I agree it’s the media coverage not the research.The research shows
" They found the biggest influence on sex hormone levels was BMI scores. The biggest increases were for oestrogens, and this increase in oestrogen may explain why post menopausal, obese women are at higher risk for breast cancer.
Women who drank 20g of alcohol or more per day (around two and a half units) had higher levels of all hormones. One alcohol unit is measured as 10ml or 8g of pure alcohol. A large 250ml glass of wine (12 per cent) is 3 units of alcohol. The higher oestrogen levels may contribute to the increased risk of breast cancer in regular drinkers.
Women who smoked 15 cigarettes a day also had moderately higher levels of all hormones than non-smokers, with the largest difference for testosterone"
I dont know the reason why I got breast cancer,maybe coz my mum had it or maybe coz I drank too much in my teens,my weight always up and down (up when I got breast cancer)or maybe I just got it coz ‘I’m a lady’ (said in a david walliams way lol :))My oestragon and progesterone levels were both 8/8.I am loosing weight,dont smoke and drink very occasionaly.I’m on tamoxifen which hopefully is doing it’s job, but it makes sense to me to try and reduce the levels if I can.
Fortunately I didn’t hear it on any news. My husband saw on the BBC website that there was a new Cancer Research paper and I went straight to their site. I didn’t hear any dreadful ways of reporting it.
I hate the word ‘blame’ for any illness and always have, even when I worked as a nurse or especially so then. No-one chooses to get ill and if we start looking at who ‘deserves’ to then we’re in serious trouble.
This is really bizarro world. The major UK cancer charity that is often referenced on this site as the pre-eminent authority on breast cancer, looks at some long established factors that increase breast cancer risk, identifies the likely mechanism that leads to cancer in some (but obviously not all) cases, and people without those risk factors get very cross. I find it odd that people think because a risk factor doesn’t apply to them, the information is invalid, and other people won’t have a use for it. There was no mention of blame in the research or the comment introducing it. Does anyone have any criticism of the methodology of the research, or is it just the results they don’t like?
StressyMessy - “and this increase in oestrogen may explain why post menopausal, obese women are at higher risk for breast cancer”
The key word in that sentence you quoted is “MAY”.
In reality it is yet another hyopthesis being reported as some major finding.
In years gone by this stuff bounced around within the medical and scientific fraternities - studies revealed an area of interest that maybe did or did not merit further investigation.
Now anyone with access to a Google button (including journalists) is an expert and these findings are trumpeted as something groundbreakingly important. So much of these things are of no genuine value whatsoever.
We have just had all the hoopla over bisphosphonates being heralded as the great breakthrough - then oops, no, actually they aren’t.
Give it a couple of years and a new study will emerge revealing that obesity actually doesn’t have as much impact on BC as was first thought.
I do understand the cynicism about research. However that ‘may’ could equally as well turn out to be a definite in years to come.
I prefer to hear about this research even if it still not as definite as we’d all like.
Either way, many of us are either trying to block our oestrogen with tamoxifen or blocking the synthesis of oestrogen with an aromatase inhibitor. Makes sense to me to do all we can to reduce circulating oestrogen. Elinda
The biggest risk factors for breast cancer remain the same - being female and getting older!
I did read in some of the research (can’t remember where, sorry!) that being overweight in PRE-menopausal women isn’t a risk factor. But that’s all by the by for me, because I got it anyhow!
Finty, the introductory post didn’t use the “blame” word, but there have been so many reports of this kind of research that insist on blaming the people who have had a cancer diagnosis, when it’s just not that simple.
“Risk” is also a very tricky word, and those who don’t understand statistics don’t understand that the word “risk” is used in a very specific way in this kind of research. We see numbers bandied around about the risk of recurrence increasing by 5% if you do something or other, but very few actually understand what that means. Which then results in the journos looking for a simple straightforward summary - and that usually includes the word “blame” in it somewhere!
I most certainly do intend losing the weight I put on during chemo, and have radically cut down on my alcohol consumption. Not being smug, but as you have said there are things we can to to improve our chances of survival so it makes sense to do them.
Well as I said my ER and PR levels were 8/8 and although it says ‘may’ be a risk in getting breast cancer the reseach shows a rise in sex hormones. so if I can reduce the hormone levels in someway even by a little then thats good for me.The oestragon/progesterone along with the rise in my blood sugar levels have given me the insentive to loose weight and eat more healthly so thats good for me too :).
I too have cut down on eating rubbish and drinking alcohol and have started eating loads of fruit and veg . I felt i owed myself that but what difference that is going to make to me i have no idea being TN.!!
Sharon xx
The study doesn’t say much that is new because it is looking at the data from other studies. What is different is that is pulling all of that data together. What I liked about was the fact that it only included research that included blood sample data showing circulating hormone levels.
I have to say though that I’d not heard about the changes in circulating hormones and smoking before.
There are things on it which we also know and can’t do a thing about. I started my periods shortly after turning age 11. I found it interesting to see that age of menarche appears to affect circulating hormones postmenopausally:
‘We found that, after adjusting for BMI, mean concentrations of oestradiol were 6% lower in postmenopausal women who had had a late menarche than in those who had an early menarche, but age at menarche was not clearly associated with the other hormones or SHBG’
I think I would like to say from the start that i am no way knocking people who research things, think that makes sense to them and therefore change their lifestyle.
some people think that my stance on nice fatty cuts of meat from animals that eat grass and not soy is not valid and they would rather eat veg–fine we have different views, and we both feel compfortable with the way we now eat and drink( or dont)
I think any wake up call that makes us re-evaluate the junk we shovel into our bodies is good. But you will never get me to exercise. If god had intended me to do that he would have given me a body that looks good in lycra.
I am still unsure about this lets stop eating oestrogen bit. If tamoxifen locks up the hormone receptors on the cancer cells, then if those receptors are locked then surly it does not matte how much oestrogen is in the body, it will just swim straight past the cancer wont it??
our bodies need oestrogen and progesterone for all sorts of things. Post menopause overies dont produce it so surely we should try to get some from the diet, and not block it out completely.
also i am more interested in what alcohol does for re-occurance rather than occurance, that is what is relevant to me now. and as we have discussed on previous posts, for post menopausal women who are not overweight the change in re-occurance is small and is more than cancelled out on the good effects of alcohol on the heart for that group, oestrogen or no oestrogen
The issues are that tamoxifen is not effective for 100% of people and there doesn’t seem to be a reliable test to know whether or not we’re one of those. I don’t know much about aromatase inhibitors and how they work. I have read though that you can develop a resistance to them. So therefore it seems logical to reduce the amount of circulating hormones such as oestrogen as well as taking either tamoxifen or an AI.
Then the times arrives when you’re taking neither tamoxifen nor an AI. Knowing all the factors that can raise our oestrogen and other hormone levels seems vital.
While oestrogen will do good things for your body such as for your bones or heart for example, that is for women without BC. Having a BC diagnosis changes everything because to put it bluntly, the greater risk is death.
Agree with CM, research is done and is (usually) reported with no alterior motive other than to inform, but the media get hold of it and add their twist, blame, contradicting other reports, blah blah so us what are us poor mortals to think. My view is its all a great big pool and the more research that is done the better. Somebody smarter than me (and have to admit to being a researcher, but not at Cochrane level) will come and gather it all together and come up with a nice succint guideline. But up to that point it will be confusing, contradictory, etc. To expect researchers all to sing from the same hymn sheet - and jeez I do hate that expression - is a total waste of time.
I know I wouldn’t be here for the length of time I am hoping I will be because of research. I also know I would have no breasts if I’d accepted the recommendation I was given based on old research and ‘conventional guidance’ that was based on outdated stuff. But the more I look at this the more I realise there is no perfect or anywhere near perfect route to guidance for the lass on the street. I would love it if I could trust doctors to know everything and sort me, but this is never going to be the case.
I do love Susan Love’s book though, she’s great at explaining the benefits of research while accepting the limitations, and the ever changing nature of the beast.
what a coincidance, I stumbled across susan loves site yesterday and was absolutely facinated by her explanation of how cancer grows, i put it up as a seperate thread… did not know she had written a book-- i will look for it on amazon