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

12. Factors promoting breast cancer: hormones

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

As we know it, most predisposing breast cancer (BC) factors - like poor diet, prolonged stress, or chronic internal infections, all of which can negatively affect efficiency of the detox and/or immune system, become breast cancer promoting factors after its initiation by inhibiting or blocking body functions directly or indirectly related to fighting malignant growth.

Likewise, the risk factors commonly referred to as promoting breast cancer factors, are usually also predisposing factors before cancer initiation. Hence, we are talking about mainly one same group of factors, but acting under different circumstances and, sometimes, through somewhat different mechanisms.

One group of breast cancer risk factors that does not share this duality are hormones stimulating cell proliferation and their exogenous mimics (chemically similar compounds that can act like these hormones in the body). They cannot stimulate malignant growth before the malignant cells actually form, and their only effect potentially contributing to cancer formation is that they may make cancer more likely by stimulating proliferation of pre-cancerous cell forms. But this can only take place after malignant transformation has been initiated.

The group of hormones of primary concern are those stimulating cell proliferation: ovarian hormones, insulin and insulin-like growth hormone (IGF), as well as exogenous compounds that can mimic their action (environmental estrogens).

So, the most important sources of woman's hormonal exposure that can be among factors promoting breast cancer growth are:

exposure to endogenous female sex hormones in general, and to estrogens in particular 

hormonal medical treatments

hormonal exposure due to obesity and/or weight gain

body size related hormonal exposure

insulin and IGF exposure, genetic and diet-related

exposure to environmental estrogens

Factors related to the level and balance of ovarian hormones are proven to be significant. Those are also the ones nearly exclusively publicized as the risk factors, and particularly those related to female's reproductive experience.

In addition to the internal hormone production, hormonal BC risk factors include hormonal medical treatments - particularly so called hormone replacement therapy (HRT) - as well as exposure to environmental estrogenic compounds (estrogen mimics). Of the latter, the risk factor are generally those with strong estrogenic potency; those weak or very weak generally inhibit estrogenic activity within the body.

Obesity and weight gain also affect body's hormonal activity. This effect is likely to be negative, but it cannot be assumed: there is a fairly consistent statistical evidence that overweight in premenopausal women has generally protective effect. Whether it is real, or only statistical association in nature, it is not clear at present.

Body height or, probably more appropriate, frame size is, on the other hand, directly related to the overall internal hormonal level and activity, thus its association with promoting breast cancer has the backing of this cause-effect relationship. In general, larger frame implies higher level of hormonal activity, hence also higher breast cancer risk on that basis.

Both insulin and IGF (insulin-like growth factor) stimulate cell proliferation. Exposure to these hormones can be significantly influenced by dietary patterns.

Following page addresses these breast cancer promoting factors in more detail

TOP NEXT

YOUR BODY  HEALTH RECIPE  NUTRITION  TOXINS  SYMPTOMS