twice weekly aspirin use may decrease bc survivor's risk of metastasis by 62-71%

[Laurel]

Curryalso,

I think that is sound advice as your platelets will drop and you do not want to have any thinning effect from aspirin on top of low counts. I am sure post-chemo, once your counts are back up, is soon enough.

[Debbie L.]

There have been quite a few observational studies that show an association between NSAIDs (including aspirin) and cancer behavior. But there are limitations to observational, retrospective studies. Gary Schwitzer does a nice job of discussing that in his blog:

http://www.healthnewsreview.org/blog...l-studies.html

tinyurl: http://tinyurl.com/yzrz6s3

Personally, I think there's something here (but opinion is far worse than observational studies, laughing). And in small doses, allergies or major GI issues excepted, it seems like a "can't hurt, might help" kind of thing to take 81mg of aspirin, which we know may have other benefits also.

But I'm reminded by critical-thinking and experienced health advocates that this same study (Nurses Study, which I happen to be part of), is the one that had the strongest "evidence" for HRT use as cardioprotective and breast cancer safe. Which isn't to diss this particular study but to point out the potential failings of observational studies.

And while I'm at it, I'll add my own thoughts. IF it's true that NSAIDs affect cancer behavior (and as I said, I do think that it is true at least to some degree), then it seems to me that we need to look at all the AI studies with this in mind as a confounder. Most of the women I know who are on AI's have some degree of pain. And for that pain, most of them take Ibuprofen in varying amounts. That fact could be a big confounder in the AI studies. NSAID use could affect the cancer's behavior directly and/or it could be a marker for those who are metabolizing the drug most effectively (thus getting the most symptoms). Or, maybe the pain issue is totally random (in relation to efficacy/metabolism) BUT the use of the NSAIDs by those experiencing the pain makes it appear that the pain is a marker for efficacy (as reported by Jack Cusick in 08), when it's actually the NSAID use for the pain that's making the difference.

Phew, that's easier to think about in my head than to put on paper.

Debbie Laxague

[Jackie07]

Debbie,

Thank you so much for the illumination. I was thinking abut something similar - that there's an explanation besides plain aspirin - but wasn't able to put the reasoning together.

The drawback of any statistic/study is that the number itself does not explain the reason behind it. Many of the Chinese medicine - herbs, acupuncture - have been practised based on their effectiveness after being implemented/experiemented on a vast population over long period of time. New researches and studies are just beginning to figure out the rationale behind it and make them available in a more efficient way.

Medicine has saved numerous lives that would otherwise not pass the genes to the next generation. Our generation (and the future generations) are defying the odds of Darwinism thanks to the advancement of modern science. I know I would not have survived childhood dieseases had I been born 20, 30 years earlier. And I would not have survived my 23-hour brain surgery had it been done 10, 15 years earlier.

Hopefully we can all survive long enough before another miracle drug/combination becomes available. Before then, I'm going to take my aspirin...

Thanks again.