According to the National Breast Cancer Foundation, 200,000 new cases of breast cancer will be diagnosed each year in the US, making it three times more common than other gynecological cancers.

Breast cancer will claim the lives of 40,000 people this year.

What is really disturbing is the speed at which breast cancer rates have risen over the past 5 decades. In 1960, one in twenty women were diagnosed—but today, it is one in seven.

The following are some important facts about this type of cancer:

One woman in eight who lives to age 85 will develop breast cancer.
Breast cancer is the leading cause of death for women age 40 to 55.
Fifteen percent of all breast cancers occur in women under age 45; in this age group, breast cancers are more aggressive and have lower recovery rates.
Eighty percent of breast lumps are NON-cancerous.

Seventy percent of breast cancers are found through breast self-exams.
About 80 percent of women diagnosed with breast cancer have no family history of breast cancer.

Unfortunately, the current medical paradigm is relatively clueless about what causes breast cancer and how to effectively treat it. Most conventional cancer treatments actually add insult to injury by doing more harm than good—a fact that up to this point has been swept under the rug by the medical industry.

Fortunately, we’re beginning to see the initial stirrings of change, as you will see from the latest research I’ll be presenting later.

In the largest review of research into lifestyle and breast cancer, the American Institute of Cancer Research estimated that about 40 percent of U.S. breast cancer cases could be prevented if people make wiser lifestyle choices. I believe these estimates are seriously LOW, and it is more likely that 75 to 90 percent of breast cancers could be avoided by strictly applying the recommendations I will review below.

In fact, the latest paleoanthropological research shows that cancer was virtually nonexistent in humans before poor diet and pollution appeared, finally proving that cancer is a man-made disease.

My aim for this article is to provide you with a broad understanding of the factors that lead to the development of this deadly disease—as we now understand them—and what you can do preventatively to avoid becoming the next victim..If you happen to be a man, please read on since it actually does apply to you as well.

Men are NOT Immune to Breast Cancer
Breast cancer is not a disease exclusive to women. For every 100 women with breast cancer, one man will develop the disease. The National Breast Cancer Foundation estimates approximately 1,700 men will develop breast cancer and 450 will die from it each year.

The average age men are diagnosed with breast cancer is 67, versus 62 for women, meaning male cancers are often caught in a more advanced stage. If you work around petrochemicals, your risk is much higher. Men who work around gasoline and combustion products have a significantly higher risk of developing breast cancer.

Males and their doctors may be diverted from an accurate diagnosis due to enlargement of the breasts or gynecomastia, a common and benign condition, plus the fact that men are generally less vigilant about checking for breast lumps.

Types of Breast Cancer
Breast cancer is classified into two types, based on whether or not it is invasive:

Noninvasive (in situ) breast cancer: Cancer cells have not spread to adjacent areas of your breast—they have remained in their place of origin. The most common type is ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS), which occurs in the lining of the milk ducts. Noninvasive breast cancer is sometimes called “stage 0″ cancer.
Invasive breast cancer. Cancer cells infiltrate or spread outside the membrane that lines a duct or lobule, into surrounding tissues. The cancer cells can then travel to other parts of your body. Invasive breast cancer can be stage I, II, III, or IV, depending on how advanced it is.

Breast cancer can be further classified according to what type of tissue it arises from:

Milk ducts: Ductal carcinoma is the most common type of breast cancer.
Milk-producing lobules: Lobular carcinoma originates in the lobules, where breast milk is produced.

Connective tissues (muscles, fat and blood vessels): Rarely, breast cancer can originate from these breast tissues; in this case, it’s called sarcoma
Inflammatory Breast Cancer: The Rarest and Most Aggressive Form
Inflammatory breast cancer (IBC) is a rare form of breast cancer of sudden onset (weeks to months) and can easily be confused with a breast infection (mastitis). The affected breast is red, swollen, warm and tender because cancer cells have blocked the lymphatic vessels in your breast.

You might or might not have a lump.

IBC accounts for between 1 and 5 percent of all breast cancer cases in the U.S., and is more common among younger women and African American women. There have been some cases documented in men. IBC is the most aggressive form of breast cancer, and survival rates are worse than for other types of breast cancer.

You should seek medical attention immediately if you have the above symptoms—or if you are being treated for mastitis but your symptoms are not resolving as expected.

Signs and Symptoms to Watch For
The most common signs and symptoms of breast cancer include the following:

A breast lump or thickening that feels different from the surrounding tissue
Bloody discharge, or other unusual discharge, from your nipple
A change in your breast’s size or shape
Changes in the skin on your breast, such as dimpling or indentation
Redness or pitting of your breast skin—kind of like the skin of an orange
Pain or tenderness in your breast
An inverted nipple
Peeling or flaking of the nipple
Enlarged lymph nodes or swelling in your armpit
If you have any of these changes, you should consult your healthcare provider immediately. But don’t panic—remember, the majority of breast tumors are benign. Many of the above signs can indicate other issues besides cancer, and your healthcare provider can help you sort it out.

What Causes Breast Cancer?
We now know that breast inflammation is KEY to the development and progression of breast cancer. Inflammation is not the cause, but rather is a key process that sets the stage for breast cancer to occur. There are certainly many aggravating factors, from foods to chemicals in the environment to lifestyle patterns and genetics—but it is the INFLAMMATION that these things cause that starts the wheel turning.

Scientists have shown that an inflammatory process within the breast itself promotes growth of breast cancer stem cells. That’s the bad news.

The good news?

Researchers were able to inactivate this inflammation selectively, which reduced the activity of these stem cells and stopped breast cancer from forming. Although your genes are a factor in your breast cancer risk, it is not your genes that dictate your health but rather the expression of them, and that depends on what genes you “turn on and off” with your lifestyle and emotional state (epigenetic factors).

In other words, you have more power over your health than your genetics does!

Breast Cancer is Closely Tied to Estrogen Exposure
There are a number of studies that have given us clues about the factors contributing to breast cancer. But one of the most significant factors is synthetic hormone replacement therapy (HRT). According to a study published online in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, breast cancer rates for women dropped in tandem with decreased use of HRT. In Canada, between 2002 and 2004, HRT use dropped by 7.8 percent. During that same time, breast cancer rates also fell by 9.6 percent.

This further supports existing evidence that HRT is linked with breast cancer, which is an estrogen-related cancer. So it is no surprise that giving women potent synthetic estrogens will increase their risk.

However, there’s a twist.

After remaining stable at around five percent between 2004 and 2006, breast cancer rates then began to rise again, even though HRT use remained low. The researchers claim this is an indication that HRT simply speeds up tumor growth, as opposed to directly causing it.

It’s also important to remember that you are exposed to a large number of estrogen-like compounds daily, called xenoestrogens. Estrogen pollution is increasingly present all around you, from plastics to canned food and drinks, food additives, household cleaning products, and pesticides. And estrogen levels are rising in our waterways as a result of the runoff from factory animal farms.

Still, whether it’s a promoter or a causative factor, there’s good reason to be wary of using HRT to address natural menopause. There is no reason to subject yourself to synthetic hormones when you reach menopause—the risk is simply too great.

If you are experiencing excessive menopausal symptoms, you may want to consider bioidentical hormone replacement therapy, which uses hormones that are molecularly identical to the ones your body produces and does not wreak havoc on your system, which is a much safer alternative.

There are similar risks for younger women who use oral contraceptives—birth control pills, which are also comprised of synthetic hormones—have been linked to cervical and breast cancers. Another aggravating factor in breast cancer is, unfortunately, the breast cancer screening tool itself.

Are Mammograms Fueling Breast Cancer Rates?
Mammography is a great example of a stubborn head-in-the-sand approach to cancer screening. Americans are already exposed toseven times more radiation from diagnostic scans than they were in 1980. It is well known that ionizing radiation increases the cellular mutations that lead to cancer—and mammograms aim a highly focused dose directly at your breasts, thereby increasing your cancer risk!

WHY would you want to do this?

Mammograms expose your body to radiation that can be 1,000 times greater than a chest x-ray, which we know poses a cancer risk. Mammography also compresses your breasts tightly, and often painfully, which could lead to a lethal spread of cancerous cells, should they exist. Dr. Charles B. Simone, a former clinical associate in immunology and pharmacology at the National Cancer Institute, said:

“Mammograms increase the risk for developing breast cancer and raise the risk of spreading or metastasizing an existing growth.”

Others have spoken out against mammography. Dr. Samuel Epstein, a top cancer expert who has been warning people for years about the dangers of mammography, explains:

“The premenopausal breast is highly sensitive to radiation, each 1 rad exposure increasing breast cancer risk by about 1 percent, with a cumulative 10 percent increased risk for each breast over a decade’s screening…”

“The high sensitivity of the breast, especially in young women, to radiation-induced cancer was known by 1970. Nevertheless, the establishment then screened some 300,000 women with X-ray dosages so high as to increase breast cancer risk by up to 20 percent in women aged 40 to 50 who were mammogramed annually.”

In July 1995, an article in The Lancet about mammograms read:

“The benefit is marginal, the harm caused is substantial, and the costs incurred are enormous.”

There is no solid evidence that mammograms save lives, in spite of the propaganda some organizations constantly parrot to the press. Mammograms are often touted as a “life-saving” form of cancer screening, responsible for reducing breast cancer death rates by 15 to 25 percent. But this reported benefit is based on outdated studies done decades ago.

In September 2010, the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most prestigious medical journals, published the first recentstudy in years to look at the effectiveness of mammograms, and their findings are a far cry from what most public health officials and physicians would have you believe.

Their bottom line was that mammograms might have only reduced cancer death rates by 0.4 deaths per 1,000 women—an amount so small it may as well be zero. Put another way, 2,500 women would have to be screened over 10 years for a single breast cancer death to be avoided.

So, not only are mammograms unsafe, but they are NOT saving lives as many professionals believed they were.

Past research has also demonstrated that adding an annual mammogram to a careful physical examination of the breasts does not improve breast cancer survival rates over a physical examination alone.

False Positives are Alarmingly Common in Mammography
Another glaring problem with mammography is its unacceptably high rate of false positives. If a mammogram detects an abnormal spot in a woman’s breast, the next step is typically a biopsy. This involves taking a small amount of tissue from the breast, which is then looked at by a pathologist under a microscope to determine if cancer is present. Estimates are that 17 percent of DCIS cases found through needle biopsy are misdiagnosed.

Mammograms carry a first-time false positive rate of up to 6 percent.

The problem is that early stage cancer like DCIS can be very hard to diagnose, and pathologists have a wide range of experience and expertise. There are no diagnostic standards for DCIS, and there are no requirements that the pathologists doing the readings have specialized expertise.

Dr. Shahla Masood, the head of pathology at the University of Florida College of Medicine in Jacksonville, told the New York Times:

“There are studies that show that diagnosing these borderline breast lesions occasionally comes down to the flip of a coin.”

Unnecessary Mastectomies are More Common than You Might Think
False positives can lead to unnecessary emotional stress and expensive repeat screenings, exposing you to even more radiation, chemotherapy, and unnecessary invasive procedures including biopsies and major surgery. Women have actually undergoneunnecessary mastectomies after receiving a false positive mammogram report.

After receiving a breast cancer diagnosis, most women are afraid and even frantic to do whatever it takes, as soon as possible, to fight and remove the cancer. And usually, that involves the “slash and burn” approach. Can you imagine what it would be like to go through surgery, having one or both of your breasts removed along with receiving debilitating radiation treatments and toxic drugs, only to later be told that you never had cancer?

This scenario happens more often than you might think; you can read about several women’s terrifying ordeals with false breast cancer diagnoses here.

And there is new evidence that breast cancer might go away on its own a fair amount of the time. Yes—WITHOUT intervention. A group of researchers who track breast cancer rates found evidence to suggest that some tumors found by mammograms might naturally disappear on their own.

Mammograms will not prevent you from getting breast cancer, and the latest study shows they offer very little benefit in improving your chances of survival. Effective cancer screening methods are important, but mammography is simply NOT the answer.

But then, what is the answer?

The screening tool I recommend is breast thermography.

Thermography: Cancer’s Best Kept Secret
By measuring the radiation of infrared heat from your body, thermographic screening can detect signs of breast cancer as much as 10 years earlier than either mammography or a physical exam—all without any ionizing radiation or mechanical pressure.

And thermography has NO damaging side effects.

Thermographic breast screening is able to predict the likelihood of breast cancer, before any tumors have formed, because it provides a snapshot of 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 sizeable tumors.

This is the classic use of “preventative medicine” because you can detect negative changes before you develop the disease—while you still have time to turn things around.

Annual thermograms allow you to map changes in your body’s heat patterns over time. If you would like to learn more about thermography, I invite you to download my FREE thermography report.

What About Breast Self-Exams?
Breast self-exams have long been recommended as a simple way for women to keep track of anything unusual in their breasts. Now, after studies have found that such exams do not reduce breast cancer death rates and actually increase the rate of unnecessary biopsies, many experts are recommending a more relaxed approach known as “breast awareness.”

Breast awareness is really self-explanatory. It means you should regularly check your breasts for changes, but can do so in a way that feels natural to you. In other words, you don’t have to do it on the same day each month, or using any particular pattern.

Simply be aware of what’s normal for you so you can recognize anything out of the ordinary. Although breast cancer is much less common in men, it certainly wouldn’t hurt for men to practice “breast awareness” as well.

One of the BEST Supplements for Breast Cancers
Dr. William LaValley from Austin Texas, is one of the top natural medicine cancer physicians I know and he recently shared this important information on curcumin which has the most evidence based literature for as a cancer support than any other nutrient. There are over 100 different pathways that curcumin has an effect on once it gets into the cell. Interestingly this also includes the metabolite of curcumin and its derivatives which are also anti-cancer. Curcumin appears to be safe in the treatment of all cancers.

In India where turmeric is widely used, the prevalence of four common U.S. cancers — colon, breast, prostate and lung — is 10 times lower. In fact, prostate cancer, which is the most frequently diagnosed cancer in U.S. men, is rare in India and this is attributed, in part, to the curcumin in turmeric.

Numerous studies have looked into this potential cancer-fighting link, with promising results. For instance, curcumin has been found to:

Inhibit the proliferation of tumor cells
Inhibit the transformation of cells from normal to tumor
Help your body destroy mutated cancer cells so they cannot spread throughout your body
Decrease inflammation
Enhance liver function
Inhibit the synthesis of a protein thought to be instrumental in tumor formation
Prevent the development of additional blood supply necessary for cancer cell growth
And according to researchers from the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, curcumin blocks a key biological pathway needed for development of melanoma and other cancers.

The spice actually stops laboratory strains of melanoma from proliferating and pushes the cancer cells to commit suicide by shutting down nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-kB), a powerful protein known to induce abnormal inflammatory response that leads to an assortment of disorders such as arthritis and cancer.

To get the full benefits that curcumin has to offer, you will want to look for a turmeric extract with at least 95% curcuminoids that contains only 100% certified organic ingredients.

The formula should be free of fillers, additives and excipients (a substance added to the supplement as a processing or stability aid), and the manufacturer should use safe production practices at all stages: planting, cultivation, selective harvesting, and then producing and packaging the final product.

Details on How to Use Curcumin
The unfortunate challenge as this time is that there are not really any very good formulations of curcumin available to use in cancer. This is because relatively high doses are required and curcumin is not absorbed that well. Typical anticancer doses are up to three grams of good bioavailable curcmin extract, three to four times daily.

One work around for this is to use the curcumin powder and make a microemulsion of it by combining a tablespoon of the powder and mixing it into 1-2 egg yolks and a teaspoon or two of melted coconut oil. Then using a high speed hand blender to emulsify the powder.

Another strategy you can use to increase absorption is to put one tablespoon of the curcumin powder into a quart of boiling water. It must be boiling when you add the powder as it will not work as well if you put it in room temperature water and heat the water and curcumin. After boiling it for ten minutes you will have created a 12% solution and you can drink this once it has cooled down. The curcumin will gradually fall out of solution over time and in about six hours it will be a 6% solution so it is best to drink the water within four hours. It does have a woody taste.

One caution to know is that you want to avoid the “yellow kitchen” syndrome. Curcumin is a very potent yellow pigment and can permanently discolor surfaces if you aren’t careful. So you can perform the mixing under the hood of your stove with the blower on to make sure no powder gets into your kitchen.

Keeping Abreast of the Research
I mentioned earlier that we are beginning to see the stirrings of change. Let me clarify what I meant by that. New scientific research on old methodologies is challenging some of the long-held notions about conventional cancer treatments, and some of this research is making it into mainstream medical journals.

Cancer screening is finally getting some long-awaited scrutiny, as it should be. And that process has found some of the conventional breast cancer treatment methods to be significantly flawed and in need of revision. It’s about time!

Here are some of the more significant recent findings related to conventional breast cancer treatment:

Needle biopsies

Needle biopsies are widely used as part of the traditional allopathic approach to diagnosing breast cancer. But they may accidentally cause malignant cells to break away from a tumor, allowing it to spread to other areas of your body.

According to a study from the John Wayne Cancer Institute, it appears that a needle biopsy may increase the spread of cancer by 50 percent compared to patients who receive excisional biopsies, also known as lumpectomies.

Lumpectomies

A 2010 study found, for certain women, a lumpectomy might not be necessary. The procedure was found to not prolong survival or prevent recurrence of breast cancer.

Lymph Node Removal

Lymph node removal might not be necessary after all. Today, the standard treatment for breast cancer patients whose cancer has spread to the sentinel lymph node is to surgically remove the other nodes as well—a procedure called axillary node dissection. (The “sentinel node” refers to the node closest to the tumor, or the lymph node that can be reached by metastasizing cancer cells first.)

However, according to this latest study, lymph node removal has virtually no impact on survival or disease recurrence, while it causes additional pain and debilitation. After five years, 82.2 percent of the women who had the axillary nodes removed were still alive and in remission, compared to 83.8 percent of the women who did not get the operation.

And, interestingly enough, the cancer recurrence was actually slightly higher in the group who had the operation, compared to those who didn’t.

Chemotherapy and Radiation

In addition to the removal of lymph nodes, current conventional treatment also typically includes chemotherapy and radiation therapy.
Chemo is a standard recommendation for women whose cancer has spread to their lymph nodes, despite its magnificent failure rate and oftentimes lethal side effects. One study concluded that as many as 18,000 of the 45,000 women each year who undergo chemo for breast cancer could safely skip it.

Similarly, six or more weeks of radiation are also part of the standard treatment for most women with breast cancer. However, according to another recent study, just ONE dose of radiation, delivered with precision to the affected site directly after her lumpectomy, had the same rate of effectiveness as the extended radiation treatment.

Breast Cancer Prevention Musts
A healthful diet, regular physical exercise, appropriate sun exposure or oral supplements to optimize your vitamin D levels, and aneffective means of managing your emotional health are the cornerstones of just about any cancer prevention program, including breast cancer.

Regular physical activity has been shown to decrease the likelihood of developing breast cancer, as well as decreasing your chances of dying from it by 50 percent, once diagnosed.

It is also important to watch out for excessive iron levels. Elevated iron is actually quite common once women stop menstruating. The extra iron works as a powerful oxidant, increasing free radicals in your body and thereby increasing your risk of cancer.

The best way to monitor your iron is to have your ferritin level drawn. Ferritin is the iron transport protein and should not be above 80. If yours is elevated, you can reduce it simply by donating your blood.

The following lifestyle strategies will help you to further lower your breast cancer risk:

Optimize your vitamin D. Vitamin D influences virtually every cell in your body and is one of nature’s most potent cancer fighters. This is one of the most important steps you can take to protect yourself from cancer.

Vitamin D is actually able to enter cancer cells and trigger apoptosis (cell death). When JoEllen Welsh, a researcher with the State University of New York at Albany, injected a potent form of vitamin D into human breast cancer cells, half of them shriveled up and died within days! The vitamin D worked as well at killing cancer cells as the toxic breast cancer drug Tamoxifen, without any of the detrimental side effects and at a tiny fraction of the cost.

If you have cancer, your vitamin D level should be between 70 and 100 ng/ml. Vitamin D works synergistically with every cancer treatment I’m aware of, with no adverse effects.

I invite you to watch my one-hour free lecture on vitamin D to find out what your optimal vitamin D levels should be and how to optimize them.

Get plenty of natural vitamin A. There is evidence that vitamin A also plays a roll in preventing breast cancer. It’s best to obtain it from vitamin A rich foods, rather than a supplement. Your best sources are organic egg yolks, raw butter, raw whole milk, and beef or chicken liver.

However, beware of supplementing as there’s some evidence that vitamin A can negate the benefits of vitamin D. Since appropriate vitamin D levels are crucial for your health in general, not to mention cancer prevention, this means that it’s essential to have the proper ratio of vitamin D to vitamin A in your body.

Ideally, you’ll want to provide all the vitamin A and vitamin D substrate your body needs in such a way that your body can regulate both systems naturally. This is best done by eating colorful vegetables (for vitamin A) and by exposing your skin to sun every day (for vitamin D).

Avoid charring your meats. Charcoal or flame broiled meat is linked with increased breast cancer risk. Acrylamide—a carcinogen created when starchy foods are baked, roasted or fried—has been found to increase breast cancer risk as well.
Avoid unfermented soy products. Unfermented soy is high in plant estrogens, or phytoestrogens, also known as isoflavones. In some studies, soy appears to work in concert with human estrogen to increase breast cell proliferation, which increases the chances for mutations and cancerous cells.
Improve Your Insulin Receptor Sensitivity. The best way to do this is with exercise and a diet comprised of foods appropriate for your nutritional type.
Maintain a healthy body weight. This will come naturally when you begin eating right for your nutritional type and exercising. It’s important to lose excess body fat because fat produces estrogen.
Drink a quart of organic green vegetable juice daily. Please review my juicing instructions for more detailed information
Get plenty of high quality animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil. Omega-3 deficiency is a common underlying factor for cancer.
Curcumin. This is the active ingredient in turmeric and in high concentrations can be very useful in the treatment of breast cancer. Concern must be addressed with the solubility though as it is not well absorbed. However it does show great therapeutic potential in preventing breast cancer metastasis.
Avoid drinking alcohol, or at least limit your alcoholic drinks to one per day.
Breastfeed exclusively for up to six months. Research shows this will reduce your breast cancer risk.
Avoid wearing underwire bras. There is a good deal of data that metal underwire bras increase your breast cancer risk.
Avoid electromagnetic fields as much as possible. Even electric blankets can increase your cancer risk.
Other Research-Based “Dos and Don’ts”
The following is a list of various factors that have been scientifically found to impact breast cancer in one way or another. Many are isolated studies that offer food for thought and open up potential avenues for future research. For more information on each, simply click on the links provided.

Depression can influence breast cancer survival. Women whose depression lifts in the first year after being told they have advanced breast cancer outlive by more than two years those whose depression symptoms worsened.
SSRIs (a category of antidepressant drug) are associated with increased breast cancer risk.

CoQ10 http://www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/pdq/cam/coenzymeQ10/Patient appears to be another useful tool. Ubiquinol would be the preferred form as it works better than the oxidized CoQ10.
Black cohosh shows promise in fighting breast cancer by inducing apoptosis in human breast cancer cells.
Artemisinin (a compound in wormwood) has been shown to be toxic to human breast cancer cells.
A high carbohydrate diet may increase your breast cancer risk.
Foods that have a scientific basis for fighting breast cancer include kelp, spicy foods, cruciferous vegetables (especially broccoli), and evening primrose oil.
Three cups of tea daily may slash your breast cancer risk by 50 percent.
If you eat a poor diet, it can cause DNA changes that may increase your daughters’ and granddaughters’ risk of breast cancer.

Durham, NC (PRWEB) August 16, 2010

Researchers from Duke University have identified a non-invasive test that may prevent death in premature babies. Premature birth occurs in up to 10 percent of all pregnancies in the USA.

One of the most devastating conditions that can occur during this stressful period is necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), in which the intestines of the baby can become infected and die. This imaging test, published in the Journal of Surgical Radiology, may allow physicians to diagnose this condition earlier and start treatment before it threatens the lives of these preemies.

“Improved understanding of the relationships between skin temperature and perfusion may provide insight into the pathophysiology of NEC,” says Dr. Henry Rice, lead author of the study and chief of pediatric surgery at Duke University. The new imaging study, known as thermography, “is a non-invasive technique to measure skin temperature over the visible body simultaneously.”

This peer-reviewed study shows that thermography can monitor temperature changes in low birth weight infants. Premature infants susceptible to necrotizing enterocolitis have a decrease in overall abdominal skin temperature prior to becoming severely ill from infection. Premature infants monitored using this non-invasive test may be started on resuscitative therapy and antibiotics before the infection becomes life threatening and the intestines begin to die.

Thermography is an affordable technology that can be readily implemented in neonatal intensive care units. Future studies will further explore the role of this non-invasive imaging test and the utility it plays in early diagnosis and treatment of necrotizing enterocolitis.

This study was published in the Journal of Surgical Radiology, a peer-reviewed medical journal distributed to over 11,000 surgeons and radiologists around the world. Physicians and surgeons from major medical centers around the country serve on the journal’s Editorial Board.
Their expertise provides an authoritative validation of peer-reviewed scientific research that makes an important contribution to patient care. Learn more about this study and other medical advances at www.SurgRad.com.

Breast Cancer News Useful Links Video Library

Paget’s disease of the nipple or breast is a rare type of breast cancer, which can occur in women and men. It shows up in and around the nipple, and usually signals the presence of breast cancer beneath the skin.

Most cases are found in menopausal women, but can also appear in women that are as young as 20.

The disease is named for Sir James Paget. He reported on the link between changes in the nipple and the underlying breast cancer. Although Paget believed the affected cells were not cancerous, it was later proved that the cells were themselves malignant, in addition to indicating underlying breast cancer. Since the condition is often innocuous and limited to a surface appearance, it is sometimes dismissed, despite the fact that it is indicative of breast cancer that may prove fatal if left untreated.

More than 95 percent of people with Paget’s disease of the nipple also have underlying breast cancer; however, Paget’s disease of the nipple accounts for less than 5 percent of all breast cancers.

Most patients diagnosed with Paget’s disease of the nipple are over age 50, but rare cases have been diagnosed in patients in their 20s. The average age at diagnosis is 62 for women and 69 for men. The disease is rare among both women and men.

In an interesting note, retired Boston Red Sox center fielder Dom DiMaggio suffered from Paget’s disease and served as a member of the board of directors of the Paget Foundation.
What are the symptoms of Paget’s disease?
A symptom is something the patient senses and describes, while a sign is something other people, such as the doctor notice. For example, drowsiness may be a symptom while dilated pupils may be a sign.

On average, a woman may experience signs and symptoms for six to eight months before a diagnosis is made.

Paget’s disease’s symptoms may vary based on the stage of the disease. However, the main symptoms that can occur in Paget’s disease include flaky or scaly skin on the nipple, straw-colored or bloody nipple discharge, skin and nipple changes in only one breast or the flattened nipples.

The first symptom is usually an eczema-like rash, usually only affecting one nipple. The skin of the nipple and areola may be red, itchy and inflamed. Some women have an itching or burning sensation. Fluid discharge may leak from the abnormal area of cells. The nipple may turn inwards. There may or may not be a lump in the breast, and there may be redness, oozing and crusting, and a sore that does not heal.

The symptoms usually affect the nipple and then spread to the areola and then the breast. It is common that the symptoms disappear for a while and this may be tricky as the patient takes it as a sign that the disease has cured, which is not true.

Most women do not visit the doctor because they mistake it as contact dermatitis or eczema. Women who feel a lump or notice skin irritation that does not seem to heal for over a month are recommended to seek the opinion of a specialist.

Patients may also experience crusty, oozing or hardened skin resembling eczema, on the nipple, areola or both and fluctuating skin changes early on, making it appear as if the skin is healing on its own. Some patients complain of burning sensations on the nipples or breasts. These symptoms usually occur in more advanced stages, when serious destruction of the skin often prompts the patient to consult.

Lumps or masses in the breast occur in 50% of the patients. In more advanced stages, the disease may cause tingling, increased sensitivity and pain.
What are the causes of Paget’s disease?
If invasive breast cancer or ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is already present in the breast as a tumor, cells might drift off from the tumor and float up through the milk ducts, where they enter the nipple and areola.

In a few cases of Paget’s disease, there is no underlying breast cancer, or if a tumor is present, it is unrelated to the disease in the nipple. Researchers suggest that in those cases, nipple skin cells may spontaneously change into cancer cells. h2 class=”blue_sea_paddingtop”>Diagnosing Paget’s disease
Recommended tests are a mammogram and a biopsy to confirm the diagnosis, and cytopathology may also be helpful.

Paget’s disease is difficult to diagnose due to its resemblance to dermatitis and eczema. The difference between these two types of conditions consists of the detail that the latter, unlike Paget’s disease, rather affect the areola first and then the nipple.

During a physical examination the doctor examines the unusual areas of the breast, especially the appearance of the skin on and around the nipples and feeling for any lumps or areas of thickening.

The most commonly tests used to diagnose Paget’s disease is the biopsy. A biopsy consists in the removal of a tissue sample from the affected area which is after looked at under the microscope by a pathologist. The pathologist may use a technique called immunohistochemistry (staining tissues to identify specific cells) to differentiate Paget cells from other cell types.

Samples of nipple discharge may also be examined under the microscope to check if Paget cells are present.

Imprint or scrape cytology may be useful. They consist in scraping cells from the affected area, or pressing them onto a glass slide to be examined under the microscope.
What are the treatment options for Paget’s disease?
Surgery is the most common treatment for Paget disease of the nipple. The specific treatment often depends on the characteristics of the underlying breast cancer.

A modified radical mastectomy may be recommended when invasive cancer or extensive DCIS has been diagnosed. In this operation, a surgeon removes the breast, the lining over the chest muscles, and some of the lymph nodes under the arm. In cases where underlying breast cancer is not invasive, the surgeon may perform a simple mastectomy to remove only the breast and the lining over the chest muscles.

Alternatively, patients whose disease is confined to the nipple and the surrounding area may undergo breast-conserving surgery or lumpectomy followed by radiation therapy. During breast-conserving surgery, a surgeon removes the nipple, areola, and the entire portion of the breast believed to contain the cancer. In most cases, radiation therapy is also used to help prevent recurrence.

Preventing Paget’s disease
Paget’s disease cannot be prevented. However, one may prevent complications of Paget’s disease, such as osteoarthritis, by taking medicine, staying at a healthy weight, and regularly doing gentle exercise that does not cause stress to the bone.

Click here to view the article.

There has been much controversy within the thermal imaging community, and much comment by outside observers concerning two factors related to the interpretation of thermal imaging of the human breast. In this regard, I have spent quite some time investigating alternative language and reporting methodology and I have determined to make changes to my interpretation reports as follows:

1) The Thermal Rating System is being dropped.

The thermal rating system has proven to be a hindrance to proper communication and understanding of actual findings with referring physicians and indeed, with patients. The rating system has not been updated nor revised since its initial inception and utilization in the mid 1980’s. There are two significant problems which routinely occur with the utilization of the reporting system; however there has not been a proposed change that makes good clinical sense until now. The two key problems with the thermal reporting or thermal rating system are:

A) Unresolved anxiety for both patient and physician when TH3 – TH5 class thermograms are not confirmed by so-called conventional methodologies such as Mammography, Ultrasound or MRI. We all know that a positive thermogram is often many years ahead of anatomical testing as confirmed by the scientific research, but this does not help us when we “label” a breast as suspicious and no other method can confirm or deny the thermal findings. This creates the medical impression of a false positive and the resulting loss of confidence by the referring clinician.

B) Inaccuracy of the Rating System itself. This rating system was designed decades ago to provide for a more accurate and quantifiable system of reporting risk, however it has inherent errors which I feel cause tremendous confusion for the primary care physician and indeed the patient. Many patients with cancer have only one rating factor, for example a marginal 1.1C delta at the nipple, and are as such, rated TH-3 Equivocal. Other patients may have three or more low level rating factors with a completely healthy breast and as such are rated TH5 Suspicious. Often these patients present in my practice for many years with absolutely no change in thermal patterning, In other words – no increase in vascular or heat signature. Very often these patients have anatomical testing which is clearly within the normal parameters (not equivocal).

In the world of diagnostic imaging, the premise of any system, be it mammography, ultrasound or thermography is simply to identify risk factors which may not be determined in any other way. As such, a heads up is given to the primary care doctor that there may be pathology requiring further investigation. That is all.

The attempt of earlier thermographers to create a rating system which is more objective and meaningful has actually created confusion within and outside of the thermal imaging community, and as such, this system should be abandoned.

This does not mean however, that reporting should simply be a series of circles or squares drawn over areas of clinical concern. Some rating factors, especially those in the “primary factors” category, still require description as a methodology to alert the primary care physician to areas of higher concern. To label these patients as equivocal, abnormal, suspicious or for that matter, normal is an inappropriate reporting methodology and as such, is no longer to be utilized.

2. The use of the Thermal Cold Stress Challenge for Breast Evaluations is being dropped.

This protocol has never been scientifically proven to be reliable and may indeed; affect the clinical management of a patient in the wrong way, for the wrong reason.

There are several solid reasons for this decision and these factors are related to my 20 years of clinical practice in the realm of thermal imaging. I wish to share these factors with you as a practicum.

A) There is no reliable literature nor blinded study to validate the use of the procedure for breast thermal imaging studies, contradictory to many studies on Reflex Sympathetic Dystrophy (RSD) and Chronic Regional Pain Syndrome (CRPS) (CMPS) Many thermographers have inappropriately applied the cold stress challenge designed for neurological conditions to the female breast.

B) The use of the stress challenge does not, and should not be used as an indicator of “aggressiveness” or “staging” of breast cancer. Some interp clinicians actually utilize a (+) or (-) in their reporting methodology to indicate whether for example, a Suspicious breast (TH5) is more (+) or less (-) suspicious depending on whether or not the area cooled. This is not a verifiable protocol and it is to be discouraged. (TH5+ or TH5-) An abnormal breast factor is ratable as a factor and requires clinical correlation, period.

C) The degree of cooling, or lack thereof, has also not been scientifically established as an indicator and I feel this has been an anecdotal use of the procedure. As such the stress challenge can be very misleading to both physician and patient. Depending on dietary influences, hormonal levels of the particular day, and the amount of stress within the patient from a variety of sources, the stress challenge may be more or less effective. Some days, a patient will cool 0.2C in a given area, and six months later 1.0 and on the next visit, 1.5. Some patients will not cool on a particular visit even 0.1C and on a subsequent visit they may cool 1.2C. Of course there are many instances of patient’s temperature increasing on the stress challenge and then on subsequent visits the area cools or stays the same. These variances have cast great doubt on the reliability of the stress challenge.

D) Some anatomical factors which are benign can severely compromise the ability of the sympathetics to provoke vasoconstriction. This would include blood vessels which have been compromised by surgery, incisional biopsy, lumpectomy, local trauma and even thoracic spine instabilities. These factors can provide for permanently dilated vessels or capillary networks which fail to respond to sympathetic stimuli.

E) The patient’s own apprehension of the procedure may produce sympathetic fight or flight responses prior to the stress challenge, often seen when patients can view the monitor during exam for example. This provokes a cooling response and “sets” the sympathetic tone prior to the actual cold challenge thus producing potential failure reporting when the fight or flight response actually took place minutes or moments before. Other examples of this are fear of the exam, an event proximate to the exam that has upset the patient (phone call) (rude comment) (slip and fall) etc. Many of these variables simply can not be accounted for.

F) Finally, and most simply, the fight or flight sympathetic response has never changed the thermal rating nor denies the need for further testing and correlation. Some clinicians will make a decision on whether or not to order additional testing based on the Success or Failure of the stress challenge procedure. The very fact that we can not with thermography, determine the amount or aggressiveness of angiogenesis validates this fact. The question must be asked- At what point of existing cancer development does angio-neo-genesis override sympathetic input? It is a great concept in theory, but it is not practical in day to day practice.

These factors (the thermal rating system) and (the cold stress challenge) contribute greatly to an overall confusion of the basic purpose of breast thermography and are based largely in Dogma. The purpose of breast thermal imaging is to view with a complimentary technology, the human breast and to determine if there are areas of clinical interest that require further clarification that can not be seen by other methods.

Thermography is a screening procedure. To continue to follow dogma and unproven methods will further restrain and constrain the advancement of this noble science.

William Cockburn, DC, FIACT, FABFE
Fellow International Academy of Clinical Thermology
Fellow American Board of Forensic Examiners