A warning about pills, ointments, drops, teas

Federal agency's order targets 14 companies for phony claims about curing various cancers

The Food and Drug Administration is cracking down on bogus claims about cancer cures.

According to a story by Laurie McGinley in The Washington Post this week, the FDA has ordered 14 companies to stop making such claims about "asparagus extract, exotic teas and topical creams for pets."

The order says if they don't stop, they may "face possible product seizures and criminal prosecution."

Or, at least, court injunctions of their products.

More than 65 unapproved products are covered in the order, "products that the companies touted as preventing, treating or curing cancer, a violation of federal law, the agency said."

Those items, the story notes, "include pills, ointments, oils, drops, teas and diagnostic devices."

Douglas Stearn

McGinley's piece quotes Douglas Stearn, director of the FDA's Office of Enforcement and Import Operations, as warning that "consumers should not use these or similar unproven products because they may be unsafe and could prevent a person from seeking an appropriate and potentially lifesaving cancer diagnosis or treatment."

The agency, the article continued, "gave the companies 15 days to correct the violations or provide a plan on how they will correct them."

FDA officials said they've "issued more than 90 warning letters in 10 years to companies marketing hundreds of fraudulent products making cancer claims on websites, on social media and in stores."

They acknowledged, however, that "while the warnings sometimes stopped the sales, the companies sometimes just moved the products to new websites."

A disturbing trend, the agency indicated, is "a rise in phony cancer treatments for pets" — dogs and cats mainly.

Want to learn how the FDA has dealt with other cancer claims? Check out "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

30-year disease hikes found in 7 ethnic groups

Asian-Americans' breast cancer rate continuing its steady rise in California, study indicates

The breast cancer rate among Asian-Americans in California keeps climbing.

In fact, it's been increasing for nearly 30 years.

According to a story by Tracy Seipel of the Bay Area News Group published this week in the Marin Independent Journal, a new study shows the jumps are true for all seven groups examined by the Cancer Prevention Institute of California.

The biggest increases occurred among Koreans and Southeast Asians (Cambodians, Laotians, Hmong, Thai). 

And although Japanese-Americans showed the slowest increases, they suffered the highest breast cancer rates among those examined.

The study, which covered 1988 to 2013 and was published in the journal Breast Cancer Research and Treatment, looked at — in addition to the three aforementioned groups — Chinese, Filipinos, Vietnamese and South Asians (Asian Indians and Pakistanis).

CPIC's study focused, naturally, on the state with the "largest population of Asian-Americans in the country" — 15% of California's 5.7 million.

Scarlett Lin Gomez

Scarlett Lin Gomez, the research's lead author, while pleased to note that the findings were "the first to evaluate patterns [among these ethnic groups] by age and stage of cancer," contends that "aspects of the Asian culture could be contributing to the growing numbers, including a tendency to consider cancer a stigma — and to keep quiet within a family."

Grace Yoo, a professor of Asian American Studies at San Francisco State who's written extensively on the subject, maintains, meanwhile, that there's a misperception among some Asian-Americans "that breast cancer is 'a white woman's disease.' It's just not on their radar."

Risk factors among Asian-Americans, according to the IJ article, might include delays in childbirth, changing diets, a rise in obesity and alcohol consumption. 

Better screenings, some believe, are another reason the increases have shown up.

But Lin Gomez thinks the immigrants' cancer risk "increases with acculturation — this is, adoption of Western lifestyles."

Grace Yoo

The IJ story also indicates Yoo is convinced that because many Asian-Americans arrive in the U.S. with no family history of the disease, there's little or no "intergenerational communication" around the importance of breast cancer screenings — and, therefore, diagnosis is postponed until the disease isn't discovered until advanced stages.

Some of the women then "face greater mortality than their white counterparts," Yoo says, and because many "equate the diagnosis as a death sentence…they may not aggressively pursue treatment."

The value of early diagnosis and treatment of breast cancer is laid out in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Risks determined after 200 studies are reviewed

Is fat the worst cancer-causing agent of all? British journal review leads writer to say 'yes'

Being overweight, according to a story in the Marin Independent Journal recently, can be the worst carcinogen.

The condition, proclaims the article by Dr. Salvatore Iaquinta, surgeon at Kaiser Permanente San Rafael, "greatly increases a person's chance of getting cancer."

Dr. Salvatore Iaquinta

A woman "50 pounds overweight," he continues, "has a greater risk of developing breast cancer than a soldier who was exposed to Agent Orange during the Vietnam War devoting prostate cancer."

Iaquinta, who writes a regular column under the rubric "Highway to Health" and who is the author of the book, "The Year They Tried to Kill Me," cites as the source for his belief a recent review in the "British Medical Journal." He notes that the authors had checked out more than 200 studies before determining their findings.

"Some of the associations between weight and cancer were gender specific," Iaquinta reports — such as breast cancer in postmenopausal women as well as cancer of the uterus lining.

Or colon and gallbladder cancers in men.

Other cancers "with increased risk related to body mass index," he indicates, include cancers of the kidney, stomach and pancreas as well as esophageal adenocarcinoma and multiple myeloma.

One of the doctor's main conclusions is that "rather than spending so much time and money to circumvent potential chemical exposures, we should be focusing our energy into staying in shape."

Details of other tests on the risks of contracting cancer 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.

Vaccine can prevent most HPV cancers

Over one-fifth of U.S. adults are infected with cancer-causing virus, federal report says

More than 20 percent of U.S. grown-ups are infected with a cancer-causing virus, a federal agency has reported.

A story by Jia Naqvi in The Washington Post today says that a study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention showed almost 23 percent of American adults between the ages of 18 and 59 had one particular type "of genital human papilloma virus (HPV) that put them at high risk of certain cancers."

The percentage almost doubled — to 42 percent — "if any type of genital HPV was included."

Prevalence, the study of 2013 and 2014 showed, "was higher in men than in women, and it was sharply higher among blacks compared to other racial and ethnic groups."

Geraldine McQuillan

Geraldine McQuillan, lead author of the report and a senior infectious disease epidemiologist at the CDC's National Center for Health Statistics, is quoted as saying, "People really need to realize that this is a serious concern."

HPV is the most common sexually transmitted disease in the United States, the story states, with nearly 80 million people currently infected and about 14 million new infections occurring "annually among teenagers as well as adults."

Each year, the Post article adds, "31,000 men and women are diagnosed with cancers caused by HPV — which, in most cases, would have been preventable with the HPV vaccine, according to the CDC."

Studies of cancer-causing agents are detailed in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Radiation time down from 2 months to 2 weeks

Newest prostate cancer therapy cuts length of treatments but adds intensity, NY Times says

A comparatively new — and popular — prostate cancer therapy can be shorter (and more intense) than standard treatments.

But it's efficacy is unproven.

And there's insufficient data so far to compare side effects.

According to an article by Gina Kolata in The New York Times today, the new treatment — called SBRT, or stereotactic body radiation therapy — usually involves five sessions within two weeks instead of 40 seasons spread over two months or 28 sessions over five or six weeks.

The National Cancer Institute (NCI) has just agreed to fund a clinic trial that will compare the SBRT and 28-session treatments, although it may be eight years before the results are finalized.

"Ideally," the Times quotes Dr. Rodney J. Ellis, a radiation oncologist at Case Comprehensive Cancer Center in Cleveland and the principal investigator for the trial, as saying, "we want to show five treatments is better."

The Times pieces says the number of men getting SBRT more than doubled between 2007 and 2013, according to the most recent Medicare data.

Prostate cancer strikes about 180,000 men annually, second only to lung cancer.

Some clinical trials, Kolata's story indicates, have provided "important information. For example, a recent one shows that hormone-blocking drugs can prolong life for men whose prostate cancer recurs after surgery to remove the prostate."

The article also indicates that a change in attitude seems to be occurring.

In favor of the shorter, more intense treatments.

Dr. Michael J. Zelefsky

Kolata's article quotes Dr. Michael J. Zelefsky, a Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center radiation oncologist, to the effect that "several years ago, 90 percent of his patients had the standard course of treatment. Now 90 percent choose the shorter course."

The newer treatment, he added, "is emerging as a very exciting form of therapy."

Why? Probably because more patients are considering "quality of life" issues and the shorter length of therapy may add to that.

Want an additional look at clinical trials and new treatments? "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book that I, Woody Weingarten (a guy who's undergone regular radiation, brachytherapy and hormonal therapy for prostate cancer), aimed at male caregivers, provides it.

24% dip in the disease's recurrence is possible

Exercise can help breast cancer patients diminish risks and bolster their quality of life

Exercise is hardly a cure-all for breast cancer.

But it can help.

Stacy Simon

According to an American Cancer Society story by senior editor Stacy Simon that I just found on the cancer.org website, exercise "is not only safe and possible during and after breast cancer treatment, but it also can reduce symptoms and improve quality of life."

The ACS article states that studies have shown "certain kinds of exercise appear to help breast cancer survivors at high risk for arm, breast and chest swelling (lymphedema) avoid the condition."

The studies have also shown that "some types of exercise can improve symptoms" for those who already have breast cancer.

And, as might be expected, that regular exercise "significantly improves physical functioning and reduces fatigue."

Perhaps most important is that Simon's piece notes, too, that physical activity "has also been linked to a 24% decrease in breast cancer coming back, and a 34% decrease in breast cancer deaths."

Her story cautions, however, that women should first check with their doctors to determine the exercise best suited for them (and to ensure their safety) — and then, after surgery, to wait to heal properly before starting a physical regimen.

The ACS story also lists possible exercise benefits as strengthening of muscles (or, at least, lessening muscle deterioration), heightening self-esteem and lowering anxiety and depression risk, and, finally, helping to control weight — "itself a risk factor for breast cancer recurrence."

Details about the healing process can be found in "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at caregivers.

Lead author calls research results 'shocking'

New study says risk of Gen Xers and millennials getting colon and rectal cancer is rising

Americans under 55 — those known as Gen Xers and millennials — are at a greater risk today of colon and rectal cancer than any generation before.

According to American Cancer Society (ACS) and National Cancer Institute (NSI) researchers, those born in 1990 have double the risk of colon cancer and quadruple the risk of rectal cancer than those born in 1950 had at the same age.

And most of those cancers would be in more advanced stages when discovered, a study published today in the Journal of the NSI indicates — probably because routine screening normally isn't recommended for those under 50.

Rebecca Siegel

The lead author of the study, Rebecca Siegel, an ACS epidemiologist, called the size of the increase "very shocking,'" most likely because the surge of younger diagnoses contrasts with the decades-long descent of colorectal cancer cases.

According to a Washington Post story by Laurie McKinley reprinted in the San Francisco Chronicle last week, Siegel noted that the drop has been driven by older adults who've gotten regular screenings, including colonoscopies, that detect growths before they become cancerous.

She also suggested that younger people are more apt to be uninsured, which might keep them from seeing a doctor until they can no longer ignore their symptoms.

"We had such great strides just in the past years in insurance coverage because of the Affordable Care Act," she said — hinting that the situation might change for the worse under the Trump administration and Congressional Republicans' desire to "repeal and replace" Obamacare.

The study looked at nearly half a million cases of colorectal cancer from 1974 to 2013. 

It found that colon cancer rates increased about 1 to 2 percent per year for people in their 20s and 30s, and that rates for middle-aged adults also rose, albeit at a slower pace.

"Rectal rates climbed even faster in recent decades," the story added, "at about 3 percent per year for people in their 20s and 30s and 2 percent annually for those 40 to 54."

Specific reasons for the increases, not incidentally, remain unclear.

The ACS, which predicts more than 95,000 new cases of colon cancer and almost 40,000 of colorectal cancer will be diagnosed this year, is reviewing colorectal cancer screening guidelines.

Research into the risks of diseases is an integral part of "Rollercoaster: How a man can survive his partner's breast cancer," a VitalityPress book I, Woody Weingarten, aimed at male caregivers.

Will FDA obey Trump, take step backward?

Researcher warns of using under-tested drugs, cites futile treatment on his father 

Dr. Cary Gross

Can some cancer treatments do more harm than good?

Absolutely, indicates Cary Gross, professor of medicine and cancer researcher at the Yale University School of Medicine, in a recent article in The Washington Post.

Gross cites the case of his own 80-year-old father, who'd been treated for Hodgkin's disease and couldn't walk because of weakness when his oncologist suggested a new, expensive, risky drug that was covered by insurance.

The oncologist was afraid chemo might do more harm than good but believed the "targeted therapy" treatment that used antibodies to kill only cancer cells would work.

Although the tumors shrunk at first, and Gross' father regained some strength, he experienced mild pain in his feet after a few months, followed by more severe shooting pains through his legs. Those side effects, Gross wrote in his article, again prevented him from walking and kept him bed-bound.

He subsequently died.

"The Food and Drug Administration had approved the treatment based only on a small study of about 100 patients, one-third of whom demonstrated complete remission," Gross reported.

"Although side effects were rare, the average age of patients in the study was 31. This is typical of cancer-treatment studies, which most often test new drugs in younger and healthier people — not older people with lots of medical conditions."

Gross expresses fear that "unfortunately, our government's commitment to evaluating new drugs is about to take a step backward. At a recent meeting with pharmaceutical company executives, President Trump announced he would be cutting regulations 'at a level nobody's ever seen before.'"

The FDA, he contends, "shouldn't shy away from requiring thorough evaluation of new drugs. The same level of enthusiasm and funding that goes into developing new treatments should be invested in testing whether they are safe and effective in patients outside of the initial small trials. Under-tested drugs with unclear safety profiles and efficacy should not be given to broad swaths of the population."

Other illustrations of clinic trials and their aftermath 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.