Nearly half our drinking water could have fluoride added to it under a 'secret' Government plan.
Dental health chiefs want to add the chemical to 40 per cent of England's water supply to combat high levels of tooth decay.
But critics said the 'mass medication' of water without the population's consent was an invasion of their human rights. They also accused dentists of being in denial about the dangers of fluoride, which has been linked to diseases including brittle bones and cancer.
Dental experts, however, said there is overwhelming evidence that adding fluoride to water helps reduce tooth decay, with children the biggest beneficiaries.
Fluoride, which is tasteless and odourless, occurs naturally but is also found in drinking water supplies - usually at levels too low to affect dental health. At present, only 10 per cent of tap water has fluoride added - in the West Midlands and the North East.
Although plans to add the chemical to more of the nation's water supply were first announced by Health Secretary Alan Johnson in February, the scale of the Government's intentions has remained under wraps until now.
Source - Daily Mail
Showing posts with label cancer. Show all posts
Showing posts with label cancer. Show all posts
Monday, August 04, 2008
Monday, July 21, 2008
Spiritual healing on the NHS?
Chinese complementary medicine can go mainstream, why not spiritual healing?
If you see Angie Buxton-King at work on the cancer wards at University College Hospital in Central London, she looks like any other medic: alert, down to earth, overworked. But her talents are different - she is a spiritual healer, one of a handful on the NHS payroll. But she hopes that, with new research and regulation of healing, there may soon be more like her.
Cancer patients at UCH are offered a range of complementary treatments as well as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. These are provided by a four-strong team led by Buxton-King: two healers (Angie and her husband Graham), a counsellor and a massage therapist. Their services are in great demand, which is hardly surprising: statistics suggest that about 90 per cent of cancer patients avail themselves of some form of complementary medicine.
In a small room behind the team's office, a CD of relaxing music is playing. The patient lies on a couch while Buxton-King runs her hands over him or her to “channel the healing energy”. Many patients report feeling heat emanating from the hands, and a feeling of profound relaxation and peace. Each session lasts for 15 minutes.
So how did this all start? In the late 1990s Buxton-King's son, Sam, was fighting leukaemia. “He wasn't expected to live longer than three months,” she says, “so we looked at alternative ways of helping him, and during the three more years that he lived, it became obvious that his quality of life was improved by healing.”
Buxton-King wanted to help other NHS cancer patients, and first offered her services to Great Ormond Street hospital. They were sceptical, so she went to UCH, where she asked Dr Stephen Rowley, the clinical director of haematology, for a chance to prove the need for her services and was taken on for a trial month, one day a week.
“At the end of that time they were very interested,” says Buxton-King. “The whole ward benefited - staff as well as patients.”
Source - Guardian
If you see Angie Buxton-King at work on the cancer wards at University College Hospital in Central London, she looks like any other medic: alert, down to earth, overworked. But her talents are different - she is a spiritual healer, one of a handful on the NHS payroll. But she hopes that, with new research and regulation of healing, there may soon be more like her.
Cancer patients at UCH are offered a range of complementary treatments as well as chemotherapy and radiotherapy. These are provided by a four-strong team led by Buxton-King: two healers (Angie and her husband Graham), a counsellor and a massage therapist. Their services are in great demand, which is hardly surprising: statistics suggest that about 90 per cent of cancer patients avail themselves of some form of complementary medicine.
In a small room behind the team's office, a CD of relaxing music is playing. The patient lies on a couch while Buxton-King runs her hands over him or her to “channel the healing energy”. Many patients report feeling heat emanating from the hands, and a feeling of profound relaxation and peace. Each session lasts for 15 minutes.
So how did this all start? In the late 1990s Buxton-King's son, Sam, was fighting leukaemia. “He wasn't expected to live longer than three months,” she says, “so we looked at alternative ways of helping him, and during the three more years that he lived, it became obvious that his quality of life was improved by healing.”
Buxton-King wanted to help other NHS cancer patients, and first offered her services to Great Ormond Street hospital. They were sceptical, so she went to UCH, where she asked Dr Stephen Rowley, the clinical director of haematology, for a chance to prove the need for her services and was taken on for a trial month, one day a week.
“At the end of that time they were very interested,” says Buxton-King. “The whole ward benefited - staff as well as patients.”
Source - Guardian
Hair dyes found to increase cancer risk
Hairdressers and barbers are at increased risk of developing cancer – because of their use of hair dyes. And the risks could extend to personal use of the dyes, according to international experts.
A review of the evidence by a panel of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, has found a “small but consistent risk of bladder cancer in male hairdressers and barbers".
A second review of the evidence on personal use of hair dyes found some studies suggesting a possible association with bladder cancer and with lymphoma and leukaemia. But the panel found that the evidence was inadequate and concluded that personal use of hair dyes was “not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans".
The panel was composed of 17 scientists who met last February to consider the latest evidence and update advice last issued by the agency in 1993.
Modern hair dyes are classified as permanent, semi permanent or temporary dyes. The permanent or oxidative hair dyes represent 80 per cent of the market and consist of colourless “intermediates” and couplers that, in the presence of peroxide, form the dyes by chemical reaction. Dark hair dyes tend to contain the highest concentration of the colouring ingredients. The use of some such colourants was discontinued in the 1970s after positive cancer tests in rats.
Source - Independent
A review of the evidence by a panel of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) in Lyon, France, has found a “small but consistent risk of bladder cancer in male hairdressers and barbers".
A second review of the evidence on personal use of hair dyes found some studies suggesting a possible association with bladder cancer and with lymphoma and leukaemia. But the panel found that the evidence was inadequate and concluded that personal use of hair dyes was “not classifiable as to its carcinogenicity to humans".
The panel was composed of 17 scientists who met last February to consider the latest evidence and update advice last issued by the agency in 1993.
Modern hair dyes are classified as permanent, semi permanent or temporary dyes. The permanent or oxidative hair dyes represent 80 per cent of the market and consist of colourless “intermediates” and couplers that, in the presence of peroxide, form the dyes by chemical reaction. Dark hair dyes tend to contain the highest concentration of the colouring ingredients. The use of some such colourants was discontinued in the 1970s after positive cancer tests in rats.
Source - Independent
Tuesday, July 01, 2008
How drinking red wine with your steak cancels out cancer causing effects of red meat
It is the perfect excuse to enjoy a glass of red wine with your Sunday roast.
Scientists have shown that the drink cancels out some harmful substances produced by the meat in the stomach.
The chemicals - released during the digestion of fat - are linked to a host of ills, including cancer, hardening of the arteries, diabetes and Parkinson's disease. It is thought the stomach acts as a 'bioreactor' in which red wine's health benefits neutralise some of the dangers of the meat. The Israeli research is far from the first to extol the health benefits of red wine, with previous studies crediting it with reducing the risk of heart disease and cancer.
But the study at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem was unusual in that it looked at the effect of wine in combination with a specific food. Researchers used two groups of rats, feeding one straight red meat, and the other meat impregnated with red wine extract.
Source - Daily Mail
Scientists have shown that the drink cancels out some harmful substances produced by the meat in the stomach.
The chemicals - released during the digestion of fat - are linked to a host of ills, including cancer, hardening of the arteries, diabetes and Parkinson's disease. It is thought the stomach acts as a 'bioreactor' in which red wine's health benefits neutralise some of the dangers of the meat. The Israeli research is far from the first to extol the health benefits of red wine, with previous studies crediting it with reducing the risk of heart disease and cancer.
But the study at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem was unusual in that it looked at the effect of wine in combination with a specific food. Researchers used two groups of rats, feeding one straight red meat, and the other meat impregnated with red wine extract.
Source - Daily Mail
Friday, June 13, 2008
Drinking organic milk 'may cut risk of heart disease and cancer'
Drinking organic milk may cut the risk of heart disease and cancer, research suggests.
A comparison of conventional and organic dairy farms found the organic variety contained significantly higher levels of health-boosting fatty acids, antioxidants and vitamins.Levels of conjugated linoleic acid - a fatty acid credited with lowering the risk of heart problems and cancer - were up to 60 per cent higher.
It is thought high grass content of the animals' diet leads to more nutritious milk.The Newcastle University researchers said that in an 'ideal world' everyone would switch to organic milk, despite it being around 10 pence a pint dearer than the traditional pinta.Study leader Gillian Butler said: 'We have known for some time that what cows are fed has a big influence on milk quality. What is different about this research is it clearly shows that on organic farms, letting cows graze naturally using a forage-based diet is the most important reason for the differences in composition between organic and conventional milk.'
Asked if everyone should switch to organic milk, she said: 'In an ideal world it would be better but logistically I don't think there would be enough. 'It is more expensive to produce as you get less milk per unit of land and it is more expensive to buy. But because it is higher in all these beneficial compounds you don't need to buy as much to get the health benefits."
"What I am trying to do is identify what it is about organic milk that makes it healthier then maybe we can use that to improve milk quality across the board.'It is important conventional dairy farmers keep an open mind and maybe tweak their production systems to improve the fatty acids in their milk."
Source - Daily Mail
A comparison of conventional and organic dairy farms found the organic variety contained significantly higher levels of health-boosting fatty acids, antioxidants and vitamins.Levels of conjugated linoleic acid - a fatty acid credited with lowering the risk of heart problems and cancer - were up to 60 per cent higher.
It is thought high grass content of the animals' diet leads to more nutritious milk.The Newcastle University researchers said that in an 'ideal world' everyone would switch to organic milk, despite it being around 10 pence a pint dearer than the traditional pinta.Study leader Gillian Butler said: 'We have known for some time that what cows are fed has a big influence on milk quality. What is different about this research is it clearly shows that on organic farms, letting cows graze naturally using a forage-based diet is the most important reason for the differences in composition between organic and conventional milk.'
Asked if everyone should switch to organic milk, she said: 'In an ideal world it would be better but logistically I don't think there would be enough. 'It is more expensive to produce as you get less milk per unit of land and it is more expensive to buy. But because it is higher in all these beneficial compounds you don't need to buy as much to get the health benefits."
"What I am trying to do is identify what it is about organic milk that makes it healthier then maybe we can use that to improve milk quality across the board.'It is important conventional dairy farmers keep an open mind and maybe tweak their production systems to improve the fatty acids in their milk."
Source - Daily Mail
Friday, May 30, 2008
Cows that eat outdoors produce healthier milk
The benefits of organic milk have been highlighted by a study showing milk from cows which graze outside on grass and clover contains more antioxidants and vitamins than that from conventional dairy farms.
An al fresco diet in cows results in milk with up to 60 per cent higher levels of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA9) which has been linked to a reduced risk of cancer, according to research from Newcastle University. The same study found 39 per cent more omega-3 fatty acid and 33 per cent more vitamin E, which are also thought to reduce the risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease. During the summer, when there is the most discrepancy between feeding techniques, the widest difference emerges between organic and non-organic milks.
Gillian Butler, the livestock production manager at Nafferton Ecological Farming Group, who led the research, said grazing provided around 84 per cent of food for cows on organic farms in the summer, compared to 37 per cent for conventionally farmed animals. The remaining diet of cows on non-organic farms comprised 29 per cent silage (preserved grass) and 34 per cent concentrate (a mixture including cereals and grains).
"We have known for some time that what cows are fed has a big influence on milk quality," Ms Butler said. "This research shows that on organic farms, letting cows graze naturally is the most important reason for the differences in composition between organic and conventional milk."
Source - Independent
An al fresco diet in cows results in milk with up to 60 per cent higher levels of conjugated linoleic acid (CLA9) which has been linked to a reduced risk of cancer, according to research from Newcastle University. The same study found 39 per cent more omega-3 fatty acid and 33 per cent more vitamin E, which are also thought to reduce the risk of cancer and cardiovascular disease. During the summer, when there is the most discrepancy between feeding techniques, the widest difference emerges between organic and non-organic milks.
Gillian Butler, the livestock production manager at Nafferton Ecological Farming Group, who led the research, said grazing provided around 84 per cent of food for cows on organic farms in the summer, compared to 37 per cent for conventionally farmed animals. The remaining diet of cows on non-organic farms comprised 29 per cent silage (preserved grass) and 34 per cent concentrate (a mixture including cereals and grains).
"We have known for some time that what cows are fed has a big influence on milk quality," Ms Butler said. "This research shows that on organic farms, letting cows graze naturally is the most important reason for the differences in composition between organic and conventional milk."
Source - Independent
Fruit and veg keep cancer at bay
From protecting you against cancers to sunburn, scientists can now explain the value of fruit and vegetables in our diet.
Small red tomatoes nestling among green peppers, sliced carrots and spring onions not only brighten up a salad but also give some protection against a wide variety of cancers. They have other more mundane properties as well. Holidaymakers in France and Spain may be less likely to suffer sunburn and prematurely aged skin if they eat tomatoes, rich in lycopene, and other fruits and vegetables rich in carotenoids.
Carotenoids are the micronutrients, mainly dark yellow or red, that give some fruits and vegetables their colour and health-giving powers. Tomato juice or ketchup with the fish and salad won't in any way replace a high-factor sunscreen, but it offers some protective action against inflammation, premature skin ageing, photo-sensitivity disorders and some skin cancers.
The carotenoids in tomatoes, peppers and pomegranates once eaten are later widely distributed in the epidermal and dermal layers of the skin. In the skin they help to absorb the light, act as antioxidants and have an anti-inflammatory response to sunburn. They act by increasing the circulation of the blood to the skin and thus its nutrition. The better skin nutrition the less its scaliness and roughness, and more improved its thickness and hydration.
Scientists attending the First International Congress on Nutrition and Cancer in Turkey last week discussed the effect of nutrition on skin health as well as on malignancies. The study of nutrition is increasingly moving from a focus on diet to food science. It is now accepted that the diet enjoyed by those living in the Far East or the Mediterranean countries has advantages over typical Western fare and contributes to a longer life. Scientists can now explain the biochemical mechanism and demonstrate how the micronutrients in the diet can interfere with the body's cellular pathways to help to prevent cancer.
Source - Times
Small red tomatoes nestling among green peppers, sliced carrots and spring onions not only brighten up a salad but also give some protection against a wide variety of cancers. They have other more mundane properties as well. Holidaymakers in France and Spain may be less likely to suffer sunburn and prematurely aged skin if they eat tomatoes, rich in lycopene, and other fruits and vegetables rich in carotenoids.
Carotenoids are the micronutrients, mainly dark yellow or red, that give some fruits and vegetables their colour and health-giving powers. Tomato juice or ketchup with the fish and salad won't in any way replace a high-factor sunscreen, but it offers some protective action against inflammation, premature skin ageing, photo-sensitivity disorders and some skin cancers.
The carotenoids in tomatoes, peppers and pomegranates once eaten are later widely distributed in the epidermal and dermal layers of the skin. In the skin they help to absorb the light, act as antioxidants and have an anti-inflammatory response to sunburn. They act by increasing the circulation of the blood to the skin and thus its nutrition. The better skin nutrition the less its scaliness and roughness, and more improved its thickness and hydration.
Scientists attending the First International Congress on Nutrition and Cancer in Turkey last week discussed the effect of nutrition on skin health as well as on malignancies. The study of nutrition is increasingly moving from a focus on diet to food science. It is now accepted that the diet enjoyed by those living in the Far East or the Mediterranean countries has advantages over typical Western fare and contributes to a longer life. Scientists can now explain the biochemical mechanism and demonstrate how the micronutrients in the diet can interfere with the body's cellular pathways to help to prevent cancer.
Source - Times
Monday, May 19, 2008
DNA damage 'caused by pesticides'
New research in India suggests exposure to pesticides could have damaged the DNA of people in farming communities, leading to higher rates of cancer.
Scientists at Patiala University, Punjab state, did the study, tracking a group of farmers for several months. But a spokesman for the crop industry trade association said a causal link between pesticide use and cancer could not be established.
There have been concerns about potential links for several years. This new study discovered that the DNA of farmers in Punjab has been altered, making them susceptible to cancer.
'Significant change'
Professor Satbir Kaur said the study ruled out other factors such as age, alcohol intake and smoking, concluding that the probable cause of this fundamental change in the building block of life was use of pesticide sprays.
"We found significant change in the DNA, so the cancer risk is greatly increased when the extent of DNA damage is very high," he said.
Salil Singhal of the industry trade association, the Crop Care Federation of India, said that this causal link could not be possible.
"There is no pesticide in use today which can cause cancer," he said.
Mr Singhal said farmers use sprays only a few times each season. But this correspondent found farmers who needed to use them far more than that in order to keep ahead of the pests.
Source - BBC
Scientists at Patiala University, Punjab state, did the study, tracking a group of farmers for several months. But a spokesman for the crop industry trade association said a causal link between pesticide use and cancer could not be established.
There have been concerns about potential links for several years. This new study discovered that the DNA of farmers in Punjab has been altered, making them susceptible to cancer.
'Significant change'
Professor Satbir Kaur said the study ruled out other factors such as age, alcohol intake and smoking, concluding that the probable cause of this fundamental change in the building block of life was use of pesticide sprays.
"We found significant change in the DNA, so the cancer risk is greatly increased when the extent of DNA damage is very high," he said.
Salil Singhal of the industry trade association, the Crop Care Federation of India, said that this causal link could not be possible.
"There is no pesticide in use today which can cause cancer," he said.
Mr Singhal said farmers use sprays only a few times each season. But this correspondent found farmers who needed to use them far more than that in order to keep ahead of the pests.
Source - BBC
Friday, May 16, 2008
Berry interesting
What's small, Scottish and packed with more antioxidants than you can shake a stick at?
No, it's not a gag. The answer is aronia berries and they're being hailed as Scotland's new super-berries.
Already causing quite a stir in the US, the berry only has one commercial source in the UK – a farm in Angus. New this month is a range of juices and smoothies full of the berries from Edinburgh juice bar, Juice Almighty.
Berries are an excellent source of antioxidants and proanthocyanidins – thought to be effective in inhibiting the growth of cancer cells – but the good news is that aronia berries contain more of these health-boosting properties than any other fruit. And if that wasn't enough, they also contain vitamins B2, B6, E, C and folic acid. Drink up!
Source - Scotsman
No, it's not a gag. The answer is aronia berries and they're being hailed as Scotland's new super-berries.
Already causing quite a stir in the US, the berry only has one commercial source in the UK – a farm in Angus. New this month is a range of juices and smoothies full of the berries from Edinburgh juice bar, Juice Almighty.
Berries are an excellent source of antioxidants and proanthocyanidins – thought to be effective in inhibiting the growth of cancer cells – but the good news is that aronia berries contain more of these health-boosting properties than any other fruit. And if that wasn't enough, they also contain vitamins B2, B6, E, C and folic acid. Drink up!
Source - Scotsman
Health scares will do you no good
The papers are full of health scares - but why do we believe contradictory and tenuous stories, while ignoring simple medical advice?
Broccoli fights cancer, says the British Journal of Cancer. This worries me because I remember vividly that once upon a time, circa 2001, broccoli was carcinogenic. Back then, it contained acetaldehyde, which was A Bad Thing Of Some Kind, and quite prominent in health stories until we forgot about it. Luckily, I don't use deodorant or incense, but phone masts, bacon and the rest of the fashionable carcinogens will probably get me if I live long enough.Or they will if the endless health scares in the press are to be believed.
But despite their repetitive, contradictory and medically tenuous nature, people pay attention to these lists of absurd things that are supposedly bad for you; they even act upon them - randomly banning bra underwiring or broccoli from their lives - while remaining resistant to constant, consistent and proven advice to eat, drink and smoke less and exercise more. Why?
Ben Goldacre, who, as well as being a doctor, writes this newspaper's Bad Science column, says the lure of the health scare story for the media lies in that fact that during the "golden age of medicine, miracle cures and sinister hidden scares really were being discovered". Now, "we move ahead by small incremental understandings of large numbers of modest risk factors, but journalists haven't found a way to write about that, so every fractional research finding has to be crowbarred into the 'miracle-cure-hidden-scare' template."
Source - Guardian
Broccoli fights cancer, says the British Journal of Cancer. This worries me because I remember vividly that once upon a time, circa 2001, broccoli was carcinogenic. Back then, it contained acetaldehyde, which was A Bad Thing Of Some Kind, and quite prominent in health stories until we forgot about it. Luckily, I don't use deodorant or incense, but phone masts, bacon and the rest of the fashionable carcinogens will probably get me if I live long enough.Or they will if the endless health scares in the press are to be believed.
But despite their repetitive, contradictory and medically tenuous nature, people pay attention to these lists of absurd things that are supposedly bad for you; they even act upon them - randomly banning bra underwiring or broccoli from their lives - while remaining resistant to constant, consistent and proven advice to eat, drink and smoke less and exercise more. Why?
Ben Goldacre, who, as well as being a doctor, writes this newspaper's Bad Science column, says the lure of the health scare story for the media lies in that fact that during the "golden age of medicine, miracle cures and sinister hidden scares really were being discovered". Now, "we move ahead by small incremental understandings of large numbers of modest risk factors, but journalists haven't found a way to write about that, so every fractional research finding has to be crowbarred into the 'miracle-cure-hidden-scare' template."
Source - Guardian
Monday, May 12, 2008
'Change your lifestyle and cut cancer risk by one third,' say experts
A third of all cancers in the UK could be prevented by changes in diet and lifestyle.
Experts say this amounts to 95,000 people a year, more than enough to fill Wembley. Professor Martin Wiseman of the World Cancer Research Fund said: "When health charities talk about numbers, it can often be difficult to comprehend what that means. We hope that by comparing it to something easier to imagine, like the capacity of Wembley, we can show the scale of the problem."
The WCRF estimate comes amid concern that growing waistlines, coupled with binge-drinking, lack of exercise and poor diet are fuelling cancer.
Cases of womb cancer – which is twice as common in the obese – have risen by a fifth over the past decade while kidney cancer, also linked to obesity, went up by 14 per cent.
Cancer prevention advice includes staying slim, exercising at least half an hour a day and eating more fruit, vegetables, wholegrains and pulses.
The WCRF's estimate of the number of preventable cancer cases follows concern that growing waistlines, coupled with lack of exercise and binge drinking, are fuelling the disease.
Cases of mouth cancer, which is associated with smoking and drinking, have increased by almost a quarter in a decade.
The number of cases of womb cancer - which is twice as common in the obese - rose by a fifth in the same period.
Cases of kidney cancer, which is also linked to obesity, went up by 14 per cent, recent figures compiled by Cancer Research UK show.
Almost 285,000 people are diagnosed with cancer in the UK each year and nearly 155,000 die.
Source - Daily Mail
Experts say this amounts to 95,000 people a year, more than enough to fill Wembley. Professor Martin Wiseman of the World Cancer Research Fund said: "When health charities talk about numbers, it can often be difficult to comprehend what that means. We hope that by comparing it to something easier to imagine, like the capacity of Wembley, we can show the scale of the problem."
The WCRF estimate comes amid concern that growing waistlines, coupled with binge-drinking, lack of exercise and poor diet are fuelling cancer.
Cases of womb cancer – which is twice as common in the obese – have risen by a fifth over the past decade while kidney cancer, also linked to obesity, went up by 14 per cent.
Cancer prevention advice includes staying slim, exercising at least half an hour a day and eating more fruit, vegetables, wholegrains and pulses.
The WCRF's estimate of the number of preventable cancer cases follows concern that growing waistlines, coupled with lack of exercise and binge drinking, are fuelling the disease.
Cases of mouth cancer, which is associated with smoking and drinking, have increased by almost a quarter in a decade.
The number of cases of womb cancer - which is twice as common in the obese - rose by a fifth in the same period.
Cases of kidney cancer, which is also linked to obesity, went up by 14 per cent, recent figures compiled by Cancer Research UK show.
Almost 285,000 people are diagnosed with cancer in the UK each year and nearly 155,000 die.
Source - Daily Mail
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Mobile phones 'more dangerous than smoking or asbestos'
Mobile phones could kill far more people than smoking or asbestos, a study by an award-winning cancer expert has concluded. He says people should avoid using them wherever possible and that governments and the mobile phone industry must take "immediate steps" to reduce exposure to their radiation.
The study, by Dr Vini Khurana, is the most devastating indictment yet published of the health risks.
It draws on growing evidence – exclusively reported in the IoS in October – that using handsets for 10 years or more can double the risk of brain cancer. Cancers take at least a decade to develop, invalidating official safety assurances based on earlier studies which included few, if any, people who had used the phones for that long.
Earlier this year, the French government warned against the use of mobile phones, especially by children. Germany also advises its people to minimise handset use, and the European Environment Agency has called for exposures to be reduced.
Source - Independent
The study, by Dr Vini Khurana, is the most devastating indictment yet published of the health risks.
It draws on growing evidence – exclusively reported in the IoS in October – that using handsets for 10 years or more can double the risk of brain cancer. Cancers take at least a decade to develop, invalidating official safety assurances based on earlier studies which included few, if any, people who had used the phones for that long.
Earlier this year, the French government warned against the use of mobile phones, especially by children. Germany also advises its people to minimise handset use, and the European Environment Agency has called for exposures to be reduced.
Source - Independent
Can starving yourself help combat cancer?
Starving the body of food for a couple of days could help in the fight against cancer, according to new research.
Scientists have discovered that a 48-hour fast seems to protect the body's healthy cells against the toxic effects of chemotherapy drugs. The breakthrough could provide a solution to a problem that has confounded cancer experts for years - how to target chemotherapy so it destroys cancer cells but leaves healthy ones intact.
It seems depriving healthy cells of the food they need for fuel sends them into a kind of survival mode, where they become highly resistant to stress or damage. Experts describe this behaviour as similar to animals waiting out winter food shortages by hibernating.
But cancer cells do not react in the same way. Instead, they carry on growing and remain just as susceptible to the effects of chemotherapy as they do when the body has a full supply of food.
The result could be that doctors can cure more cancers by using higher doses of chemotherapy drugs to shrink or destroy tumours.
Source - Daily Mail
.
Scientists have discovered that a 48-hour fast seems to protect the body's healthy cells against the toxic effects of chemotherapy drugs. The breakthrough could provide a solution to a problem that has confounded cancer experts for years - how to target chemotherapy so it destroys cancer cells but leaves healthy ones intact.
It seems depriving healthy cells of the food they need for fuel sends them into a kind of survival mode, where they become highly resistant to stress or damage. Experts describe this behaviour as similar to animals waiting out winter food shortages by hibernating.
But cancer cells do not react in the same way. Instead, they carry on growing and remain just as susceptible to the effects of chemotherapy as they do when the body has a full supply of food.
The result could be that doctors can cure more cancers by using higher doses of chemotherapy drugs to shrink or destroy tumours.
Source - Daily Mail
.
Friday, April 18, 2008
The yellow mushroom that could fight cancer
An exotic mushroom could help in the fight against cancer, it emerged yesterday.
Tests show extracts from Phellinus linteus, a yellow tropical fungus, can combat breast, prostate, skin and lung cancers. It is thought the mushroom, a mainstay of Oriental medicine since ancient times, stops blood vessels from growing and feeding tumours. Study of the fungus, which grows on the bark of dead mulberry trees, could lead to the development of new anti-cancer drugs.
Alternatively, the extract itself may be used to treat patients. Dietary supplements could even help ward off the cancer in healthy individuals, the U.S. researchers believe.
Scientists from the Methodist Research Institute in Indianapolis showed that a powdered extract of the mushroom can halt the growth of breast cancer cells. Experiments suggest it does this by blocking an enzyme involved in the development of the blood vessels needed to nourish the growth and spread of cancer cells.
Lead researcher Dr Daniel Sliva said: "We saw a number of positive results from our investigation of aggressive human breast cancer cells, including a lower rate of uncontrolled growth of new cancer cells, suppression of their aggressive behaviour and the formation of fewer blood vessels that feed cancer cells' essential nutrients."
Previous studies have shown the mushroom is also effective against prostate, lung and skin cancers.
Source - Daily Mail
Tests show extracts from Phellinus linteus, a yellow tropical fungus, can combat breast, prostate, skin and lung cancers. It is thought the mushroom, a mainstay of Oriental medicine since ancient times, stops blood vessels from growing and feeding tumours. Study of the fungus, which grows on the bark of dead mulberry trees, could lead to the development of new anti-cancer drugs.
Alternatively, the extract itself may be used to treat patients. Dietary supplements could even help ward off the cancer in healthy individuals, the U.S. researchers believe.
Scientists from the Methodist Research Institute in Indianapolis showed that a powdered extract of the mushroom can halt the growth of breast cancer cells. Experiments suggest it does this by blocking an enzyme involved in the development of the blood vessels needed to nourish the growth and spread of cancer cells.
Lead researcher Dr Daniel Sliva said: "We saw a number of positive results from our investigation of aggressive human breast cancer cells, including a lower rate of uncontrolled growth of new cancer cells, suppression of their aggressive behaviour and the formation of fewer blood vessels that feed cancer cells' essential nutrients."
Previous studies have shown the mushroom is also effective against prostate, lung and skin cancers.
Source - Daily Mail
Monday, March 31, 2008
We love our mobiles... but are we being told all the facts about how safe they are?
They are both fashion accessories and an essential part of our lives. Yet since they first became widely available in the 1990s, there have been nagging doubts about just how safe they are.
Could they cause cancers in the brain? Does living near a mobile phone mast raise your risk of other cancers? Despite official reassurances, we still don't seem to be any closer to a definite answer.
Last September, the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) programme, which is funded jointly by the Government and the industry, concluded that mobile phones, base stations and masts "have not been found to be associated with any biological or adverse health effects".
This conclusion was based on the findings of the working of the cells in our bodies. A major UK report eight years ago warned that children could be especially vulnerable to mobile phone emissions because of their thinner skulls and developing nervous system.
However, the Health Protection Agency, which is responsible for safety in this area, has stated that as far as adults are concerned, wi-fi, phones and radio masts all operate on a power level that is well within the accepted guidelines, and that there is no evidence that they pose a threat to people's health.
Speaking last September, the chairman of the MTHR programme, Professor Lawrie Challis, said: "There is no evidence for immediate or short-term health effects" — though he added there was a "slight hint" of increased risk of brain tumour among long term users.
There have not been any official studies on children, but because children have been shown to react differently to environmental stimuli, Professor Challis said it was "possible that they were at greater risk".
The advice to parents is to limit children's use of mobiles, and ensure that those under the age of eight do not use them at all.
For some experts, this warning does not go nearly far enough. Professor Denis Henshaw, head of the human radiation effects group at Bristol University, says: "We are steeped in denial over the safety of mobile phones and related technologies."
Source - Daily Mail
Could they cause cancers in the brain? Does living near a mobile phone mast raise your risk of other cancers? Despite official reassurances, we still don't seem to be any closer to a definite answer.
Last September, the Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research (MTHR) programme, which is funded jointly by the Government and the industry, concluded that mobile phones, base stations and masts "have not been found to be associated with any biological or adverse health effects".
This conclusion was based on the findings of the working of the cells in our bodies. A major UK report eight years ago warned that children could be especially vulnerable to mobile phone emissions because of their thinner skulls and developing nervous system.
However, the Health Protection Agency, which is responsible for safety in this area, has stated that as far as adults are concerned, wi-fi, phones and radio masts all operate on a power level that is well within the accepted guidelines, and that there is no evidence that they pose a threat to people's health.
Speaking last September, the chairman of the MTHR programme, Professor Lawrie Challis, said: "There is no evidence for immediate or short-term health effects" — though he added there was a "slight hint" of increased risk of brain tumour among long term users.
There have not been any official studies on children, but because children have been shown to react differently to environmental stimuli, Professor Challis said it was "possible that they were at greater risk".
The advice to parents is to limit children's use of mobiles, and ensure that those under the age of eight do not use them at all.
For some experts, this warning does not go nearly far enough. Professor Denis Henshaw, head of the human radiation effects group at Bristol University, says: "We are steeped in denial over the safety of mobile phones and related technologies."
Source - Daily Mail
Friday, February 29, 2008
'Cancer link' to heavy mobile use
Heavy mobile phone use may be linked to an increased risk of cancer of the salivary gland, a study suggests.
Researchers looked at 500 Israelis who had developed the condition and compared their mobile phone usage with 1,300 healthy controls. Those who had used the phone against one side of the head for several hours a day were 50% more likely to have developed a salivary gland tumour.
The research appeared in The American Journal of Epidemiology.
Numerous studies have focused on the risk of tumours among those who use mobile phones, and overwhelmingly found no increased cancer risk. But researchers at Tel Aviv University say these have tended to focus on brain tumours, and often did not include long-term users.
Cancer of the salivary gland is a very rare condition. Of the 230,000 cases of cancer diagnosed in the UK for instance annually, only 550 relate to this area.
Source - BBC
Researchers looked at 500 Israelis who had developed the condition and compared their mobile phone usage with 1,300 healthy controls. Those who had used the phone against one side of the head for several hours a day were 50% more likely to have developed a salivary gland tumour.
The research appeared in The American Journal of Epidemiology.
Numerous studies have focused on the risk of tumours among those who use mobile phones, and overwhelmingly found no increased cancer risk. But researchers at Tel Aviv University say these have tended to focus on brain tumours, and often did not include long-term users.
Cancer of the salivary gland is a very rare condition. Of the 230,000 cases of cancer diagnosed in the UK for instance annually, only 550 relate to this area.
Source - BBC
Mobiles 'not brain cancer risk'
Mobile phone use does not raise the risk of brain tumours, a Japanese study suggests.
The research is the first to look at the effects of hand set radiation levels on different parts of the brain.
Tokyo Women's Medical University found no increased risk of the three main types of brain cancer among regular mobile phone users.
The study, comparing 322 brain cancer patients and 683 healthy people, appears in British Journal of Cancer. The cancer patients had one of the three most common types of brain tumour - glioma, meningioma or pituitary adenoma. The researchers rated each subject according to how many years they had been using a mobile phone, and how long they spent talking on it each day.
They studied the radiation emitted from various types of mobile phone, and placed them into one of four categories relating to radiation strength. And they also analysied how each phone was likely to affect different areas of the brain.
Lead researcher Professor Naohito Yamaguchi said: "Using our newly developed and more accurate techniques, we found no association between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more evidence to suggest they don't cause brain cancer."
Source - BBC
The research is the first to look at the effects of hand set radiation levels on different parts of the brain.
Tokyo Women's Medical University found no increased risk of the three main types of brain cancer among regular mobile phone users.
The study, comparing 322 brain cancer patients and 683 healthy people, appears in British Journal of Cancer. The cancer patients had one of the three most common types of brain tumour - glioma, meningioma or pituitary adenoma. The researchers rated each subject according to how many years they had been using a mobile phone, and how long they spent talking on it each day.
They studied the radiation emitted from various types of mobile phone, and placed them into one of four categories relating to radiation strength. And they also analysied how each phone was likely to affect different areas of the brain.
Lead researcher Professor Naohito Yamaguchi said: "Using our newly developed and more accurate techniques, we found no association between mobile phone use and cancer, providing more evidence to suggest they don't cause brain cancer."
Source - BBC
Thursday, February 28, 2008
Coffee, mobiles and breast implants 'won't give you cancer'
Drinking coffee, using mobile phones or having breast implants is unlikely to cause cancer, according to a risk ranking system devised by a cancer specialist to debunk popular myths.
The cancer risk assessment reaffirms smoking, alcohol and exposure to sunlight as leading risk factors, but allays concerns about coffee, mobile phones, deodorants, breast implants and water with added fluoride.
The five-point system created by Professor Bernard Stewart from the University of New South Wales in Australia, lists the risk of cancer from proven and likely, to inferred, unknown or unlikely.
"Our tool will help establish if the level of risk is high, say on a par with smoking, or unlikely such as using deodorants, artificial sweeteners, drinking coffee," Stewart said.
He found active smokers and ex-smokers to be the most at risk, although the risk is reduced for people who quit smoking.
Drinking coffee, using a mobile phone and having breast implants are unlikely to cause cancer according to the ranking systemDrinking alcohol was also a high risk factor, particularly for people who also smoke, although Stewart said no specific type of alcoholic drink was most strongly to blame.
Drinking chlorinated water and using a mobile phone was far less likely to cause cancer, Stewart said, although the risks associated with the long-term use of mobile phones had not been fully established.
Source - Daily Mail
The cancer risk assessment reaffirms smoking, alcohol and exposure to sunlight as leading risk factors, but allays concerns about coffee, mobile phones, deodorants, breast implants and water with added fluoride.
The five-point system created by Professor Bernard Stewart from the University of New South Wales in Australia, lists the risk of cancer from proven and likely, to inferred, unknown or unlikely.
"Our tool will help establish if the level of risk is high, say on a par with smoking, or unlikely such as using deodorants, artificial sweeteners, drinking coffee," Stewart said.
He found active smokers and ex-smokers to be the most at risk, although the risk is reduced for people who quit smoking.
Drinking coffee, using a mobile phone and having breast implants are unlikely to cause cancer according to the ranking systemDrinking alcohol was also a high risk factor, particularly for people who also smoke, although Stewart said no specific type of alcoholic drink was most strongly to blame.
Drinking chlorinated water and using a mobile phone was far less likely to cause cancer, Stewart said, although the risks associated with the long-term use of mobile phones had not been fully established.
Source - Daily Mail
Thursday, January 31, 2008
Medical plants 'face extinction'
Hundreds of medicinal plants are at risk of extinction, threatening the discovery of future cures for disease, according to experts.
Over 50% of prescription drugs are derived from chemicals first identified in plants. But the Botanic Gardens Conservation International said many were at risk from over-collection and deforestation.
Researchers warned the cures for things such as cancer and HIV may become "extinct before they are ever found".
The group, which represents botanic gardens across 120 countries, surveyed over 600 of its members as well as leading university experts. They identified 400 plants that were at risk of extinction.
These included yew trees, the bark of which forms the basis for one of the world's most widely used cancer drugs, paclitaxel.
Hoodia, which originally comes from Namibia and is attracting interest from drug firms looking into developing weight loss drugs, is on the verge of extinction, the report said. And half of the world's species of magnolias are also under threat.
The plant contains the chemical honokiol, which has been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat cancers and slow down the onset of heart disease.
The report also said autumn crocus, which is a natural treatment for gout and has been linked to helping fight leukaemia, is at risk of over-harvest as it is popular with the horticultural trade because of its stunning petals.
Souce - BBC
Over 50% of prescription drugs are derived from chemicals first identified in plants. But the Botanic Gardens Conservation International said many were at risk from over-collection and deforestation.
Researchers warned the cures for things such as cancer and HIV may become "extinct before they are ever found".
The group, which represents botanic gardens across 120 countries, surveyed over 600 of its members as well as leading university experts. They identified 400 plants that were at risk of extinction.
These included yew trees, the bark of which forms the basis for one of the world's most widely used cancer drugs, paclitaxel.
Hoodia, which originally comes from Namibia and is attracting interest from drug firms looking into developing weight loss drugs, is on the verge of extinction, the report said. And half of the world's species of magnolias are also under threat.
The plant contains the chemical honokiol, which has been used in traditional Chinese medicine to treat cancers and slow down the onset of heart disease.
The report also said autumn crocus, which is a natural treatment for gout and has been linked to helping fight leukaemia, is at risk of over-harvest as it is popular with the horticultural trade because of its stunning petals.
Souce - BBC
How DIRT can protect you against cancer
The idea that we're too clean for our own good will be familiar to many. Scientists call it the hygiene hypothesis, and the theory is that far from benefiting our health, our obsession with cleanliness and hygiene is actually bad for us.
It's said that exposure to dirt and germs early in life 'primes' the immune system so it is prepared for any future threat - and that our constant wiping and sterilising of everything from kitchen work tops to children's toys may be undermining this important mechanism.
Last year, UK consumers spent £610 million on household cleaning products, up 16 per cent over a five-year period, according to market research experts Mintel. And the result of all this cleaning, according to proponents of the hygiene hypothesis, is an exponential growth in allergies.
The UK has one of the highest rates of allergy in the world - around 6,000 people a year need hospital treatment for potentially life-threatening reactions to animals, bee stings and foods such as peanuts.
Previously, researchers have focused mainly on allergies, asthma and eczema. Numerous studies show children raised on farms are less likely to get these diseases, either because they inhale all kinds of toxins or drink raw milk packed with bugs. Youngsters raised with cats or dogs also seem to be protected.
But now scientists believe the hygiene hypothesis could also explain the rising incidence of cancer.
Since the mid-Seventies, the number of people in the UK annually diagnosed with cancer has risen by 25 per cent, according to Cancer Research UK.
According to the hygiene hypothesis, repeated exposure to allergens, bacteria or certain toxins keeps the immune system on 'red alert', suppressing cancer cells in the earliest stages of development. Studies suggest that the more germs you get into your body, the less likely you are to get certain tumours.
Source - Daily Mail
It's said that exposure to dirt and germs early in life 'primes' the immune system so it is prepared for any future threat - and that our constant wiping and sterilising of everything from kitchen work tops to children's toys may be undermining this important mechanism.
Last year, UK consumers spent £610 million on household cleaning products, up 16 per cent over a five-year period, according to market research experts Mintel. And the result of all this cleaning, according to proponents of the hygiene hypothesis, is an exponential growth in allergies.
The UK has one of the highest rates of allergy in the world - around 6,000 people a year need hospital treatment for potentially life-threatening reactions to animals, bee stings and foods such as peanuts.
Previously, researchers have focused mainly on allergies, asthma and eczema. Numerous studies show children raised on farms are less likely to get these diseases, either because they inhale all kinds of toxins or drink raw milk packed with bugs. Youngsters raised with cats or dogs also seem to be protected.
But now scientists believe the hygiene hypothesis could also explain the rising incidence of cancer.
Since the mid-Seventies, the number of people in the UK annually diagnosed with cancer has risen by 25 per cent, according to Cancer Research UK.
According to the hygiene hypothesis, repeated exposure to allergens, bacteria or certain toxins keeps the immune system on 'red alert', suppressing cancer cells in the earliest stages of development. Studies suggest that the more germs you get into your body, the less likely you are to get certain tumours.
Source - Daily Mail
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)