How do you judge success or failure of an event? By the number of products sold? Or by the one life that you touch?

That was the question I asked myself after participating in a Women’s Expo in a small town this weekend. I sold six of my books, Stop the Needless Suffering, The Complete Woman’s Guide to Balancing Your Hormones Naturally, with promises of selling two more. It was a two hour drive and seven hours of my time. Six ladies were in my first breakout session, and one man and one woman were in my afternoon session.

One of the ladies in my morning session asked me if I would talk with her daughter who was working a booth across the hall from me at the Expo…for breast cancer prevention. The irony of that fact was soon to be revealed.

The mother had had a mastectomy for breast cancer. The cancer was estrogen receptor-positive. Please understand the significance of this fact prior to hearing the rest of the story regarding her daughter.

Unlike normal breast cells, cancer cells arising in the breast do not always have receptors for estrogen.

Breast cancers that DO have estrogen receptors are said to be “estrogen receptor-positive,” while those breast cancers that DO NOT possess estrogen receptors are called “estrogen receptor-negative.” In women with estrogen receptor-positive cancers, cancer cell growth is under the control of estrogen.

This woman’s daughter was 40 years old and had recently had a complete hysterectomy. The doctor ordered no saliva testing to assess her baseline hormone levels following surgery. He simply ordered triest for her to use daily postoperatively. Triest is the combination of the three main estrogens: estrone, estradiol, and estriol.

It is well established that there is a significant hereditary tendency for breast cancer. The mother was estrogen receptor-positive for breast cancer. The daughter is taking three different kinds of estrogen – “unopposed” by progesterone.

The doctor told the daughter she “didn’t need progesterone” because she had had a hysterectomy – a common misunderstanding among the traditional medical community. In fact, if you read the work of Dr. John Lee, M.D., you will see that he believed prescribing women “unopposed estrogen” to be a case of medical malpractice.

This lady was grossly overweight. Obesity is a risk factor for breast cancer. The commonly held theory is that fat cells are estrogen producing. Estrogen makes fat cells bigger. It is a vicious cycle. All this going on in a daughter whose mother is estrogen receptor-positive.

Let’s summarize what is going on here:

1. The mother has a history of breast cancer, estrogen receptor-positive.
2. Breast cancer is hereditary.
3. The daughter is taking triest, a combination of three estrogens following her hysterectomy.
4. The daughter has had no baseline testing to determine her hormone levels.
5. The daughter is receiving no progesterone.
6. The daughter is grossly overweight.
7. The daughter is working a booth for breast cancer prevention, totally unaware of her own significant risk factors.

All of the above constitutes a train wreck just waiting to happen.

Education is the key. Please help me to increase awareness. Please become your own health care advocate so that you can protect yourself as well as help to educate the lay and medical community.

Your life and the lives of those you love depend upon it.

Cookies, candies, and parties… what a fun time of the year. However, one important ingredient might be in short supply on those party trays…indole-3-carbinol.

Indole-3-carbinol occurs naturally in “cruciferous” vegetables such as broccoli, cauliflower, Brussel sprouts, cabbage, and kale. Indole-3-carbinol is demonstrating a lot of promise because of its possible anticarcinogenic, antioxidant, and anti-atherogenic effects.

The mechanism of action is felt to be the ability of indole-3-carbinal to alter estrogen metabolism and other cellular effects. Animal studies demonstrate dose-related decreases in tumor susceptibility. In 2006, Hsu et al proved that indole-3-carbinol induces a growth arrest of human reproductive cancer cells.

In addition, researchers at Rockefeller University have found that the body metabolizes estrogens into several different forms that can impact cancer development. One form, 2-hydroxyestrone (2-OHE1), tends to inhibit cancer growth. Another, 16-µ-hydroxyestrone (16-µ-OHE1), actually encourages tumor development. A woman’s “biochemical individuality” determines how much of each form is produced.

An “Estronex 2/16 Test” is a measurement of these two forms of estrogen. Studies have shown that measuring the ratio of the 2-OHE1 (the “good” estrogen) and 16-µ-OHE1 (the “bad” estrogen), determined from a single urine specimen, provides an important indication of future risk for development of breast cancer.

Women with low ratios have much higher rates of breast cancer. Low ratios also indicate increased long-term risk for other estrogen-sensitive cancers, including uterine, ovarian, cervical, and even head and neck cancers.

What does indole-3-carbinol have to do with this ratio? Studies have demonstrated that consuming more foods containing indole-3-carbinol can raise the ratio.

Back to all the holiday foods…sometimes we simply do not consume enough of the protectant cruciferous vegetables. The good news is that indole-3-carbinol is also available in supplement form.

However, with supplementation comes a caution: be advised against the indiscriminant overuse of indole-3-carbinol in the hopes of preventing cancer. Researchers extend the caution  due to indole-3-carbinol’s effect on estrogen levels.

Like anything else, balance seems to be the key. Hmm, does that also mean to balance out the cookies with a little indole-3-carbinol this holiday season?  :  )

Dr. Mercola posted a very thorough article today on the topic of mammography vs thermography. See the entire article at http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/11/26/why-mammography-is-not-an-effective-breast-cancer-screen.aspx.

Every year I see more and more articles popping up supporting the use of thermography, and every year my personal physician writes an order for mammography. This year I intend to print a copy of this article when it is time for my annual checkup.

Are any of your personal physicians currently ordering thermography? If so, does your insurance carrier cover it? I would love to hear your personal experiences. Please feel free to comment.

Dr. Mercola references an article Beyond Mammography, written by Dr. Len Saputo, a graduate of Duke University Medical School, Founder and Director of the Health Medicine Forum, Co-founder/Medical Director of the Health Medicine Institute and Health Medicine Center, and in private practice in Internal Medicine and Health Medicine. Dr. Mercola states:

“Breast thermography, which involves using a heat-sensing scanner to detect variations in the temperature of breast tissue, has been around since the 1960s. However, early infrared scanners were not very sensitive, and were insufficiently tested before being put into clinical practice, resulting in misdiagnosed cases.

Modern-day breast thermography boasts vastly improved technology and more extensive scientific clinical research.

In fact, the article references data from major peer review journals and research on more than 300,000 women who have been tested using the technology. Combined with the successes in detecting breast cancer with greater accuracy than other methods, the technology is slowly gaining ground among more progressive practitioners.

Education and awareness of better, less risky and more effective options for detecting breast cancer are woefully deficient, but they do exist, and it is my hope you will take the time to review this important information, whether you’re a man or a woman, and forward it widely to your family and friends.”

Please take time to review the article. It presents a very convincing case regarding the hazards of mammography vs the benefits of thermography. The following comments are very compelling:

“Thermographic Breast Screening – A Safer, More Effective Alternative

Most physicians continue to recommend mammograms for fear of being sued by a woman who develops breast cancer after he did not advise her to get one. But I encourage you to think for yourself and consider safer, more effective alternatives to mammograms.

The option for breast screening that I most highly recommend is called thermographic breast screening.  

Thermographic screening is brilliantly simple. It measures the radiation of infrared heat from your body and translates this information into anatomical images. Your normal blood circulation is under the control of your autonomic nervous system, which governs your body functions.

Thermography uses no mechanical pressure or ionizing radiation, and can detect signs of breast cancer as much as 10 years earlier than either mammography or a physical exam! 

Whereas mammography cannot detect a tumor until after it has been growing for years and reaches a certain size, thermography is able to detect the possibility of breast cancer much earlier.  

It can even detect the potential for cancer before any tumors have formed because it can image the early stages of angiogenesis — the formation of a direct supply of blood to cancer cells, which is a necessary step before they can grow into tumors of size.

More men’s lives could also be spared from the disease as mammography is not frequently used on men, which leads to most men with breast cancer being diagnosed at a very late stage.”

Wow! I look forward to hearing about your personal experiences with thermography!