Home
site map
email

healthknot.com


 

Health news:
 
June 2010 - Dec 2013

Minimizing breast cancer risk

May 2010

Time to move beyond salt ?

Salt hypothesis vs. reality

Is sodium bad?

April 2010

Salt studies: the latest score

From Dahl to INTERSALT

Salt hypothesis' story

March 2010

Salt war

Do bone drugs work?

Diabetes vs. drugs, 3:0?

February 2010

The MMR vaccine war: Wakefield vs. ?

Wakefield proceedings: an exception?

Who's afraid of a littl' 1998 study?
 

January 2010

Antibiotic children

Physical activity benefits late-life health

Healthier life for New Year's resolution

 

December 2009

Autism epidemic worsening: CDC report

Rosuvastatin indication broadened

High-protein diet effects

 

November 2009

Folic acid cancer risk

Folic acid studies: message in a bottle?

Sweet, short life on a sugary diet

 

October 2009

Smoking health hazards: no dose-response

C. difficile warning

Asthma risk and waist size in women

 

September 2009

Antioxidants' melanoma risk: 4-fold or none?

Murky waters of vitamin D status

Is vitamin D deficiency hurting you?

 

August 2009

Pill-crushing children

New gut test for children and adults

Unhealthy habits - whistling past the graveyard?

 

July 2009

Asthma solution - between two opposites that don't attract

Light wave therapy - how does it actually work?

Hodgkin's lymphoma in children: better alternatives

 

June 2009

Hodgkin's, kids, and the abuse of power

Efficacy and safety of the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's:
behind the hype

Long-term mortality and morbidity after conventional treatments for pediatric Hodgkin's

 

May 2009

Late health effects of the toxicity of the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's

Daniel's true 5-year chances with the conventional treatment for Hodgkin's

Daniel Hauser Hodgkin's case: child protection or medical oppression?

April 2009

Protection from EMF: you're on your own

EMF pollution battle: same old...

EMF health threat and the politics of status quo
 

March 2009

Electromagnetic danger? No such thing, in our view...

EMF safety standards: are they safe?

Power-frequency field exposure
 

February 2009

Electricity and health

Electromagnetic spectrum: health connection

Is power pollution making you sick?

January 2009

Pneumococcal vaccine for adults useless?

DHA in brain development study - why not boys?

HRT shrinks brains

NEWS ARCHIVE
2009
2008
2007

Bookmark and Share
 

June 2010 - December 2013

I - Breast cancer risk factors

8. Breast cancer initiating factors

2 good choices to prevent breast cancer

I - BREAST CANCER
 RISK FACTORS
  

II - SCREENING X-RAY MAMMOGRAPHY

III - ALTERNATIVE TESTS

The biggest risk factor
Risk factors overview
Times change

END OF A MYTH
The whistle
Contra-argument
Last decade
Current picture

 OTHER  X-RAY TESTS
Digital standard
Tomosynthesis
Breast CT

Predisposing factors
Diet       Other

BENEFIT
Earlier diagnosis
Fewer breast cancer deaths

Gamma-ray tests
BSGI/MBI 
PEM

INITIATING  FACTORS
Radiation
Chemicals
Viruses

RISK  &  HARM

OTHER  TESTS
Breast MRI
Ultrasound
Thermography
AMAS test

INACCURACY RISKS False negative
False positive
Overdiagnosis
PROMOTING  FACTORS
Hormonal
Non-hormonal

RADIATION

Radiation primer
Screen exposure
Radiation risk
PHYSICAL EXAM
Clinical
Self-exam

Higher all-cause mortality?

• Minimizing breast cancer risk

Unlike breast cancer predisposing and promoting factors, which are many and of great variety, there are only a few factors - no more than three - actually initiating cancerous transformation in woman's breast:

1-radiation - primarily ionizing, although non-ionizing radiation shouldn't be entirely discounted -

2-chemical carcinogens, and

3-viral infections

 In addition to radiation, chemical exposure and viral tumor proteins, DNA alterations resulting in cancerous growth can also be caused by accumulated errors in DNA replication during mitosis. As with other changes in the structure of the DNA molecule, it typically requires the combined effect of multiple alterations to initiate malignant transformation. At present, it is not known how significant are they in breast cancer, but these replication errors are certainly contributing factor to the possible malignant transformation.

In general, the higher rate of cellular proliferation, the more significant it is.

Just like any other complex body function, the quality of DNA replication depends on a multitude of factors, from inheritance and lifestyle to nutritional status and toxic exposures.

There is convincing evidence that radiation exposure is the primary breast cancer causative factor. DNA damage by carcinogenic chemicals is the second, and DNA alterations due to viral infections are yet another,  probably the least significant factor.

How harmful these three direct causative factors will be in every individual case, what form the ensuing breast cancer will take, and how it will progress, depends on a variety of predisposing and promoting factors present, in a different form, in every individual case. In general, if the cellular function is already compromised by multiple factors negatively affecting cellular homeostasis and repair, including:

unfavorably altered gene expression,

inherited negative genetic polymorphism, compromising cell cycle integrity

significant oxidative exposure, particularly of the DNA molecule

inefficient oxidative protection and detox system

nutritional deficiencies and imbalances, negatively affecting DNA repair

toxic overload, damaging the body and bodily functions

will be more prone to undergo transformation into malignant growth.

    All these factors overlap in many ways. For instance, poor (and that does not imply lack of food), unbalanced diet is very likely to compromise body's oxidative and detox protection and could, in fact, negatively alter gene expression. This, in turn, could combine with the inherent genetic polymorphism and result in a further, critical worsening of the cellular repair mechanism and degradation of cell cycle control.

Once a cell turns cancerous, and starts multiplying, how fast it will progress depends significantly on the presence and activity of a variety of factors promoting cellular proliferation, including:

level and balance of ovarian hormones, either endogenous (which can also be affected by stress hormones metabolism) or of external origin (medical treatments, xenoestrogens),

elevated insulin and/or IGF,

low melatonin,

breast compression (wearing bra),

obesity/ weight gain for postmenopausal or lean (undernourished) body for premenopausal women, and

medical hormonal treatments,

as well as on the presence and efficiency of the factors inhibiting their activity or, in general, controlling cellular proliferation.

This is, of course, far from the complete picture, and mainly listing the factors that happened to have relatively significant statistical association with breast cancer incidence and proliferation in most of the studies. What the studies typically do not address is more important:

 ü quality of the diet - and not just general quality, but individually-tailored quality meaning that it provides what the individual body specifically needs -

ü toxic load, damaging and obstructing body functions needed for wellbeing in general, and for fighting breast (or any other) cancer in particular,

ü progress in reducing that toxic load and, of course,

ü the state of mind: psychological and emotional wellbeing

Let's take a closer look at radiation, the major breast cancer causative factor.

TOP   NEXT

YOUR BODY  HEALTH RECIPE  NUTRITION  TOXINS  SYMPTOMS