Prevention is ignored I think Cancer Research UK and the Government have their own agenda and looking seriously at prevention is not on the agenda.
I get fed up of the Cancer Charities coming up with lame comments about other people\'s research. All we get is it needs more study, or the research done so far is inconclusive. It may be that some of the research they comment on is flawed (I\'m not talking Vit D specifically here) or it may be that Cancer Charities aren\'t that interested in the possibility of a relatively simple thing such as Vit D deficiency ever being proved to be able to reduce incidence of breast cancer dramatically \'cos then they\'re all out of a job. Have a look at their accounts on the Charities Commission website and see what a huge enterprise, including the world of academia, would have to be dismantled if far fewer people got cancer and if most people who got it could be cured.
Another thing that annoys me is all this CRUK stuff about half of all cancers could probably be prevented by lifestyle changes (presumably excluding taking Vitamin D!) Well what specific lifestyle changes then? What lifestyle changes should my daughter be making to halve her risk of getting breast cancer. Have 10 kids and breast feed them all until they\'ve grown wisdom teeth perhaps?
My MP is enquiring on my behalf what the Dept of Health is doing about research into prevention so I await developments with interest.
--- Christine --- I read your last paragraph and wanted to come up with something, witty or profound or intelligent, but instead found that I was just stunned as usual into silence when the Government\'s way of thinking is mentioned.
Like you in your own fight with them over drug provision, I too have contacted them on several topics related to breast cancer and its prevention and treatment - every time I receive a stereo type reply which is completely flawed. I have no doubts whatsoever that if we were to ask everyone on this site would they allow you to put their names to a letter you would be prepared to send to the Government on this issue, and should they all agree, it would only result in yet another load of pre-ordained responses which result in their inactivity.
If you do decide you think it worthwhile though, I would happily put my name on the letter..... but let\'s face it .... the more \'trials\' or \'research\' the more wasted money and excuses for them to do absolutely NOTHING.
63 Studies and no action? A few days ago I read in the newspaper about a scientist who had reviewed 63 studies dating back 30 years looking at vitamin D and cancer and concluded that increase vitamin D seems to possibly halve the risk of some cancers, including reducing the risk of breast cancer. Yet, when a CRUK spokeswoman was asked about this, all she said was that the matter required further study. Study number 64 I guess.
The UK has massive problems with vitamin D deficiency. A report that came out last summer said that half of British teenagers are vitamin D deficient, even though young people are supposed to be good at synthesising vitamin D from the sun (ok, I know, what sun?).
I can understand why they wouldn\'t want to say that everyone needed to start taking vitamin D right away, since there are problems with possible adverse effects from getting too much, but I was disappointed that CRUK didn\'t respond that somebody in the UK had human trials underway or even planned to address this problem.
Are there any good reasons why the government doesn\'t fund this type of research?