|
Eating Meat and Eggs Does not Increase
Breast Cancer Risk
During the 90s, much ado was made about a possible link
between eating saturated fat and increased breast cancer risk. In most
of the research, consumption of hydrogenated oils (trans fatty acids) was
never accounted for or if it was, it was not published. As time passed,
this link was discounted, primarily because of the weakness of the studies,
so I was glad to see evidence showing that breast cancer is not associated
with meat or egg consumption. Eggs are one of the healthiest foods you
can eat, and hormone-free meat supplies valuable high quality protein.
The researchers are associated with the famous Nurses’ Health Study
in Boston, and examined data on diet and breast cancer. The 88,647 women
included in the data had been followed for 18 years, with 5 assessments
of diet and nutrient intake. During the followup period, 4,107 women developed
invasive breast cancer. Those who ate the most animal protein had a two
percent higher risk of breast cancer, while those who
ate the most red meat had a 7 percent lower risk of breast cancer, and those who ate the most meat of all kinds had an 11 percent
lower risk of breast cancer.
HRT Does not Improve Quality of Life in Women
Without Menopausal Symptoms
Last summer the Women’s Health
Initiative (WHI) rocked the world of conventional hormone replacement therapy
(HRT) when one arm of the study was halted early because of clear increased
health risks to women using PremPro. Now, further analysis from this study
published in the New England Journal of Medicine is showing that when women who don’t
have menopausal symptoms are put on PremPro, the most commonly used form of HRT, they do not
experience an increase in their quality of life compared to women on a placebo. What can one say to
this? Duh? If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it? However, this research was presumably done
because of the habit that conventional doctors had, prior to last summer, of putting every woman
over the age of fifty on a one-dose-fits-all HRT regimen. The broad consequences of that
mechanistic mindset are estrogen dominance and progestin side effects, and the specific
consequences, as we saw in the WHI, can range from weight gain and mood swings to fatal blood clots
and breast cancer.
Editorial comments on the newly published research suggested that only women
with menopausal symptoms should be put on PremPro, but that’s hardly the point. The point
is that doctors should be measuring saliva hormone levels first, and then giving only what is
deficient, in small, physiologic doses of natural hormones. (N Engl J Med. Published
online March 17, 2003)
Progesterone Protects the
Uterus
It was very rewarding to receive a phone call from Dr. Helene Leonetti telling me
that her study comparing PremPro with Premarin and progesterone cream was complete, was soon to be
published in a major peer-reviewed medical journal, and that it is to receive third prize at the
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Annual Clinical Meeting this spring.
Dr.
Leonetti’s study effectively proves that progesterone cream protects the uterine lining (the
endometrium) as well as progestins do. Most of you know that in conventional medicine, women who
have a uterus are always supposed to be given a progestin along with their estrogen to protect them
from uterine cancer. In spite of the many negative side effects of the progestins, many doctors
have hesitated to prescribe progesterone cream instead, for fear it would not protect the
endometrium. In Dr. Leonetti’s study, uterine tissue was examined before, during, and after
using either PremPro (Premarin plus Provera) or a combination of Premarin and progesterone cream.
The group using progesterone cream was found to be as well protected as the PremPro group. This
should put to rest any concerns that physicians may have about using progesterone cream for hormone
replacement.
Conventional Medicine Gives itself a
Failing Grade
I was happy to see that the Journal of the American Medical
Association (JAMA) is looking at itself and its competitors with a critical eye.
According to the Associated Press, one study “reviewed 359 studies published between 1989 and
1998 in JAMA, the New England Journal of Medicine, the Lancet, the British
Medical Journal and Annals of Internal Medicine. Only 26 studies reported
straightforward statistics that clearly assessed the effect on patients.”
Lobular Breast Cancer Rates Skyrocketing
The incidence of lobular breast cancer more than doubled between 1987 and 1999,
according to a study from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle.
The incidence of invasive ductal carcinoma, which is more common, remained
stable during the same time period, and the rate of mixed ductal-lobular carcinoma
nearly doubled. Lobular carcinoma is the type of breast cancer most frequently
associated with the use of PremPro.
JAMA 2003;289:1421-1424.
PAGE TOP
e-mail:
connect@virginiahopkinstestkits.com 
Webscape
by
ALLBUSNET.COM
an aerial dynamics company
|
