Guns and Cancer

If you saw a stranger carrying a gun enter your neighbor’s house, would you get involved and call the police?  I think most people would agree that's the right thing to do. Recently, guns have been a main topic of conversation because of their most recent role in the senseless tragedy at the Sandy Hook school and the subsequent political efforts to make obtaining guns more difficult.  Major gun violence like Columbine and the DC Sniper always grip the national attention. Yet, according to statistics published for 2010, the death rate for guns in the US is about 1 in 10,000.  According to a 2004 report published by the Centers for Disease Control, there are over 100 more likely causes of death than guns. (See  http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr56/nvsr56_05.pdf).  Nevertheless, gun violence remains one of the most hotly debated and media covered issues in our country.

Cancer, on the other hand, according to the American Cancer Society, is responsible for 25% of male deaths and 20% of female deaths. So why in our society is there relatively little discussion about preventing cancer? True, there are plenty of public efforts around early cancer detection like getting colonoscopies and mammograms. Pink lapels are everywhere, but it's not nearly enough. (See my blog on Cancer: Prevention or Detection? at http://mdprevent.blogspot.com/2013/05/cancer-prevention-or-detection.html.)

Yet, other than encouraging smokers to stop and people of all ages to avoid the sun, we barely scratch the surface of the cancer topic.  (By the way, speaking about the sun, except for those most prone to skin cancer, most people should get at least 15-30 minutes of direct sun each day at non-peak hours to naturally produce Vitamin D and melatonin. One interesting recent study showed that higher blood levels of melatonin were associated with a lower rate of diabetes.).

So even though cancer is ubiquitous and everyone knows someone who has been diagnosed, treated, or passed from it, we as a society generally prefer to ignore the topic when possible. Why? As my wife likes to say, "it's just morbid to discuss it." I agree. Discussing cancer neither makes for good table-talk nor is it very popular topic at almost any other time.

It may be polite to avoid the topic, but is it smart? Is it time to overcome our distaste for the subject and bring it front and center?  Should we discuss it with friends and neighbors, our children and other relatives, co-workers, and even strangers? Should the halls of congress echo with debates on this topic greater than virtually any other? The answers depend on how much we value life and to what extent we are willing to go to preserve it.  What's the alternative? Continue to by and large avoid this difficult topic and in turn, sacrifice meaningful collective efforts to identify the major culprits.

The other question you may be asking is can and will such discussions change anything other than the mood of those involved? The scientifically valid answer of the moment is for some people, it simply won't matter. That's because scientists believe today that cancer is the result of damage to one's DNA and random mutations. In other words, some people are so genetically susceptible to developing cancer, that they cannot reasonably be expected to avoid all environmental triggers that have already and will continue to damage their DNA. Also, as far as researchers know right now, no one can completely avoid the random mutations that create cancer cells.

But for many, if not most, people, vigilance and caution could make a huge difference. For example, next on the list after smoking, being overweight is probably the most significant cancer risk factor. Obesity has recently become a hot topic, but mostly because of its effects on heart disease and diabetes, even though being overweight is the second greatest risk factor for cancer. Is it the extra weight, the type of food consumed, or the lack of exercise that creates the added risk? The answer is unclear.  Maybe it's all three. For example, a new study reveals the mechanism behind why exercise decreases a woman's risk for breast cancer. It is related to the changes to estrogen brought about by exercise. Exercise is good and women who exercise are less likely to develop breast cancer. When was the last time you heard that exercise prevents cancer?

When it comes to guns, we recognize their implicit danger. Guns take lives unexpectedly and can create peril at any time.  Most Americans agree that limiting the spread of guns is a necessity and a moral imperative. Unfortunately, efforts to limit gun access usually only affect law-abiding citizens and not those able to obtain firearms by criminal means.  In contrast, except in relation to children, and even in that regard the efforts are paltry, there is virtually little effort by citizen groups or the government to limit the hazards of chemically infested foods we regularly consume.

Some isolated groups are waging campaigns. For example, the Environmental Working Group (ewg.org, a non-profit organization, has developed a list of fruits, vegetables, and other household mainstays with the highest pesticide and chemical residues.  However, the truth be told, the science showing a cause and effect relationship between these products and cancer is relatively limited and inconclusive. Is it limited because there isn't any link, because it doesn't exist, or because Big Food prevents it from seeing the light of day, I can't tell you. While the dangers may be real, they are unproven.

Yet, although I'm not trying to instill paranoia, I still think the principle of what you don't know may still harm you, may apply.  One cannot imagine much benefit to our body from the countless chemicals we consume.

That's why caution is in order when consuming conventional fruits and vegetables. Although a major study from Stanford showed that such produce is no less nutritious than organically grown counterparts, soft-skinned conventionally raised produce is full of chemical contaminants. If unavoidable or the only type you can afford, then wash it thoroughly before eating.  Choose your household cleaning products carefully, opting for more environmentally friendly products when you can, and always protect your skin and  airways when using such products. Avoid, whenever possible, and otherwise limit consumption of all processed foods replete with a multitude and variety of potentially harmful chemicals.

If you saw a stranger with a gun entering your neighbor's house, you would probably assume the worse. Just because you do, doesn't mean he intends harm to your neighbor. Yet, you would still be alarmed. So why are you any less cautious about the foods and products you come in contact with and allow to invade your body that are strongly linked to cancer and other diseases?

No one can promise you that you will crimp your own cancer development. With 50% of men developing cancer and 33% percent of women doing so, your odds of avoiding cancer are not great.  (I'm sorry for being morbid, but those are the facts.)  However, I can tell you with confidence after reviewing over twenty thousand related studies, that living a healthy lifestyle will shift the odds in your favor.

If you value your health and your life, isn't it worth the effort? Again, there are simple things you can do such as avoiding processed foods full of chemicals, taking precautions with cleaning products, and carefully washing your produce to remove as much residue as possible. Little things may actually matter. This may be one of those situations where you can actually create your own luck. Avoiding cancer is important because prevention really is preferable to cure.  Hippocrates knew this 2,500 years ago and it's even more true today. As Louis Pasteur once said, "Chance favors the prepared mind."

No one should experience the daily agony my relative must now bear.  Please heed my words and decrease the probability that you or a loved one will ever experience the same.  Bet on yourself and your loved ones.

Cancer: Prevention or Detection?

I recently spent a couple of days with my relative who is grappling with cancer.  It gave me plenty of time to reflect on what cancer represents.  Cancer is not only about the threat to our health and life; it is also about the physical and emotional agony it causes. No one should have to endure it.

On the plane back from the visit, I noticed an article in Delta's complementary airline magazine about the partnership forged between Delta and the American Cancer Society. The article spoke about the importance of cancer prevention and how it relates to cancer screening. To be fair, detection of cancer is really not prevention at all except if it is referring to prevention of death. There is no doubt that certain detection tests like annually checking for blood in the stool and a digital rectal exam are helpful in finding cancer early and potentially avoiding another cancer caused death.  But detection tests do not prevent cancer.

In fact, there are very few things most people do or even doctors advocate to prevent cancer. The HPV vaccine is one rare example. Not smoking is another. Avoiding obesity has become a more common refrain. The question is, however, given the ravages of and pain and discomfort caused by cancer, which I just witnessed first-hand, why isn't there a greater focus on actual cancer prevention?

Recent studies have revealed the extent that gene mutations play in cancer development.  What continues to baffle researchers are the specific causes of these gene mutations. Is it hereditary or environmental? Is it fate or self-fulfilling?  I will not pretend to have the definitive answer because it is simply unknown. Yet, here is what we do know. Chemicals can cause gene mutations. This is a fact beyond a shadow of the doubt. We are exposed to chemicals in so many forms they seem unavoidable. They exist in our foods, on our foods, from the products we eat our food with, wrap our food, store our food, etc. They are in products we put on our bodies, and inhale on a daily basis. While they are ubiquitous, it doesn't mean we should take comfort in the old adage that "everything causes cancer so you can't avoid it and you shouldn't try."  This type of outdated thinking is a mistake and displays serious denial of the risks of unrelenting exposure to dangerous chemicals.

So what's a person to do? What if you can't afford to buy organic, have to live where you work, can't eliminate all the chemicals in your house? The answer is: do the best you can, but don't ignore the threat. No one can guarantee that your efforts will pay off any more than buying a lottery ticket is a sure thing. However, unlike a lottery ticket or placing a bet in a casino, making a conscious effort to limit your chemical exposure, particularly in your food, may spare you unimaginable pain and grief.

So take the time to read labels and if you don't recognize an ingredient, don't let the so called food pass through your pearly gates, your teeth. You may not be able for yet inexplicable reasons to prevent cancer, but don't let your ignorance be the cause of it.

I apologize for the solemn tone of today's blog, but watching my relative suffer close-up makes me want to do everything and anything to spare others from the same fate. It's your health. It's your life. Please take control.

Alcohol and Cancer

My last blog titled "Can Breast Cancer Be Prevented?" offered few clues if prevention is even possible. The reason for the lack of insight was because there are a very limited number of even close to conclusive studies available.  Therefore, imagine my delight, when yesterday a new study comes along that may shed light on a well known dietary factor that may lead to breast and other forms of cancer such as mouth, throat, esophagus, liver, colon, and rectum. That factor is alcohol.

If you are among those who think that drinking alcohol, even in moderation, poses no risks, a new report finds that alcohol is to blame for one in every 30 cancer deaths each year in the United States.
According to the study's researchers, the effects of alcohol consumption are even more pronounced with breast cancer, with 15 percent of those deaths directly related. Even worse, drinking in moderation doesn't help because 30 percent of all alcohol-related cancer deaths are linked to drinking 1.5 drinks or less a day. Quoting one of the researchers, "Alcohol is a cancer-causing agent that's in "plain sight," but people just don't see it." Study author Dr. David Nelson, director of the Cancer Prevention Fellowship Program at the U.S. National Cancer Institute added, "As expected, people who are higher alcohol users were at higher risk, but there was really no safe level of alcohol use."

Published online Feb. 14 in the American Journal of Public Health, the study sought to determine the risks related to drinking and cancer.  The study involved the compilation of data from various sources, including the 2009 Alcohol Epidemiologic Data System, the 2009 Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System and the 2009-2010 National Alcohol Survey. Both women and men were affected by alcohol with alcohol-related cancer deaths in men, accounting for about 6,000 deaths each year. The researchers estimated that each alcohol-related cancer death accounted for an average of 18 years of potential life lost.

According to the report, previous studies have shown drinking is a risk factor for cancers of the mouth, throat, esophagus, liver, colon, rectum and, in women, breast cancer, and one expert was noted on Medline to weigh in, stating that the findings in this study are consistent with what has been shown before.
 
So does this mean you shouldn't drink alcohol, even in moderation? Before I answer, let me tell you my bias. I don't like alcohol and I never did. I've never had more than two drinks in my life at one time and I can say with pride that I've never been inebriated (maybe a little tipsy). Nevertheless, I'm not completely buying this study. Here's why. There is no doubt that alcohol is a toxin, poorly tolerated by several organs such as the brain, liver, etc.  It does not, however, rise to the level of causing cancer like cigarettes that are said to kill over 100,00 each year.

The reasons that alcohol may lead to cancer deaths are not well understood even by researchers.  Some studies claim that alcohol may actually be good for the heart in moderation. No one, including me advocates that one should start drinking if they aren't already in order to prevent heart disease. No one, including me can say with certainty that alcohol isn't causing cancer. I have a problem with studies that don't show cause and effect. It's not that I don't quote them often because they sometimes are the best we have and that's the problem.

My real problem is these one off studies based on compilation of data. Like I wrote in my last blog, we need to shift our research focus to figuring out more definitively what works and what doesn't work when it comes to our health and not rely on retroactive gathering of statistics. For the moment, it's the best we have so it's probably wise not to ignore it; but, I look forward to the day when we know for sure.

In the interim, if you are one of those people who are cancer-phobic, and I wish more were, my recommendation is to really limit your alcohol consumption to special occasions and to limit your consumption to one glass of alcohol (three ounces or less) when such occasions arise. My apologies to those who consume one glass or more regularly with dinner--the numbers are simply not in your corner. In fact, the researchers say their findings suggest there's no safe amount of alcohol when it comes to certain types of cancer.

Update 5.13.13.  A new meta-analysis study, a study that looks at multiple other studies to reach a conclusion, shows again that even moderate alcohol consumption ups the risk for developing breast cancer. 

What Can You Eat If You Have Cancer?

The other day, I saw a patient who had been diagnosed, a number of years ago, with metastatic breast cancer (it had already spread to the lymph nodes in her arm).  She was advised to undergo chemotherapy, but decided instead to undergo a rigorous process of fruit and vegetable juicing. Here she was now years later standing in front of me with no apparent evidence of cancer.  What is the take away from this story? For me, there is none. Anecdotal stories of cures from cancer by food alone offer no compelling scientific evidence. Perhaps the surgeon had effectively removed all the cancer and that is why the patient had no recurrence?  Perhaps she had a very slow growing tumor that continues to spread but goes undetected?  Maybe the fruits and vegetables actually did make a difference? Nevertheless, there can be little doubt that eating healthy foods helps ward off diseases, but the question remains: can you depend on them for a cure?

The problem is that cancer is a confounding disease and can act dissimilar from one person to another even when it is of a similar histology (micro-anatomy) such as squamous, adeno, or sarcoid types of cells. Also, our bodies immune responses to cancer is also different because of our diverse genetic make-ups. That's why we sometime hear of someone being diagnosed with cancer and then passing away a few short months later, while others with similar cancers enjoy many more years of life. It is also true that certain cancers, such as pancreatic cancer, are often discovered very late in their course and often portend very poor short-term outcomes.  Ultimately, the staging (how extensive it is and if it has spread beyond its primary location) of a cancer really does make a difference. The sooner you find cancer, the more effective interventions usually prove to be.

Yesterday, I spent time reviewing various websites that proffer advice on how to eat properly when one has cancer.  What I found was frightening and I am sure very confusing for someone searching for the right answers. The government based sites recommended eating meat and milk products to maintain strength while virtually every other site discouraged consumption of such food materials because of their links to causing and propagating cancer.  The government sites seem to offer their information on the basis of what the government considers healthy eating.

There can be little doubt of the sway of the Dairy and Cattle Associations on the government's recommendations. This is well established.  Nevertheless, a person with cancer is left guessing which set of directions to follow. Unfortunately, I profess some uncertainty in answering this very question. However, I will try.

Based on everything I have read to date, meat and dairy products seem more problematic than helpful when dealing with cancer.  Fruits, vegetables, nuts, beans, seeds, whole grains, and wild Salmon seem more helpful than problematic.  Sugar, other than the natural fructose found in in fruits (don't confuse with high fructose corn syrup, which is horrible), seems universally bad.

Given the choice between conventional therapies and home grown remedies, I would choose both.  My relative battling cancer has made that very choice. He is being bombarded every day with a heavy dose of juicing which includes pomegranates, papaya, berries, apple, citrus fruits, collard greens, turmeric, cinnamon, etc., while also taking prescribed medicine. He is getting the best of both worlds.

As a side note, the person who prepares his food got carried away one day and tried to sneak some very healthy sardines into his smoothie. Suffice it to say, it did not go well. There are limits to what kind of foods can be combined together at one time and still be palatable.  Cancer patients with taste buds need to at best enjoy their food like everyone else, and at worse, not detest it.  There are ample good recipes for combining healthy ingredients; while some experimentation is encouraged, it is advised to not get carried away such as by throwing blueberries and sardines together.

For example, while recently traveling, I got to enjoy a smoothie of my own. There was an airport kiosk offering a smoothie they called "Habit." It contained fresh squeezed orange juice, whole banana, fresh pineapple, raw kale and spinach, and nothing else other than ice. There was no sugar of any type added and I must tell you it was delicious. I understand why they call it "Habit" because I could get use to drinking one of those smoothies every day.


By the way, on another note, this morning I received an email from Harvard Medical School titled "The Top Health Headlines of 2012." The fifth headline was "Do vitamins and other supplements live up to their promise?"

I read the accompanying article and here is a quote from it worth noting:

"Despite their popularity, there is no evidence that multivitamins enhance health or prevent illness. In fact, both the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and a National Institutes of Health State-of-the-Science Conference concluded that multivitamins do not offer protection against heart disease or cancer."

Now the truth be told, I don't agree with everything I read from Harvard Medical School because sometimes the information provided is outdated or simply wrong. Therefore the information provided is merely offered as another view about the ubiquitous multivitamins and dietary supplements.  As always, consult with your physician before initiating taking any pills.

In summation, although no one can tell you definitively what foods can stop cancer once it develops, it seems prudent, if you or someone you know find him or herself in that situation, to eat like we ate thousands of years ago when meat and dairy were in short supply, and we lived off the land and ate fresh oily fish.

Do Fruits and Vegatables Prevent Cancer?

The answer in one word is "unproven." A large study involving 500,000 Europeans over a multi-year basis failed to show a definitive correlation between cancer development and fruit and vegetable consumption.

So if that's the case, why is it important to eat such whole foods?

Before I give you an answer, I want to point out the trap that you may have fallen into by even considering this question. If you've been reading this blog for some time, then at this point you should realize that when it comes to your health, X usually does not cause or prevent Y.

Yes, there are some notable exceptions like cigarette smoking causing lung cancer, trans-fats causing heart disease, etc. but it's almost never so simple.  True, we also know that sufficient levels of Vitamin A prevent night blindness, of niacin prevent pellagra, of Vitamin C prevent scurvy, etc. In other words, there are known cause and effects for certain diseases, but it's usually not one thing alone that causes the major killers such as heart disease, cancer, etc.

Why? The human body is a very complicated machine that is usually able to handle many imperfections (like autoimmune diseases, etc.) and environmental assaults (unhealthy foods, etc.) before it breaks down and stops working completely. It has many built-in mechanisms such as the immune system, the complement system, etc. that fight to fix problems before they wreak havoc.

Even in the case of really harmful things like smoking, not everyone develops lung cancer, one of the known consequences. Sometimes smokers die from the heart damage that smoking does and sometimes they die from something completely unrelated. (Many smokers who don't develop cancer from smoking do develop other lung diseases like emphysema and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), the fourth highest killer of Americans.)

The point here is that it would be a mistake to think that anything, including fruits and vegetables, considered in isolation would prevent major diseases such as heart disease, the leading killer of Americans, and cancer, the second leading cause of death.

It is the sum of the parts that ultimately make a difference. If one eats lots of fruits and vegetables but simultaneously eats lots of processed sugar and other known carcinogens, the fruits and vegetables are unlikely to yield a high preventive effect.

So now let's come back to my question of why it is important to eat fruits and vegetables in regards to cancer.

The answer is that while no study has distinctly proven a cause and effect relationship between the amounts of fruits and vegetables one consumes (once above the deficiency threshold and below the toxicity level) and the development of cancer, there are certain factors that have proven to be strong risk factors for cancer development. One is weight. Overweight and obese people appear to have a markedly increased risk for development of a variety of types of cancer affecting both men and women. It is also a strong risk factor for cancer recurrence. For most people, their weight is a direct result of the types of foods they eat. People who typically eat more fruits and vegetables usually eat less processed foods like breads, crackers, pasta, etc. and weigh less. (See my previous posts 'Why You Get Fat?'  and the two part 'Why You Stay Fat?' for a more exhaustive discussion.)

As I previously wrote about a close relative that was recently diagnosed with cancer, I have taken a keen and deeper interest in the subjects of cancer prevention and survivability so that I may offer this relative the best guidance.

After review of hundreds of cancer prevention studies, I have reached some very tentative conclusions.

Fruits and vegetables alone (and clearly supplements including vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, etc. naturally found or synthetically produced to mirror such chemicals) do not alone prevent cancer.

However, as part of an otherwise healthy lifestyle that includes avoidance of known carcinogens such as smoking, drinking lots of alcohol, being overweight, exposure to environmental hazards such as asbestos and numerous other substances and chemicals such as acrylamide that develops on the surface of french fries during the frying process, nitrites used to preserve cured meats, certain food dyes, pesticides, and other chemical additives, etc., eating fruits and vegetables is likely to cut down one's risk of both developing cancer and dying from it.  As I previously wrote, the risk of men developing cancer is 1 out of 2 and of dying from it is 1 out of 4. For women, the numbers are slightly better with the risk of developing it being 1 out of 3 and of dying of it being 1 out of 5.

Cancer remains mostly a disease of random mutations instead of genetics.  What causes these mutations, why some get it versus others, and why some survive the exact same cancers while others die from them remains an issue of scientific debate. While science continues to try to figure it out, do yourself a favor and shift the odds in your favor. Substitute fruits and vegetables in place of processed foods, in addition to making many other known healthy lifestyle choices such as regular exercise, getting proper sleep, etc.  By doing so, you will give your body every opportunity to function at the optimal health level and to continue functioning for many more good years.

Waiting for cancer?

Let me tell you a very personal story. About three weeks ago, I got a phone call in the evening from a close relative. During the call, I was informed that this person had been diagnosed with cancer. A week later the person called again and notified me that a second cancer had also been diagnosed.  I was devastated and I am still reeling from the news. I love this person very much and can only imagine how dreadful it is for someone to be diagnosed with cancer and what fear it must invoke. Of course, when a close relative develops a serious illness, other family members are surely also concerned about the risk to their own health of developing a similar disease.  Such news brings pain to all quarters.

According to the American Cancer Society, the risk of a man developing cancer is 1 in 2 and of dying of cancer is 1 in 4. The risk of a woman developing cancer is 1 in 3 and of dying of cancer is 1 in 5. You have to be a Luddite not to be concerned about such odds and the personal risk to you of developing this horrific illness.

Although there is clearly a genetic basis for some people to develop cancer, most cancers are random mutations.  In general, it is now believed by credible scientists that virtually all people have cancers cells of one type or another in their bodies at all times due to such random mutations. However, their properly functioning immune system is often capable of dispatching with most of these fledgling cancer cells before they develop into life-threatening tumors.

At this point you may be thinking that if it's only a question of odds, then why not just hope that you will be lucky because what else can you do?  Well, I am here to tell you that there may be a lot to do.

It's well known that professional gamblers using a variety of techniques are able to improve their odds in casinos. For example, counting cards while playing the card game black jack shifts the odds in one's favor over the house. Such subtle shifts can make the difference between vast losses and gains.

In life, can there be any greater loss than the loss of health?

As with gambling, certain human behaviors shift the odds in favor of avoiding or even curing cancer.

Dr. Dean Ornish, in a landmark experiment, demonstrated that a change in diet could stop the expression of prostate cancer. In a limited study, he showed that with certain men, he could arrest the progression of the disease.

It is well established that breast cancer survivors who are overweight have a much higher rate of recurrence of their cancer than comparative normal weight ladies.

There are countless credible studies that support the role of diet and lifestyle in cancer development and death and at this point, almost all doctors agree that lifestyle, including diet, plays a major role in one's health and risk of dying from cancer.

Let's get back to my painful story. After researching the specific types of cancers that my relative had developed, I offered directed recommendations regarding changes in diet and lifestyle that offered hope for improved health and survivability.  After sharing a number of suggested changes, my close relative suddenly uttered that he/she was not prepared to go crazy about his/her diet.

What prompted this response?  My suggestion to eliminate all processed sugar products from the diet.

There has developed a growing body of evidence that sugar stimulates the growth of cancer. It does so by causing the release of insulin which binds to insulin receptors on the surface of solid tumors and stimulates them to grow faster.

When I shared this with a friend yesterday, she asked me why she hadn't heard about the role of sugar in cancer before?  She said her father had died from cancer and one of the country's leading oncologists had never mentioned the need for her father to avoid the sweet stuff.  Unsure of how long it had been since her father passed, I queried and she said that it was about ten years ago.  My response to her question was that scientists did not have as clear an understanding ten years ago as they do today about the dangers of sugar and other dietary intakes on their role in cancer development, progression, and survivability.

As fate would have it, a patient gave me an article two days ago that recently appeared in Mother Jones magazine chronicling the efforts of the sugar industry to suppress the alarming facts regarding the dangers of sugar not only for cancer development, but for heart disease and diabetes as well. Like Big Tobacco before it, the sugar industry has been very successful in confusing the general population into being unalarmed and apathetic about the dangers that sugar poses.

It's gotten so bad that most people actually believe that eating sugar 'in moderation' (however they define moderation) poses no threat to their health. Yet, our country suffers from an epidemic of obesity, heart disease, diabetes and dementia, with a rising tide of metabolic syndrome in which people have elevated blood pressure, sugar and cholesterol.

It may be unfair to single out sugar and its precursors (high glycemic index carbohydrates) as the worst culprits, but the label may actually be accurate. Clearly there are numerous other protagonists responsible for our health problems, including trans-fats, saturated fats, food additives, etc., but sugar laden products such as those containing High Fructose Corn Syrup, deserve special attention.

There are many ways to die, but I can't imagine a much worse way that wasting away from cancer. I still vividly remember as a medical student when I was asked to see a patient in the hospital.  As I entered the room, I saw a very jaundiced looking man with the outlined remains of what I could only imagine were once extremely good looks, who had wasted away and was now close to death from cancer. After addressing his immediate concern for which I had been summoned, I asked if there was anything else I could get him. I still get chills thinking about his response. He answered softly, but assuredly, that I could give him back his health. Then he smiled at me, apparently resigned to his fate.  He died a few days later.

As scientists now know about the major role that food plays in the cancer story, it would be a shame not to take heed of preventive measures that could very well save your life and allow you to enjoy many more years of disease-free living.  I wish I knew in medical school what I know now and I wish I had been able to do more for this stranger. He is long gone, but there are many more than can be helped now.

Let me start by suggesting some basic rules of staying healthy. The top rule is to eat mostly foods that have no labels, such as fruits and vegetables.  Enjoy large amounts of beans, lentils, chickpeas, nuts, and seeds. Consume whole grains on a regular basis particularly the ancient grains such as spelt, quinoa, and millet. Make Wild Salmon a staple of your dinner table, consuming it even every other day if possible.

Of course, you can ignore this advice and gamble with your life and the increased risk of developing cancer.  Or maybe, you now understand the risks and aren't willing to play the odds.

In addition, make sure that you stay physically active by walking at least 7,500 steps (3.75 miles) per day with at least 15 minutes of more intense exertion each day. Get at least 7 hours of sleep a night with at least 3-4 hours of uninterrupted sleep. Manage your stress by learning techniques to deal with life's inevitable stressors such as relatives informing you that they are ill.

The great American poet Robert Frost once wrote that "two roads diverged in the woods" and he "took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference."

Are you going to stay on the road traveled by most people of eating whatever they want blinded to the dangers of developing cancer and other horrible diseases that prematurely shorten their lives or simply make life far more difficult OR will you take the road less traveled by, by eating healthier and see if that makes all the difference?

Are you waiting for cancer? Please don't. It's not worth the wait.

Do Multivitamins Prevent Cancer? Part 1

If you are tuned in to health news, you may have heard about the new study that showed that among older men who took multivitamins, the incidence of cancer was reduced by 8%. Just like the studies that showed increased death rates in women who took multivitamins, this study failed to control for overall health.  

Therefore, when considering the relevance of these findings one does not know if the results were due to cause and effect or coincidence.

Undoubtedly, almost everyone, including the authors of this study, agree that foods that contain such multivitamins in their natural form as those studied have value in cancer prevention. Therefore, without controlling for the diet of the subjects of this study, one cannot reach conclusions whether the moderate reduction in non-prostate cancer rates (there was no reduction in prostate cancers, which represented half of the cancers that developed) we're due to pills or food.  Also, the study did not identify those who had nutritional deficiencies that can impair proper immune system functioning that can lead to cancer growth. 

Furthermore, this research was paid for by companies that provided the vitamins used in the study, which always raises red flags. 

So what's the take-away?  Eat whole foods like vegetables, fruits, nuts, beans, whole grains and wild salmon that contain all the essential vitamins, minerals, fatty acids, and amino acids our body needs that exist in a presumed synergistic relationship with hundreds of other nutrients and avoid synthetic pills of isolated chemicals.

But don't take my word for it. Tomorrow I will give you the actual numbers from the study and you can reach your own conclusions.

Consumer Reports Investigates Vitamins and Supplements: Ten Dangers That May Surprise You

If you haven't seen this yet, I'll let the news release from Consumer Reports below speak for itself. All I can say is Yay! that Consumer Reports is willing to take on the supplement industry and shine the light on the dangers of supplement products. You may want to consider purchasing the latest issue for all the facts.

Release Date: 08/02/2012

Consumer Reports Investigates Vitamins and Supplements: Ten Dangers That May Surprise You

Plus, advice for protecting yourself against hazards associated with vitamins, minerals, herbs, and other nutritional supplements


YONKERS, NY — In a new report in its September issue and online at www.ConsumerReports.org, Consumer Reports identifies ten hazards that might surprise the large swath of American adults—more than 50 percent—who take vitamins, herbs, or other nutritional supplements.
“Patients sometimes assume that supplements are safe because they are ‘all natural,’ but not all supplements are truly natural. In fact, one of the greatest safety hazards to consumers involves supplements that have been spiked with prescription drugs or toxic metals,” said Jose Luis Mosquera, M.D., medical adviser, Consumer Reports, and an internist who specializes in integrative health and medicine.
Consumer Reports identifies ten hazards distilled from interviews with experts, published research, and its own analysis of reports of serious adverse events submitted to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), obtained through a Freedom of Information Act request.  Here are some of the hazards discussed in the report, plus advice for staying safe:

Supplements are not risk-free.  More than 6,300 reports describing an excess of 10,300   serious outcomes, including 115 deaths and more than 2,100 hospitalizations, 1,000 serious injuries or illnesses, 900 emergency-room visits, and some 4,000 other important medical events, streamed into the FDA from supplement companies, consumers, health-care providers, and others between 2007 and mid-April 2012.  CR notes that the reports by themselves don’t prove that supplements caused the problems, but the raw numbers are cause for concern. Current laws make it difficult for the FDA to order a problem product off the market. In fact, to date, the FDA has banned only one ingredient, ephedrine alkaloids.

Protect yourself: Search the FDA’s website at www.fda.gov for warnings, alerts, or voluntary recalls involving a supplement you are thinking of taking.  If you suspect you’re having a bad reaction to a supplement, tell your doctor. You can also report your problem to the FDA at 800-332-1088 or www.fda.gov/medwatch.

Some supplements are really prescription drugs.  According to Daniel Fabricant, Ph.D, director of the FDA’s Division of Dietary Supplement Programs, dietary supplements spiked with prescription drugs are the “largest threat” to consumer safety.   Many recalled products have the same or similar active ingredients as prescription drugs such as sildenafil (Viagra), tadalafil (Cialis), and sibutramine (Meridia, a weight-loss drug that was removed from the market in 2010 because of evidence that it increased the risk of heart attacks and strokes). Others contained synthetic steroids.  “As a result, adulterated products can cause some of the same side effects and interactions that a consumer may be trying to avoid by opting for supplements instead of prescription drugs,” says Dr. Mosquera.

Protect yourself. Consult your doctor if you are having trouble in the bedroom (it could indicate an underlying health problem).  And try to slim down with diet and exercise.  Build muscle by weight training.  

You can overdose on vitamins and minerals.  Unless your health-care provider tells you that you need more than 100 percent of the recommended daily intake of a particular nutrient, you probably don’t.  Megadoses of the fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K can cause problems, and even some standard doses may interfere with certain prescription medicines.  “Surprisingly, some people may experience adverse effects from even normal doses of a vitamin or mineral supplement, especially patients with digestive issues or those who take blood thinners,” says Dr. Mosquera. 

Protect yourself: Using information from the labels on the supplements and food you routinely consume, add up your daily exposure to everything, and then check CR’s “How much is too much?” table to see if you’re overdoing it.

You can’t depend on warning labels.  For one thing, the FDA doesn’t require them on supplements with one important exception, iron.  In a market basket study of 233 products purchased online and in the New York City metropolitan area, Consumer Reports found wide variations and inconsistencies in labeling.

Protect yourself:  Make sure your doctor or pharmacist knows what supplements and prescription drugs you are taking or thinking of taking.  You can also check for interactions by using Consumer Reports’ “Guide: 100+ Commonly Used Supplements.” To access the free guide, go to www.ConsumerReports.org/health and click on “Natural Health.”

Heart and cancer protection: not proven.  Omega-3 pills and antioxidants are widely thought to reduce the risk of heart disease and cancer, respectively, and millions of women take calcium to protect their bones. But recent evidence casts doubt on whether those supplements are as safe or effective as assumed.  The report notes that the widely held view that fish-oil pills help prevent cardiovascular disease hit a snag when a study of 12,500 people with diabetes or prediabetes and a high risk of heart attack or stroke found no difference in the death rate from cardiovascular disease or other outcomes between those given a 1-gram fish-oil pill every day and those given a placebo.  These findings were published in a June 11, 2012, issue of New England Journal of Medicine online report.  

Consumer Reports also notes a recent blow against calcium supplements by German and Swiss researchers who followed almost 24,000 adults for an average of 11 years.  They found that regular users of calcium supplements had an 86 percent increased heart-attack risk compared with those who didn’t use supplements, as reported in the June 2012 issue of the Journal Heart. 

Protect yourself: Lay off the antioxidant supplements and reduce your cancer risk safely by quitting smoking, avoiding excessive alcohol, and eating a healthy diet that includes plenty of fruit, vegetables, nuts, legumes, and whole grains.

Publication date 08/02/12

© Consumer Reports 2012. The material above is intended for legitimate news entities only; it may not be used for advertising or promotional purposes. Consumer Reports® is an expert, independent nonprofit organization whose mission is to work for a fair, just, and safe marketplace for all consumers and to empower consumers to protect themselves. We accept no advertising and pay for all the products we test. We are not beholden to any commercial interest. Our income is derived from the sale of Consumer Reports®, ConsumerReports.org® and our other publications and information products, services, fees, and noncommercial contributions and grants. Our Ratings and reports are intended solely for the use of our readers. Neither the Ratings nor the reports may be used in advertising or for any other commercial purpose without our permission. Consumer Reports will take all steps open to it to prevent commercial use of its materials, its name, or the name of Consumer Reports®.