Tag: Breast cancer

Categories
Featured

Guide to Natural Menopause Survival

[amazon_link asins=’0007169671,B005DSAMKW,B013XJPZQI,B01F2NYNF2,B015X0CQR6,B074YY8FR3,B074Z2KRNJ,B01F2O8M4Y,B071L79JQ9′ template=’ProductCarousel’ store=’finmeacur-20′ marketplace=’US’ link_id=’3e1aad7e-08f7-11e8-bbca-931ba8bdcb58′]

“Men-o-pause” may be a funny play on words but it’s no laughing matter to millions of women. When hot flashes, mood swings and memory changes are affecting your life, you want help fast. But where can you find it when the “newest” science says the old science is wrong — or even harmful?
CLICK & SEE
An understanding of how and why science went astray, plus a simple, strategic plan can get your life back in balance.

What Happens During Midlife’s Pause?

Menopause is nature’s way of signaling the end of child-bearing years. When you stop having your periods naturally — usually when you’re around 50 years old — the slow-down tends to be gradual.

But menopause can occur before or after age 50, and it can also be surgically induced.

For instance, if you have your ovaries or uterus removed, you’ll skip the “peri” part and advance straight to full-blown menopause. When that happens, symptoms often intensify because there’s no gradual downshift: estrogen and progesterone production simply stops.

When menopause occurs, the primary symptoms you’re likely to experience are:

•Hot Flashes

•Vaginal Dryness

•Menstrual Irregularities (natural)

•Depression, Mood Swings

•Weight Gain (natural or surgically induced)

Short and long-term strategies can help you control these symptoms. The best approaches are preventive and involve diet and exercise. That’s not surprising because the most obvious manifestations of menopause have emerged in the last 75 years.

With a return to what’s been natural for centuries, it’s possible to minimize even the most frustrating night sweats and weight gain.

Menopause is NOT a Disease

As it is  mentioned, menopause occurs when you stop producing estrogen and progesterone, and your periods cease. So, it seemed sensible to scientists that replacing those hormones would alleviate menopausal symptoms.

One of the problems with this approach was that it looked at menopause as a disease to be treated with medication, as opposed to another life stage. The other: it turned out that synthetic hormones don’t act like the real thing.

The problems will be detailed with hormone replacement later, along with information on the “new” science of bioidentical hormones.

For affordable symptom-relief right now, here are the simplest, heart-healthy ideas, followed by longer-term solutions.

Heart-Healthy, Symptom-Ease

We all hope for a quick fix. That’s not what healthy lifestyle changes are all about, but for those who want the short-list, here’s an easy way to determine if you’re in menopause, along with the “to-dos” that put you on the right track fast.

First, ask your physician for a blood test called an FSH test. It determines if your pituitary gland thinks your ovaries aren’t fully functioning, and as a result, is secreting “follicular stimulating hormone” or FSH. There is no need to do this if you have had a surgically induced menopause, as you are menopausal by definition and your FSH will be elevated.

The higher your FSH level, the more likely you’re in menopause. Peri-menopause begins the process a few years in advance; once you haven’t had a period for a year, you’re considered post-menopausal.

Just a few diet and lifestyle changes can have a dramatic effect on how you experience menopause — especially if you start making them at the “peri” stage.

Three Surefire Strategies to Start

1.Phytoestrogens. Taking Phytoestreogens or plant-estrogens before menopause can moderate day-to-day estrogen levels, so that when menopause comes, the drop won’t be so dramatic. Weak estrogens that block stronger forms, phtyoestrogens are found in licorice and alfalfa.

Royal Maca also seems to be an amazing adaptogenic herbal solution for menopause that has helped many women. Be sure to avoid the inexpensive ones, as they typically don’t work. Get the real deal from Peru.

2.Omega-3. Take high quality, animal-based omega-3 fats. A high quality animal-based omega-3 supplement, such as krill oil, can be far more effective and beneficial than fish oil. Balance omega-3 and omega-6 by eating foods rich in these oils.

3.Green tea. Polyphenols are associated with a lowered risk of heart disease, and green tea like Royal Matcha has polyphenols that can be more effective than those in red wine — plus 17 times the antioxidants of wild blueberries.

One study shows green tea can also reduce the risk of breast cancer in younger women under 50, and now, certain polyphenols have been shown to have some HRT-like benefits, without the drawbacks.
If you noticed soy isn’t on the list, it’s because non-fermented soy can damage your health.

There are also musts-to-avoid, some of which you may be aware of already. They include refined carbohydrates, sugar, caffeine and alcohol.

What to Follow Up With

Once you’ve covered the three musts to start with, add the following to your lifestage regimen:-

•Black Cohosh. It may help regulate body temperature and hot flashes.

•Locally grown, organic food

•Exercise! Start a program that you know you’ll do at least 3 times a week, even if it’s just 15 minutes a day to start.

•Vitamin D. Please review my one-hour video lecture for the latest on this essential vitamin.

The Smartest Long-Term Solutions

If you’ve developed healthy habits that support your lifestage and invested a little time exploring the web links highlighted here, work on these long-term adjustments next:

•Add low-to-moderate intensity and variety to your exercise plan

•Optimize your health with my easy Nutrition Plan

Avoid These DANGEROUS Solutions:-

It has been overwhelmingly proven that conventional hormone replacement therapy (HRT), which science once touted, is in fact, dangerous. The following prescriptions now have black box warnings and need to be avoided:

1.Premarin. Premarin is an estrogen extracted from Pregnant Mare’s Urine. We now know it is associated with an increased risk of heart disease.

2.Estrogen Therapy. Estrogen, which is extracted from Premarin, was effective in combating some menopausal symptoms but proved to have serious, negative side effects, such as the increased risk of breast cancer and an increase in insulin levels.

3.Provera. This drug is a progestin or a synthetic form of progesterone, which probably makes it even more toxic than Premarin. Its well-documented, negative side effects include blood clotting.

In addition, long-term usage studies revealed many other negative side effects of HRT, including high blood pressure and vaginal bleeding. A year after millions of women quit taking hormone replacement therapy, incidents of breast cancer fell dramatically — by 7 percent!

No wonder women now know to avoid dangerous, conventional estrogen replacement.

The “New” Science: Bioidenticals

Recently, there’s been tremendous excitement about Bioidentical Hormone Replacement Therapy (BHRT), which was even discussed on the Oprah show in a television breakthrough.

When diet and lifestyle changes are not enough, bioidentical hormones may be able to help.

However, the FDA has recently attacked BHRT, specifically estriol, effectively banning it. Ironically, the FDA is simultaneously attempting to create natural-substance knock-offs. Here’s what’s happening:

Bioidenticals, unlike synthetic hormones or natural ones from animals, are natural hormones that are bioidentical to your own.

The bioidentical that is prescribed 80 percent of the time is estriol. It’s natural, not a drug, and you get it at compounding pharmacies. The FDA is trying to require physicians who write prescriptions for it to fill out an Investigational New Drug (IND) application. It’s no simple form; it’s 40-pages long and expensive to file. And, the FDA admits it’s unaware of any adverse effects of bioidentical hormones.

The inside scoop: Estriol has been used safely for decades, and it is  believed that  it  is particularly useful when your ovaries have been removed or you’ve had a hysterectomy. Dr. Johathan Wright, who was interviewed many times for  Expert Inner Circle program, is a pioneer in bioidenticals, and you can see what he has to say about their value in this short video.

The attack on bioidenticals comes just as the FDA is advancing drugs that are synthetic knock-offs of natural estriol. Talk about an upside down world!

Note on Bioidentical Delivery Methods

As for administering bioidentical hormones, you need to know that some delivery methods are clearly superior to others.

Oral supplementation is perhaps your worst option, as your liver processes everything in your digestive tract first, before it enters your blood stream. Any method that bypasses your liver will therefore be more effective.

Hormone creams are one common alternative that achieves this. However, since progesterone is fat soluble, it can build up in your fatty tissues and lead to having too much progesterone in your body. This in turn can disrupt other hormones. It’s also near impossible to accurately determine the dose when using a cream.

Sublingual drops offer the best of both worlds, as it enters your blood stream directly and will not build up in your tissues like the cream can. It’s also much easier to determine the dose you’re taking, as each drop is about one milligram.

So you know exactly how much you’re taking. The direct delivery system also means you can oftentimes take a lower dose than you would need if you were taking it in pill form.

Knock-Off Naturals: Don’t Be Fooled

Natural estriol can’t be patented, so there are no huge profits to be made on it.

I’m not surprised its availability is being threatened. In fact fake, profit-generating versions of the real thing are mushrooming.

Omacor (an FDA-approved, Omega-3 fat fish oil), Trimesta (a knock-off of natural estriol, now Lovaza) and already FDA-approved Prestara, a pharma version of the natural hormone DHEA, will all soon be competing against what you can get cheaper. Some believe these natural knock-offs could even be dangerous.

For instance, Trimesta is taken orally, even though this is known to be a greater risk factor for endometrial cancer than taking hormones transdermally (through the skin). Prestara is taken in doses of 200 mg daily, which is too high for women — even 50 mg daily may cause women to experience undesirable side effects, including facial hair.

To support physicians’ rights to freely prescribe bioidenticals and your right to have access to them, go to the Health Freedom Foundation’s website. You’ll find updated information and a letter you can send to Congress and the President.

One Small Step Toward Lifelong Serenity

Menopause is one of those instances where what’s easiest and natural is also best. Because prevention is always the smartest medicine, start making changes in your diet and lifestyle during peri-menopause.

Sticking to the perimeter supermarket aisles, where vegetables and fruits dominate, puts you on the right path.

By the time menopause comes, you’ll have developed healthy nutritional habits that you can build on for every life stage.

Written By Dr. Mercola

References:
[1] The Mao Clinic Staff, “Menopause Symptoms,” The Mao Clinic
[2] American Physiological Society (2007, August 14). Grapes, Soy And Kudzu Blunt Some Menopausal Side Effects. ScienceDaily. Retrieved April 2, 2009

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Categories
News on Health & Science

Medical News – Updated

You may click & read the  UPDATED MEDICAL NEWS:->

1.Prostate Cancer:->:prostate-cancer-prostrate-l A Newly Discovered Route For Testosterone To Reach The Prostate: Treatment By Super-selective Intraprostatic Androgen Deprivation.

2. Breast Cancer->Breast_Cancer_nor.Breast_Cancer_ab . HER2-like And Basal-Like Genotype Breast Cancer Are More Likely To Respond To Chemotherapy:

3. Emotional Distress-> emotional distress Understanding The Emotional Distress Facing First Responders

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Categories
News on Health & Science

Want to live longer? Try Vitamin D

[amazon_link asins=’B00GB85JR4,B00JGCBGZQ,B0032BH76O,B004XLRTUQ,B0179785OO,B004U3Y8OM,B004GJYTF8,B000A0LE6O,B0037LOLKY’ template=’ProductCarousel’ store=’finmeacur-20′ marketplace=’US’ link_id=’017607b8-f7ab-11e7-aa2d-6714719a4b2a’]

Writing in the journal Clinical Endocrinology, scientists from the Netherlands, Austria, and the U.S. report that low blood levels of the sunshine vitamin are associated with increased risk of all-cause mortality, and mortality from heart disease, in the elderly. The research follows hot on the heels of similar findings published in Nutrition Research and in the Archives of Internal Medicine.
.
The new study used data from 614 people participating in the Hoorn Study, a prospective population-based study with men and women with an average age of 69.8. Blood levels of 25(OH)D were measured at the start of the study. After an average of six years of follow-up, 51 deaths had been documented, 20 of which were due to cardiovascular health.

People with the lowest average vitamin D levels were found to be at a 124 and 378 percent increased risk of all-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality, respectively.

Commenting on the potential mechanism, the researchers note:
“Apart from the maintenance of muscular and skeletal health, vitamin D may also protect against cancer, infections, autoimmune and vascular diseases, suggesting that vitamin D deficiency might contribute to a reduced life expectancy.”

Adults with lower blood levels of vitamin D may also be more likely to die from heart disease or stroke. Scientists in Finland compared blood levels of vitamin D, and deaths from heart disease or stroke over time in more than 6,000 people. Those with the lowest vitamin D levels had a 25 percent higher risk of dying from heart disease or stroke.

In addition, in a study of 166 women undergoing treatment for breast cancer, nearly 70 percent had low levels of vitamin D in their blood, according to a study presented at the American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Breast Cancer Symposium. The analysis showed women with late-stage disease and non-Caucasian women had even lower levels.

Said Luke Peppone, Ph.D., research assistant professor of Radiation Oncology, at Rochester’s James P. Wilmot Cancer Center:

“Vitamin D is essential to maintaining bone health and women with breast cancer have accelerated bone loss due to the nature of hormone therapy and chemotherapy. It’s important for women and their doctors to work together to boost their vitamin D intake.”

Resources:
NUTRAIngredients.com November 3, 2009
Reuters October 29, 2009
University Rochester Medical Center October 9, 2009
Clinical Endocrinology November 2009, Volume 71, Issue 5, Pages: 666-672
American Society of Clinical Oncology’s Breast Cancer Symposium, San Francisco, CA October 8, 2009

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Categories
News on Health & Science

Mammogram Guidelines: What You Need to Know

[amazon_link asins=’016045316X’ template=’ProductCarousel’ store=’finmeacur-20′ marketplace=’US’ link_id=’f9eac28d-c510-11e7-a149-d1e58b17a042′]

[amazon_link asins=’1619845385,B076J9QJKX,B00EJWYG7S,B01M3SD8P7,B075X3KRFF,B01M0AG01N’ template=’ProductCarousel’ store=’finmeacur-20′ marketplace=’US’ link_id=’13fbbbb6-c511-11e7-a573-6ba8d0df0a12′]

If the brouhaha following a government advisory panel’s recent change in breast-cancer-screening recommendations has proved anything, it is that even modern medicine does not rely on statistics, scientific facts and clinical outcomes alone.

CLICK & SEE

That’s the hard lesson that the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) learned when it changed course on its recommendations for mammography screening and advised women to delay having the screen until they are 50, rather than beginning evaluations at 40, as they have recommended previously. Over the past two decades, annual mammograms for women over 40 had become a standard of preventive care in the U.S. — right up there with daily exercise, quitting smoking and getting a flu shot.
(Read “Understanding the Health-Care Debate: Your Indispensable Guide”)

But after taking a more in-depth look at the numbers, the task force decided that the risks of mammography for women in their 40s do not outweigh the small benefit that the screens provide. On top of that, the panel recommended that doctors no longer urge women to perform monthly breast self-exams at home, citing a lack of scientific evidence to support that they save lives.

Immediately, almost every major cancer organization and physicians’ group — including the American Cancer Society, the Susan G. Komen Breast Cancer Foundation and the American College of Ostetricians and Gynecologists — questioned the new recommendations. So did women. “I’m just shocked, absolutely shocked,” says Deana Rich, a clinical-research associate in Seattle. The 47-year-old has no family history of breast cancer but has been dutifully getting an annual mammogram for the past seven years in order to reduce her risk of dying from the disease. One of her friends recently received a breast-cancer diagnosis, and several other friends are breast-cancer survivors; all of them learned of their disease thanks to a routine mammogram they got during their 40s. “I can’t imagine what would have happened if they didn’t have that. The cancer would have just had more time to grow,” says Rich.
(See 10 players in health-care reform.)

That is the biggest worry boiling up among doctors and women across the country — that a procedure that undeniably reduces the risk of breast cancer is no longer being recommended for millions of women. Another worry: will insurance begin denying coverage of breast-cancer screens in women under 50 who want them? The Obama Administration quickly disputed that notion, as well as the suggestion that the panel’s advisory was a government strategy to cut costs by rationing health care. “The U.S. Preventive Task Force is an outside, independent panel of doctors and scientists who make recommendations,” said Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius in a statement. “They do not set federal policy, and they don’t determine what services are covered by the Federal Government.”

Sebelius added that private insurance companies were unlikely to change their policies and that mammograms are a valuable lifesaving tool. She advised women to “keep doing what you have been doing for years. Talk to your doctor about your individual history, ask questions and make the decision that is right for you.”

Indeed, the mammogram is one of doctors’ most powerful tools against breast cancer. There is a robust body of clinical-trial evidence showing that routine screening reduces breast-cancer deaths; the task force attests to that as well. But while everybody, to varying extent, agrees that mammograms are beneficial, what’s less clear is the age at which routine mammography screening should begin. That depends in part on breast cancer risk, which increases with age — for every 100,000 women, the risk of developing breast cancer is 1 in 69 in women in their 40s, 1 in 38 in women in their 50s, and 1 in 27 among women in their 60s.

Consensus on this question would be helpful because professional cancer organizations, cancer hospitals and doctors base their screening guidelines on the advice of nationally recognized groups — like the American Cancer Society and the National Comprehensive Cancer Network (or NCCN, a coalition of National Cancer Institute–designated hospitals), and the USPSTF. Neither the ACS nor the NCCN intends to modify its guidelines for yearly breast-cancer screening in all healthy women over 40.

So how exhaustive was the task force’s deliberation? How definitive are its guidelines? And which set of recommendations should women follow?

The USPSTF, a volunteer group of 16 health professionals, is often considered to issue the most conservative recommendations compared with other national groups. In 2002, for instance, it called for breast-cancer screening every one or two years for women ages 40 to 49, while other guidelines advocated yearly tests. For its updated 2009 recommendations, the USPSTF analyzed clinical trials on the benefits of mammography — much of that same research was also evaluated for the task force’s 2002 decision — while folding in new data on the risks and harms of screening. Those risks include false positive results, over-diagnosis, patient anxiety and unnecessary biopsies, tests and doctor’s visits.

The panel also commissioned computer-modeling studies that weighed the benefits of routine screening (reduction in death rate) against its risks, depending on the ages of the women being screened and how often they were tested — every year or every other year.

Overall, based on a review of mammography trials, the panel found that having a yearly mammogram screening cuts the risk of breast-cancer death 15% in women ages 40 to 49. That reduction, it should be noted, is relative, not absolute. The absolute risk of breast-cancer death after age 40 is 3% without annual screening, according to the computer models. That means that with routine screening, which leads to a 15% lower risk of death from breast cancer, a woman’s absolute risk drops to 2.6%. Small numbers in either case. Put another way, the panel concluded, the benefit of routine mammograms for women in their 40s is one fewer death for every 1,904 women screened annually for up to a decade.

That benefit increases, however, with the age of the women being screened, as the risk of breast cancer rises: among women 50 to 59, one death is averted for every 1,339 women routinely screened; among women 60 to 69, 377 mammograms would be needed to prevent one death. The task force’s computer models further showed that shifting women’s screening schedule from yearly to once every two years retains 81% of the benefit of screening while reducing the harms like false positives by half.

Combined, the findings led the panel to reverse their 2002 recommendations on mammography, which extended the advice, originally targeting women over 50, to also include women in their 40s. The new recommendations, published in the Nov. 17 issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, once again leave out the younger women and suggest that those over 50 get screened biennially. But the recommendations do not instruct women under 50 never to get screened, says Dr. Diana Petitti, vice chair of the task force. The new guidelines were meant to trigger and inform discussion between women in their 40s and their doctors about routine screening. “We thought we were saying that the evidence shows that there is this amount of benefit and this amount of potential harm for women in their 40s,” she says. “Which suggests that routine screening is not appropriate. But the word routine clearly got lost.”

Such details were bound to get lost in a heated — and highly politicized — discussion of a topic that is for most women more emotional than medical. Add to that an immediate offensive blitz by some cancer doctors who were concerned that the new guidelines would essentially limit their patients’ options for preventing breast-cancer death. “I am appalled and horrified,” says Dr. David Dershaw, director of breast imaging at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. “We have something that saves lives, and to say we are not going to do it anymore is unconscionable.”

The panel stands by its new recommendations, relying on the data, which simply do not support the benefit of routine screening when balanced with risks, among younger women. The new recommendations are also backed by some prominent physicians, including the cancer surgeon Dr. Susan Love, who agree there’s insufficient data to show that screening under 50 works. The debate, says Dr. Len Lichtenfeld of ACS, is not likely to end soon. “This is the beginning of a discussion that will likely continue vigorously over the next several months, if not years,” he predicts.

But the more immediate issue for many cancer doctors is not that mammograms may work better in some age groups than in others. What worries experts is that the new guidelines could result in fewer women getting screened overall. Already one-third of American women who should be getting annual mammograms do not get screened. Since 1990, the death rate from breast cancer among women under 50 has been declining, 3% each year, in large part because of the expanded screening guidelines. “[The new recommendations] may erode some of the advances we had made in reducing breast-cancer mortality,” says Dr. Therese Bevers, a professor of clinical cancer prevention at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center in Houston.

For Deana Rich’s part, she plans to continue with her annual screenings, even if at some point she ends up paying for them herself. “It’s just too scary not to get mammograms,” she says. “I know it’s not the be all and end all, but it is one screening tool that we do have.”

Source:Health & Science. 20th. Nov. ’09

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Categories
Healthy Tips

Check Your Breasts for Cancer

[amazon_link asins=’B0746YJWDJ,B00DVEQ4XE,B07471W32H,B00O3YYHXU,B01AZ5P2S4,B01LWMUZZD,B074W7R66W,B00QGZANQE,B0185JVE7U’ template=’ProductCarousel’ store=’finmeacur-20′ marketplace=’US’ link_id=’084725dc-8a70-11e7-9340-354ad97c04ef’]

Cancer. The word is derived from “crab” and conjures up visions of multiple tentacles insidiously spreading all over the body. Unfortunately, the vision includes undiagnosed, undetected, untreated versions of the dreaded disease.

Women in India are prone to cervical (lower end of the uterus) and breast cancer. A vaccine (HPV or human papillovirus vaccine) was recently introduced to reduce the incidence of cancer of the cervix. However, there is no vaccine to prevent breast cancer. One in 22 women in India are projected to be diagnosed with breast cancer in the course of their lifetime. The incidence varies from eight per 1,00,000 women in rural India to 27 per 1,00,000 women in urban areas. Breast cancer is not a disease confined to women; in rare occasions, it can occur in men too.

Lumps in the breast can be felt when they are pea sized. The tissue feels different, and is firmer and harder than in the surrounding areas. Later the skin over the lump may be discoloured or thickened (resembling an orange peel). Also, there may be retraction (pulling inward) of the nipple.

Many lumps are harmless non-cancerous fibroadenomas. Others are not real lumps but nodular breasts reflecting the hormonal changes that occur during the course of a normal menstrual cycle. All lumps, however, must be taken seriously and evaluated as soon as they appear.

Evaluation of a breast lump is usually done with a mammogram or an ultrasound examination. Once the position has been accurately localised, the lump is aspirated with a fine needle. Cells obtained during the procedure are used to diagnose the nature of the lump. Depending on the diagnosis, the breast is operated. This is followed by chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormone therapy and immunotherapy.

Breast cancer can occur at any age, though it is less common under the age of 25 years. The exact mechanism which sets in motion the changes responsible for breast cancer is not known. Certain environmental and genetic factors are associated with an increased risk of breast cancer.

• Long years of menstruation with early menarche (less than 12) and late menopause (over 55)

• Delayed childbirth

• Failure to breast-feed children

• Breast or ovarian cancer in first degree relatives

• Smoking and drinking alcohol

• Obesity

• Cancer elsewhere and exposure to radiation

• Post menopausal hormone replacement therapy for more than four years.

In developed countries, the majority of cases is discovered by routine screening, even before a lump is palpable. In India, by the time the patient arrives for an evaluation, the cancer has usually spread locally. This is unfortunate as a 20-year survival is found in 90 per cent of patients if the tumour diameter is less than 1cm. Early detection and diagnosis are therefore of paramount importance.

One of the most useful tools for early detection is breast self examination. It is simple, easy and sensitive. It can be done in five steps, preferably on the same day every month. This is to negate any changes in consistency because of hormonal effects.

………….breast_self_test

Step 1: Begin by looking at your breasts in the mirror, uncovered, with your shoulders straight and arms on your hips. Check that the breasts are their usual size, shape and colour. There should be no visible distortion or swelling. The danger signs are dimpling, puckering, bulging of the skin, redness, soreness, rash or swelling, or a nipple that has changed position.

Step 2: Look for the same changes with raised arms.

Step 3: Gently squeeze each nipple between your finger and thumb and check for nipple discharge.

Step 4: Next, feel your breasts while lying down, using your right hand to feel your left breast and then your left hand to feel your right breast. Use a firm, smooth touch with the first few fingers of your hand, keeping the fingers flat and together. Cover the entire breast from top to bottom, side to side from the armpit to the cleavage. Follow a pattern to be sure that you cover the whole breast.

5. Begin examining each area with a very soft touch, and then increase pressure so that you can feel the deeper tissue, down to your ribcage.

Step 5: Finally, feel your breasts while you are standing or sitting.:-

Mammograms can detect tumours before they are felt with the hand. After the age of 45 years, they should ideally be done every two years. In case of any abnormality, see a competent surgeon immediately. The process may be expensive, but is well worth the cost.

A few lifestyle changes can reduce your risk of developing breast cancer.

• Maintain a BMI (weight in kg / height in metre squared) of around 23

• Reduce the intake of fat

• Eat five helpings of fruits or vegetables a day

• Regular exercise (jogging, cycling swimming, running) for 45 minutes at least four times a week has a positive effect on the immune system.

You may click to see:-

10 tips to reduce Cancer risk
Aspirin reduces Breast Cancer Risk by 20%
Red wine improves cancer prognosis

Source: The Telegraph (Kolkata, India)

Related articles by Zemanta
Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
css.php