we think ourselves less susceptible. We eat or drink thinking, somewhere under the surface, that it will change our lives for the better, that we will become younger, more successful, more elegant. We "know" that this isn't true, but that knowledge doesn't always help.
A little humor and understanding of humanity, some acknowledgement of our frailties, would take Jane Brody a long way.
1. Everyone knows (or think they know) all or most of what she says already. There is nothing surprising here.
2. It is hard, hard, hard for many people to maintain the lifestyle she describes. Ms. Brody is pretty smug in her tone. Maybe it is easy for her. Economics matter. Have you tried working 3 minimum wage jobs and taking a nice brisk walk through your urban neighborhood when you are done for the day? Who is watching your kid? Have you tried maintaining a semi-vegetarian lifestyle with little money and no time?
Economics isn't all that matters. Unhealthy food is marketed and distributed constantly. In the course of a week, my son's classroom and childcare might give out 2-3 cupcakes heaped with frosting for birthdays or holidays. Every time he behaves well in school or even in a grocery story he is offered a lollipop. Merchandising related wrappers on foods tempt as much as the actual food. For adults it is the same, although we think ourselves less susceptible. We eat or drink thinking, somewhere under the surface, that it will change our lives for the better, that we will become younger, more successful, more elegant. We "know" that this isn't true, but that knowledge doesn't always help.
A little humor and understanding of humanity, some acknowledgement of our frailties, would take Jane Brody a long way.
39
I'm guessing very few people find this article offensive in any way. It's a restatement of important basic principles, as we know them now, for promoting health, from a woman who has experienced this illness firsthand. You should try them out - might help with the anger and hostility thing.
4
I am a cancer survivor, who has been reading -- and liking -- Jane Brody's articles for years -- and I felt terribly uncomfortable reading this one. Yes, we should all eat right, exercise, stop smoking, drink only in moderation. But guess what? Most women who get breast cancer are NOT in the "risk" category. Articles like this make cancer victims feel somewhat responsible for their cancer --and, as my experience confirms, also leads to others (friends and family) wondering what the cancer patient did to cause her cancer.
Let's all eat right and exercise and quit smoking -- just because we will feel better -- but we STILL may get cancer!
Let's all eat right and exercise and quit smoking -- just because we will feel better -- but we STILL may get cancer!
12
Many readers are skeptical about the suggestions this article states because they have gotten cancer even though they have led the lifestyle recommended. But there are other factors not mentioned: environmental hazards that include cleaning products in our homes, chemicals in our furniture, and pesticides in our yards and food. Ex.: A couple who lives next door to me has lung cancer and prostrate cancer. She cannot understand why she has lung cancer when she never smoked. And yet, they spray their yard thoroughly including trees with mosquito insecticide. They constantly spray their yard with weed killers as well. And I'm sure the cleaning products in their home are not any better in the fumes they expel and the chemicals absorbed through the skin. When I buy fruits and vegetables I always make sure I wash them thoroughly.
20
So they are to blame?! This describes about 90 percent of homeowners.
1
It looks like you missed breastfeeding. The CDC features it on their list of cardinal preventative measures (https://www.cdc.gov/cancer/breast/basic_info/prevention.htm) for women who have the opportunity. Breast cancer risk goes down steadily the longer a woman is breastfeeding, with one WHO stat I've seen placing risk near zero for women who breastfeed for 7 or more years (a quick search didnt find that statistic, sorry!). It also supports management of another key risk factor, obesity and overweight, as breastfeeding exclusively burns up to 500 calories a day.
18
Thanks for your excellent addition to the list of ways of trying to prevent breast cancer, and also promoting breast-feeding, which so benefits our children!
I breastfeed my children - -and I, too, thought that would keep me from getting breast cancer. I ate right, exercised, never smoked, drink only on occasion.
I got breast cancer -- twice. I was so sure I would never have it! Because I breast fed.
I got breast cancer -- twice. I was so sure I would never have it! Because I breast fed.
4
I breastfed my 2 children each for over a year and still got breast cancer. I am an older mom, started at 34, and then it does not supposedly protect you. You have to have lots of children very young and breastfeed them all in order for that kind of protection. So, this is for most women these days not possible.
3
Your article omits a large perhaps the largest source of fuel for hormonal cancers. Urging women to reduce dairy fat could positively impact ER/PR cancers.
Harvard Study Links Dairy Product Consumption to Cancer https://alignlife.com/articles/breast-cancer/harvard_study_links_dairy_p... via @
Harvard Study Links Dairy Product Consumption to Cancer https://alignlife.com/articles/breast-cancer/harvard_study_links_dairy_p... via @
6
Like many i am surprised by the lack of scientific method in this piece. The sentence ever Brody mentions her drinking habits belongs to a late night bar talk, not a leading newspaper.
I am surprised also that neither the article not the comments mention the risk of deodorants. Especially those with metallic nanoparticles.
I am surprised also that neither the article not the comments mention the risk of deodorants. Especially those with metallic nanoparticles.
6
None of the bad habits apply to me and I was diagnosed with breast cancer at the age of 45. I know many other women who live similarly healthy lifestyles that are surprised when they receive the diagnosis. A cynic might say that all my good habits aren't worth the time and energy. My healthy habits help me feel good on a daily basis which is why I keep them.
17
Ugh! Come on, NYT. The two biggest risks for developing breast cancer are being female and growing older. Can't control those. The 1 in 8 statistic is widely misunderstood as well. For every 8 women living to age 85, one will have had breast cancer in her lifetime. Seven will not.
Lots of people who follow all the rules still get breast cancer. Likewise, lots of people who don't never do. About 40,000 people die in this country alone of breast cancer every year, even those who do everything "right." Why? We have no idea. Let's focus on that.
Articles like this lead a person with no experience with breast cancer to believe someone who does get breast cancer likely caused it by making poor decisions. At this time in our healthcare debate, that is simply irresponsible.
I know that the reality of the disease is unpredictable and scary. Let's focus on fixing that, not blaming cancer patients.
Lots of people who follow all the rules still get breast cancer. Likewise, lots of people who don't never do. About 40,000 people die in this country alone of breast cancer every year, even those who do everything "right." Why? We have no idea. Let's focus on that.
Articles like this lead a person with no experience with breast cancer to believe someone who does get breast cancer likely caused it by making poor decisions. At this time in our healthcare debate, that is simply irresponsible.
I know that the reality of the disease is unpredictable and scary. Let's focus on fixing that, not blaming cancer patients.
90
Well said. Bravo.
7
Two points your readers should understand: (1) although excess weight is a risk factor for post-menopausal breast cancer, leanness is associated with increased pre-menopausal breast cancer risk (which is why Dr Willet cited here, specifiies that avoidance of weight gain in "adult life" is important); (2) there is increasing evidence that breast cancer risk for Asian women residing in the US -- American born or who have immigrated to the US -- has been underestimated. Overarching statements such as "Asian women ... have one of the lowest rates of breast cancer" is a egregious oversimplification. Asian women residing in the US do not have one of the lowest rates of breast cancer!
8
I believe that the research relates to diet, not to ethnicity. When Asian women move from Asia to the USA, they often change their diets.
please be sure that your artwork is representative of the real physical diversity and beauty of women, and not 8-10 cookie cutter models, with a septuagenarian thrown in for good measure.
12
Tomatoes tomatoes tomatoes - even and esp. tomato paste! http://nfcr.org/2017/01/26/tasty-tomatoes-anti-cancer-attributes-healthy...
A breast cancer doctor I know urges women to eat more tomatoes- the studies show cooked tomatoes can be the best for lycopene absorption = ie tomato paste.
A breast cancer doctor I know urges women to eat more tomatoes- the studies show cooked tomatoes can be the best for lycopene absorption = ie tomato paste.
1
But then there's the risk that the linings of most brands of canned tomatoes may cause...
It's complicated.
It's complicated.
3
It is during female puberty that breast cells are differentiating and replicating most; And it is during that period girls may ingest supplemental iron that is excessive for them but helpful to the first neoplatic mutation.
2
My wife has had a perfect score on this list of do's and don't's for years, and I mean perfect and beyond!! She also got breast cancer. The list here is, of course, useful, but it fails to mention many other factors, particularly the large number of environmental toxins people encounter in their lives from pre-birth on. We need more attention paid to these factors that are often beyond individualistic arguments of personal control.
26
You can do everything right and still get breast cancer. And this is the way it is, but with the new health care bill, poor health and disease are blamed on the individual. If one is unlucky enough to contract a disease, you are basically on a death panel because insurance will be too expensive. Trump and Ryan and ait right Wealthcare is abhorant.
22
I am always curious about individuals who say they did everything right yet they still got cancer. One can well understand why they are angry, but not why they tell others not to follow the good advice they did.
Epidemiologist study populations, not individuals. They find a 10 fold or greater difference in the incidence of different cancers in different countries. They study the reasons why and report them. Individuals can not possibly see what is happening on a large scale even within their own country. So telling other people the advice is wrong, is really unreasonable.
Anecdotes are not data.
Epidemiologist study populations, not individuals. They find a 10 fold or greater difference in the incidence of different cancers in different countries. They study the reasons why and report them. Individuals can not possibly see what is happening on a large scale even within their own country. So telling other people the advice is wrong, is really unreasonable.
Anecdotes are not data.
11
That is not what we are saying. Yes. We all need to eat right, exercise, stop smoking and drink only in moderation -- because we will feel better.
I had breast cancer twice, and, like so many posters, I thought I was living a healthy lifestyle. Although caring, my family and friends all wondered what I had done "wrong" to get breast cancer. Don't you know? It says right here in the NYTimes, if you eat right and exercise, your chances of getting cancer is lowered.
And now we have health care POLICY that implies that if someone is sick, it's because that sick person did something wrong -- so why should people who live right have to pay for them?
I had breast cancer twice, and, like so many posters, I thought I was living a healthy lifestyle. Although caring, my family and friends all wondered what I had done "wrong" to get breast cancer. Don't you know? It says right here in the NYTimes, if you eat right and exercise, your chances of getting cancer is lowered.
And now we have health care POLICY that implies that if someone is sick, it's because that sick person did something wrong -- so why should people who live right have to pay for them?
7
I would say that we'd like women to not have a false sense of comfort because they are living a healthy life. I'm not suggesting that because I got stage 4 breast cancer without ever smoking or drinking that you should smoke and drink all you want :)
Thank you, thank you for your comment, which should comfort those who feel victimized by Jane Brody's excellent article, and help all of us understand the laws of large numbers.
1
Don't you think it's the pesticides in food? Personally, when I get diagnosed with cancer, I'm going to blame it on the pesticides in wine.
3
This article is so simplified and so incomplete. Although doing all the things (or not doing) what the author suggests does help maintain good health, breast cancer is so much more complex than that. Hormone replacement therapy is a HUGE factor in breast cancer. Doctors that prescribe estrogen/progestin therapy are writing a death sentence. There are countless environmental factors that cause breast cancer too, such as Insecticides - how many women use Round-Up thinking it is safe? There are so many toxins around us that upset our delicate hormonal balance - which is a huge factor in breast cancer. I would suggest not only what the author suggests, but also eat organic foods as much as possible - especially dairy products. Rid your house of all toxins. And if your hormones are out of balance go the natural route - no artificial hormones. There is loads of information out there on how to balance your hormones naturally.
11
I myself was one of those healthy women who was diagnosed in 2014 at age 44 with stage 2 breast cancer. I was a runner and ate a diet that Ms. Brody describes in this article all my life. According to my physician I was in perfect health, except for the cancer. Ms. Brody forgot to mention that being overweight is only a risk factor for breast cancer after menopause. Before menopause it is actually slightly protective to be a little overweight. Many women I know who were diagnosed at a young age like myself are skinny and active. I have no genetic factors, I was tested.
I think that we can't rule out the impact of our environment which contains many endocrine disrupters in water, plastics, cosmetics and so on. It is hard to avoid contact with them all our lives and they do influence our hormonal balance, probably causing many of the hormonal cancers such as breast cancer.
I think that we can't rule out the impact of our environment which contains many endocrine disrupters in water, plastics, cosmetics and so on. It is hard to avoid contact with them all our lives and they do influence our hormonal balance, probably causing many of the hormonal cancers such as breast cancer.
21
Some pediatric CA and much mid-life BC might correlate with gross Fe supplemental intake. More is not better on this element. Small children and most women can be overdosed with one size fits all over the counter supplements. Rapidly reproducing cells are normally restricted by limited iron availability from food so the evolved immune systems can cope. Bacteria in the blood and neoplasms anywhere can run away provided well intended pharmaceutical Fe not specifically ordered by your personal M.D. My unqualified opinion for your consideration.
2
I was treated for late 1st stage breast cancer 28 years ago I stopped smoking just before my lumpectomy and haven't smoked since. I also watch my diet and walk daily. So far, so good.
9
To those who think that Jane Brody is blaming the victim, I notice an important word in her first paragraph: may. No guarantees.
1
How come they didn't include full, round, heavy type of women body in the illustration ?
11
I noticed that too. Then I read the article where (surprise!!) she quoted a male doctor, who said LOSE WEIGHT especially the kind around your middle; belly fat is metabolically active and produces estrogens.
So, the (in my experience anyway) universal, inevitable, genetically programmed in 90% of the population, matronly spread of post-menopause is your mortal enemy and you have to fight it because IT WILL KILL YOU unless you figure out a way to magically get rid of it.
Thanks a lot; I guess I'm doomed.
Fed up with this kind of sanctimonious advice, which will probably be reversed in another 20 years (I should live so long) anyway. Notice the "heart-healthy diet" low in protein and fat and full of whole grains? That's the one that they now think has made so many Americans obese, because the food industry yanked the fat from processed foods and replaced it with carbs.
I'm gonna live my life and ignore all this stuff. I weigh 30 lbs more than I did on my wedding day, and it's all around my middle because that's where Nature put it. I eat what I choose and I walk my dog and to hell with the lot of them.
So, the (in my experience anyway) universal, inevitable, genetically programmed in 90% of the population, matronly spread of post-menopause is your mortal enemy and you have to fight it because IT WILL KILL YOU unless you figure out a way to magically get rid of it.
Thanks a lot; I guess I'm doomed.
Fed up with this kind of sanctimonious advice, which will probably be reversed in another 20 years (I should live so long) anyway. Notice the "heart-healthy diet" low in protein and fat and full of whole grains? That's the one that they now think has made so many Americans obese, because the food industry yanked the fat from processed foods and replaced it with carbs.
I'm gonna live my life and ignore all this stuff. I weigh 30 lbs more than I did on my wedding day, and it's all around my middle because that's where Nature put it. I eat what I choose and I walk my dog and to hell with the lot of them.
12
Thank you!
5
I read your article and wanted to scream. I was diagnosed with Inflammatory Breast Cancer stage 3 last June. I hardly drank liquor, was walking 2.5 miles a day, and followed a decent diet. With IBC, a mammogram doesn't pick it up so forget about early detection. Breast cancer is not prejudice. So whether you are athlete or not, skinny or fat, vegan or red meat eater, cancer has no boundaries.
18
I couldn't have been healthier when I was diagnosed with breast cancer 10 years ago. I was at a perfect weight, and had been eating right for decades. I never smoked. I was an exercise bandit. I ate red meat maybe once a month.
So much of this is speculative.
I was a DES baby which likely had a part in it; AND early in my career, as a scientist, I worked with tritiated thymidine, which may or may not have been a contributing factor.
We can be warned; admonished, guided. We can do ALL the RIGHT THINGS and still "get" it. If you're going to get it, there's little to be done about it.
Plus, I grew up in NYC -- so who knows what environmental factors played a role.
We can't prevent it. We're all hoping for a cure.
So much of this is speculative.
I was a DES baby which likely had a part in it; AND early in my career, as a scientist, I worked with tritiated thymidine, which may or may not have been a contributing factor.
We can be warned; admonished, guided. We can do ALL the RIGHT THINGS and still "get" it. If you're going to get it, there's little to be done about it.
Plus, I grew up in NYC -- so who knows what environmental factors played a role.
We can't prevent it. We're all hoping for a cure.
14
Absolutely no mention of environmental factors, including pesticides on foods and chemicals in personal care products. The widespread use of these toxins has absolutely contributed to the rise in many maladies, including ASDs, asthma, allergies, and, yes, cancer. Aluminum in anti-perspirant alone is an obvious culprit.
12
Well said!
1
Interestingly none of the women I know who developed breast cancer smoked, drank or had mothers who did. They had healthy diets and were active when younger. Statistics are useful I guess but in reality life is just plain unpredictable.
9
Actually the jury is in on soy foods - they contain phytoestrogens and can mimic natural hormones and increase your potential for breast cancer. My oncologist advised me to limit soy as part of preventing a recurrence of breast cancer.
And I followed all of these guidelines yet had breast cancer anyway.
And I followed all of these guidelines yet had breast cancer anyway.
6
Given the doubling time of the average cancer cell in an unrestricted growth environment a breast cancer clinical at age thirty-five probably started during puberty. The first cells establishing a micro-colony. It is likely many pubescent girls ingested pharmaceutical iron at rates exceeding their uptake and elimination rates. Does anyone know? Vitamin makers now provide choice but you can still take all you want. More to be on the safe side is intuitive but can be wrong regarding iron.
1
I'm a retire physician and cancer researcher, who continues to read medical science. Sadly, research has never looked at the forest for the trees. Our over-active stress response is the primary cause of the cancer epidemic in Western urban populations. High stress hormone levels suppress our immune systems, which would otherwise eliminate early cancers. Traditional living hunter-gatherer clans NEVER have a single case of breast or any other cancer. Read Stefansson, "CANCER: A Disease of Civilization?", 1960. Retained body heat is a major instigator of cancerous mutations in ductal stem cells, a result of embryonic dedifferentiation. Women should wear only cotton bras that allow heat loss through sweat evaporation, unlike all the synthetic and mostly size enhancing modern bras that over heat breast tissue, including with exercise. The "healthcare" industry does not want to cure cancer, God forbid prevent it, as it is a cash cow for all invloved. Your boilerplate article is a waste of electrons.
9
I dare say life in the wild was very high stress, traumatic, and violent. Oncologists once treated cancer associated anemia with iron. Not so much now after finding that decreased survival time. Past practice could have the public out with pitch forks and torches but collective convention is not fair to fault, unless newer knowledge is suppressed, obscured, or ignored. Wild monsters in the dark woods, the deep grass,and the cave crevices prey on is no more - just this one last monster - cancer - so so slowly yielding. All truth help free us from it at last. Please.
There's nothing new in this article.
If only shooting the message prevented breast cancer, many of you ladies would be set.
8
My grandmother had BC. My mother died of BC. My older sister was diagnosed with BC in 2002. I was diagnosed in 1995 at the age of 29. I had a lumpectomy, with chemo and radiation and they removed the Norplant from my arm. I tested positive for the hormone receptor. I had a recurrence 6 years later so had a mastectomy. I work out, I eat a mostly plant based diet , I drink alcohol and I keep my sense of humor about my one real breast and the ugly twin. I know there is no silver bullet but all of this information matters. And while it is incredibly frustrating that there is not a cure...any time now...helloooo...I will do my research and listen to what helps others. The worst that can happen with changing bad habits is we may feel better. What is wrong with that?
4
No mention of hormone replacement. Just as my mother had after her hysterectomy, I started taking hormone replacement at age 50. I use estrodial and testosterone.
I did this because severe osteoporosis is common in my family - both grandmothers and some aunts - but cancer is not. My mother never broke a bone.
Twenty years later I'm strong and fit with no shrinkage in height. I get a mammogram every othe year. I don't smoke, drink a few ounces of wine each day and exercise.
I know the hormones raise my risk of breast cancer, but this still seems like a better choice for me. The risks of hormone replacement are known. Those for long term use of the anti-osteoporosis drugs are not.
I did this because severe osteoporosis is common in my family - both grandmothers and some aunts - but cancer is not. My mother never broke a bone.
Twenty years later I'm strong and fit with no shrinkage in height. I get a mammogram every othe year. I don't smoke, drink a few ounces of wine each day and exercise.
I know the hormones raise my risk of breast cancer, but this still seems like a better choice for me. The risks of hormone replacement are known. Those for long term use of the anti-osteoporosis drugs are not.
15
I started on the same combo, but stopped after 5 yrs - because at the time they were considered dangerous potential carcinogens (and you cannot restart without elevating the risk of heart problems, so far as is known) What these hormones actually do is stimulate cell production --which is terrific- especially if you are aging - EXCEPT if you harbor or develop cancer cells. ( I think I have that right). I would have stayed on the small dose of estradiol had I understood that - but the data available changes. So far the loss of bone has been slow...
I hope this article sits right next the one about how the overwhelming majority of weight loss diets fail.
37
it's not the failure of the diets, but the lack of commitment of those who attempt them. If people (especially school-age children) were made more aware of the very negative health effects of excess weight, dieting would surely be unnecessary.
1
The diets are poorly designed and nutritionally deficient. Just recipes for failure. A good diet must be nutritionally sound and at least as filling and good-tasting as the junk it proposes to replace.
4
Although the suggestions for minimizing the risk of breast cancer are certainly good for general health, I'm sceptical about their value for reducing the risk of breast cancer. Of the four friends of mine whose breast cancer has been most serious, none is a serious drinker; none has ever smoked; all are physically active; and two have always been skinny. However, all four have closer relatives in their nuclear families who have had various kinds of cancer. -- Can the habits suggested in this article really defeat a genetic predisposition? I wonder.
86
Anecdotal evidence. The article describes risk factors. That does not mean that every woman who gets breast cancer must "meet certain criteria" to get the disease. Science education is badly needed in this country.
2
Dear Ms. Brody, I find it baffling that people think your article is about victim shaming! Everyone wants to believe that you can be fat and fit, that drinking is good for you, that what you eat and how you feel are not related, and that illness is just bad luck. Also, I can’t believe the folly of fried chicken restaurants and doughnut companies selling boxes of these toxic foods with pink ribbons on them for breast cancer awareness month. This is where people’s outrage should be, not railing against this article, which is factual and straight forward. True, cancer is from many things, but the biggest cause is what we are putting in our mouths. And as geneticists like to say, heredity loads the gun and lifestyle pulls the trigger. Thank you for your excellent article.
65
Re -"heredity loads the gun and lifestyle pulls the trigger"
Sure we should all try to follow the advice in the article, but from what I've seen too may times, heredity loads the gun and this awful disease pulls the trigger.
Sure we should all try to follow the advice in the article, but from what I've seen too may times, heredity loads the gun and this awful disease pulls the trigger.
No. The biggest cause is not what we put in our mouths. Far and away the two biggest risk factors are being female and growing older. I suspect the reason you don't see this article as blaming the victim is because you've already accepted that message.
8
Thank you! I have also been astonished at the defensive reactions, and accusations that Jane Brody is using a "snarky" tone. Thank you, Jane Brody, for your helpful column which in no way blamed the victims of breast cancer.
2
Jane I agree with everything you said. I have exercised, not smoked, moderate drinker, eat fresh foods with lots of fruits of vegetables, few saturated fats and am not overweight. And I got breast cancer - so how does that square with your article which is accurate but bizarrely simplistic.
105
Good Morning,
My understanding of the information in the article is that certain life style habits may reduce the risk of BC but may not prevent it entirely. I think that is obvious. There is no cure...yet, but these life style habits make sense to me. It also helps to know that we may not be able to prevent BC, we can make some changes to help prevent it...which is a psychological gain as well.
My understanding of the information in the article is that certain life style habits may reduce the risk of BC but may not prevent it entirely. I think that is obvious. There is no cure...yet, but these life style habits make sense to me. It also helps to know that we may not be able to prevent BC, we can make some changes to help prevent it...which is a psychological gain as well.
These suggestions are fine for overall health but they won't prevent breast cancer. Ms Brody's snarky tone of superiority is off putting. Too much victim blaming couched in supposed medical wisdom.
111
@Susan: Perfectly said, and, unfortunately, is typical of Ms. Brody: "snarky tone of superiority is off putting." (As another commenter pointed out, why mention her own alcohol intake? Also typical.) It's really too bad, because she is - or was - capable of writing about topics which are often neglected. And it's time for her to include more than the usual mainstream unquestioning approach, and to avoid placing most, if not all, of the responsibility on patients and more on where it belongs: corporations of all sorts who are poisoning us, and a government which allows them to.
1
I am working on following many of the steps - losing weight, exercising, diet, etc., in hopes that a better physical condition would at least improve my chance for survival should I get sick.
16
good luck. it didn't help those readers (including myself) who did just that.
2
How is this article different from every other article the Times runs telling us to 1) quit smoking or don't start 2) lose weight or don't gain it 3) eat right 4) don't drink (much) 5) exercise?
Has the Times ever investigated how many people change their behavior as a result of these articles?
Has the Times ever investigated how many people change their behavior as a result of these articles?
31
they dont really care if people get healthier, they care about providing material that people want to read.
Yeah, yeah, yeah. I was an always slim 50'year old who never smoked or drank and always ate my veggies. No family history or genetic anomaly either. I still was afflicted with invasive breast cancer which thankfully was successfully treated. I hate articles like these - they purport to provide some sure fire roadmap for avoiding cancer - and in the process, blame victims. Enough!
304
Me, too! I am still fuming at these kinds of articles after having breast cancer eight years ago. I did everything "right", diet, exercise, not smoking or drinking, and, which Ms. Brody did not mention, refusing to take hormones when I reached menopause. Breast cancer is mostly genetic, I am convinced, but these lifestyle habits will no doubt make me feel better and be healthier in the long run. Just don't insult me by telling me they will keep me from getting breast cancer!
8
I live in a small town of 2000 and have for the last 43 years. Over 27 years ago, two older women just down the block, and one woman across the street all got breast cancer, then over the course of a few years more four others, one older and three younger. because I knew all of them, except one, I charted everything I knew about them. The older ones all had never smoked or drank any alcohol but had hormone replacement therapy. The younger ones except one had all been on the birth control pill. One of the younger ones had smoke and drank moderately. From my reading years earlier, in an article when they tried out the birth control pill in Puerto Rico on young women, before it was brought into the US market, there was a moderate percentage who got cancer. One of the older ones who had been a nurse, admitted as much that her hormone replacement therapy had caused her cancer. All of the older ones lived a very long time, however out of their younger ones around the age of 40, and a little older, and one under 40, 4 died within less 2- 3 years. Having had over a dozen doctors in our family over three generations, I believe that for many women it is the hormones working on a particular genetic component. Because this is a strong Mennonite Community, 5 were born Mennonites, the other two non affiliated religion. It is easier in communities to do observational studies where you personally know the history of those you are studying.
13
There is absolutely no way to *know* whether a particular factor caused a person's illness, even if you think you know. Twenty percent of people with lung cancer never smoked.
26
I was diagnosed with type 2 Diabetes and put on Metformin on June 26th, 2016. I started the ADA diet and followed it 100% for a few weeks and could not get my blood sugar to go below 140. Finally I began to panic and called my doctor, he told me to get used to it. He said I would be on metformin my whole life and eventually insulin. At that point i knew something wasn't right and began to do lots of research. Then I found Lisa’s diabetes story http://mydiabetesday.com/i-finally-reversed-my-diabetes/ I read that article from end to end because everything the writer was saying made absolute sense. I started the diet that day and the next morning my blood sugar was down to 100 and now i have a fasting blood sugar between Mid 70's and the 80's. My doctor took me off the metformin after just three week of being on this lifestyle change. I have lost over 30 pounds and 6+ inches around my waist in a month. The truth is we can get off the drugs and help myself by trying natural methods
16
It's one of those "we won't tell you, you have to buy the book" tricks that totally annoy me such that I refuse to take the bait. If it is really a helpful technique, give us a clue-- share it.
1
Ms Brody need to stop presenting what is clearly her personal opinion as medical fact. Not all the cited articles are correctly interpreted and I have to question if they are used in intentionally misleading way to promote her own point of view. This column might be better presented as an op-ed instead of a piece of health reporting.
53
Not sure why your opinion counts more; everything she writes has been supported by the medical literature.
As a breast cancer survivor, I find these kind of articles offensive. They are not reassuring, rather often make women feel guilty if they cannot maintain this all-perfect life style. Eat right, don't smoke, don't drink, get exercise is not new information and it is apparent to me that cancer is bad luck as much as anything. Please spare us your platitudes and piety.
215
That's not piety thats common sense
9
There is very little that’s new in Ms. Brody’s columns these days--it’s the sort of thing you used to read in “women’s” magazines at the doctor’s office, when they still had magazines at the doctor’s office! She uses data from observational studies, which are pracically useless, although she never mentions this.
13
Totally agree with you. The truth is that lots of people follow these rules but still develop and die from cancer. And lots of people who don't follow these rules don't. Let's focus on the big factors, not on these side shows.
6
This advice is best directed at younger women. Once you reach middle age after a lifetime of drinking and eating all the "wrong" things, it's far too late to make much difference in your overall risk. The damage has been done. Also it's much, much harder to lose weight in middle age. (At age 50, I can attest this, sigh!)
13
Agreed, it is much, much harder to lose weight in middle age, but don't give up. I (age 62) just tried a new program at our YMCA "Weigh to Change"... for the first six weeks of a 10 week program I did intensive (for me) exercise 5 days a week, counted a reduced calorie diet every day, had group support and lost.... 1.5 pounds. Very discouraging... BUT, I had lost inches, AND... the nutritionist tweaked the protein I consumed, and I kept at the exercises and then the weight started to tumble off. A combination of the right mix of foods, continuing the exercise, and my body deciding to react. Not sure what your perfect mix might be for you, but its worth trying new combinations from knowledgeable professionals. Good luck to you!
15
Keto diet. In one week I have lost seven pounds already. No carbs, healthy fats. It blasts the weight off.
In regards to this article, I don't believe much of it. Fats are being found to be healthy especially coconut oil which is being found beneficial for health and weight loss. Wine has been found in moderation to help those with prediabetes and diabetes..
The best thing women can do is to remove ALL sugars from their diet.
In regards to this article, I don't believe much of it. Fats are being found to be healthy especially coconut oil which is being found beneficial for health and weight loss. Wine has been found in moderation to help those with prediabetes and diabetes..
The best thing women can do is to remove ALL sugars from their diet.
6
I, too, was diagnosed with breast cancer, mine was in 2009. It was stage 2 aggressive, invasive triple negative breast cancer. Yet here I am.
It's my understanding that dairy's IGF1, in addition to the extra estrogen encourage the growth of cancer. Also, sugar, alcohol (the sugar in it), and animal protein (not plant protein) are all substances that support the growth of cancer. In addition, I understand soy is very beneficial and in studies has demonstrated that it reduces the chances of breast cancer recurrence.
Michael Greger, M.D., John Robbins, and Joel Fuhrman M.D., are among a whole list of food authorities who advise this.
Of course it is ok to discount all of this, but not if you set yourself up to be an advisor for other people whose lives and health may hang in the balance.
Jacqui Ward
It's my understanding that dairy's IGF1, in addition to the extra estrogen encourage the growth of cancer. Also, sugar, alcohol (the sugar in it), and animal protein (not plant protein) are all substances that support the growth of cancer. In addition, I understand soy is very beneficial and in studies has demonstrated that it reduces the chances of breast cancer recurrence.
Michael Greger, M.D., John Robbins, and Joel Fuhrman M.D., are among a whole list of food authorities who advise this.
Of course it is ok to discount all of this, but not if you set yourself up to be an advisor for other people whose lives and health may hang in the balance.
Jacqui Ward
8
@JMWard:
Animal protein has never been demonstrated to cause cancer. Vegans and vegetarians still get cancer. Processed meats are associated with slightly higher rates of some cancers in observational studies based on self-reported food surveys. Greger and Fuhrman are vegan advocates, they recommend a low fat, low protein, all starch diet for everyone. If that diet sounds successful or nourishing to you, then knock yourself out.
Animal protein has never been demonstrated to cause cancer. Vegans and vegetarians still get cancer. Processed meats are associated with slightly higher rates of some cancers in observational studies based on self-reported food surveys. Greger and Fuhrman are vegan advocates, they recommend a low fat, low protein, all starch diet for everyone. If that diet sounds successful or nourishing to you, then knock yourself out.
17
The author doesn't mention cancer risks associated with use of hormonal contraception and the link between abortion and breast cancer. These have not been definitively established but this may be due to the controversial nature of the topics involved. Avoiding the use of hormonal contraception and opting for natural methods of fertility awareness should be given much, much greater attention for their potential to improve women's health.
1
No conclusive link was ever found between breast cancer and abortion. That is pure myth.
80
Once and for all, there is NO link between abortion and breast cancer.
24
There is no connection between abortion and cancer. None whatsoever.
6
I spent my early childhood in post-war West Germany. We moved to Canada when I was 9, my sisters were 11, 7, and 3. Three of us have had breast cancer; the most unfortunate among us who has not been diagnosed with BC is stricken with MS. We are now in our 60’s and early 70’s. We have all led very ‘healthy’ lives and did all the ‘right things’. We cook our food ‘from scratch’, we do not drink to excess, we have borne and nursed children, we have a normal BMI, we do not smoke, etc. etc.
In the last few years some of my German first cousins have died of unexpected cancers. There is no family history of cancer other than a grandmother who died of stomach cancer – she became addicted to nicotine during WWl due to the food shortage. My parents were non-smokers.
I was tested for the BRCA gene. It did not show up, even though through genetic testing I know we do have some Ashkenazi ancestors. There is a possibility that we carry a yet-undiscovered gene but I cannot help but think that what was in the environment while we were young affected us, and we are possibly more chemically sensitive than the norm – 3 of us with BC cannot be blamed on ‘bad luck’. It has always upset me that I am made to feel ‘responsible’ for my breast cancer by the world at large when my life-style has been exemplary. We have been increasingly poisoning our environment since the 40’s and the repercussions will only worsen and taint and affect all of our lives in the future.
In the last few years some of my German first cousins have died of unexpected cancers. There is no family history of cancer other than a grandmother who died of stomach cancer – she became addicted to nicotine during WWl due to the food shortage. My parents were non-smokers.
I was tested for the BRCA gene. It did not show up, even though through genetic testing I know we do have some Ashkenazi ancestors. There is a possibility that we carry a yet-undiscovered gene but I cannot help but think that what was in the environment while we were young affected us, and we are possibly more chemically sensitive than the norm – 3 of us with BC cannot be blamed on ‘bad luck’. It has always upset me that I am made to feel ‘responsible’ for my breast cancer by the world at large when my life-style has been exemplary. We have been increasingly poisoning our environment since the 40’s and the repercussions will only worsen and taint and affect all of our lives in the future.
143
It would be helpful if NY Times editors reviewed current help articles for consistency with what else had been said recently. Try these http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/health/policy/24cancer.html?action=cli...®ion=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article
or
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/health/policy/24cancer.html?action=cli...®ion=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article
Much as I worship Jane Brody, this sort of general "It can't hurt..." advice is not useful. Unless there's an actual solid new medical breakthrough, supported by high quality research, what about a pause in the generic prevention articles?
or
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/24/health/policy/24cancer.html?action=cli...®ion=EndOfArticle&pgtype=article
Much as I worship Jane Brody, this sort of general "It can't hurt..." advice is not useful. Unless there's an actual solid new medical breakthrough, supported by high quality research, what about a pause in the generic prevention articles?
23
Please don't "worship" any writer or doctor. It's more important to make informed choices. It's your body.
12
A recent 2017 study in Boston states that consumption of soy does not have a harmful effect on survivors or pose a risk to develop BC.
9
I have had breast cancer twice (9 years apart) I eat well, exercise, do all the right things. Articles like yours tend to blame women for their breast cancer.
MY BREAST CANCER WAS CAUSED BY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS I was exposed to DDT as a child living on the South Shore of Long Island. This areas was sprayed frequently in warmer months with DDT to mitigate the mosquito population until DDT was banned in 1962.
Jane, let's not forget the environmental factors--additives to foods, cosmetics, the environment. Once we know and understand what corporations are putting into the water, the air and the ground, perhaps we will have a better way to slow down or stop the incidences in breast cancer.
Check out Breast Cancer Action--one of the only advocacy groups that DOES NOT take money from corporate sponsors.
http://www.bcaction.org/
MY BREAST CANCER WAS CAUSED BY ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS I was exposed to DDT as a child living on the South Shore of Long Island. This areas was sprayed frequently in warmer months with DDT to mitigate the mosquito population until DDT was banned in 1962.
Jane, let's not forget the environmental factors--additives to foods, cosmetics, the environment. Once we know and understand what corporations are putting into the water, the air and the ground, perhaps we will have a better way to slow down or stop the incidences in breast cancer.
Check out Breast Cancer Action--one of the only advocacy groups that DOES NOT take money from corporate sponsors.
http://www.bcaction.org/
187
I could not agree with this more. Ladies, keep in mind that loading up on fruits and vegetables that are not organic or drinking from plastic water bottles or hot coffee in to-go cups are seemingly little things that are extremely harmful to one's health.
5
The jury is out, but my personal belief is that environmental factors play a far larger role than food -- drinking in moderation -- or anything EXCEPT smoking, which is a PROVEN carcinogen.
16
My cancer was similarly caused — I inhaled a big whiff of the spray they used to kill West Nile Virus-carrying mosquitos. Then the cancer crept up on me so gradually, I didn't know it was there until I was very very sick.
Lesson learned — pay attention to the signs your body is giving you.
Lesson learned — pay attention to the signs your body is giving you.
5
I find the injection of your personal habits and history very odd in these columns. You did get breast cancer in the first place, which is terrible, and I am glad that it has not returned, but I am not sure why your drinking habits are of interest. That said, stay healthy.
44
But really, you can be perfect and still get breast cancer. Both my sister's were diagnosed with stage 4 breast cancer, one when she was 44, the other when she was 53. No BRAC gene involvement. No history in the family of breast cancer. Healthy lifestyles, well maybe a bit too much stress in their lives at times. Each lived for seven years after their initial diagnosis, mostly because they lived rather than waited around to die. You tell me, why them?
Do I worry about breast cancer? Of course, wouldn't you? But I also worry about my health in general, and few of these suggestion for healthier living do not apply to a wide range of diseases and other health ailments. At sixty, I realize that one basically needs to take care of your physical and mental health all the days of your life, and it's never too late to develop good habits and practices.
When one is diagnosed with a life threatening illness, the first reaction is likely, Why me? The second is, what did I do to bring this on? But, you cannot take back the past, you only can keep moving forward. Life is random, you cannot define all the things that might happen. You can only hope to tilt the odds in your favor.
Do I worry about breast cancer? Of course, wouldn't you? But I also worry about my health in general, and few of these suggestion for healthier living do not apply to a wide range of diseases and other health ailments. At sixty, I realize that one basically needs to take care of your physical and mental health all the days of your life, and it's never too late to develop good habits and practices.
When one is diagnosed with a life threatening illness, the first reaction is likely, Why me? The second is, what did I do to bring this on? But, you cannot take back the past, you only can keep moving forward. Life is random, you cannot define all the things that might happen. You can only hope to tilt the odds in your favor.
74
Illness is just that -- illness. It is random. It is UNFAIR. It does not necessarily go to the person with bad habits or lazy lifestyle. Being thin will not guarantee perfect health. Eating vegan or vegetarian will not keep you alive forever.
We like to think of illness as PUNISHMENT for "bad behavoirs" because then we don't have to feel compassion (or fear for ourselves) -- we can shrug and say "they deserved it!"
Look at how people today treat diabetics! it's just awful. They shame people for having a disease.....thinking THEY are immune.
Well I have a newsflash -- YOU ARE NOT IMMUNE. Thin people get cancer. Thin people have heart attacks. Thin people die of diabetes. Thin people have strokes.
Meanwhile, we live lives of fear and deprivation, thinking we can keep the boogieman away.
You can't. Live for today -- be sensible -- don't go overboard -- enjoy each day in the here and now.
We like to think of illness as PUNISHMENT for "bad behavoirs" because then we don't have to feel compassion (or fear for ourselves) -- we can shrug and say "they deserved it!"
Look at how people today treat diabetics! it's just awful. They shame people for having a disease.....thinking THEY are immune.
Well I have a newsflash -- YOU ARE NOT IMMUNE. Thin people get cancer. Thin people have heart attacks. Thin people die of diabetes. Thin people have strokes.
Meanwhile, we live lives of fear and deprivation, thinking we can keep the boogieman away.
You can't. Live for today -- be sensible -- don't go overboard -- enjoy each day in the here and now.
90
fInally a sensible comment! We just have to face the fact, that it ist rather a miracle, when after a lifetime of cell divisions we are spared an acummulation of cancerous mutations.
5
Avoid Premarin, if possible. Look at the statistics. I was advised by my doctor to continue taking it "for health benefits" for 10 years, long after menopause. I was diagnosed with invasive lobular breast cancer a year ago.
21
Who knew? Healthy living - keeping your weight down, not smoking, keep alcohol consumption down - keeps you healthy. Duh?
16
That's a misreading of statistics; it reduces your risk of specific diseases, it does not keep you healthy.
4
I think one point to emphasize is that all these actions may reduce the risk of breast cancer. They do not "keep cancer at bay." When I was diagnosed with de novo metastatic breast cancer, I was a physically active, normal weight vegetarian, who ate lots of fruit and veggies and minimal dairy, never smoked, and only drank, at most, a glass of wine or two over a weekend. I agree that the article includes good advice. It just should not be interpreted to mean that if you follow it you will not get cancer.
232
Or that if you don't follow this advice you will get cancer.
4
Isn't the 1 in 8 statistic quoted by Ms. Brody misleading in this context? I thought I read some time ago that 1 in 8 means 1 in 8 women living to age 90. Can anyone shed any light on this?
14
From the Susan G. Komen Foundation website:
"Women in the U.S. have a "1 in 8” (or about 12 percent) lifetime risk of getting breast cancer.
This means that for every 8 women in the U.S. who live to be age 85, 1 will be diagnosed with breast cancer during her lifetime.
The lifetime risk of breast cancer is much higher than the 1- or 10-year absolute risks of breast cancer.
This is because lifetime risk adds up all the 1-year absolute risks over a woman's life, up to age 85."
"Women in the U.S. have a "1 in 8” (or about 12 percent) lifetime risk of getting breast cancer.
This means that for every 8 women in the U.S. who live to be age 85, 1 will be diagnosed with breast cancer during her lifetime.
The lifetime risk of breast cancer is much higher than the 1- or 10-year absolute risks of breast cancer.
This is because lifetime risk adds up all the 1-year absolute risks over a woman's life, up to age 85."
6
In sync with the GOP health care bill comes NYT and Jane Brody BLAMING women for not taking care of themselves by avoiding breast cancer. You too can save yourself from this disease with just a few simple steps... What a huge lie. All of these recommendations--eating well, exercising, not smoking--are activities that countless current and past (and future) breast cancer patients have done, continue to do through treatment, and will do in the future, assuming they are not one of the 40,000 (40, 000!!!) U.S. women who DIE from breast cancer each year. That is where the NYT and Jane Brody should be focusing their attention. This number has not budged in decades and it is far, far too easy to blame women.
151
This author is terribly behind the times on health advice. What we don't need from the New York Times is another person regurgitating the same and misleading information that has been the norm since the 50's but has been repudiated time and again. Some fresh and more up to date writing would be appreciated. For example, the soy connection to Asia had been disproven. A close examination of their diets show the amount of soy in the diet is minimal not to mention only certain types of soy. Just one example. Thanks for posting my opinion.
37
I believe adequate sleep in a properly darkened room is another factor under our control.
11
This would also go far in improving the quality of one's sleep and in turn, reducing stress.
3
I didn't mention about HOMA score or HOMA Oxford that developed by researchers at Oxford University even though I mentioned that (1) cancer and other degenerative diseases are caused by damaged mitochondria (energy batteries) in cells and that (2) most common causes of mitochondria damages are excess glucose (sugar) and excess iron. Many after-menopause women continue intake of excess carbs and excess iron even though these excesses are not necessary after menopause.
HOMA score tells how much our insulin receptors (spots of cell membrane receiving insulin hormone and glucose) are clogged by toxins such as chemicals and metals/minerals. You check (1) fasted glucose level and (2) fasted insulin level, then google HOMA Oxford, then the website shows a table of insulin receptor clogging level. If your HOMA score were bad, this will be roughly applicable for hormone problems of many other hormone receptors. Hormone imbalance, often for women, occurs when hormone receptors are clogged and is another cause of metabolic diseases. You need cell level detoxification like C-cleanse recommended by Dr. Russell Jaffe. Check his most academic lectures by YouTube, you would understand some if you recall chemistry and biology courses at high school.
HOMA score tells how much our insulin receptors (spots of cell membrane receiving insulin hormone and glucose) are clogged by toxins such as chemicals and metals/minerals. You check (1) fasted glucose level and (2) fasted insulin level, then google HOMA Oxford, then the website shows a table of insulin receptor clogging level. If your HOMA score were bad, this will be roughly applicable for hormone problems of many other hormone receptors. Hormone imbalance, often for women, occurs when hormone receptors are clogged and is another cause of metabolic diseases. You need cell level detoxification like C-cleanse recommended by Dr. Russell Jaffe. Check his most academic lectures by YouTube, you would understand some if you recall chemistry and biology courses at high school.
4
As a breast cancer veteran who ran marathons, and followed all of the recommendations in the article I would add one that is missing and I believe crucial: Do not use estrogen, specifically estradiol, after menopause unless specifically directed to by a physician who both understands and explains the risks to you. I was prescribed estradiol for Osteopenia and wound up with estrogen positive breast cancer. My bone density improved while taking estradiol and then plummeted into Osteoporosis after stopping it and then taking an aromatase inhibitor to eliminate all estrogen for five years after completing initial treatment. I wish the estrogen prescribing doctor had spent time explaining breast cancer risk; I might have looked for alternatives for bone building. Now I'll be dealing with a life long risk of cancer recurrence.
24
Thanks for this very helpful information relating to treatment for osteopenia with estradiol and its consequences for you. This strengthens my decision not to take hormone-replacement therapy of any kind.
2
and now to the biggest cause of breast cancer: bad luck. At least that's why my oncologist said when I was diagnosed with HER2 + breast cancer at age 44. When I was diagnosed I was active & fit, eating a sugar/gluten/dairy free diet, I had breastfed my daughter, I didn't drink, and as it turned out, I tested negative for the BRCA genes. I kept asking all the doctors around me (and physician friends too) why I got cancer. They unanimously agreed: I'll never know and there was nothing I could've done to prevent it.
317
Thank you for keeping it real-it really does just come down to bad luck. I got leukemia as a teenager-despite various assertions to the contrary, it was not the result of poor diet, negative thinking, or an obnoxious gift from the universe to teach me loving kindness. Don't put that well-intentioned baggage on me, it's tough enough as it is.
moderating alcohol intake should be emphasized.
5
I am a medical anthropologist breast cancer researcher and co-author of Dressed to Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras.
Wearing tight bras for long periods of time is a leading cause of breast pain, cysts, and cancer. The fact is, bra-free women have about the same risk of breast cancer as men, while the tighter and longer the bra is worn the higher the risk rises. Numerous studies show a significant bra-cancer link.
Bras also cause breasts to droop, since the internal suspensory ligaments in the breast weaken and atrophy over time due to the external support of the bra. When women stop wearing bras their breasts lift and tone. There is also a loss of breast pain and cysts, which are usually caused by wearing tight bras.
Recent peer-reviewed studies showing a bra-cancer link:
2015 Comparative study of breast cancer risk factors at Kenyatta National Hospital and the Nairobi Hospital J. Afr. Cancer (2015) 7:41-46. This study found a significant bra-cancer link in pre-and post-menopausal women.
2016 Wearing a Tight Bra for Many Hours a Day is Associated with Increased Risk of Breast Cancer Adv Oncol Res Treat 1: 105. This is the first epidemiological study to look at bra tightness and time worn, and found a significant bra-cancer link.
Wearing tight bras for long periods of time is a leading cause of breast pain, cysts, and cancer. The fact is, bra-free women have about the same risk of breast cancer as men, while the tighter and longer the bra is worn the higher the risk rises. Numerous studies show a significant bra-cancer link.
Bras also cause breasts to droop, since the internal suspensory ligaments in the breast weaken and atrophy over time due to the external support of the bra. When women stop wearing bras their breasts lift and tone. There is also a loss of breast pain and cysts, which are usually caused by wearing tight bras.
Recent peer-reviewed studies showing a bra-cancer link:
2015 Comparative study of breast cancer risk factors at Kenyatta National Hospital and the Nairobi Hospital J. Afr. Cancer (2015) 7:41-46. This study found a significant bra-cancer link in pre-and post-menopausal women.
2016 Wearing a Tight Bra for Many Hours a Day is Associated with Increased Risk of Breast Cancer Adv Oncol Res Treat 1: 105. This is the first epidemiological study to look at bra tightness and time worn, and found a significant bra-cancer link.
14
You appear to hawk your book all over the internet, always citing these same 2 studies from Africa. From what I can tell you are not a medical doctor or a cancer researcher.
The 2016 study was published by OMICS Intl. which appears on lists of questionable open-access journals which lack the rigorous standards of traditional medical journals.
I found no references to the 2015 African study except for your own postings. I checked the abstract of the original journal article and it does not appear that the study controlled for weight or obesity. Women who can go "bra-less" are generally thinner than those who wear bras regularly, and excess weight is a proven factor that increases risk of breast cancer.
The 2016 study was published by OMICS Intl. which appears on lists of questionable open-access journals which lack the rigorous standards of traditional medical journals.
I found no references to the 2015 African study except for your own postings. I checked the abstract of the original journal article and it does not appear that the study controlled for weight or obesity. Women who can go "bra-less" are generally thinner than those who wear bras regularly, and excess weight is a proven factor that increases risk of breast cancer.
36
Wow! Thanks so much for this valuable information on bra-wearing. Very helpful!
All of the dietary studies Brody cites are observational studies, often based on self-reported food surveys.
The low fat/low sat fat diet was tested in an actual experimental trial called the Women's Health Initiative. It was the largest and longest experimental trial on diet ever conducted, 40,000+ women, 7 years. The results? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. _No protective effect whatsoever_ from a low fat/low sat fat diet, no effects on cancer (including breast cancer), no effects on heart disease, no effects on obesity, diabetes, or overall mortality.
But to acknowledge this, Brody and other high-carb advocates would have to admit that they have been wrong about decades of failed low fat advice.
The low fat/low sat fat diet was tested in an actual experimental trial called the Women's Health Initiative. It was the largest and longest experimental trial on diet ever conducted, 40,000+ women, 7 years. The results? Nothing. Nada. Zilch. _No protective effect whatsoever_ from a low fat/low sat fat diet, no effects on cancer (including breast cancer), no effects on heart disease, no effects on obesity, diabetes, or overall mortality.
But to acknowledge this, Brody and other high-carb advocates would have to admit that they have been wrong about decades of failed low fat advice.
54
We would all be better off drastically reducing our grains. The "healthy whole grains" movement is a crock.
13
I have a modest proposal, ala Jonathan Swift: choose parents who don't carry a gene that predisposes you to breast cancer. We hear a lot about BRCA genes but there are also others that predispose you to breast cancer.
19
How does one choose their own parents? I received my BC diagnosis at 41. Because of my age, I underwent genetic testing. Thankfully, I came back negative for all *known* mutations. My cancer was either due to a mutation we don't know about yet (the geneticist told me to contact them in 5 years to see what has changed in the field) or purely bad luck. A recent study showed that approximately 2/3 of all cancers are caused by random mutations.
10
You can do all these things for years but the wrong genes change the equation. Believe me. I know. BRCA genes as the previous writer said, are not the only genes out there. My family is negative for BRCA but my mother died of breast cancer and my sister and I were diagnosed and treated. These types of articles are helpful but also unintentionally caste blame. It reinforces for those who do not develop breast cancer that they did the right things and the women who developed breast cancer, did not. Again, I know.
22
I get your point but unfortunately this isn't an action anyone can take, so I appreciate the information in this article.
1
There is one guarantee: the NYT will publish a contradictory article on this subject next week and after that, another, etc. As a cancer survivor, and the sister of a metastatic breast cancer patient who died after doing all the "right" things, all I can state is do your best because it truly is a roll of the dice. Try to eat more veggies than meat; find ways to get exercise and move your body; a half mile walk every day is doable for most. Keep your weight and BMI within the healthy parameters. At least if you are diagnosed with cancer, you will be in fighting mode to do your best to deal with the therapies that wreck havoc and you will have the strength to question your doctors' dictating what is right for your body. FYI...regarding soy, it is used as a condiment in Asian cuisines. Americans eat chunks of the stuff (most of it unfermented) and fake food like soy ice cream substitutes. Regarding alcohol, after reading all the contradictory articles published by the NYT, I need a drink.
185
Actually, tofu - chunks of Bean curd - is common in Japanese, Chinese, and Korean cuisine.
8
East Asians do indeed eat tofu, but they don't top it off with soy cheese, soy yogurt, soy fake meat, soy ice cream, and soy "egg" salad.
I went that route for a while, and all I got out of it was a sensitivity to soy (in the form of horribly itchy mucus membranes) that fortunately disappeared after a year of complete abstinence from it.
I went that route for a while, and all I got out of it was a sensitivity to soy (in the form of horribly itchy mucus membranes) that fortunately disappeared after a year of complete abstinence from it.
6
As an Asia, I can tell you that I eat way more soy in forms of soy milk, tofu, or edamame, aka, chunks of it.
Why do you say avoid saturated fats and list dairy products? Dairy is what should be avoided. Grass fed meat is very good for you. It's the hormones in the dairy and cows that have estrogen. The point is to avoid excess estrogen, where ever it comes from. Saturated fat isn't bad for you, its' the estrogen. It's the main point. You can even test the estrogen levels in your blood to help avoid breast cancer.
7
What credentials do you have to back up your statements?
14
The world is a random, cruel place. Suffering abounds. This article sounds like one big Dumbo feather - something to hang onto to stave off fear. Don't be afraid. Just do the best you can most days.
90
It is also in my power to assist those GOP representatives (who voted to take away healthcare) out of office.
258
This article feels like one parsed together, not by an expert (doctor or research scientist) but by a college kid who used the Internet to cobble together her essay, and tossed in a few nuggets of personal, albeit not useful information.
Nothing enlightening here. Another waste of digital and print column inches.
Nothing enlightening here. Another waste of digital and print column inches.
50
Since 50% of Americans are OBESE and another 25% overweight this is not just one item on this list of dos. and don'ts. Insulin & cortisol levels are the major issues now-- not calories-- so eating a high carb low fat diet may make this worse.
9
Why does Jane Brody insert her personal drinking habits into this article on lifestyle factors found to prevent breast cancer? Even if "a drink now and then is not likely to be a problem" does she believe her experience is somehow proof? It's an n of 1 and example of poor scientific reporting.
124
The "at most" language stuck out to me, too, as if she were "proving" that she didn't overdo the drinking. There would have been a more natural flow if it had read, "If I do drink at all, it is generally one or two drinks in any given week."
I'm surprised that this article doesn't mention the possible connection between dairy intake and breast cancer. Worldwide, breast cancer rates are lowest in countries where dairy intake is also lowest. Given that cows are now kept pregnant constantly to produce the maximum amount of milk, the amount of hormones in milk is very high. Milk protein is also one of the best substances for causing cells to proliferate (as it should be, since it is intended to grow infants quickly) - unfortunately it can also causes cancer cells to grow rapidly, as was shown by studies in 2014 on prostrate cancer cells.
40
It's in paragraph 16, and includes a link to the NCBI study. But the paragraph is oddly constructed, and seemingly conflates saturated fats and dairy.
Thank you!!!
I'm 60 years old with breast cancer. All my life - since very young, my diet has been superb, eating all the right stuff - all organic - we even raise our own beef and lamb - and all our own veggies. I own a Pilates studio and exercise all the time, never had to see a doctor for anything except a yearly check-up. I'm the healthiest person I know. And I'm the healthiest person most people know.
Maybe it's genetic? I haven't had a braca 1 or 2 test. But, still, even though I do have cancer, I must say that because I'm in such great health otherwise, my ability to stave off a lot of chemo's side effects is much greater then most - still teaching and working out. My diet hasn't changed much - just adding green tea, wheatgrass, pure fish oil...
Your list is true but, don't forget, attitude is so important too. We all have the capability to see the positives in a negative situation. So, even if you take care of yourself as I have, just remember, if you do get breast cancer, know there's always a light at the end of the tunnel and lots of gifts given when you open your heart.
Maybe it's genetic? I haven't had a braca 1 or 2 test. But, still, even though I do have cancer, I must say that because I'm in such great health otherwise, my ability to stave off a lot of chemo's side effects is much greater then most - still teaching and working out. My diet hasn't changed much - just adding green tea, wheatgrass, pure fish oil...
Your list is true but, don't forget, attitude is so important too. We all have the capability to see the positives in a negative situation. So, even if you take care of yourself as I have, just remember, if you do get breast cancer, know there's always a light at the end of the tunnel and lots of gifts given when you open your heart.
72
A large collaborative study has also shown that breastfeeding can reduce the risk of aggressive ER-negative breast cancer in African-American women: http://ow.ly/R7vV30bwIZ2
10
According to an article in the NYT in July 2016, four percent of women who got breast cancer could have prevented it through healthier lifestyle choices. So for 96 percent, none of this matters.
288
If that statistical conclusion and the research design holds up, how will you know you're part of the 4% or not?
7
Does anyone at the NYTimes ever vet the science of these personal health columns? This is far from the first time this column has presented incomplete or misleading, or just plain wrong information.
5
True. But for those four percent, all of this matters.
Mostly, a good article with real info. BUT - a couple caveats. Women can do all the right things and still get breast cancer - there are the BRCA genes and triple negative. And I do know women who have done all the "right" things and still gotten breast cancer. Just a little balance, please.
106
Related to the comment about the inherited BRCA gene, what about the risk factor of being related to someone who has breast cancer? And I'd love to see some clear data on the impact of HRT (hormone replacement therapy) --BOTH the HRT you get at any pharmacy AND also the more bio-available HRT (not made from horse pee) that can only be ordered from places like Women's International Pharmacy . There's always been warnings about the former leading to the development of breast cancer (NOT the latter). The latest studies on that would be super important; maybe alleviating fears of breast cancer while we work to save our bones.
Breastfeeding and having children are also known protective measures not mentioned in the article.
25
This article mentions things that every woman can do, not all women can have children or breast feed, so I'm *glad* it was not included.
15
Thanks for the updated information. I hope the women and men who write for the food section read it.
18
I always wonder about the Times's enthusiasm for whole grains. Japan and Korea seem to think whole grains are toxic, and they have had far a lower incidence of breast cancer, as well as heart disease and diabetes, and they live longer. This proves nothing, of course, but it makes you wonder how much of the research on whole grains is affected by the fact that people who eat whole
grains tend to be health conscious in dozens of ways.
grains tend to be health conscious in dozens of ways.
31
These articles love correlation, thinking it's causation.
1
"I remain an occasional drinker..." Glad you included this. Way too much fearmongering goes on regarding postmenopausal survivors and alcohol consumption. Some breast-cancer tumors are not fueled by estrogen and this particular scare tactic is unwarranted. As important as diet and exercise is enjoying each day once treatment is over, and moderate drinking might play a part if we choose to do so.
14
I have recently watched two cancer-related on-line presentations by the experts on cancers. One is Dr. Thomas Seyfried of Boston College, who pioneered ketogenic cancer therapy with great results for human tests including stage 4 cancer patients. The cancer cells, which have damaged mitochondria, devour and ferment glucose (sugar), but they can't live on ketone (a fat) whereas normal cells thrive on ketone. Dr. Seyfried starves cancer cells by ketogenesis, then treats patients with normal cancer therapy which minimizes chemotherapy that causes secondary damages.
Dr. Joseph Mercola, well-known family doctor, recommends ketogenic diet because, like Dr. Seyfried, he believes that all the degenerative diseases like cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, atherosclerosis etc. are metabolic diseases caused by the damages of mitochondria. Excess carbs and excess iron intake causes oxidative damages of mitochondria, then inflammation of organs. Older men or after-menopause women are usually suffering from excess iron. He suggests Iron level around 50 ng/ml which is similar to vitamin D3. Both doctors published books, "Fight cancer with a ketogenic diet" by Dr. Thomas Seyfried and "Fat for fuel" by Dr. Joseph Mercola.
Dr. Joseph Mercola, well-known family doctor, recommends ketogenic diet because, like Dr. Seyfried, he believes that all the degenerative diseases like cancer, diabetes, Alzheimer's, atherosclerosis etc. are metabolic diseases caused by the damages of mitochondria. Excess carbs and excess iron intake causes oxidative damages of mitochondria, then inflammation of organs. Older men or after-menopause women are usually suffering from excess iron. He suggests Iron level around 50 ng/ml which is similar to vitamin D3. Both doctors published books, "Fight cancer with a ketogenic diet" by Dr. Thomas Seyfried and "Fat for fuel" by Dr. Joseph Mercola.
23
So almost lost in your advice is the core preventive message: for the best results eat well, early on.
Teach your children well. Keep away from potentially damaging food-like items ( the sugars, refined carbs -- MAYBE the saturated fats) which can cause lasting damage over 20 or 30 years, AND develop good habits when young. Exercise is another habit best formed when young. We all can try to incorporate most of the recommendations for better health anytime, of course, but trying to change your contours and weight later in life is, for most people, close to impossible.
Three cheers for Michelle Obama for her attempt to steer young people - and convince their reluctant adult handlers - towards healthy eating and movement.
Teach your children well. Keep away from potentially damaging food-like items ( the sugars, refined carbs -- MAYBE the saturated fats) which can cause lasting damage over 20 or 30 years, AND develop good habits when young. Exercise is another habit best formed when young. We all can try to incorporate most of the recommendations for better health anytime, of course, but trying to change your contours and weight later in life is, for most people, close to impossible.
Three cheers for Michelle Obama for her attempt to steer young people - and convince their reluctant adult handlers - towards healthy eating and movement.
89
Thank you for mentioning the former First Lady.
I miss her and President Obama.
I miss her and President Obama.