Sexual matters and issues are of great concern for many cancer patients during the period of treatment. While most patients would comfortably discuss sexual issues with their doctors, others would not even hear of it. Sex is the last thing a woman would like to discuss during this treatment period. Otherwise many women would be comfortable discussing sexual matters at least six months or a year after treatment. This is an opinion of older women compared to younger women who would have like to delve into sexual discussions immediately. However prediction of an outcome especially if it has to be good, is determined by a patient's attitude. A person who loves her body and in a good sexually active relationship offers the best outcome. Many women in this case are trying to overcome trauma associated with cancer and sex after mastectomy does not appeal to many.
The trauma of losing a breast during mastectomy can really impact heavily on a woman's sexual life. However there is still a positive side to it as most women confess that a mastectomy rarely interferes or inhibits their sexual exploits and enjoyment. A number of women are not comfortable with nudity after mastectomy. The scars they have only add to their trauma. They would be very unsettled if someone stared or looked at their scars. They fear engaging in active sex. They haven't yet learnt to love their scars. But for how long would they continue hiding them? And how long would it take them to resume sex after mastectomy? The breast area is the bone of contention and many women are very sensitive physically and emotionally specifically towards the area of operation, the breasts. Touching and scrutinizing these areas is not something positively welcomed.
Vaginal dryness and an early menopause occur as a result of ovaries being damaged during treatment. These are some of the worst side effects of chemotherapy. These are the hard facts which make a woman to take up to a year before she can think of discussing sexual matters. And how long will it take her to resume sex after mastectomy? However this should not be a problem especially with the advent of lubricants. Though some brands are greasy or excessively thick, there are brands that almost mimic nature and provide maximum lubrication. However it is not advisable to use estrogen based lubricants as it might be absorbed into the body.
Women subjected to surgery and mastectomy, are usually adjusted in good measure emotionally as well as sexually in one year just like their counterparts who just had a minor operation. It all takes courage and attitude change to resume an active sex life. The fatigue experienced long after chemotherapy makes sexual intercourse daunting. However, getting into the mood is the first step towards resuming sex after mastectomy. It can be a gradual process that does not involve penetration at first. It only gets to that level after the couple is comfortable with the sensitive nudity of the woman.
Tuesday, September 30, 2008
Every Human Being Is The Author Of His Own Health
Every human being is the author of his own health, -an old Buddhist saying.
It began in August 2005, when I was diagnosed with breast cancer. The tumor was located toward the back of the breast close to the chest wall. My best option was to have the breast removed. The day before the surgery was scheduled, the surgeon called.
"Your pre-opt tests came back," he said. "Your liver enzymes are about three times higher than normal."
"What are liver enzymes?" I asked.
"Liver enzymes let us know how healthy the liver is," he explained. "You're not taking any medication that would affect the liver so we better find out what's going on. Surgery is on hold until we run some tests."
On hold. This malignancy was growing inside me and I was on hold. The tests were inconclusive. The CAT scan, ultrasound, hepatitis tests, and iron absorption test offered no answers.
"The surgery is still risky," the surgeon warned. "Surgery could make your liver worse."
At this stage I was more worried about the cancer than the liver, so I told him, "I'll take my chances."
Three days later I had the mastectomy. The cancer didn't appear to have spread to my lymph nodes. This good news was short-lived when we decided I would not undergo any further cancer treatment because of my unhealthy liver.
Every three months for the next year I took liver function tests. The results were always the same: the liver enzymes were three times higher than normal. But I was not idle during this year. I read hundreds of medical journals, poured through hundreds of medical studies, and read dozens of books on nutrition and soil depletion. When my doctor wanted to begin treatment for my liver, I decided to put my research to work. I became my own guinea pig.
"I'm going to take six months," I told him, "and then I'll be back."
The liver, I discovered, removes toxic substances from the body, produces most of the body's cholesterol, and acts as a storage unit for vitamins A, D, K, and B12. The liver enzymes show how well the liver is functioning and, obviously, mine wasn't functioning too well. With research notes in hand, I developed a plan of action. For the storage unit, I stopped the daily vitamin and mineral supplements that I had taken for years, to prevent overdosing. For the toxic substances and cholesterol, I switched to organic foods and olive oil for cooking and baking. I stuck to this plan for six months. After the six months passed, I called my doctor to arrange tests.
Two weeks later I sat in the doctor's office. He walked in with a puzzled expression.
"Well?" I asked.
"Your tests are normal." He acted surprised. "Actually, they are better than normal. Your liver enzymes are below normal. Your overall cholesterol dropped forty points. Your good cholesterol went up forty points. Even your bad cholesterol dropped a few points. What did you do?"
It began in August 2005, when I was diagnosed with breast cancer. The tumor was located toward the back of the breast close to the chest wall. My best option was to have the breast removed. The day before the surgery was scheduled, the surgeon called.
"Your pre-opt tests came back," he said. "Your liver enzymes are about three times higher than normal."
"What are liver enzymes?" I asked.
"Liver enzymes let us know how healthy the liver is," he explained. "You're not taking any medication that would affect the liver so we better find out what's going on. Surgery is on hold until we run some tests."
On hold. This malignancy was growing inside me and I was on hold. The tests were inconclusive. The CAT scan, ultrasound, hepatitis tests, and iron absorption test offered no answers.
"The surgery is still risky," the surgeon warned. "Surgery could make your liver worse."
At this stage I was more worried about the cancer than the liver, so I told him, "I'll take my chances."
Three days later I had the mastectomy. The cancer didn't appear to have spread to my lymph nodes. This good news was short-lived when we decided I would not undergo any further cancer treatment because of my unhealthy liver.
Every three months for the next year I took liver function tests. The results were always the same: the liver enzymes were three times higher than normal. But I was not idle during this year. I read hundreds of medical journals, poured through hundreds of medical studies, and read dozens of books on nutrition and soil depletion. When my doctor wanted to begin treatment for my liver, I decided to put my research to work. I became my own guinea pig.
"I'm going to take six months," I told him, "and then I'll be back."
The liver, I discovered, removes toxic substances from the body, produces most of the body's cholesterol, and acts as a storage unit for vitamins A, D, K, and B12. The liver enzymes show how well the liver is functioning and, obviously, mine wasn't functioning too well. With research notes in hand, I developed a plan of action. For the storage unit, I stopped the daily vitamin and mineral supplements that I had taken for years, to prevent overdosing. For the toxic substances and cholesterol, I switched to organic foods and olive oil for cooking and baking. I stuck to this plan for six months. After the six months passed, I called my doctor to arrange tests.
Two weeks later I sat in the doctor's office. He walked in with a puzzled expression.
"Well?" I asked.
"Your tests are normal." He acted surprised. "Actually, they are better than normal. Your liver enzymes are below normal. Your overall cholesterol dropped forty points. Your good cholesterol went up forty points. Even your bad cholesterol dropped a few points. What did you do?"
Self Care During Radiation Treatment For Breast Cancer
Battling Cancer is a tough time in anyone's life. Perhaps the toughest. That's why we've decided to write this article on how to care for yourself during radiation for Breast Cancer.
It very important to properly care for yourself during radiation for breast cancer. Keep in mind that after radiation you could feel fatigued for up to six weeks. Sleep as much as you like during this time - one thing you really need is your rest.
Also, make sure after radiation that you wear a comfortable bra. Making sure your bra fits properly and doesn't rub in any way is all part of good care for yourself during radiation for breast cancer. If a part of your bra rubs place a soft cloth between the bra and your skin.
Weight loss can be a problem after radiation treatment. In order to properly care for yourself during radiation for breast cancer make sure you eat a balanced diet. This will help you to avoid weight loss and keep your energy levels as high as possible.
Keep the skin fold area under your breast clean and talk to your doctor before using any powders, lotions, deodorants or perfumes. As part of your care for yourself during breast cancer radiation you need to make sure you are not using any products that might react with your skin at this time or do something to affect the radiation treatment in any way. Because of this it is best to avoid deodorants. Deodorants contain magnesium, and this can inhibit the effectiveness of the radiation treatment. To avoid reactions with the treated area, also avoid starching your clothes.
It very important to properly care for yourself during radiation for breast cancer. Keep in mind that after radiation you could feel fatigued for up to six weeks. Sleep as much as you like during this time - one thing you really need is your rest.
Also, make sure after radiation that you wear a comfortable bra. Making sure your bra fits properly and doesn't rub in any way is all part of good care for yourself during radiation for breast cancer. If a part of your bra rubs place a soft cloth between the bra and your skin.
Weight loss can be a problem after radiation treatment. In order to properly care for yourself during radiation for breast cancer make sure you eat a balanced diet. This will help you to avoid weight loss and keep your energy levels as high as possible.
Keep the skin fold area under your breast clean and talk to your doctor before using any powders, lotions, deodorants or perfumes. As part of your care for yourself during breast cancer radiation you need to make sure you are not using any products that might react with your skin at this time or do something to affect the radiation treatment in any way. Because of this it is best to avoid deodorants. Deodorants contain magnesium, and this can inhibit the effectiveness of the radiation treatment. To avoid reactions with the treated area, also avoid starching your clothes.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Trans & breast cancer
Is trans fat bad for the breast as well as the heart?
French researchers compared blood samples taken in the mid-1990s from 363 women who were later diagnosed with breast cancer and 702 similar women who were not. Those who had higher blood levels of trans fat were nearly twice as likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer over the next seven years as those with lower trans levels.
What to do: Avoid trans fat to protect your heart (and maybe your breasts). Skip foods made with partially hydrogenated oils in restaurants and at the supermarket. If you minimize the saturated fat you get from beef and high-fat dairy foods, you'll also dodge their low levels of naturally occurring trans fat.
French researchers compared blood samples taken in the mid-1990s from 363 women who were later diagnosed with breast cancer and 702 similar women who were not. Those who had higher blood levels of trans fat were nearly twice as likely to be diagnosed with breast cancer over the next seven years as those with lower trans levels.
What to do: Avoid trans fat to protect your heart (and maybe your breasts). Skip foods made with partially hydrogenated oils in restaurants and at the supermarket. If you minimize the saturated fat you get from beef and high-fat dairy foods, you'll also dodge their low levels of naturally occurring trans fat.
Rise in risk of breast cancer
*One in seven women will develop breast cancer if present health trends continue, a study by the Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre has warned. The risk to women who carry gene mutations that can lead to the disease has risen dramatically in the past 60 years, said the study of 1,442 women published in the journal BMC Cancer. It said the trend could be reversed in part by maintaining a healthy lifestyle.
A Window into Breast Cancer
Breast cancer patients and their families might hold the important key to enabling new technologies that can help pinpoint the right treatment for the right patient at the right time. A new genomics project spearheaded by Santa Clara-based Iris BioTechnologies is looking for participants to offer information that will lead to more personalized medicine for the treatment of breast cancer and other deadly illnesses.
With widely different responses to the more than thirty chemotherapeutic agents in use today the ability to rapidly classify "generic" diseases like breast cancer into genetic subtypes is long overdue. In the past, oncologists have made treatment decisions based solely upon broadly defined disease knowledge and personal experience, with little or no insight into the molecular biology of cancer. Thanks to advances in technology the necessary clinical tools are rapidly becoming available.
One new tool is the Iris Breast Cancer Chip, which captures crucial molecular information concerning the activity of more than one hundred genes implicated in the disease from a breast biopsy sample. When processed, this information creates an optical pattern that is then analyzed by the company's proprietary data program called "BioWindows," which launched earlier this year.
"By combining the patient's cancer gene profile with their environmental, hereditary and lifestyle information, doctors can pinpoint what drugs worked for patients with similar profiles," explains Simon Chin, CEO of Iris. "The marriage of these two technologies is essential to assist doctors with practical prognosis, disease prevention, and the development of more fully targeted medicine."
Iris expects to launch their first Nano-Biochip to identify gene expression patterns in breast cancer later this year. For now, breast cancer patients and their families are welcome to enter information into the database at www.biowindows.com.
"Looking at a mirror offers a sense of what you look like on the outside; with the Nano-Biochip and BioWindows technology you have a glimpse of the 'inner you' based upon heredity and factors that impact your genes," says Mr. Chin. "We believe the future of treatment is in personalized medicine, and it all starts with your involvement."
With widely different responses to the more than thirty chemotherapeutic agents in use today the ability to rapidly classify "generic" diseases like breast cancer into genetic subtypes is long overdue. In the past, oncologists have made treatment decisions based solely upon broadly defined disease knowledge and personal experience, with little or no insight into the molecular biology of cancer. Thanks to advances in technology the necessary clinical tools are rapidly becoming available.
One new tool is the Iris Breast Cancer Chip, which captures crucial molecular information concerning the activity of more than one hundred genes implicated in the disease from a breast biopsy sample. When processed, this information creates an optical pattern that is then analyzed by the company's proprietary data program called "BioWindows," which launched earlier this year.
"By combining the patient's cancer gene profile with their environmental, hereditary and lifestyle information, doctors can pinpoint what drugs worked for patients with similar profiles," explains Simon Chin, CEO of Iris. "The marriage of these two technologies is essential to assist doctors with practical prognosis, disease prevention, and the development of more fully targeted medicine."
Iris expects to launch their first Nano-Biochip to identify gene expression patterns in breast cancer later this year. For now, breast cancer patients and their families are welcome to enter information into the database at www.biowindows.com.
"Looking at a mirror offers a sense of what you look like on the outside; with the Nano-Biochip and BioWindows technology you have a glimpse of the 'inner you' based upon heredity and factors that impact your genes," says Mr. Chin. "We believe the future of treatment is in personalized medicine, and it all starts with your involvement."
Friday, September 26, 2008
Breast Cancer Cure - Could Dairy Be The Culprit?
Professor Jane Plant has a PhD in geochemistry. When she got breast cancer for the fifth time, she decided, "I had no alternative but to die or to try to find a cure for myself. I am a scientist - surely there was a rational explanation for this cruel illness that affects one in 12 women in the UK?"
Her husband's return from a trip to China prompted her to examine why breast cancer rates were so low in China and she concluded that it was due to their lack of dairy product consumption. This lead her to completely eliminate all dairy products from her diet, which, along with other diet modifications and meditation led to her tumour completely disappearing. As she writes in her book, "Your Life Is In Your Hands":
"I now believe that the link between dairy produce and breast cancer is similar to the link between smoking and lung cancer. I believe that identifying the link between breast cancer and dairy produce, and then developing a diet specifically targeted at maintaining the health of my breast and hormone system, cured me."
If you read Professor Jane Plant's book "Your Life Is In Your Hands", it is immediately evident that she is a very sincere person and has been motivated by true concern to share her cure with others. Personally, I have no doubt that eliminating pasteurized dairy products was the key to her healing.
But there's the crux of this issue: You will note I said, "pasteurized" dairy products. Which indeed is what most of the western world consumes. It's a very important distinction to keep in mind that many doctors and scientists feel it is not RAW milk that causes these kinds of problems, but rather PASTEURIZED milk.
Breastmilk, whether from a cow or human, is a living food, packed full of immune system substances, enzymes to aid digestion, and good bacteria (if the cow is a healthy, pasture-fed - not barn-bound, grain-fed - animal). And once you heat breastmilk (whether from a cow, goat, or human), it is a denatured product that is very difficult to digest and many of the nutrients are unable to be absorbed.
Breastfeeding mothers who pump their milk for baby to have when they're not around, are told to never heat their breastmilk, but rather to put the bottle in a bowl of warm water to slowly raise the temperature. If you do happen to heat your breastmilk, you're told to throw it out and not give it to your baby. This is because heating breastmilk beyond body temperature kills the live enzymes, good bacteria, and denatures the proteins and other co-factors in the milk. It is then considered a toxic substance which could harm the baby.
So, if this is what happens to human breastmilk when it is heated, why should cow breastmilk be any different? It is not.
In addition, homogenization of cow's milk is another nasty process that alters fats and produces substances that many scientists feel harm the arteries and are the primary cause of heart disease.
So again, as with much of our food supply, you have profit-driven motives degrading the safety and nutrient value of our food. To have healthy raw milk, the cows need to roam free on adequate pasture, outside in the fresh air and sunshine. They need to eat fresh grass, not grain or continual hay, the fields need to be free of pesticides and chemical fertilizers and the cows need to be free of any growth hormones or antibiotics. As with humans, 'everything goes through to the breastmilk'.
Now which method of milk production (and distribution since pasteurized milk sits on the shelf much longer) do you think is cheaper for the dairy industry? Do they make more money if you drink pasteurized or raw milk? Follow the money and the truth will emerge.
One can't help but wish Professor Plant had gone further in her examination of cultural diets and health. Perhaps it would have led her to this very important distinction between raw and pasteurized dairy products. For example, take the Masai tribe of Kenya - very strong, tall, healthy people and their diet is mostly raw cow's milk and cow's blood.
Dr. Weston A. Price (a renowned dentist in the 1950's and author of "Nutrition And Physical Degeneration") studied a village in the Swiss Alps, whose primary food sources were rye bread, cheese, and fermented milk products. They were extremely healthy with a tooth cavitation rate of less than 1% and no major diseases. But again, all of their dairy products were from raw and often raw, fermented milk. Traditionally fermented foods add additional necessary enzymes and good bacteria to further aid digestion and whole-body health.
Store-bought yogurt - even if it's organic - is not properly fermented, and the strains of bacteria are not potent enough to derive much (if any) benefit from. Additionally, the milk is pasteurized, not raw.
Humans have been consuming fermented milk products (made from raw milk) for thousands of years. There are even tales of how warring armies - like Genghis Khan - took their probiotic starter cultures with them as they travelled to wage war since they recognized how important fermented raw milk was to the health and strength of their armies.
Indeed, if Professor Plant had looked just over the border towards Nepal, she would have discovered that the primary foods of the Nepalese (and Tibetan) diet are raw yak's milk and raw butter. And both these groups of people are renowned for their robust health and longevity.
So yes, throw out all your pasteurized dairy products and never eat/drink them again. In that regard, I am in complete agreement with Dr. Jane Plant and I'm sure they are a principle cause of breast cancer and many other diseases. But then don't ignore the healing benefits of raw dairy products - which are historically and across many cultures proven to be beneficial to the health of humans.
Her husband's return from a trip to China prompted her to examine why breast cancer rates were so low in China and she concluded that it was due to their lack of dairy product consumption. This lead her to completely eliminate all dairy products from her diet, which, along with other diet modifications and meditation led to her tumour completely disappearing. As she writes in her book, "Your Life Is In Your Hands":
"I now believe that the link between dairy produce and breast cancer is similar to the link between smoking and lung cancer. I believe that identifying the link between breast cancer and dairy produce, and then developing a diet specifically targeted at maintaining the health of my breast and hormone system, cured me."
If you read Professor Jane Plant's book "Your Life Is In Your Hands", it is immediately evident that she is a very sincere person and has been motivated by true concern to share her cure with others. Personally, I have no doubt that eliminating pasteurized dairy products was the key to her healing.
But there's the crux of this issue: You will note I said, "pasteurized" dairy products. Which indeed is what most of the western world consumes. It's a very important distinction to keep in mind that many doctors and scientists feel it is not RAW milk that causes these kinds of problems, but rather PASTEURIZED milk.
Breastmilk, whether from a cow or human, is a living food, packed full of immune system substances, enzymes to aid digestion, and good bacteria (if the cow is a healthy, pasture-fed - not barn-bound, grain-fed - animal). And once you heat breastmilk (whether from a cow, goat, or human), it is a denatured product that is very difficult to digest and many of the nutrients are unable to be absorbed.
Breastfeeding mothers who pump their milk for baby to have when they're not around, are told to never heat their breastmilk, but rather to put the bottle in a bowl of warm water to slowly raise the temperature. If you do happen to heat your breastmilk, you're told to throw it out and not give it to your baby. This is because heating breastmilk beyond body temperature kills the live enzymes, good bacteria, and denatures the proteins and other co-factors in the milk. It is then considered a toxic substance which could harm the baby.
So, if this is what happens to human breastmilk when it is heated, why should cow breastmilk be any different? It is not.
In addition, homogenization of cow's milk is another nasty process that alters fats and produces substances that many scientists feel harm the arteries and are the primary cause of heart disease.
So again, as with much of our food supply, you have profit-driven motives degrading the safety and nutrient value of our food. To have healthy raw milk, the cows need to roam free on adequate pasture, outside in the fresh air and sunshine. They need to eat fresh grass, not grain or continual hay, the fields need to be free of pesticides and chemical fertilizers and the cows need to be free of any growth hormones or antibiotics. As with humans, 'everything goes through to the breastmilk'.
Now which method of milk production (and distribution since pasteurized milk sits on the shelf much longer) do you think is cheaper for the dairy industry? Do they make more money if you drink pasteurized or raw milk? Follow the money and the truth will emerge.
One can't help but wish Professor Plant had gone further in her examination of cultural diets and health. Perhaps it would have led her to this very important distinction between raw and pasteurized dairy products. For example, take the Masai tribe of Kenya - very strong, tall, healthy people and their diet is mostly raw cow's milk and cow's blood.
Dr. Weston A. Price (a renowned dentist in the 1950's and author of "Nutrition And Physical Degeneration") studied a village in the Swiss Alps, whose primary food sources were rye bread, cheese, and fermented milk products. They were extremely healthy with a tooth cavitation rate of less than 1% and no major diseases. But again, all of their dairy products were from raw and often raw, fermented milk. Traditionally fermented foods add additional necessary enzymes and good bacteria to further aid digestion and whole-body health.
Store-bought yogurt - even if it's organic - is not properly fermented, and the strains of bacteria are not potent enough to derive much (if any) benefit from. Additionally, the milk is pasteurized, not raw.
Humans have been consuming fermented milk products (made from raw milk) for thousands of years. There are even tales of how warring armies - like Genghis Khan - took their probiotic starter cultures with them as they travelled to wage war since they recognized how important fermented raw milk was to the health and strength of their armies.
Indeed, if Professor Plant had looked just over the border towards Nepal, she would have discovered that the primary foods of the Nepalese (and Tibetan) diet are raw yak's milk and raw butter. And both these groups of people are renowned for their robust health and longevity.
So yes, throw out all your pasteurized dairy products and never eat/drink them again. In that regard, I am in complete agreement with Dr. Jane Plant and I'm sure they are a principle cause of breast cancer and many other diseases. But then don't ignore the healing benefits of raw dairy products - which are historically and across many cultures proven to be beneficial to the health of humans.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
