Exercise may help reduce breast cancer risk

More on the subject of weight fats and hormones.

RB


http://news.inq7.net/lifestyle/index...id=69273&col=2

[Sherryg683]

Haha, if exercise help reduce breast cancer risk, then there should be no way that I or my friend should have ever gotten it. I worked out in the gym 6 days a week, played tennis, swam and was a complete health freak. I was in the best shape of my life the year before my diagnosis. My friend was the same way, we worked out together and she was very diet conscious. I still question why we did everything right and got sick anyway. I just have soon smoked and drank and over ate. Not really but, sorry I'm just not buying a lot of the stuff being thrown out there at the moment...sherryg683

I sympathise with and sense your frustration. I am sure you are not alone in your thoughts.

All this figures are reflections of trends and averages no more, and as becomes more and more evident cancer is very individual disease, with some hints as to causes and masses of simply unknowns.

I wish more was invested in looking in depth at possible causes and prevention. It is hugely complex.

My personal search is to try and better understand the roles of fats particularly omega three DHA EPA etc., the omega three six balance in inflamatory diseases and particularly BC.

I really do question whether I should post each and every item I come across.

I am sorry if the post annoyed you.

RB

[Sherryg683]

I'm sorry if I sounded annoyed with your post, it's not that at all. I am totally fed up with this disease. As soon as I get feeling decent, I get another treatment that makes me feel like hell for weeks. I just get tired if hearing what we could do or could have done to keep from getting BC when actually it doesn't seem to discriminate who it strikes...sherryg683

[Lolly]

Sherry and RB;

RB, don't stop posting! Your articles are always food for thought, pardon the pun

Sherry, I know exactly what you mean. I've heard so many stories from those I meet in treatment; some like you did everything "right" and still they got cancer, some did all the wrong stuff and so weren't terribly surprised at their diagnosis.

Personally, I feel much of our risk and subsequent diagnosis results from environmental factors. We can control some of our exposure, but not all. RB's posts are relevant to me as reminders that we can still enhance our individual responses to treatment and those environmental triggers through diet and excersise.

<3 Lolly

I think some of these studies do help create a false sense of security in women that they won't get breast cancer because they do this or that. Before I was diagnosed, I read many articles in woman's magazines telling how exercise, low fat diet, breast feeding, etc. lowered your risk of breast cancer. These studies would quote 20 % or 30 % reduction if you did this or that.

Well, I thought there was no way I would get this disease. I ate healthy, I exercised, I had 3 children who I each nursed for a year. I had no family history. I was 37 years old when I was diagnosed last year. When I was first diagnosed, I asked my onc,How did this happen,what did I do that caused this. I think another problem with these studies is then when someone gets brest cancer,you blame yourself that you did something wrong. The studies tell you what to do to reduce your risk,they imply that you are in control of whether you get it or not. You can prevent it, so the logic follows that you caused it.

Now I am very skeptical about studies about reducing risk of recurrence by doing this or that. If it didn't help me from getting this disease, what help is it from keeping the cancer from coming back?

Rb- Nothing against you for posting the articles. I think it is interesting, but I just don't know what to think anymore.

Laurie

[DeborahNC]

No, no, RB, please never stop posting! Your posts are always informative and thought provoking.

Like Sherry said it was nothing against your post or you. I can understand her feelings about exercise and being in shape and still developing cancer despite it. It's like the report about early pregnancy preventing BC.

Maybe the advice in the link provided didn't work for many of us, but that doesn't mean the link and post isn't appreciated.

We're all in this together. ((RB & Sherry))

Deborah in NC

[Lee]

Sometimes articles like this make me really bitter. I eat healthy, was in very good shape prior to diagnosis (ran 12-16 miles/week, and also did strength exercises 2-3x/week), nursed my 3 kids for 1 year, and have no family history of cancer of *any* kind. For the last 5 years I have taken an Omega 3 supplement along with a few other vitamins. Yet here I am, at age 43, with Stage IV breast cancer. How the heck could this have happened? I did what was recommended to keep breast cancer at bay and yet it still found me. I think it's human nature to think we did something wrong to cause it.

I'm with you, I don't know what to think anymore.

My personal plea is PLEASE PLEASE seriously look at balancing your omega threes and sixes, as part of a strategy for better health.

The more I read the more it is apparent that fats are not simply lumps of "lard" but hormones capable of directly or indirectly regulating all sorts of body functions, link to insulin. leptin, ER, inflamatory reactions, fatty acid synthesis, cell growth, all in all sorts of tissues........

The body needs omega three in the brain, for eye sight maintainance, controlling cellular inflamation, as part of cell membranes, in vascular repair, as part of the reproductive system and organs.......

Omega 6 above the 1:1 balance (approx) seems in many trials to significantly contribute to / fire and fuel the inflamatory pathways at cellular and possibly other levels, and may even set up self fueling cycles (we are conscientioulsy shovelling down the fuel high n-6 oils, margerines, in processed food, our live stock.....).

Historically we have had ratios of n3 - n6 of around 1:1 or a couple either side - now 1:10 is more normal and up to 1:50.

We are all told polyunsaturates are good for us and so happily slurp sunflower safflower grapeseed etc etc thinking how good we were - I certainly did - feta in oil, beans in oil - olives in sunflower oil! expensive light oils etc. It is in almost all processed foods...it is actually hard to avoid without going back to basics. The reality is that over the necesary minimum there is much evidence that it could be doing VERY significant harm. I now rely on olive oil, nuts etc for my omega six - all high omega six bottled oils for me are out.

I cannot give you absolute answers or assurances simply beacuse the trials that could be done looking at fats in body fat breast, waist, gluteal, which would give an accurate history of intake combined with gene array looking at the impact on HER 2 Brac etc know genes protenins etc linking to cancer have not been done. The trials that have been done have to much room for error by virtue of their design to give truly definative answers, which results in the mixed messages we get. The indicators are out there and authors are begining to express this view. The Zone Inflamation diet, and Cracking the Metabolic Code. There are lots of trials that would support heading towards a conclusion that the balancing of n3 and n6 needs seriously looking at.

In general terms it has no downsides if nothing else it will improve your general health.

It is hugely complex. If you do decide to make significnat changes to your diet consult with your advisers as omega threes DHA etc are reported as having synergistic effects on some treatments, and might be known to impact on others.

I know we are all bombarded by diet do's and dont's to the point of "fatigue". BUT fats are different they are fundamantal to the simplest creatures, and are part of the "evolutionary" process - likely they were around before the plants and animals we see today - they are bound to lifes most fundamental processes - they could be responsible in significant part for the increases we are seeing in western diseases and there is evidence they are in corners here and there - AND we have NEVER EVER had access to the quantities on omega six we are consuming, and probably on average have never had less omega three.

PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE do a little reading on the subject and come to your own conclusions. There are lots of post on this site and MASSES of trials on "NCBI".

For me excess omega six, and failure to get enough omega three / DHA will be the smoking plus of the 2020s.



RB

[Lee]

As part of his job, my dh studies nutrition. A lot. We have been eating healthy foods since we got married 15 years ago. We rarely eat processed foods, all our veggies are fresh and mostly organic. No already-prepared frozen meals, no meals-in-a-box. We rarely eat beef. We eat a lot of vegetarian meals. During the summer, I get a fresh box of organic produce every week, which forms the basic structure of our meals for the week. The only oils I use are high-quality extra virgin olive and, once in a while, canola. I take an omega 3 supplement, and have for years. The only fast food we eat is pizza, and then it is covered in vegetables, not meat. We don't eat white bread, everything is whole grain or unrefined. If anyone should have the correct balance of 3s and 6s, it should be me. And yet, here I am.

I am not a sufferer but have witnesseed its effects, and the bravery of the women who have suffered from it. What can I say.

I have not suggested cure, or guarantee of prevention. I am simply trying to reflect a large body of trials including a french one on women using breast fat tissue samples showing that the thrid of lump excisions with the highest fish oil derivatives in breat tissue fat had a 70% less chance of the lump being invasive. That leaves 30% which is still a very large number who's lumps were invasive.

I post because I beleive that it is essential to minimise those risks which may significantly contribute to the risk profile of BC and inflamatory diseases. I am simply trying to inform and raise debate, in a world that is more interested in selling cures for all, than prevention for many and cures for those who are unfortunate enough to be in the group whose best effots did not help.

Prevention so far as it is possible must be better than cure. Good health will contribute to recovery and survival under treatment more than poor health.

It is so sad to see the developement of all of these western diseases increasingly even in children. Where will this leave humanity in another generation, and what will be its incidence of BC. I read a trial last night this is an abstract from it

"This is the earliest detectable lesion in hypercholesterolemic animal models of atherosclerosis in different species (2, 4–10), and is present in the coronary arteries of 50% of young humans between 10 and 14 y of age, as observed in an autopsy study (2).

" http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/71/1/213S#top


I am sure you are more aware of this than me otherwise you would not follow the diet you do, and know that there is cogent research pointing to the fact that balancing the omega threes and sixes is a significant health factor.

I am sure you are also more aware than I am of the various factors that can possibly trigger this hugely complex disease.

I wish that nutritional trial were set up for fats looking a tissue fats breast (3mnths to make a noticealbe difference) waist and gluteal (years to change), gene expression, and disease incidence. That we could get facts rather that dietary perceptions.

Please do not shoot the messenger. I have debated asking this because it could make you understandably mad. but it is important and just maybe something that you might like to rule out. What was your oilive oil intake and omega three intake?. Olive oil contains about 10% n6 but can be a lot higher, could you have low levels of n6 in weight but in comparative terms much lower levels of n3. There was no mention of fish in your diet. The mediterrenean diet trials from memory all have quite a strong fish element. My amateur inpression from my reading is that whilst a lower fat diet is regarded as benificial the body needs threes, and an imbalance no matter what the absolute intake is where problems start. Please excuse me if the answer to this is a strong no way.

I have seen one murine trial were HER 2 was doubled, and ednrb uprated by a factor of ten by inceasing the n6 to n3 ratio.

Thank you for taking the trouble to post, and contributing to the debate. topic.

I suppose the ultimate question has to be have you given up on your views and "healthy" eating, and what would you say to those who live at the extreeme on fast food?


RB