Camera examination of ancient skull shows that Egyptians tried to remove cancer 4,500 years ago

By examining an Egyptian skull from 4,500 years ago, an archeologist and his team apparently have "changed the previously understood timeline of when humans may have tried to treat cancer." 

A story by Ben Brasch in editions of The Washington Post a while back quotes archeologist Edgard Camarós, PhD professor at the University of Santiago de Compostela in Spain, as saying "it was clear that we were looking at a milestone in the history of medicine. That was one of those eureka moments." 

Camarós and his team maintain that they've "found proof that moves forward our under landing of when humans treat to treat cancer by 1,000 years."

Edgard Camarós

The team recently published a report in the Frontiers in Medicine journal explaining how they used new camera-and-screen technology and how the markings they found indicate that ancient scientists were trying to remove cancer from a skull.

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, cancer was the second-leading cause of death in the United States in 2022.

More information linking research and diseases can be found in Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer, a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at caregivers.

'Forever chemicals' make rainwater anywhere around globe unsafe to drink, new study says

Rainwater apparently is no longer safe to drink anywhere on Earth because of "forever chemicals" linked to cancer.

At least that's the findings of a new study, according to a recent story by Morgan McFall-Johnsen on the Business Insider website.

The study, made by a team of environmental scientists at the University of Stockholm, used U.S. contamination guidelines as a baseline. Results were published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology. 

The hazardous chemicals — per- and polyfluoroaklyl substances, or PFAS — "have spread throughout the entire atmosphere, leaving no place untouched," the article indicates.

The University of Stockholm has been a site of studies of PFAS for a decade.

According to McFall-Johnsen's piece, there are "thousands of PFAS, all human-made, used in food packaging, water-repellent clothing, furniture, carpets, nonstick coating on pots and pans, fire-extinguishing foams, electronics, and some shampoos and cosmetics."

During manufacturing and daily use, the story continues, "they can be released into the air. They also leach into open water and get aerosolized in sea spray. From there, they spread through the atmosphere and fall back to Earth in rain."

The term "forever chemicals" stems from their lingering a long time before breaking down.

PFAs, the story says, are "a hazard to human health, and peer-reviewed studies have linked them to some cancers, decreased fertility, reduced vaccine response, high cholesterol, and developmental delays in children."

Ian Cousins, PhD

The Insider article quotes Ian Cousins, lead author of the study, a PhD and a professor at the University of Stockholm's department of environmental science, to the effect that, based on the U.S. guidelines, "rainwater everywhere would be judged unsafe to drink." 

Although "in the industrial world we don't often drink rainwater [directly], many people around the world expect it to be safe to drink, and it supplies many of our drinking water sources," the story also quotes Cousins.

Because PFAS "persist for so long and cycle through the planet's oceans, atmosphere, and soil so effectively, the researchers expect levels will continue to be dangerously high," the article underscores.

It is "vitally important," the researchers wrote, "that PFAS uses and emissions are rapidly restricted."

More information about chemicals adding to people's risk of disease can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Bans on abortion are complicating access to drugs for cancer, arthritis, ulcers, other diseases

Some chronically ill women, because of legal bans on abortion, are facing questions about critical medications that could be used to end a pregnancy.

That conclusion is drawn in a story by Katie Shepherd and Frances Stead Sellers in yesterday's editions of The Washington Post.

"The sudden imposition of anti-abortion laws [after the reversal of Roe v. Wade] has left patients, doctors and pharmacists wading through a minefield of treatments and legal and ethical dilemmas related to women's health care — even in situations…that have nothing to do with pregnancy," Shepherd and Sellers write.

Medicines that treat conditions from cancer to autoimmune disease to ulcers, the piece notes, "can also end a pregnancy or cause birth defects and, as a result, "doctors and pharmacists in more than a dozen states with strict abortion restrictions must suddenly navigate whether and when to order such drugs because they could be held criminally liable and lose their licenses for prescribing some of them to pregnant women."

Even if they could show their patients suffer from conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis, the Post story goes on, "some doctors worry they could be prosecuted for prescribing such drugs to a patient with an unintended pregnancy."

Such patients, Shepherd and Sellers continue, "are also at greater risk because they can no longer seek abortions in their home states should they accidentally become pregnant while taking such drugs — no matter how grievous the injuries to the developing fetus."

Dr. Traci Poole

The article quotes Dr. Traci Poole, faculty member at Belmont University College of Pharmacy in Nashville and a practicing pharmacist, as asking, "If you are of childbearing age, are you going to be denied medications that could potentially interfere with a pregnancy?"

The story also says that physicians and pharmacists acknowledge "being blindsided by the speed of changes to state laws," and say they're making change to their practices to protect themselves against liability.

CVS and Walgreens and other major drugstore chains are instructing employees to delay filling prescriptions until they can validate their use to ensure they'll not be used to terminate pregnancies.

The Shepherd-Sellers article also quotes Jack Resneck Jr., president of the American Medical Association, who told federal lawmakers last month that doctors "have been placed in an impossible situation — trying to meet their ethical duties to place patient health and well-being first, while attempting to comply with vague, restrictive, complex, and conflicting state laws that interfere in the practice of medicine and jeopardize the health of patients."

More information about laws and their unintended consequences is available in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Top U.S. court rejects Roundup maker's appeal of decision that the weed killer causes cancer

The U.S. Supreme Court has let a $25 million verdict against Bayer, parent company of Monsanto, manufacturer of the popular weed killer Roundup, stand. 

The original jury found that Monsanto, the giant agribusiness that manufactures the pesticide, had failed to warn about cancer risks to those using the product.

The top court's decision not to intervene means not only that the decision in the suit brought by Edwin Hardeman, who was diagnosed in 2015 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, can remain intact but the way is cleared for thousands of similar lawsuits against Bayer. 

A story by Ann E. Marimow in an edition of The Washington Post this week notes that the "Biden administration had urged the court to deny the company's [stance], a departure from the Trump administration's position."

Hardeman's suit alleged that his use of Roundup for more than two decades caused his cancer and that Monsanto, which Bayer purchased in 2018, failed to warn about the risks associated with the active ingredient, glyphosate.

After an international research group in 2015 classified glyphosate as "probably carcinogenic to humans," the state of California demanded a warning label on Roundup, the nation's most widely used weed killer — in opposition to the Environmental Protection Agency's repeatedly concluding that "glyphosate is unlikely to cause cancer in humans."

Two years ago, according to the story, "Bayer agreed to pay more than $10 billion to settle tens of thousands of potential U.S. claims" but it admitted no wrongdoing. It also said it was moving toward alternate ingredients to "manage litigation risk in the U.S. and not because of safety concerns."

Judge Michelle Friedland

Just days before the Supreme Court ruling about the Hardeman suit, "a separate ruling from the 9th Circuit ordered the EPA to reconsider its finding in 2020 that glyphosate did not pose 'any unreasonable risk to man or the environment,'" Marimow's article reports. As a part of the unanimous decision, Judge Michelle Friedland writes that the Trump-era opinion "was not supported by substantial evidence" and didn't meet the agency's "legal obligations for reviewing environmental impact."

More information on court battles over carcinogenics can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

High-sugar foods can lead to obesity, then cancer

Daily glass of fruit juice or diet soda can boost disease risk, new French study of 100,000 adults shows

Even one daily glass of juice or soda can increase your risk of cancer. 

That conclusion, according to a recent story by Najja Parker in The Atlanta Journal-Constitution, stems from a new study of 100,000 French adults who were followed for nine years.

The study, published in the British Medical Journal, says that consuming sugary drinks each day — in amounts as small as 100 ml of 100% fruit juice or one-third of a typical can of an artificially sweetened diet beverage — is now "associated with an overall increase in cancer risk of 18% and breast cancer risk by 22%."

Earlier this year, the AJC article continues, "researchers from the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health found sugary drinks were linked to higher risk of early death, especially for women."

Dr. Mathilde Touvier

But lead researcher Dr. Mathilde Touvier told The Guardian that "it's probably safe to drink soda or fruit juice on occasion," according to a story by Stephen Johnson on the Big Think website. "The recommendation from several public health agencies," she's quoted as saying, "is to consume less than one drink per day. If you consume from time to time a sugary drink it won't be a problem, but if you drink at least one glass a day it can raise the risk of several diseases — here, maybe cancer, but also with a high level of evidence, cardiometabolic diseases."  

A handful of U.S. cities — including Albany, Berkeley and San Francisco in California; Boulder, Colorado; Philadelphia; and Seattle — have levied taxes on the soda industry. "Those levies seem to decrease soda consumption," Johnson's piece says.

The Big Think article also notes that "although consuming large amounts of sugar has been linked to some forms of cancer, like esophageal cancer, there's no strong evidence showing that it causes the disease, according to the American institute for Cancer Research. But there is an indirect link: Eating high-sugar foods often leads to obesity, which, in turn, raises the risk of developing cancer."

Information on other cancer-causing agents can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Bills can be as bad for patients as side effects

Lack of money may adversely impact health of cancer patients, says AARP article

Surviving cancer may depend on what's in your savings account.

At least that's the conclusion of an article by Peter Moore in an edition of "AARP: The Magazine" a while back.

The piece suggests that average costs for the disease "run in the $150,000 range."

Why so much?

Moore postulates that "containing the cancer and killing [the] abnormal cells without damaging nearby healthy cells often requires a range of treatments, over an extended period of time — lengthy radiation, complicated surgeries, costly chemotherapy, plus other strong medications to supercharge your immunity."

Although new treatments emerge with regularity, he writes, "with new hope comes even more cost: 11 or the 12 cancer drugs that the Food and Drug Administration approved in [a recent year] were priced at more than $100,000 [annually.]"

Even with a good insurance policy, "a patient is probably looking at a bill of more than $4,000 in deductibles and co-pays."

Patients, of course, must often cope as well with "loss of income during months of treatment and recovery," not to mention travel and lodging expenses "at a cancer-centric health facility."

Plus the costs of myriad follow-up tests.

Moore notes that "not only are cancer patients two and a half times as likely to declare bankruptcy as healthy people, but those patients who go bankrupt are 80 percent more likely to die from the disease than other cancer patients, according to studies from the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle."

Dr. Gary Lyman

The AARP story also quotes Dr. Gary Lyman of that center: "For many patients, when they get the bills, it can be as bad as some of the side effects of the disease or the treatment."

Moore entertains the idea that many patients don't discuss their financial fears with their doctors, fearing such action could "compromise their treatment."

The result of that silence and fears, or from a patient lying because he or she couldn't afford to follow a prescribed regimen?

"Doctors [don't] know that their patients might take their pills less often than prescribed [and/or] avoid follow-up therapies or tests."

More details about what else impacts cancer patients psychologically can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

'Fundamental change' in treating tumor cells

Nobel Prize goes to American, Japanese working separately on cancer immunotherapies

Two researchers who worked on game-changing therapies that unleash brakes against cancer have won 2018's Nobel Prize for medicine.

James P. Allison (left) and Tasuko Honjo

The pair — Dr. James P. Allison of the MC Anderson Cancer Center in Houston and Dr. Tasuko Honjo of Kyoto University in Japan — found "checkpoint inhibitor" therapies that "greatly increased survival of cancer patients and may produce even greater results when combined with traditional therapies," according to an online story this week by Tina Hesman Saey in ScienceNews, the nonprofit magazine of the Society for Science & the Public.

The article indicates that "all previous types of cancer therapy were directed at the tumor cell, but Allison's and Honjo's approach was to remove brakes that keep the immune system in check."

The two, who were working separately, will equally share the prize of just over $1 million.

An earlier piece by Saey and Aimee Cunningham in ScienceNews noted that they had identified proteins that act as brakes on tumor-fighting T cells.

A Reuters story said the "scientists' work in the 1990s has since swiftly led to new and dramatically improved therapies for cancers such as melanoma and lung cancer, which had previously been extremely difficult to treat."

Treatments known as immune checkpoint blockade that resulted from their work, the piece added, "'have fundamentally changed the outcome' for some advanced cancer patients," the Nobel institute said."

The discoveries consequently spawned a multi-billion dollar market for new cancer medicines.

Reuters quoted a professor at the Institute of Cancer Research in London, Kevin Harrington, as contending the two scientists' work had revolutionized cancer treatment:

"We've gone from being in a situation where patients were effectively untreatable to having a range of therapy options that, when they work, work very well indeed," he said in a statement. "For some patients we see their tumors shrink or completely disappear and are effectively cured."

More information on research can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Carcinogenic chemical in java? Lawsuit may tell

Longstanding suit against possible cancer perils in coffee may be resolved by year's end

Will coffee labels in California soon warn about cancer risks?

Perhaps — at least if Long Beach attorney Raphael Metzger has his way.

Raphael Metzger

Metzger, according to a recent story by Hoa Quách on the Patch website, has "sued restaurants, stating that the warning is needed as coffee contains acrylamide, a carcinogen."

A judge finally is expected to rule before the end of the year on the lawsuit he filed way back in 2010 — against companies such as Starbucks and 7-Eleven, based on Proposition 65, a 1986 law that requires items containing the chemical to have warning labels.

That suit, not incidentally, followed another by the attorney and his Metzger Law Group, one that he filed against fast-food companies in 2002 "contending that french fries also contained the hazardous ingredient," the story notes.

The current suit, on behalf of the Council for Education and Research on Toxics, offers an alternative request to the java labels — have the manufacturers "reduce the acrylamide content of their coffee products to safe levels."

But the National Coffee Association offers this defense: "There is no evidence that coffee causes cancer."

On its website, it says coffee "is a complex beverage (both compositionally and culturally) — and it's much, much more than just one of its elements. Pretending otherwise does not serve public interest in any way."

Meanwhile, CNN writer Jen Christenen has reported that at least 13 of the defendants have settled and agreed to give a warning, most recently 7-Eleven.

Private mediation with some of the remaining retailers, she contends, has been slated.

At a bench trial last fall, Christenen writes, "the coffee companies argued that the level of acrylamide in coffee should be considered safe under the law and that the health benefits of coffee essentially outweigh the risk."

Her story quotes Metzger on a personal level: "I'm addicted to coffee, I confess, and I would like to be able to have mine without acrylamide."

Christenen also points out that "in addition to coffee, acrylamide can be found in potatoes and baked good like crackers, bread and cookies, breakfast cereal, canned black olives and prune juice, although its presence is not always labeled."

A Bloomberg article indicates that the lawyer's initial complaint "grew to include about 90 coffee producers, distributors and retailers, from mom-and-pop roasters to multinationals such as Nestle."

That piece also stated his complaint had "alleged that a 12-ounce cup of coffee contains about 10 times more acrylamide than the state's 'no significant risk level.'"

Metzger's nine-attorney law group, according to its website, was founded in 1987 and "is a boutique firm whose practice is concentrated on the litigation of toxic tort and environmental exposure cases in the state of California."

A multitude of products has previously been linked to the disease. To check out many of these, pick up a copy of "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

'Existential dread' matches dread about disease

Cancer patients, survivors fear GOP dismantling Obamacare, return to 'medical dark ages'

Both cancer patients and survivors are having new fears — anxieties that equates to the trepidation they had when first diagnosed with the disease.

According to a recent story by Laurie McKinley in The Washington Post, what they're afraid of is the Republican obsession to dismantle the Affordable Care Act, otherwise known as Obamacare.

The McKinley piece says those patients and survivors "are among the most vocal of groups raising alarms about the GOP's repeal effort. They are calling congressional offices and showing up at their representatives' town hall meetings with angst-filled stories about a pre-ACA world in which they couldn't get individual health plans because of their medical histories."

More than 15 million people in the United States are patients or survivors, the story adds, "with millions more affected as family members."  

McKinley writes that "many people described a kind of existential dread that matches their fear of cancer," still the second-leading cause of death in this country.

Dr. J. Leonard Lichetenfeld

In effect, they fear a return to the "medical dark ages" where their disease is concerned.

"Some worry," the story continues, "that the law's likely dismantling may put the latest oncology treatments, which can run $10,000 a month, out of reach. Others point to research showing that insurance status affects cancer patients' survival."

The piece also quotes Dr. J. Leonard Lichtenfeld, deputy chief medical officer of the American Cancer Society, as telling a recent House committee hearing, "Cancer patients need to know that they have insurance."

Fear, and how to overcome it, is a major topic of "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers. 

18 million premature deaths predicted

Number of smokers dips again, but addiction is now linked to 40 percent of all cancers

Smoking has now been linked to 40 percent of all cancers despite the number of smokers continuing to decline dramatically.

Malignancies, in addition to lung cancer, include throat, stomach, pancreas and liver, according to a recent story by Laurie McKinley in The Washington Post.

Tom Frieden

McKinley quotes Tom Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, as saying that although smoking rates are "at all-time lows…nearly half (the current 36 million smokers) could die prematurely from tobacco-related illnesses, including 6 million from cancer."

The article also quotes the CDC's Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report to the effect that the number of smoking adults declined 1.7 percent last year — down to 15.1 percent.

In 2005, there were 45.1 million adult American smokers.

Ernest Hawk, vice president for cancer prevention at MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, also was quoted by McKinley: "Smoking is more than just a habit. It's an addiction, and it's very hard to get off any addictive substance."

I cerainly know all about that — I smoked more cigarettes than I care to remember. 

For more than 30 years.

When I finally quit, I dug a hole in my back yard, inserted an unfinished pack of Pall Malls, and declared to the skies, "I'm burying these cigarettes so I can live."

The American Lung Association, by the way, has called on Congress "to fully fund smoking-cessation efforts in states," according to the Post story.

"Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at caregivers, details a vast variety of cancer causes, proving that cancer is hardly monolithic.

Will new drugs eventually result from findings?

Genes in African elephants could lead to protection for human cancers, study indicates

African elephant

An African elephant walked into a bar, ordered a glass of water and told the mixologist, "I've got a good chance of never getting cancer."

Sound like the start of a joke about the elephant in the room? 

Well, it's not.

The implication that the pachyderm might have some kind of evolutionary protection against cancer while human beings can only wish for such immunity is somewhat unsettling.

According to a recent story by Deborah Netburn in the Los Angeles Times, scientists say that "just 4.8% of known elephant deaths related to cancer. For humans, cancer-related deaths are between 11% and 25%."

Those figures fly in the face of elephants, which live about 70 years, having 100 times more cells than humans — cells that, in theory at least, should therefore mutate and become malignant more often than human cells.

But African elephants, it appears, "have 20 copies of a gene called TP53" that has the "ability to create a protein that suppresses tumors," the Times article indicates.

That translated into "a damaged cell [destroying] itself so it won't pass on potentially harmful mutations," the piece noted.

Humans have only one copy of TP53.

Dr. Joshua Schiffman

The Times story was based on a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association.

Dr. Joshua Schiffman, a pediatric oncologist at the University of Utah's Huntsman Cancer Institute in Salt Lake City and a senior author of the study, indicated the findings could lead to creation of "a drug that mimics the actions of TP53" — which eventually could mean new protections for humans.

"Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," the VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers, details how recent studies have advanced the body of knowledge in the cancer community — as well as how study results have tended to flip-flop, changing not only from year-to-year but even month-to-month.

Aging increase causes spread of medical facilities

What's behind boom in cancer centers across U.S.? Answer: 'silver tsunami' and money

A cancer center building boom is spreading across the country, according to a story this week in the Washington Post by Brady Dennis.

The piece reports the American Cancer Society as saying "more than 1.6 million people in the United States will be diagnosed with cancer this year," and goes on to suggest "the number is certain to rise with the aging of the baby boom generation."

A steady population increase among the elderly means "a push to bring the latest specialized treatments and access to more clinical trials to patients who don't live near major academic research centers," the article states.

Voila! The national building boom.

Furthermore, the piece notes that because "medical advances are allowing more people to live longer with cancer and, in some case, to treat it as a chronic disease…there is fierce competition among hospitals searching for reliable revenue in a rapidly changing health-care landscape."

There remain many skeptics in the medical community, however, those who contend the label cancer center can easily be applied by virtually any facility and, therefore, "doesn't guarantee that each place will have doctors with deep expertise, a track record of good outcomes or credentials such as a National Cancer Institute designation as a top-notch center."

Dr. Peter Bach

Daniels' article quotes, for instance, Dr. Peter Bach, an oncologist and director of the Center for Health Policy and Outcomes at New York's famed Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center.

Bach, whose wife, Ruth, died a few years back when her breast cancer recurred and metastasized, says his concern is that an average patient could have difficulty determining where to get "high-quality care when the market is flooded with places claiming to be cancer centers."

The Washington Post piece also says that "it remains unclear whether the proliferation of cancer centers…will lead to more tests, surgeries and mediations being billed to Medicare, private insurers and patients."

An outgrowth of the rise in the aging population, according to the story, is that well-known institutions — such as Sloan Kettering or Baltimore's Johns Hopkins — "are forming alliances with smaller hospitals in an effort to extend their brands, in some cases around the country and the globe."

The Post quotes Patrick Duke, managing director for a consulting group that advises hospitals about real estate projects, CBRE Healthcare, to the effect that the economics of cancer treatment "are good. That's a touchy subject for some people, but it's the reality…The procedures and the drugs are well reimbursed. It's a big business."

Is the boomer concept real?

Seven years ago, when I, Woody Weingarten, served on the Marin County Civil Grand Jury, I was repeatedly told our area was being inundated by a "silver tsunami." The truth of that became evident as I opened my eyes and saw who was driving on our highways, walking on our streets.

Clearly, the longer folks last, the greater chance there is for them to contract a life-threatening disease. My VitalityPress book, "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," whose aim is helping male caregivers, discusses the aging population, medical care in general and breast cancer care in particular, and high medical costs.

Benefit will aid alternative cancer clinic

Breastfest tomorrow will help level the playing field by aiding low-income women with cancer

Beer and breast cancer.

Not exactly a combination that slips into a comfy mental corner or trickles off the tongue  easily.

But it’s an important combo, especially since an all-volunteer Breastfest tomorrow will provide, according to Marin County's website, “endless eats and bottomless cups.”

It’ll be the 15th year for the benefit event, which will take place from noon to 4 p.m. at the Marin County Fairgrounds (after a few years at Fort Mason in San Francisco).

Jenn Procopio, who co-founded the festival in 2000 at what was then called the Larkspur Landing shopping center and is now known as the Marin Country Mart, reports that 100 percent of the proceeds will benefit the nonprofit Charlotte Maxwell Complementary Clinic.

Jenn Procopio

The clinic’s core mission, according to its online information, “is to provide relief from the terrible side effects of cancer and its treatments (pain, nausea, fatigue and loss of appetite), to enhance immune function, and to better the quality of life for women battling cancer.”

Besides, in effect, leveling the playing field.

Low-income U.S. women, adds the clinic's website, “are four times more likely to die from their form of cancer than those living above the federal poverty line.”

Tomorrow’s festival, which includes 38 microbreweries that will be pouring samples, should push the donation total past the half-million dollar mark.

Live entertainment will be provided by Kingsborough, a Santa Rosa rock band.

The clinic, with one office in Oakland and another in San Francisco, acts as a safety net and provides free alternative-medicine treatments and other services for poor women with cancer.

Its treatments include Chinese and Western herbs, massage and nutritional therapies, guided imagery,  acupuncture, and homeopathy in general.

The clinic also provides transportation and social services, educational workshops and organic foods.

Procopio, general manager at Marin Brewing Company, got involved with Breastfest (whose admission is $55 in advance, $65 at the ticket booth), when her mom was fighting breast cancer and she discovered that health plans only rarely covered alternative treatments for side effects.

I, Woody Weingarten, clearly remember my wife’s immersion in alternative treatments — as well as traditional Western medicine — when she had breast cancer.

The truth is, she’s still using the same Chinese herbs that first were prescribed 20 years ago.

Her story, and mine as prime caregiver, are contained in my new VitalityPress book, “Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner’s breast cancer.”

Warning: Be careful of fraudulent philanthropies

FTC says four cancer charities diverted $187 million of donors' money meant for patients

The Federal Trade Commission has called four cancer philanthropies a sham, claiming they bilked contributors of $187 million.

The charges were filed in a civil complaint.

No criminal charges were pending.

According to a recent article in the Washington Post, the charities' telemarketing and websites declared that the donations would pay for patients' pain meds, hospice services and other care. 

But, the FTC said, the bulk of the contributions actually benefitted the charities' three organizers, their friends and fundraisers — with less than 5 percent going to patients' needs.

A sidebar article by Ariana Eunjung Cha listed five reasons the government took so long to catch on. Among them:

• "The government is overwhelmed" by the sheer number of public charities — more than 1,050,000.

• The IRS has been "disincentivized from pursuing cases against charities."

Myra Miblowit of BCRF

• "The names of cancer charities, even legitimate ones, are confusingly similar to one another." The writer quotes Myra Biblowit, president of the respected Breast Cancer Research Foundation, as saying, "It is vitally important that donors utilize charity watchdog organizations to vet non-profits for transparency and efficiency."

"Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," my new VitalityPress book that's aimed at male caregivers, includes a chapter, "Where Men Can Find Help," that lists organizations (including the BCRF), books and other resources I have vetted as being legitimate and useful.

The Post's main story — carrying the triple byline of Peter Whoriskey, Brady Dennis and Ariana Eunjung Cha — reported that "the scheme was a family effort," with each of the four charities run by either James Reynolds Sr.; his son, James Reynolds Jr.; or the father's ex-wife, Rose Perkins.

The money in question was raised between 2008 and 2012 by the Cancer Fund of America, Cancer Support Services, the Children's Cancer Fund of America and the Breast Cancer Society.

An agreement calls for the three family members to be banned from fundraising and charity management, and for the dissolution of the Children's Cancer Fund and the Breast Cancer Society.

Softening the impact of breast cancer chemo

Humorous photos don't appear in 'Rollercoaster' but helped couple deal with hair loss

Rhoda Draws in her studio.

Humor can help patients and caregivers cope.

So can artistic flights of fancy.

At a time when her breast cancer and chemo-induced loss of hair turned my wife, Nancy Fox, into a portrait of cheerlessness, Rhoda Draws, a painter-caricaturist-friend based in Mill Valley, California, superimposed some playfulness on half a dozen photographs.

Nancy couldn't help but smile.

Nor could I.

Nancy, digitally enhanced.

Rhoda, who's also an author and teacher, presented the re-imagined photos (aka digitally enhanced, or cyber-imaged) to Nancy as a gift.

Immediately, my wife for a while stopped mourning the loss of her shoulder length, red hair — what she describes in my new book, "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," as "the one part of my body that I have loved unconditionally."

None of the distinctive photos accompany my narrative. Not because Nancy doesn't appreciate them 20 years after her diagnosis and treatment, but simply because I, Woody Weingarten, didn't use any illustrations at all in the book.

Nancy used the six re-imagined, often whimsical photos on a one-page flyer she sent to friends and family members who aided her. She added this text: "Thanks for your helping hands…and your loving heart…during all my changes."

The front of our refrigerator is decorated with two of the images — on magnets. They still make us smile, every day.

And cope.

And remember the ups and downs of the past triggered by passages in "Rollercoaster."

Such as:

• "Her dread of going bald had careened off the charts. Just before turning out the lights she recalled that as a girl with braids down to her waist, she'd panicked when her mother demanded she cut them off."

• "I do wish she could consistently see herself as I do, as a beautiful creature with or without hair."

• Sadness about her missing hair — even though that loss was temporary — remained the biggie for Nancy. A year after her final treatment, she wrote in her journal that it 'was clearly the psychologically devastating part of the cancer."

• It had taken more than two years before she could look at images of her baldness…She agreed at last to put the photos of her hairless stage into two albums…[She] triggered my caregiver button: 'You and I will never see it the same way,' I replied sincerely. 'Your high cheekbones and eyes showed off better when there was no hair to look at. The fact is, you're lovely both ways.'"

Two decades after her breast cancer diagnosis, Nancy's loveliness still makes me tremble.

Even though her hair is draped around her shoulders again.