Sensible-Alternative Naturopathic Clinic

Fifteen years ago, we were still being told that breast cancer was genetic. After decades of research and billions of dollars spent, researchers have finally had to admit that only 10% of breast cancer cases have any genetic factor, and less than half of cases can be linked with other risk factors such as reproductive history and diet. The research has quietly shifted direction, with new research focused on the effect of pollution. In 2003 alone, there were 26 studies linking breast cancer with dioxins and PCB's. According to many authorities now, including the American Cancer Society, the majority of breast cancer may actually be the result of exposure to environmental toxins like these.

The American Breast Cancer Fund released a report called: State of the Evidence 2004: What Is the Connection between the Environment and Breast Cancer?  According to the report, the rapid increase in breast cancer in recent decades has occurred at the same time as a staggering increase the number of chemicals. Nancy Evans, the editor of the report says that "compelling scientific evidence" links breast cancer with some of the 85,000 synthetic chemicals in use. The worst chemicals are plastics, pesticides, petroleum combustion, manufacturing solvents, and also personal use products such as nail polish, sunscreen, and other cosmetics.

The 2010 report from the US President's Cancer Panel reached a similar conclusion. They warn that there is a 'a growing body of evidence linking environmental exposures to cancer', and claim that the effect of pollution on cancer has been until now seriously under-estimated.

The Chemical Age

Chlorinated hydrocarbons, or organochlorines, form the basis for plastic and pesticides. These products are so pervasive now that it is easy to forget that they are new to the world, and to our bodies. Prior to the 1930's, when chlorine was combined with organic molecules, chlorinated hydrocarbons did not exist in nature.  Their invention heralded the beginning of the chemical age. We are embarked on a health experiment that is only 2 generations old.

The most famous chlorinated hydrocarbons are DDT, Agent Orange, DES, PCB's and dioxins. You probably know that DDT has been banned, but don't get too comfortable just yet. There are thousands of other cousins to DDT that are pumped into our environment every day, many as industrial by-products, but over 11,000 are used intentionally as pesticides, bleaching agents, plastics and solvents.

But aren't the toxins in a very low concentration?

Chemical manufacturers argue that our bodies should be able to detoxify trace amounts of such toxins. It's true that we are designed to eliminate the thousands of natural toxins in our food supply, but the toxins of the new chemical age might just be more than we can handle.

According to the American Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the average American tests positive for at least 116 chemicals, many of which were banned over two decades ago. Over 250 toxic substances have been identified in human breast milk, including perfumes, suntan oil, pesticides and heavy metals. It is estimated that infants ingest 42 times above what is regarded as the safe limit for dioxins, a chemical that in does not even have a safe limit, because according to the US Environmental Protection Agency, dioxin is 300,000 times more carcinogenic than DDT.

These toxins are different. Traditional toxicology tells us that toxins are dose dependent. Which means, that if the dose is low enough, then the effect should be negligible. The problem is that many modern toxins such as chlorinated hydrocarbons are hormone disruptors (also called endocrine disruptors). They act as hormones in the body, so a tiny amount may be all that is needed. The ordinary rules don't apply.

Sometimes a small amount is even worse than a large amount. When the plastic additive Bisphenol A is in low concentration, it demonstrates a stronger hormone -disrupting effect than when it is in a high concentration.  The reason for this paradox is Bisphenol A's activity as a hormone. Hormonal activity can be amplified at a lower concentration.

Cumulative effect of multiple toxins. We must look beyond the effects of single chemicals. We are exposed to a cocktail of hundreds of similar molecules, and the effect of one can multiply the effect of another.  Research into Gulf War Syndrome has shown that when people are exposed to more than one pesticide, the blood concentrations of the individual pesticides are up to 100 times greater than during exposure to a single toxin.

Hormone Disruption

Endocrine disruptors are toxic chemicals that interfere with hormone receptors. Any hormonal system can be affected, including the thyroid, but the biggest worry are oestrogenic chemicals, also called xenoestrogens (meaning foreign estrogens). Oestrogen is a very powerful molecule to begin with, and some xenoestrogens, such as dioxins, stimulate oestrogen-sensitive breast tissue up to 1000x times more strongly than oestrogen. This means that abnormal proliferation of breast tissue can occur when the toxins are only a few parts per billion.

Xenoestrogens are a serious problem for the environment and human health. They are blamed for declining frog populations, sex changes in fish, early puberty in girls, decreasing sperm counts, lack of male births, infertility, endometriosis, prostate cancer and breast cancer. There is no immunity to these chemicals. We cannot adapt to them. Adaptation occurs over thousands of years, and our bodies have had only 50 years to cope with these very potent biological agents. For some delicate species, such as frogs, extinction is a real possibility.

Endocrine disruptors are dangerous to males and females of all ages, but breast cancer is more likely to develop after exposure during specific times in a woman's life. The most vulnerable time for exposure to occur is when females are still in utero. Research has found that exposure to insecticides as a foetus leads to abnormal breast tissue proliferation later in life.  Early puberty is another particularly vulnerable time. This means that pregnant women and pubescent girls must take particular care to minimise their exposure. It also means that studies that look only at the general population are of little use. Research must be targeted to the vulnerable periods in breast development.

Research into endocrine disruption is still in its infancy. If you are reassured by the fact that the Australian government seems unconcerned, think again. The government simply has not kept pace with science that is only 10 years old, but the emerging immensity of the problem is hard to ignore. The American Environmental Protection Agency, for example, now considers endocrine disruption to be such a problem that in 1996, it identified it as one of its top six research priorities. Some endocrine disruptors, such as growth-enhancers for livestock, have been banned in Europe for 20 years, but they remain in common use in Australia. The Australian government's attitude has been conservative, but with breast cancer rates on the constant rise, they cannot afford to waste much more time.

The world-wide trend is moving towards stricter regulation for thousands of chemicals. At the moment, only a fraction of household and industrial chemicals have actually been tested. Manufacturers have not needed to prove that they are safe, but rather, the onus has been on government and NGO's to prove that they chemicals are dangerous. This is a daunting task in a world with over 70,000 chemicals.

This may be about to change. In 2003, the European Commission announced their REACH program (Registration, Evaluation and Authorisation of Chemicals). REACH requires chemical manufacturers to prove that chemicals already in use are actually safe. This means new safety testing for the first time of nearly 30,000 chemicals. There is no initiative like this in Australia.

Definition: A xenoestrogen is an industrial chemical that interacts with oestrogen receptors a 1000 times more strongly than human oestrogen. Also called environmental estrogens, or oestrogen mimics.

Hidden toxins: Where are the xenoestrogens in your daily life?

Air pollution contains a cocktail of dioxins, PCB's, benzene, naphthalene, solvents, and incinerated plastics. Most air and water toxins are from vehicle exhaust and industry. Industry contributes emissions from the manufacture of chemicals, as well as paper bleaching and waste incinerators.
Solution: If possible, avoid living in industrial and agricultural areas. Lobby your government. Consider an air filter. Do not forget about indoor air quality. The majority of our chemical exposure may actually come from our own carpets, cleaning products and air fresheners (see below).

Drinking water contains pesticides and volatile organic compounds, but the biggest concern is the chlorine that we add to it. Chlorine itself has been linked with a number of cancers, and when chlorine reacts with organic matter in water supplies, it forms toxic by-products such as trihalomethanes and other chlorinated hydrocarbons, which are proven xenoestrogens.
Solution: Use an activated carbon water filter, and don't forget your shower. According to the New Scientist, the air from showers, baths and dishwashers delivers 6 to 100 times more chloroform and THMs than drinking water.

Bleached products. Industrial bleaching of paper products produces dioxins. Some products, such as tampons and paper cups, come into direct contact with our bodies, and should be avoided, but do not forget that bleaching of any product emits dioxins into our air, water and food supply. Until industry changes the bleaching process, we are going to simply have to do without sparkling white paper.
Solution: Buy unbleached.

Bleached tampons. Tampons used to be bleached with chlorine gas, leaving significant residues of dioxin. Most companies now bleach with the safer chlorine dioxide, and the residues are only a few parts per billion, less than you get our standard polluted air.  The problem is that vaginal tissue is highly porous, and these are chemicals that really do not have a safe level anyway. Furthermore, many synthetic material tampons are made from wood pulp that was originally bleached.
Solution: Buy unbleached cotton tampons.

Plastics contain bisphenol A, PVC and phthalates. Bisphenol A and phthalates are softening agents used in vinyl flooring, plastic bags, food packaging, cosmetics, and of most concern: plastic baby bottles and chewable baby toys. In the late 90's, Denmark banned the use of phthalates in baby toys, and the cosmetic industry followed suit by voluntarily reducing the amount in personal care products. Phthalates are still legal in Australia and are not currently reportable to the Australian National Pollutant Inventory. The toxins are found in all plastics, but those that come into contact with our bodies or food are the biggest risk:
Solution: Don't microwave in plastic. Lobby your government for safer baby toys and food packaging.

Dangerous plastics
• Chewable baby toys
• Plastic liners in cans and long-life milk containers
• Plastic wrap and food containers (especially when heated)
• Plastic water bottles (single-use bottles are not designed to be reused)
• PVC medical devices like bags and tubing
• Coatings on time-released medicines
• Dishwasher detergents
• Cosmetics
• Moisturizing cream
• Sunscreens
• Styrofoam cups

Styrofoam cups contain bisphenol A and polystyrene, both endocrine disruptors. Bisphenol A has been shown to produce genetic abnormalities after only a few days exposure to 20 parts per billion. Bleached cardboard is probably not much better.
Solution: Drink coffee out of ceramic mug.

Cosmetics contain paraben, phthalates, and solvents, which are all proven xenoestrogens. The effect is measurable. Nail polish fumes have recently been shown to prevent the conception of baby boys, as well as to increase the risk of breast cancer.

According to an American Environmental Working Group report Skin Deep, over 10,500 ingredients are approved for cosmetic use, and eighty-nine percent of those have never been safety tested by any publicly accountable institution. Cosmetic manufacturers used to claim that the chemicals applied to skin are not absorbed, but new studies show that they are, in fact, absorbed very well, especially with the ‘penetration enhancer' that are often added to products. Some of the worst ingredients, such as parabens, have been detected at high concentration in breast cancer tissue itself.
Solution: Phthalate-free cosmetics are available in natural food markets. Unfortunately, there is no natural nail polish. Pregnant women, at least, should avoid it for now.

Sunscreen ingredients are of particular concern because they are applied liberally to porous childhood skin. The ingredients to avoid are benzophenone-3, octyl-methoxycinnamate (OMC) and octyl-dimethyl-PABA. (10)
Solution: Read the label. Sunscreens are available that contain active ingredients of only zinc oxide or titanium oxide.

Cleaning products create internal air quality that is two to five times more polluted than outside air (11). Volatile organic compounds, including many xenoestrogens, are emitted from cleaning products, disinfectants, aerosol sprays, and dry-cleaned clothing. One cleaning product surfactant called nonylphenol, is one of the xenoestrogens accused of causing sex changes in fish when it spills into waterways.
Solution: Use natural cleaning products.

Air fresheners emit volatile organic compounds.
Solution: Use essential oil burners instead.

Dry-cleaned clothes and carpets. Perchlorethylene vapour is a known carcinogen, and will gas off for weeks from clothes and carpets. Dry cleaner workers and those that live near a dry cleaner are at even higher risk.
Solution: Choose a "non-perc" drycleaner if possible. Better cleaning methods are being researched, but over 50% of cleaners in Australia still use perchlorethylene.

Computers, furniture and carpets are manufactured with brominated flame retardants, which have been proven to be stored in breast tissue. According to the Lancaster University, these chemicals have increased exponentially increase in breast milk in the last 25 years. Fresh paint and varnishes also emit volatile organic compounds, and vinyl floor covering emits phthalates.
Solution: Lobby your government to ban brominated flame retardants.

Pesticides. Belgian researchers found that women with breast cancer have higher levels of the pesticides DDT or hexachlorbenzene in their blood stream than women without breast cancer. These particular pesticides were banned in Australia decades ago, but they are persistent and they were not banned everywhere.

One pesticide of particular concern is still in use. Banned in some European countries as a cancer-causing agent, Atrazine is still legal in Australia. Atrazine is a proven endocrine disruptor, and increases the risk of breast and other cancers. Atrazine, and other pesticides such as diuron, fluometuron, metolachlor, simazine and trifluralin were found in Australian groundwater in 1997.

Fly sprays contain synthetic pyrethroids, which are NOT the same as the natural pyrethrin from chrysanthemums. The modifications make the molecule fat-soluble, and new research shows that it is a xenoestrogen.

Pesticide residues are in our water and food. Grains, coffee and tobacco are particularly heavily sprayed. Animal fat concentrates the pesticides that are found in the animal's feed.

Solution: Buy organic or pesticide-free food. Use natural pest control in your home or garden. Boric acid powder works particularly well for cockroaches.

Beef growth hormones. Hormone Growth Promotants like Zeranol were banned in Europe in 1988, but they are still used in Australia as an implant in the ear of beef cattle.  Zeranol has been shown to stimulate abnormal growth in breast cells, even at concentrations 30 times lower than what safety regulations allow. Similar hormonal growth promotants are used for lamb, and Australian chickens are regularly fed antibiotics. Antibiotics are also linked to an increased risk of cancer.

Growth hormone and pesticide residues are almost certainly the reason why red meat is associated with a greater risk of breast cancer. Organic meat does not carry the same risk.
Solution: Buy organic meat.

HRT. The strong oestrogen-like drugs in conventional HRT and the pill are xenoestrogens. They are more strongly-acting and less predictable than human oestrogen, and, in 2002, the Women's Health Initiative study proved that conventional HRT increased the risk of breast cancer. Many Australian women discontinued the drugs at that time, but are now forced to return to them in order to control hot flushes and mood disturbances. The good news is that there is an alternative. Rather than taking conjugated oestrogens, ethinylestradiol or medroxy-progesterone acetate, women have the option of using hormone supplements that are exactly identical to human hormones, called bio-identical hormones. Bio-identical oestrogens and progesterone do NOT have the cancer risk of conventional HRT. Bio-identical oestriol (a mild oestrogen) and progesterone, in particular, have actually been shown to prevent breast cancer
Solution: If you do use HRT, use bio-identical hormone replacement.

Birth control pill. The pseudo-hormones in the Pill are listed as Class 1 Carcinogens. The listing was made in 2005 by the Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), a division of the World Health Organization. This follows closely on the listing of HRT drugs under the same classification, which is logical, because the hormones in the Pill are very similar to the hormones in HRT. And consider this: When HRT use dropped by 68% between 2001 and 2003, breast cancer rates dropped by 11%, a decrease never before seen in breast cancer rates. According to the National Cancer Institute in the US, the drop in cancer rate can probably be attributed to the drop in HRT use.

The IARC listing was made after a review of all studies available in 2005. Since then, the Mayo clinic has published another meta-analysis linking the Pill to cancer. The researchers looked at 39 studies published since 1980, and concluded that the pill increases the chance of breast cancer in young women by 150.

Solution: Don't take the Pill. See Lara's Pill article for more options.

Cigarette smoke contains multiple xenoestrogens, including insecticide residues. Tobacco, along with coffee, is one of the most heavily sprayed crops in the world. Furthermore, cigarettes contain between 2 and 4µg of cadmium per pack. Cadmium is a toxic metal, and it is known to cause kidney damage and lung cancer. According to a 2003 study, cadmium is also a xenoestrogen, and induces measurable changes in breast tissue. Like other xenoestrogen exposures, the most vulnerable time is in utero. Pregnant women who smoke are increasing their daughter's risk of breast cancer.
Solution: If you have been a smoker, and want to measure your cadmium exposure, contact our clinic for a urine test. This test measures toxic metal residues stored in the body. Metals can be removed by detoxification.

How does breast cancer happen?

Step 1: DNA damage. Damage to the DNA (possibly by a xenoestrogen) is the first step. Some DNA is more susceptible than others, and this is where the small genetic component of breast cancer risk comes in. We now also know that there are times in a woman's life when breast tissue is much more susceptible to DNA damage. One time is during foetal development, and the other is during early puberty. A combination of carcinogens, such as being exposed to solvents while on the pill, will also increase susceptibility. Most breast cancer occurs decades after the initial damage is done, and most of us have multiple exposures over many years. It is difficult to prevent DNA damage entirely, but we can prevent those cells from surviving and growing.

Step 2: Growth. Most cells in the body have a natural life span, after which time they are replaced by new cells. This natural cell death (also called apoptosis) is promoted by hormones such as progesterone and melatonin, nutrients such as iodine, and by a healthy immune system. Cancer cells, on the other hand, do not die off easily. Instead, they begin rapid cell growth, which is promoted by oestrogen, prolactin, and insulin-like growth factors.

CAUSES of breast cancer:

Poor liver clearance of oestrogen. Oestrogen promotes the unchecked growth of abnormal breast cells. The liver is normally supposed to remove oestrogens through the stool, but if there is constipation, or problems with the liver, this removal will not occur. An example is the finding that some over-the-counter pain killers inhibit liver clearance and therefore increase the risk of breast cancer. There is also a problem with partially detoxified oestrogens. These molecules are called oestrogen metabolites, and they stimulate abnormal breast tissue more strongly than ordinary oestrogen. Toxic oestrogen metabolites can be detected with a urine test called 2 & 16 Urinary Oestrogen Metabolites. Oestrogen metabolites can be cleared from the body with supplements such as calcium D-glucarate, or indole-3-carbinol (I-3-C) and diindolylmethane (DIM) (compounds from broccoli sprouts). Contact the clinic for more information.

Deficiency of important nutrients such as iodine and vitamin D.

Antibiotics. According to a study from the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), women who use antibiotics one or two times per year are twice as likely to develop breast cancer, compared to those who do not use antibiotics at all. Even a few courses of antibiotics in a lifetime are enough to increase the risk by 150%. Gut bacteria have an important role in clearing oestrogen from our body, and when the population of good bacteria are disrupted by antibiotics, then this function declines.

Oestrogen dominance (relative progesterone deficiency) is the result of too much oestrogen (and xenoestrogens) compared to progesterone. Symptoms of oestrogen dominance include PMS, fibroids, endometriosis, endometriosis, irritable, fluid retention and sugar cravings. Oestrogen dominance also increases the risk for breast cancer because abnormal breast cells are stimulated under these conditions. It can be detected with a saliva hormone test.

Insulin stimulates breast cancer to grow, and may also contribute to oestrogen dominance. According to researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health in Boston, women who consume more carbohydrates, particularly sugar, are at a greater risk of dying from breast cancer. The majority of breast tumours are positive for insulin-receptors, and release high levels of insulin-like growth factor.

Trans fat. There is no direct link between dietary fat and breast cancer. The association of breast cancer with fat is probably due to the pesticide and hormonal residues concentrated in animal fat, as well as to trans fat. Trans fat is damaged polyunsaturated fat that is found in partially hydrogenated vegetables oil such as margarines and commercially prepared food. In a recent study, European women who ate higher levels of trans fat were 40% more likely to develop breast cancer. Trans fat also increases insulin levels and is a risk for PCOS, and endometriosis.

Alcohol. Because alcohol inhibits liver detoxification enzymes and increases oestrogen, women who drink more than one standard drink per day have a higher risk of breast cancer.

Chronic stress increases the risk of developing breast cancer, and also decreases the chance surviving it. The stress hormone cortisol appears to be the culprit. It increases oestrogen and melatonin, and when it high at night (a common feature in stressed women), it suppresses the immune system and melatonin. Night-time can be detected by saliva hormone test. Traumatic events such as divorce, abuse, and death of a loved one are the most stress associated with breast cancer. The best way to survive is to find a way to let go of traumatic events.

Radiation increases cancer risk. For example, women who had diagnostic x-rays for scoliosis have a 70% higher risk of developing breast cancer. Other sources of radiation include long-haul flights and being within a meter of microwaves, computers, fuse boxes and TVs.

Mammograms are a source of radiation, and may ultimately increase your risk of breast and other cancers. This is a shocking thought because women have mammograms to prevent breast cancer. See Lara's Rethinking Mammograms article.

Do Bras increase the Risk for Breast cancer?

The role of bra-wearing and cancer is still under debate. We know that bras worsen symptoms of fibrocystic breast disease (lumpy, painful breasts), and we also know that fibrocystic breasts increase the risk for breast cancer.  The problem comes from the fact that bras inhibit lymphatic drainage from the breast tissue, and this means that the immune system cannot do its job. As many as 20% of women wear bras to bed, and there is simply no reason for this. Research shows that bras actually promote sagging, rather than prevent it

Lobby your government.

Breast cancer is a political issue. Increased funding by the Clinton administration in 2000 and the European Commission in 2002 is what has brought information about hormone-disrupting chemicals into the mainstream. The new research will directly influence European Union legislation on chemical emissions, and this will result in regulation of industry. In many cases, industry already possesses the technology it needs to reduce emissions, but they choose not to use it because it will decrease their profit margin. An example is paper bleaching, which can be done with hydrogen peroxide or ozone rather than chlorine, but is costly and so industry has lobbied against a dioxin ban. Send a message to your MP that human health is more important than industrial profit.

What about "plant oestrogens"?

A phytoestrogen is a plant molecule that buffers oestrogen receptors. It is many times weaker than human oestrogen, but will gently act when oestrogen is deficient, such as menopause. At the same time, if oestrogen and xenoestrogens are high, a phytoestrogen will protect against them. We are adapted to have them in our daily diet.

Foods rich in phytoestrogens:
soy, yams, lentils, carrot
flaxseeds, sesame seeds, beetroot
red clover, apples, garlic, broccoli
mung sprouts, pumpkin, rye, parsley
liquorice, millet, sunflower seeds

Daily habits to protect yourself

Phytoestrogens. A recent Finish study confirms the theory that plant estrogens protect against breast cancer. Women with the highest blood levels of the plant estrogen, enterolactone, were found to have the lowest incidence of breast cancer. Unlike xenoestrogens, which can stimulate breast tissue many times more strongly than human oestrogen, plant oestrogens in soy, linseed, and red clover usually stimulate less strongly. In this way, they buffer oestrogen receptors, protecting hormone sensitive tissue from oestrogen and xenoestrogens.

Phytoestrogens have always been in our food supply, and our bodies are adapted to a steady supply of them. It a moderate dose, they are part of our normal hormone balance, and they protect our hormone sensitive tissue. In this way, phytoestrogens are similar to the cancer-reventative drugs such as tamoxifen (but without the side effects). Some caution is advised. Red clover or soy should not be supplemented in a concentrated form, because in a high dose, phytoestrogens can interfere with hormone balance and fertility. High doses may also be inappropriate for the vulnerable foetal stages of breast tissue development. One study showed that female foetuses exposed to soy in utero were more likely to develop breast cancer later on.

Green Tea contains epigallocatechin gallate (EGCG), a phytochemical that inhibits tumour growth. EGCG has a similar structure to methotrexate, a common chemotherapy agent, but unlike chemotherapy, it does not have harsh side effects. Recent research suggests that 2 to 3 cups per day is enough EGCG to inhibit cancer. Pregnant women, and those at risk for heart disease, need to be careful because excessive EGCG can reduce folate levels.

Eliminate refined sugar from your diet. Insulin resistance is a proven cause of breast cancer.

Vegetables generally are recommended as prevention for breast cancer. Dark green vegetables, in particular, are rich in phytochemicals and antioxidants which support liver clearance and immune system. Raw vegetables in juice form provide natural enzymes that help the immune system to destroy cancer cells.

Probiotics. Good gut bacteria promote the clearance from the body of active oestrogen metabolites.

Broccoli contains indole-3-carbinol (I-3-C) and diindolylmethane (DIM) which help to clear toxic oestrogen metabolites through the liver.

Natural progesterone down-regulates oestrogen receptor in breast cells, prevents cell division, and has been shown to prevent breast cancer as well as the anti-cancer drug tamoxifen. Progesterone is one of the reasons why pregnancy is protective against breast cancer. This natural human hormone is very high during pregnancy, and is also produced during the second half of every menstrual cycle. In women with oestrogen dominance, it is deficient, and a supplement may be required.

Melatonin is best known as a sleep hormone. It also is very important for immune function and hormone balance, and is being investigated for its activity against breast cancer. Melatonin deficiency can develop during a long course of night shifts, and by sleeping in a light room. New evidence suggests that tight clothing such as bras may also reduce melatonin secretion.
Always sleep in the dark, and if you work nights, consider a melatonin supplement.

Detoxify. Your liver would like to remove toxins, but it can do that only if it has the nutrients that it needs: B-vitamins, essential fatty acids, vitamin C and selenium. Raw vegetables, particularly beetroot, are also beneficial to the liver. See Lara's Detox article for more information.

Exercise and sauna. Perspiration removes fat-soluble xenoestrogens, such as dioxins, through the skin.

Selenium. This essential trace mineral has been shown to protect against breast cancer.  Supplementation is necessary because selenium is deficient in Australian soil. It will be absent even from organic produce.

Iodine. When breast tissue is deficient in iodine, it divides more rapidly. Dietary iodine slows breast cell turnover, and promotes apoptosis, or programmed cell-death of potentially cancerous cells. Most Australians are deficient in iodine, and they are missing out on it's cancer-protective properties.

Vitamin D slows down breast cancer. In a study of 279 women, a higher level of vitamin D in the blood was directly correlated with a slower advance of the disease. Researchers believe that vitamin D may be slow breast cancer because it "turns off" the genes that promote it.

Vitamin D is formed when the skin is exposed to UVB light, so the surprising fact is that moderate sunshine prevents cancer (such as breast, prostate and colon cancer). The amount of sunshine required will vary according to skin colour, age, season, time of day, and latitude, but the current recommendation is sunlight exposure for a period equal to 25% of the time it would take to develop a light pinkness of the skin. This must be done without sunscreen, and not through a window. If you want to test your vitamin D, please contact the clinic.

Appointments at Sensible-Alternative

For professional advice regarding breast cancer prevention, please make an appointment with one of our Naturopaths.

Locations in Crowsnest Pass, Canada and Sydney, Australia.

1) Dr Lara Grinevitch - Crowsnest Pass, Canada

Lara sees patients on Mondays.

Click here to email Lara

Phone Crowsnest Clinic: 1 403 563 3334. (Clinic phone is attended Tuesday-Friday)

Text message or leave a voicemail on Lara's cell:  1 587 880 4436

2) Biljana Koga or Deborah Gibson - Sydney, Australia

Two Sydney locations: Chatswood - Cronulla

One phone number: 02 8011 1994

To email our Sydney head office: click here.

 

References:

1. Fontham, E.T.H et al. Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What We Can Do Now. President's Cancer Panel, 2008-2009 Annual Report. CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians, published online Oct. 28, 2009.
2. vom Saal, F. An Extensive New Literature Concerning Low-Dose Effects of Bisphenol A Shows the Need for a New Risk Assessment. Environ Health Perspect. 2005 August; 113(8): 926-933.
3. Frederick S et al. 2005. Concerning Low-Dose Effects of Bisphenol A Shows the Need for a New Risk Assessment. Environ Health Perspect.
4. Greiner SN et al. 2000. Estrogen-independent effects of atrazine (ATR) on mammary gland (MG) development in rats. Toxicological Science 54:332.
5. Markey CM et al. 2001. In utero exposure to bisphenol A alters the development and tissue organization of the mouse mammary gland. Biology of Reproduction 65: 1215-1223.
6. Abou-Donia MB. 1996. Neurotoxicity resulting from coexposure to pyridostigmine bromide, deet, and permethrin: implications of Gulf War chemical exposures. Toxicol Environ Health. 48:35-65
7. Anderson, I. 1986. Showers pose a risk to health. New Scientist. Aug. 18
8. Tampons and Asbestos, Dioxin, & Toxic Shock Syndrome, FDA Report, www.fda.gov/cdrh/consumer/tamponsabs
9. Hunt PA et al. 2003. Bisphenol a exposure causes meiotic aneuploidy in the female mouse. Curr Biol. 13(7):546-53.
10. Cosmetics Ingredient Review (CIR). 2003 CIR Compendium, containing abstracts, discussions, and conclusions of CIR cosmetic ingredient safety assessments. Washington DC
11. Darbre PD et al. 2004. Concentrations of parabens in human breast tumours. J Appl Toxicol . 24(1): 5-13.
12. Schlumpf M et al. 2001 In vitro and in vivo estrogenicity of UV screens. Environmental Health Perspectives. 109(3): 239-244
13. The Inside Story: A Guide to Indoor Air Quality 1995. EPA publication 402-K-93-007
14. Kalantzi Olga et al. 2004. Different Levels of Polybrominated Diphenyl Ethers (PBDEs) and Chlorinated Compounds in Breast Milk from Two U.K. Regions. Environmental Health Perspectives 112(10)
15. Charlier C, et al. 2003. Breast cancer and serum organochlorine residues. Occup Environ Med. 60(5): 348-51
16. Greiner SN et al. 2000. Estrogen-independent effects of atrazine on mammary gland development on rats. Toxicological Science 54: 332
17. Timms, W. 1997. Liverpool Plains Water Quality Project 1996/97 Report on Groundwater Quality.. Department of Land and Water Conservation, CNR97.108
18. Go, V et al. 1999. Estrogenic Potential of Certain Pyrethroid Compounds in the MCF-7 Human Breast Carcinoma Cell Line. Environmental Health Perspectives 107:173-177
19. A review to update Australia's position on the human safety of residues of hormone growth promotants (HGPs) used in cattle. Chemical Review and International Harmonisation Section Office of Chemical Safety. TGA. July 2003
20. Liu S et al. 2002. Involvement of breast epithelial-stromal interactions in the regulation of protein tyrosine phosphatase-gamma (PTPgamma) mRNA expression by estrogenically active agents. Breast Cancer Research and Treatment 71:21-53
21. Velicer, C et al. 2004. Antibiotic Use Linked to Breast Cancer Risk? Journal of the American Medical Association
22. Writing Group for the Women's Health Initiative Investigators. 2002. "WHI Study, the Risks and Benefits of Estrogen and Progestin in healthy post-menopausal women." JAMA 2002 288(3): 321-333
23. Lemon, H.M. et al. 1989. Inhibition of Radiogenic Mammary Carcinoma in Rats by Estriol or Tamoxifen. Cancer 63(9):1685-1691
24. Chang, KJ, et al. 1995. Influences of Percutaneous Administration of Estradiol and Progesterone on Human Breast Epethilial Cell Cycle in Vivo. Fertil Steril 63:785-791
25. Johnson, M.D et al. 2003.Cadmium mimics the in vivo effects of estrogen in the uterus and mammary gland. Nature Medicine. Advance Online Publication.
26. Marshall, SF et al. 2005. Nonsteroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drug Use and Breast Cancer Risk by Stage and Hormone Receptor Status. Journal of the National Cancer Institute 97(11): 805-812
27. Borugian MJ, et al. 2004. Insulin, macronutrient intake, and physical activity: are potential indicators of insulin resistance associated with mortality from breast cancer? Cancer Epidemiol Biomarkers Prev 13(7): 1163-72
28. Kohlmeier L et al. 1997. Adipose tissue trans fatty acids and breast cancer in the European Community Multicenter Study on Antioxidants, Myocardial Infarction, and Breast Cancer. Cancer Epidemiology and Biomarkers Prev. 6:705-10.
29. Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. 2002. Alcohol, tobacco and breast cancer--collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 53 epidemiological studies, including 58,515 women with breast cancer and 95,067 women without the disease. Br.J Cancer;. 87: 1234-1245
30. Ashizawa K. 1990. Breast Form Changes Resulting From A Certain Brassiere. Journal of Hum. Ergol. 19(1):53-62.
31. Pietinen, P et al. 2001.Serum enterrolactone and risk of breast cancer: A case-control study in eastern Finland. Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention. 10(4): 339-344
32. Hilakivi-Clarke L et al. 1999. Maternal exposure to genistein during pregnancy increases carcinogen-induced mammary tumorigenesis in female rat offspring. Oncology and Reproduction. 6:1089-1095
33. Inoh, A, et al. 1985. Protective Effects of Progesterone and Tamoxifen in Estrogen-induced Mammary Carcinogenesis in Overiectomized W/Fu Rats. J Cancer Res 76: 699-704
34. Lee YA. 2000. The effects of skin pressure by clothing on circadian rhythms of core temperature and salivary melatonin. Chronobiol Int (6):783-93
35. Cos S et al. 2000. Melatonin, experimental basis for a possible application in breast cancer prevention and treatment. Histol Histopathol. 15(2): 637-47
36. Hu YJ et al. 2003. Role of glutathione peroxidase 1 in breast cancer: loss of heterozygosity and allelic differences in the response to selenium. Cancer Res, 63(12):3347-51
37. Polar MK et al. 2003. Effect of the vitamin D3 analog ILX 23-7553 on apoptosis and sensitivity to fractionated radiation in breast tumor cells and normal human fibroblasts. Cancer Chemother Pharmacol. 51(5):415-21.
38. Holick MF. 2004. Vitamin D: importance in the prevention of cancers, type 1 diabetes, heart disease, and osteoporosis. Am J Clin Nutr 79:362-371
39. International Agency for Research on Cancer. PRESS RELEASE N� 167
40. 29th Annual SABC: Abstract 5. Presented December 14, 2006
41. .Barclay, L et al. Oral Contraceptive Use Increases Risk for Premenopausal Breast Cancer. Mayo Clinic Proc. 2006;81:1287, 1290-1302
42. Velicer CM et al. Antibiotic Use in Relation to the Risk of Breast Cancer. Journal of the American Medical Association, Feb. 18, 2004;291(7):827-835
43. Zahl P-H, Maehlen J, Welch HG. The natural history of invasive breast cancers detected by screening mammography. Arch Intern Med. 2008; 168(21):2311-2316
44. American Society of Breast Surgeons 10th Annual Meeting: Abstracts 9 and 20. Presented April 24, 2009.
45. Palmieri C, et al Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in early and advanced breast cancer. J Clin Pathol 2006.