Archive for July 25th, 2010

Genentech Provides Update From Avastin FDA Advisory Committee Meeting

Genentech Provides Update From Avastin FDA Advisory Committee Meeting
Genentech, Inc., a member of the Roche Group (SIX: RO, ROG; OTCQX: RHHBY), announced that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) Oncologic Drugs Advisory Committee (ODAC) voted 12 to one that use of Avastin® (bevacizumab) in combination with paclitaxel for previously untreated (first-line) advanced HER2-negative breast cancer be removed from Avastin’s U.S. label. The committee’s vote does …

Read more on Medical News Today

Six Simple Ways How to Avoid From Cancer

People do research and survey to find medicine to kill cancer. Cancer can come to our body, because of wrong way of live. We never pay attention and neglect of food to eat every day and tend to consume junk food. We should choose food to eat, so that we could prevent from cancer. There are six simple ways how to avoid from cancer, please implement the 6 steps below;

1.Eat vegetables and fruit

Vegetables and fruit are full of vitamins and anti oxidance. Serve seven times a day, so that we can be avoided from cancer.

2.avoid smoking

Smoking has high risk for few cancers, 70 % death risks caused of smoking. Avoid from smoking is the best choice for you.

3.Used steam cleaner than shampoo carpet.

People tend to use shampoo carpet than steam cleaner to clean carpet, because easy and quick to use. The shampoo carpet contain carcinogen, one of chemical substance that easy to create cancer. Used steam carpet with hot water is saver than chemical substance.

4.Eat Brazil nut

Brazil nut is rich of selenium; two Brazil nuts are the same as 200 mcg selenium. If you eat two Brazil nuts a day, decrease 50 % of cancer risk.

5.Get the sun ray

Get sun ray 15 minutes a day without sunscreen; help your body to make 1.000 IU vitamin D. Survey proved that vitamin D can decrease breast cancer risk and ovarian cancer for 30 %.

6.Eat colorful vegetables and fruits

Red fruit and vegetables, such as tomato, bit and watermelon can decrease 40 % from skin cancer risk. Serve on your daily menu; help to improve your health.

Orange fruits and vegetables, such as yellow gourd, parrot, and orange can decrease 32 % from cancer.

Green vegetables, such as spinach, broccoli and pea can prevent from breast cancer.

Blue fruits, such as grapes, blueberry and plum can prevent 40 % from stomach cancer.

Please choose the best one for you and implement in your daily life.

Destroy Breast Cancer :: How to Treat Breast Cancer ? The Number One Way

There are many treatment options available to help get rid of your cancer. But the best method, according to many doctors and nutritionists, is the very food that you eat. According to a number of research studies, foods that have healing properties are the best to consume, in order to get rid of breast cancer. So if certain foods are required, what would these foods be? Based on many nutrition and medical tests, the best and most healthy diet involves eating plenty of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes.

By consuming these foods, you greatly reduce your risk of developing breast cancer. And, if you already have breast cancer, you have an excellent chance of the cancer going away by eating these types of foods. What is it about these foods that allow such healing? In the same studies spoken about about, it was found that certain elements in foods actually help fight and prevent cancer at the cellular level. What are these elements? They
are healing substances known as “phytonutrients” (a special type of nutrient found in plants). They have the ability to fight cancer very effectively. A good example of this type of a plant that contains these nutrients is broccoli.

Broccoli contains a special type of phytonutrients called “isothiocyanates”. In lab tests, this chemical was found to actually destroy cancer tissue. You can find phytonutrients in many other types of foods such as soybeans, tofu, tempeh, and soy milk. Soy milk, specifically, is good for you if you are lactose intolerant, and contains a soy product called “genistein”. Genistein has been shown to stop the growth of tumors in tissue. Another food that has been known for centuries as an incredible healer for many illnesses is garlic. It has a lot of phytonutrients and what are known as “allyl sulfides”. Allyl sulfides have been shown to destroy cancer-causing substances in the body very effectively. The main thing to consider here is that by eating the right foods, you can develop a strong immune system and keep cancer away for good.

Striking back

Striking back
“You have cancer.” Three words no one wants to hear. Three words that changed Yolanda Colin’s life.The Aurora resident got the news in April 2007. “I went for my yearly checkup, and they told me they found a lump in my left breast,” the 61-year-old Colin said. Her doctors told her she needed an ultrasound and a biopsy. The biopsy came back clean, but her doctors wanted to do a second biopsy just …

Read more on Chicago Sun-Times

Teen takes steps to fight cancer

Teen takes steps to fight cancer
ASHBURNHAM – Jessica R. Wing, 16, has taken small steps at her familyand#8217;s business in Fitchburg to help raise breast cancer awareness and will take many more steps and#8212; about 60 miles worth in Boston and#8212; for her grandmother, whose breast cancer is in stage four.

Read more on Worcester Telegram & Gazette

Can your genetic makeup stop you from buying life insurance?

By Michelle Matlock, Life Quotes, Inc.

If your grandfather was an alcoholic does that mean that you’re destined to be one as well? What about your mother and aunt who have both been diagnosed with breast cancer?

Your genetics determine more than the color of your eyes and skin, they present a detailed map that illustrates familial traits, ticks, and in some cases, the odds of being stricken by a serious illness.

Following several key court cases beginning in early 2000, genetic testing was used to make unfounded assessments of genetic risks for those seeking employment or insurance.

“We are incredibly vulnerable when it comes to our DNA,” says Dr. Deborah Peel, a practicing physician, boarded psychologist and founder and chair of the non-profit consumer health privacy advocacy organization, patientprivacyrights.org. “I don’t think we realize that when we walk around a room we shed DNA everywhere. This information can be lifted from a glass of water or a soda can. If you can lift off enough microscopic material you can find out a great deal about that person’s genetics.”

Some fear that as genetic testing becomes a routine practice in medical treatment, insurers will find ways to use the information to deny, limit or cancel insurance.

Others fear that the possibility of discriminatory practices concerning genetic tests will bring advancements in human genetics to a grinding halt.

Nowadays, consumers and advocacy groups alike are looking for stronger protections when it comes to who can access their medical records.

In May 2008, former President Bush signed the Genetic Information Nondiscrimination Act of 2007-2008 (GINA) to protect Americans from being discriminated against by heath insurers and employers based solely on their DNA. The United States Department of Health and Human Services, issued a March 2009 guide that tackles GINA in detail. According to the guide: “When making determinations required under 45 CFR 46.111 (a), GINA’s provisions prohibiting discrimination in health coverage based on genetic information do not extend to life insurance, disability insurance, or long-term care insurance. GINA’s provisions prohibiting discrimination by employers based on genetic information generally do not apply to employers with fewer than 15 employees.”

“I find GINA a bit disconcerting,” says Linda McCabe, author and Adjunct Associate Professor of Human Genetics and Pediatrics at the David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA. “On the one hand it is a very limited step toward providing some protections for individuals who are asymptomatic and would like to have genetic testing done. I’m very concerned that anyone who actually has a disorder or develops a disorder will not be protected. GINA does not protect you if you have symptoms.”

Even after GINA was passed, the American College of Medical Genetics reported receiving a high number of phone calls from physicians about whether patients can pay for genetic testing out of pocket, worried that such information may be used against them by insurers.

A February 2008 survey by the Genetics and Public Policy Center in Washington D.C., showed that an overwhelming majority of the 1,199 Americans surveyed support genetic testing for research and advancements in health care, but a whopping 92 percent were concerned about genetic tests being used to profile their health. While a large majority trusted their doctor’s handling of genetic test results (86 percent), only 16 percent trusted employers who have access to this data. An even lower percentage trusted their insurers with the same information. 

Ninety three percent felt genetic testing shouldn’t be used to make decisions to deny or limit insurance coverage or decisions related to hiring and promotion in the workplace.

Of late, the topic has been addressed in regard to health insurers, but very little has been mentioned about what this information could mean to someone applying for life insurance — particularly in the individual market.

Life insurance is of special concern because underwriters assess mortality risk to determine how to rate or deny a policy to those who have a pre-existing medical condition.

“Insurers generally are not quick to embrace new technologies such as genetic testing,” says Whit Cornman, spokesperson for the American Council of Life Insurers (ACLI). “Instead they tend to look at things that have a long proven track record.”

“The run-of-the-mill approach to life insurance involves evaluating factors such as weight, height and a history of chronic disease, insurers are not necessarily looking at genetic information. Also, those factors are certainly less expensive to gather,” says Amanda Arnold, Health Policy and Legislative Analyst for the National Human Genome Research Institute at the National Institutes of Health.

Arnold adds that to date, the NHGR has not received any cases involving genetic discrimination, patient privacy and life insurance, but she understands why genetic testing might interest insurers.

“I can imagine a scenario that it would be in their interest to gather such information when it comes to establishing premiums, but they have better ways to determine a person’s health and set rates,” says Arnold. “In the meantime, we will continue to monitor the issue. If problems emerge at some point in the future, then we would encourage the policy community to look at the implications of the practice and make additional recommendations as it becomes necessary.”

Currently, 43 states have recognized the importance of maintaining the privacy of genetic information. But each state approaches the issue differently. GINA does not trump more expansive state laws.

“State legislatures do so many things at the state level regarding insurance and there are some protections regarding genetic discrimination and patient privacy on the federal level but none apply specifically to life insurance,” says Arnold. “The state level could be where this topic bubbles up, especially if the states start parsing more laws regarding this issue.”

 In January 2008,The National Conference of State Legislatures compiled a list of states that strictly prohibit the use of genetic information for risk selection and classification by life insurers. Those states include:

Arizona: Requires “actuarial” justification to use genetic information in life insurance and informed consent to use genetic information.

California: Requires informed consent to use genetic information. Note: In California, an insurer can only require a person to undergo a genetic test if the life insurer explicitly pays for the cost.

Florida: No insurance company shall refuse to issue, fail to deliver, or charge a higher rate solely because a person has a sickle-cell trait.

Maine: Requires Informed consent and allows actuarial justification

Maryland: Allows actuarial justification.

Massachusetts: Allows actuarial justification. Forbids insurance companies from requiring a genetic test.

Minnesota: Requires informed consent and allows actuarial justification.

Montana: Allows actuarial justification.

New Jersey: Allows actuarial justification and requires informed consent.

New Mexico: Allows actuarial justification and requires informed consent. Must notify applicant that genetic test may be used.

New York: Requires informed consent

North Carolina: Restricts discrimination based on genetic information in life insurance, but only applies to “sickle-cell trait, thalassemia-minor trait, hemoglobin C trait and Tay-Sachs trait.

Oregon: Allows actuarial justification and requires informed consent.

Vermont: Restricts discrimination based on genetic information in life insurance.

Notes: An actuary has to “justify” the reason for requiring a policyholder to provide genetic test results

Informed consent. A potential policyholder must agree to take an genetic test through a written informed consent for the test, it must include a description of the test, the reason, potential uses, and other limitations, it must also provide the meaning of its results, and the express right to confidential treatment of the results. The written informed consent must inform the individual that they should consider consulting with a genetic counselor prior to taking the test and must state whether the insurer will pay for the consultation. An informed consent disclosure form must also be approved by the state’s insurance commissioner prior to its use.

Inconclusive

While there are fears that genetic testing has the ability to open a Pandora’s box for those applying for life insurance, authorities in the medical community continue to question the reliability of DNA tests.

Concerned with the possibility that test results are misleading, the FDA and the Federal Trade Commission have also started to question the accuracy of genetic testing.

“DNA shows certain predispositions to illness, but it is not 100 percent precise in determining this predisposition,” says Peel. “Predilection, preferences and behavior are in the gene, but the legitimate studies are just not there yet to actually predict with any confidence if you will become ill, even if you are susceptible to a certain condition.”

The National Institutes of Health have pointed out that clinical genetic tests are available through physicians, genetic counselors and labs, for more than 1,300 diseases, with hundreds more under research.

Harking back to the nature versus nurture debate, geneticists are swimming in a muddy pool of uncertainty when it comes to predicting the full course of a genetic abnormality.

“I don’t know if genetic tests are misleading, but I do know that we don’t have enough data. Most disorders are not caused by a single gene interaction, it’s an interaction of multiple genes combined with our environment,” says McCabe.

Even if you received a positive result for being presymptomatic (when symptoms have not appeared), a genetic test cannot accurately establish the risk of developing an illness. Physicians cannot use your results to predict the course or the severity of a condition. The information a test provides is even more limited when it comes to a condition that is inherited.

Also, DNA testing can miss a disease-causing anomaly because some tests cannot detect all the genetic changes that would jumpstart a particular illness, requiring further testing to confirm a negative result.

“Everyone has common, natural variations in their DNA, (polymorphisms) that have no effect on health,” says McCabe, “If there is a change in the DNA that isn’t associated with the disorder, it can be difficult to determine if it is a natural variation or not.”

She adds, while a result can rule out a specific diagnosis, it cannot show if the person has a higher risk of developing a disease or illness. When this happens, generally family members are also tested to rule out a certain disorder, says McCabe.

McCabe opined that she feels it is not question of accuracy when it comes to genetic tests.

“It’s more about genetic determinism… I don’t think anyone should place too much emphasis on one genetic test result,” she says.

McCabe suggests if you are thinking about submitting your DNA to a genetic test you should work with a board certified genetic professional who specializes in genetic counseling before deciding to go through with a test.

“There are pros and cons that need to be addressed and often patients find it’s really unnecessary,” says McCabe. “Everyone is at risk for a genetic disease, we just may not know what the specific genes are for every DNA mutation in their family. It is very difficult to reach any real conclusions because the number of disorders which we have genetic testing for is still limited.”

This article was originally published at Life Quotes, Inc.

The Rose, Houston’s leading non-profit breast cancer organization

The Rose is the Houston area’s leading 501(c)(3) non-profit breast cancer organization providing mammography screening, diagnosis, access to treatment and support to all women regardless of their ability to pay. Last

Interview on Sirius: Breast Cancer Screenings (Part 2)

(Part 2) During his interview with Sirius Make It Plain, COAs Ted Okon discusses the recent news this week from the task force that made new breast cancer screening recommendations.

Credentials question halts Duke gene trials

Credentials question halts Duke gene trials
Researchers have stopped three clinical trials that rely on the work of a Duke University scientist who may have falsely claimed to be a Rhodes scholar on applications he submitted for federal grant funding.

Read more on The News & Observer

Fundraisers- 7/25

Fundraisers- 7/25
Pie orders being taken by St. Luke’s MARTINSBURG – Orders are now being taken for St. Luke’s United Methodist Church’s frozen pies. Apple, blueberry, cherry and peach are $6.50 each, while mince meat is $7.

Read more on The Martinsburg Journal