Then do it yourself with a new application for the smartphone which you can download for under $6

More…

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

about Cancer

Cancer is a class of diseases in which a group of rougue cells display uncontrolled growth (division beyond the normal limits), invasion (intrusion on and destruction of adjacent tissues), and sometimes metastasis (spread to other locations in the body via lymph or blood). These three malignant properties of cancers differentiate them from benign tumors, which are self-limited, and do not invade or metastasize. Most cancers form a tumor but some, like leukemia, do not. This list looks at 10 of the most usual misconceptions about cancer.

Misconception: All cancers are the same.

Probably the biggest cancer misconception because the “Cure for Cancer” slogan makes people assume it is essentially one drug that will fix one illness. There are over a hundred types of cancer and they are all approached differently, assessed  individually, depending on how much knowledge is known about the specific cancer and also depending on the patient’s specific needs. Thanks to the fund raising efforts of organizations such as Susan G. Komen and Avon, Medicine has made great advances in breast cancer research. Others, like pancreatic, throat and esophageal cancers, are relatively out of the spotlight and as such, much is still being discovered and survival rates are still comparatively low in the advanced stages of these cancers.

Misconception: There is no cure.

It does get a bit confusing because we delve into technicalities but while the disease is incurable so far, the individual cancer patient can be cured. So while it’s technically true that cancer as a broad topic isn’t curable, it’s also horribly wrong and very much false to tell someone they can’t be cured of their cancer. There is a cured status, so as far as individuals are concerned, there is a cure for their cancer. Remission is the first five years immediately after diagnosis. If, after treatment and after those five years, there is no recurrence of the cancer, then the patient is declared cured. Certain types, like skin cancer, are curable by simply removing the tumor. While childhood leukemia and breast cancer are incurable as a disease, up to 90% of patients undergo successful treatments, become cured, and can live relatively normal lives.

Misconception: Cell phones cause cancer.

This is a misconception that is has no definite answer but the general consensus is that it is untrue. Fact  is that cell phone technology is advancing rapidly and they now contain far less carcinogens than their predecessors. Studies on the correlation of cell phones to brain cancer are difficult to determine because it’s hard to accurately record such a study, however, the most recent attempt was done by the Danish Cancer Society and they have found absolutely no link between cell phones and brain cancer.

Misconception: Any lumps or large masses detected during cancer screenings are cancerous.

Not every abnormality is an assumption of a  cancer diagnosis. It could just be a cyst that would either reabsorb itself into the body or need to be surgically removed. Some tumors are benign, meaning they are non-cancerous, however, determining which are benign, pre-cancerous, and cancerous is why screenings are necessary & important.

Misconception: Artificial sweeteners cause cancer.

This is an erroneous misconception that has regularly shown up in news headlines since the 1970s because of a 1969 study on the effects of cyclamate on mice. It was later disclosed that the mice had been given the cyclamate equivalent of 800 cans of diet soda per day for several weeks. No studies observing moderate amounts of artificial sweeteners have shown that it can lead to cancer. Artificial sweeteners are discussed because it is the most prevalent food myth but it applies to many other kitchen goods from coffee to broccoli to even water (specifically the fluoride content in water). Just as in the artificial sweeteners situation, too much of anything could lead to cancer, but it requires an excessive amount of the product to be potentially hazardous.

Misconception: All you need to beat cancer is a positive attitude, not treatment.

A good & positive attitude does wonders to help alleviate the gravity of the situation in discovering you have the big ‘C’. That’s why so many members of the cancer ward medical staff have a very pleasant demeanor. It certainly helps that the patient can maintain a positive outlook throughout treatment. However, cancer is much more than “mind over matter” and thus far, western medical research has provided the only avenue that has been repeatedly and comprehensively studied and consistently proves to be the most effective treatment against cancer.

Misconception: Surgery could cause cancer to spread throughout the body.

This myth probably originated several decades before, when physicians could only diagnose the most advanced stages of cancer and surgeries were exploratory. Cancer treatments were still pretty rudimentary and without modern machinery, there was no way to fully determine if every cancerous cell was removed. Equipment has vastly improved since then and can provide a much clearer picture of what needs to be done during surgery.

Misconception: Only women get breast cancer.

Women have the distinct title of ‘the breast cancer sex’ and are 100 times more likely to get breast cancer than men but since men also have breast tissue, it is still possible for them to develop breast cancer. The American Cancer Society states that roughly 2000 men are diagnosed with breast cancer every year.

Misconception: The prevalence of cancer is on the rise.

It’s correct that there are now more cases of cancer than in the past but it doesn’t take into account many other factors, such as increased population and longevity (risk for certain cancers increase with age). When compared to populations of the past, there is actually a decrease in the risk of cancer. This misconception may be prevalent simply because the topic is no longer taboo and people hear about it more often than they did in the past.

Misconception: Medical science already has and is withholding a cure for cancer.

Conspiracy theories abound and like many other conspiracy theories, this one is false. The Hippocratic Oath is taken to save lives, which a cure for cancer would surely do. If that weren’t enough, then surely no one would believe a pharmaceutical company wouldn’t want to be the first to claim ownership of a cash cow like the “Cancer Cure.” There was an article published recently of a drug that has been tested on four dogs and cured all four dogs that had cancers previously thought to be too advanced to be treated. With a few more successful cases, researchers will soon be allowed to see if this drug could yield similar results in human testing.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

to only Kill Cancer Cells

A new virus that has been specifically engineered to kill cancer cells has been found to be a medical first because of its effectiveness. The virus has been engineered by medical researchers to target only cancer cells throughout the human body.

The virus is very special because it only attacks cancerous tumours and leaves healthy tissue fully intact.  The virus has been trialled on humans but so far the trials have only been quite small (23 people have only been trialled so far).

If the research goes to plan then the treatment could give cancer therapies a real transformation.

Viruses have been used before to kill cancer but they have always been injected direct into the tumour in order to avoid killing the healthy cells. This new virus will without doubt make the treatment much much easier and possibly more effective.

The new virus has been developed by scientists who modified the vaccinia virus. The vaccinia virus is more commonly used usually as a smallpox vaccine. The new form of this virus is known as JX-594.

The research was guided & inspired by a team of scientists from the University of Ottawa in the United States.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

into management of state housing tenants after the skeletal remains of an elderly man were discovered in a unit up to two years after his death.

Seventy-five-year-old Robert Roll’s corpse went undetected until July 7, despite neighbours urging housing department officials to check on him.

Housing Minister Troy Buswell said he was not satisfied with the explanation provided by the Department of Housing, whose records incorrectly stated that Mr Roll’s home had been inspected in 2010.

“The information I received contained discrepancies in regard to the last contact the department had with Mr Roll, and my main concern is that the department’s systems showed that an inspection was undertaken in 2010, when an inspection did not actually occur,” Mr Buswell said.

“Whether this was caused due to human error or improper actions, we need to make sure this doesn’t happen again.

“The audit will examine the circumstances around the discovery of Mr Roll’s body, as well as the department’s tenancy management actions throughout the history of Mr Rolls’ tenancy.

“It will also look at the actions taken to identify and test safety devices in Mr Roll’s unit, and overall tenancy management at the complex at 601 Wellington Street.”

The audit will also consider the extent to which the department has implemented the recommendations of the Auditor General’s 2010 report into the fitting and maintenance of safety devices, records systems and procedures such as property inspections.

“While the department is finalising a report on its own response to the Auditor General’s report, it seems logical to have an independent body also scrutinise this response, particularly when we are engaging someone to look at similar issues relating to Mr Roll’s case,” he said.

“I expect the audit will identify any key concerns or weaknesses in the department’s management of Mr Roll’s tenancy and any continuing issues around systems and procedures, with recommendations as to how these may be improved.”

The audit will be undertaken by KPMG. It will commence this month and is expected to take eight weeks.

Police said last month that it appeared Mr Roll had cancer and died of natural causes. A report has been prepared for the WA coroner.

They have since established Mr Roll was a former boilermaker, believed to be from Newcastle in England’s north but had moved to Australia several decades ago.

Residents in the same apartment block began to grow concerned when Mr Roll’s mail began piling up.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

Mobile phone users may be at increased risk from brain cancer and should use texting and hands-free devices to reduce exposure, the World Health Organisation’s cancer experts say.

Radio-frequency electromagnetic fields generated by such devices are “possibly carcinogenic to humans”, the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) announced at the end of an eight-day meeting in Lyon, France.

Mobile phones … a cancer risk. Photo: Jim Rice

Experts “reached this classification based on review of the human evidence coming from epidemiological studies”, pointing to an increased incidence of glioma, a malignant type of brain cancer, Jonathan Samet, president of the work group said.

Two studies in particular, the largest conducted over the last decade, showed a higher risk “in those that had the most intensive use of such phones”, he said in a telephone news conference.

Some individuals tracked in the studies had used their phones for an average of 30 minutes per day over a period of 10 years.

“We simply don’t know what might happen as people use their phones over longer time periods, possibly over a lifetime,” Samet said.

About 5 billion mobile phones are registered in the world. The number of phones and the average time spent using them have both climbed steadily in recent years.

The IARC cautioned that current scientific evidence showed only a possible link, not a proven one, between wireless devices and cancers.

“There is some evidence of increased risk of glioma” and another form of non-malignant tumour called acoustic neuroma, said Kurt Straif, the scientist in charge of editing the IARC reports on potentially carcinogenic agents.

“But it is not at the moment clearly established that the use of mobile phones does in fact cause cancer in humans,” he said.

The IARC does not issue formal recommendations, but experts pointed to a number of ways consumers can reduce risk.

“What probably entails some of the highest exposure is using your mobile for voice calls,” Straif said.

“If you use it for texting, or as a hands-free set for voice calls, this is clearly lowering the exposure by at least an order of magnitude,” or by tenfold, he said.

A year ago the IARC concluded that there was no link between mobile phones and brain cancer, but that earlier report was criticised as based on data that was out of date.

The new review, conducted by a panel of 31 scientists from 14 countries, was reached on the basis of a “full consensus”, said Robert Baan, in charge of the written report, yet to be released.

“This is the first scientific evaluation of all the literature published on the topic with regard to increased risk of cancer,” he said.

But the panel stressed the need for more research, pointing to incomplete data, evolving technology and changing consumer habits.

“There’s an improvement in the technology in terms of lower emissions but at the same time we see increased use, so it is hard to know how the two balance out,” Baan noted.

The IARC ranks potentially cancer-causing elements as carcinogenic, probably carcinogenic, possibly carcinogenic or “probably not carcinogenic”. It can also determine that a material is “not classifiable”.

Cigarettes, sun beds and asbestos, for example, fall in “Group 1″, the top threat category.

Mobile phones now join glass wool and petrol exhaust in Group 2B as “possibly carcinogenic”.

Industry groups reacted cautiously, pointing to other common consumer items – including coffee and vegetables pickled in chemicals – that are included in the same category.

“In France, the health ministry already applies a precautionary approach to mobile phones because it considers that no danger has been established, that doubts remain and, thus, that more research is needed,” the French Federation of Telecoms said in a statement.

Some consumer advocacy groups said the new classification was overdue.

“As of today, no one can say the risk does not exist, and now everyone – politicians, telecoms, employers, consumers and parents – have to take this into account,” said Janine Le Calvez, head of PRIARTEM, a consumer advocacy group concerned with mobile phone safety.

AFP

FDA expands Pfizer drug

approval for rare cancer

Associated Press, 05.20.11, 06:23 PM EDT

WASHINGTON — The Food and Drug Administration said Friday it expanded approval of a Pfizer drug to treat a rare form of pancreatic cancer.

The agency said it cleared Sutent to treat cancerous tumors of the pancreas that cannot be surgically removed, or have spread to other parts of the body. Such tumors are slow-growing and rare, affecting less than 1,000 U.S. patients each year, according to an FDA estimate.

Earlier this month the FDA approved Novartis ( NVS – news – people )’ Afinitor for the same disease.

Sutent is a pill-based drug that blocks molecules involved in the growth and spread of tumors. It is already approved as a treatment for kidney cancer and for tumors of the stomach, esophagus, and bowels that do not respond to other treatment. The drug was first cleared by the FDA in 2006.

The FDA approved the drug based on a study of 171 patients in which those taking Sutent lived about five months longer without their disease spreading than patients taking a placebo.

Side effects with the drug include diarrhea, nausea, vomiting, fatigue, high blood pressure, energy loss, stomach pain and changes in hair color.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

CANCER patients are offering themselves as human guinea pigs as researchers investigate a possible cure for cancer that was found in north Queensland rainforests.

Scientists have identified a compound in the fruit of the native blushwood shrub that appears to “liquefy and destroy cancer with no side-effects”, according to latest research.

Found deep in the remnants of a 130 million-year-old rainforest, the fruit extract may yet hold the secret antidote to Australia’s No.1 killer disease.

Victoria Gordon, of EcoBiotics, an Atherton Tableland-based company, said they hoped to go to human clinical trials later this year.

Dr Gordon said a single dose injection of the extract, known as EBC-46, had been effective in 50 critically ill dogs and about a dozen cats and horses.

“This is proving to be something exceptional,” she said.

“The tumour literally liquefies.

“There is a rapid knock-down of the tumour, it disintegrates within 24 hours and we have a rapid healing response.

“The biggest tumour we treated was the size of a Coke can in a dog, and that animal is fully healed and healthy.”

Dr Gordon said it had worked on skin cancers, such as carcinomas and melanomas, and bone cancer, and was a possible treatment for breast, colon and prostate cancer.

But she warned wannabe human guinea pigs against seeking under-the-table treatment.

She said it was “immoral, illegal, and unscientific” to seek to be administered the drug before approval, likely to take up to seven years, by the Therapeutic Goods Administration.

“We have been inundated with calls – it shows there is such a need for a breakthrough in anti-cancer treatment,” she said. “Most people understand when we explain the situation.”

Former breast cancer sufferer Mena Crew, 65, said many dying of cancer would “do anything for a miracle cure”.

“We would all like a magic cure, that would be wonderful, and I hope in my lifetime we find it,” the breast cancer support volunteer said.

She has worked with more than 200 sufferers and some victims in her role with the Cancer Council Queensland.

“I don’t want to kill the enthusiasm of all the wonderful research, but until it is proven it will do the job, we recommend they go with proven and conventional treatments,” she said.

“It is good, however, to think the secret antidote may be growing in the jungle above Cairns.” Queensland Australia.

Sourced & Published by Henry Sapiecha

a potent weapon in fight against cancer

A common cause of cancer is when cells are altered or mutated and the body’s tumor suppressor genes are switched off. Scientists at the University of Nottingham have managed to bring cancer cells back under control by reactivating the cells’ cancer suppressor genes using an extract from axolotl oocytes. The scientists say the discovery could form a powerful new technology platform for the treatment of a variety of cancers.

The process of cell division is controlled by specific genes and these are turned “on” or “off” depending on their function. Among the most important of these genes are tumor suppressor genes. These genes repress the development of cancers and normally act as a control point in the cell division cycle. Therefore, the switching off of tumor suppressor genes is a common cause of cancers.

The on/off switch in genes is controlled by the modification of proteins that are bound to the DNA in a cell, which are known as epigenetic modifications. Tumour suppressor genes in many cancers are switched off by epigenetic marks, which is the underlying cause of tumors.

In an effort to reverse this process the researchers looked to the axolotl salamander – an animal well known for its ability to regenerate most of its body parts. The scientists found that humans evolved from animals that closely resemble axolotls and therefore, proteins in axolotls are very similar to those in humans. Axolotl oocytes – eggs prior to ovulation – are also packed with molecules that have very powerful epigenetic modifying activity and a powerful capacity to change epigenetic marks on the DNA of human cells.

By treating the cancerous cells with axolotl oocyte extract, the researchers were able to reactivate the tumor suppressor genes and stop the cancer from growing. After 60 days there was still no evidence of cancerous growth.

The researchers say the identification of the proteins in axolotl oocytes responsible for this tumor reversing activity is a major goal of future research, and could form a powerful weapon in the fight against cancer.

The University of Nottingham team’s research appears in the journal

Molecular Cancer.

Sourced & published by Henry Sapiecha

Microfluidic device promises

rapid detection of cancer and HIV