BF for 1yr reduces risk of breast cancer by 60%!

[Laurie]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... _cancer_dc

Another great reason to bf!

New study shows that by bf for 1yr, mom's risk of breast cancer goes down by 60%!!!!

[leah44]

I don't mean to confront Laurie here or to discourage bf but the article said that people who have a certain genetic mutation have a lower risk if they BF for 1 year but that the risk of breast cancer is still high in those people. There is certainly nothing that I have seen out there that says that bf for a year reduces your risk of breast cancer by 60%. Apparently, bf for a year can reduce your risk but not nearly by that much.

In fact, sometimes it's because women are pg &/or nursing that breast cancer goes undetected for a while (and therefore progresses during that time). A pg woman is unable to get a mammogram without risk & if a bf woman finds a doctor who will give you a mammogram, the mammogram's results are not as good as they could be. Anyone who has breastfed can certainly tell you that her breasts are lumpy a lot of the time. Also, self-examination is nearly impossible to do correctly during pg & bf because of that. Even so, self exams apparently diagnose about 90% of the breast cancers in pregnant & lactating women.

I certainly think that bf is a wonderful thing but so is a person's choice to do whatever she may want concerning feeding her infant. I loved bf my son and did so for a year but there are many I know that have chosen not to bf or have had a difficult time trying and stopped.

About 11,000 women a year are determined to have breast cancer who under the age of 40. I believe the stats are that women are about 20% less likely to develop pre-menopausal breast cancer if they have breastfed for as little as a few months. While I love that 20% stat, I hate the 80% one.

Breast cancer is a very serious disease that can not be avoided by bf or anything else. Diligence seems to be the only thing that makes the difference between life and death.

Leah
(Derek born 4/22/02, edd 12/6/04)

[Laurie]

Quoting the article:

"Women carrying BRCA1 mutations who breast-fed for more than 1 year were about 60 percent less likely to have breast cancer than women who never breast-fed, the investigators report in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute" They cite studies which back this up as well.

I was just passing along information. **Anything** we can do as women to stop this disease is worth a shot, imo.

[leah44]

Laurie,

There is a new study indicating that the risk of brain cancer is different for people born at different times of the year.

I'm interested in how you suggest we use this info to our advantage.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=s ... r_birth_dc

Leah

[Laurie]

Thanks Leah, for your support!! I loved the post that you had in the other thread that you were sick of women going against each other's decisions...and then proceed to attack me here. I was ONLY providing information in a BREASTFEEDING forum. I would never go into a FORMULA forum and do the same. So sorry I OFFENDED you by posting new information about breastfeeding that might possibly help someone decide to at least TRY breastfeeding.

That's it, I'm not posting here anymore since you and others are so offended by MY opinions. You know, you cannot argue with opinions...you can argue FACTS but I'm just stating opinions, aren't I? And SHE ASKED!!!!!!!!!!!!! And for the THOUSANDth time, I'M NOT JUDGING ANYONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Mar2]

Laurie - I just wanted to thank you for sharing this information. As it turns out, my MIL informed me just this weekend that my baby daughter may have inherited a breast cancer gene from my FIL's side. Hopefully there will be a cure for cancer during my daughter's life time, but if not, I will definitely impart this information to her. I've got a lot of research to do now to see if this study even applies to her.

I can understand why you wouldn't want to post again. It is impossible to understand everyone's intent/meaning when talking face to face. So it is easy to see how things can be so seriously misunderstood when we can't hear a tone of voice or see a facial expression. Writing is so limited that way.

What I find interesting, is that I read the same posts everyone else did. And what truly seemed to hurt some posters, seemed very helpful to me. You just never know how a certain turn of phrase can really make someone's day or really tick them off.

What I have always appreciated about this site and the HuGS site is that I know exactly where to find other women with expertise and/or interest in a wide variety of areas. I don't want to be a breastfeeding expert or adoption expert or medical research expert. But I love knowing there are others here with those interests and passions. I hate to see you stop posting when you have so much to share. But I don't blame you if that is your choice.

My best to you, your kids, and the little one on the way.
Take care,

[emily]

Rather than starting a new thread, I thought I would add this in. I was just reading Parents or Parenting or some such mainstream mag and I saw it saying that breastfeeding reduces the risk of infant death in the first year by 20%, which I thought was profound.

[leah44]

Laurie,

I certainly would not have cared and would not have been so irritated if you had in fact told the truth. The article was limited to people with a genetic mutation -- there is no such study indicating that bf reduces the risk in all women by 60%.

Your posts are obviously helpful to some & I certainly would not want to be even part of the reason why you don't continue to post. I just ask that if you state something other than your opinion that you state the truth and not a misrepresentation of it.

Breast cancer is a serious disease that has affected my family too much. I don't want bf mothers out there to forego their routine exams etc. because you inform them that bf reduced their risk by 60%. I don't want anyone out there to think there is any protection against this disease. The only real thing that we can do is make sure it is detected early.

Of course, diet, bf, and other habits may help -- I agree with that -- but nothing safeguards your life better than routine mammograms, self-evals & awareness.

Leah

[jjbeck]

Laurie, I really hope you reconsider about not posting here anymore. I honestly do not think anyone was expecting you to defend your reasons for BFing, I think most of us agree breastmilk if healthier it is just that sometimes looking at the big picture breastfeeding is not the healthiest choice you know what I mean? You know for woman that have to bottle feed for medical reasons etc. I think it is the woman that bottlefeed that feel they need to explain why. Or at least I do. I breastfeed and bottle feed.
Anyway, please dont stop posting I know many have appreciated your posts.

[emily]

Wow Leah.

I am not sure if you realize this but you are not reading what Laurie was saying correctly. I think maybe because the subject of breast cancer is such a deep issue for you, perhaps you aren't being objective. Laurie has never said nor implied the things that you claim she has said and/or implied. If you read the article clearly, and her statements clearly, you can see that. You are accusing her of some pretty harsh things and you have no basis to accuse her personally of such. I hate to butt into something that is between two people, but I have read this thread several times, and I am really bothered by it.

Laurie NEVER said that it reduces ALL women's risk of breast cancer by 60%. I took her quote in the original post as a synopsis of the article and it is true that for the women in the article, who carry a specific gene, did have a 60% reduced risk in this particular study. And she certainly never implied that by breastfeeding women no longer need to worry about their breast health either long term or during breastfeeding. Saying that there is a reduction by 60% certainly is not equivilant to saying that the risk is eliminated. Also, in general, how many of us are tested for this gene? I have never been tested for it. Maybe I have it, maybe I don't. But, if I do, then maybe I will have reduced my risk of breast cancer.

Also, just because someone posts something that is positive about breastfeeding does not mean that their post must then be negative about bottle feeding.

Anyhow Laurie, I hope you stick around on the boards! I thought it was an interesting article. I also noted that it said "cumulative" breastfeeding equal to or greater than 12 months. I know several moms who were only able to breastfeed for a few months. I think it is good for women to know that there can be health benefits for both them and their child even with short periods of breastfeeding or combine breast and bottle feeding.

Emily

[leah44]

Emily,

The only thing I was accusing Laurie of is misrepresenting the truth. The title of this post is a misrepresentation as is the actual post "New study shows that by bf for 1yr, mom's risk of breast cancer goes down by 60%!!!!" That's just not true. Plus, if you read the article it says that people with that mutation who bf still have a higher risk than those without it.

In Laurie's other posts, it is very clear that she believes that bf is the right way to feed your child. Everyone is entitled to her opinion but I also wanted to say that sometimes breast cancer goes undetected while pg &/or nursing. That can make the difference between life & death and the decision whether or not to bf (and not have testing during that time period) esp. by older pg women with a history of breast cancer in their families should be made carefully.

I don't think I made many harsh accusations. I didn't accuse her of anything until I read her reply that didn't even consider what I had written. Read the first line of my reply .. "I don't mean to confront Laurie here" or something like that. I originally just thought she made a mistake & I wanted to correct it. When I saw her reply, I accused her of misrepresenting the truth.

Yes -- this issue is near and dear to my heart. That is what caused me to reply to Laurie's post in the first place. But that did not lead me to be "harsh". If you read my original reply, you will notice that I put nothing in there but factual statements. Laurie tends to generate heated discussions on this board & I assumed from that that she could handle my reply. I certainly did not mean to cause her to want to leave the board but I also believe she is acting childish is throwing a tantrum over this. I notice that you only rushed to her defense when she threatened to leave. If you consider any of that harsh, then so be it.

I believe her posts are worthwhile but I will definitely not back down if I see false info posted by her or anyone.

Leah

[Cheri]

Laurie,
I do hope you'll stick around too. (I would understand if you choose not to). I know your posts have been very helpful to me & others (both here & on the HUGS site).

I hope pg is treating you better this time & you're not too sick.

[emily]

"Mom's" risk. Not "moms' risks". She is saying ONE MOM had a reduced risk with a title of her post.

Also, if you mention her other posts. Are you sure you aren't projecting some of your feelings about her other posts onto this one, because it sure looks that way to me.

Personally, I think it would much more effective on your part to post some research on some of the points YOU were trying to make, rather than what you are doing in this post, which frankly, isn't constructive at all.

[leah44]

Emily,

She was not saying that one mother had a reduced risk. A study is not made by one mom. That's just silly.

Frankly, I am tired of this post. I think my points constructive -- otherwise I would not have brought them forth at all.

Fortunately, it's your right to choose whether or not to read my or anyone else's posts. And it's your and my right to choose whether or not to reply. I could write something meaningless if I want to. Plus you might find meaning where another would not.

I was not confronting Laurie based on her prior posts. I just thought that because she had opinionated posts, she could handle a reply.

I've already repeated myself way too much here. I've said my peace -- and I'm only losing sleep because I'm pregnant and because my sister has breast cancer.

Leah

[jjbeck]

Geeze Leah. Sorry to hear about your sister having breast cancer. Not something you want to have to deal with if you have an HG pg....Not something anyone wants to deal with at all. My sister had breast cancer too. She had to have a mastectomy as well as chemo etc. There was one med that helped greatly though. Tamophen or something. I know how difficult trying to cope with a family member struggling with cancer can be. I have had many family members with cancer. Does your sister know about macrobiotics? I know it has a rep as seeming like a crunchy lifestyle, but truthfully it works wonders. If you want to know more you can email me or IM me at anytime...or if you just need some emotional support.
Take care,
Jen

[leah44]

Hi Jen,

I've sat down to reply a few times only to cry each time. Thanks for your words and offer of support. My sister just finished chemo & starts radiation in a few weeks. I was unable to help her during the toughest times due to HG but now I'm feeling a lot better & able to be by her side much more. I don't know about whether she would be interested in a macrobiotic diet -- I am a vegan and she laughs at me for doing that all the time. However, any type of life threatening disease tends to change people so we'll see.

I might take you up on your offer of support. Fortunately, I am very lucky -- as is she -- we both have lots of family and friends. But, it is always nice to talk with someone who has been through a similar situation.

Glad to read that your sister is okay. Tamoxiphen has been a real cure-all, I hear. I'm sorry to read that you've had so much cancer in your family. I hope no one is battling it right now.

I should have been tested before becoming pg but didn't know that. My sister found the cancer weeks after I became pregnant. Now, I have to decide what to do regarding bf. I'd like to do so for a year -- like I did with my 1st -- but because my sister has breast cancer, I'm kind of at odds with what to do. I'd like to be able to get a mammogram & feel assured that I am cancer-free. I'm 37 and am uncomfortable waiting until 39 before being able to get tested properly, esp. since she discovered her cancer she was 39. I'd like to be able to be here for my sons & now I'm really scared. As I've said so many times, early detection is the key.

Thanks again.

Leah

[aaronsmommy]

This must be so scary for you, I can't imagine. I am gald you shared your struggles and I hope it can help us bring a healing conclusion to the discussions that have been a bit disturbing to some of us here and more importantly help you find some support here.

I have been thinking about this, and was reluctant to post, but I was hoping I could add a different perspective to what has been discussed. The study (I included the abstract below) that was originally posted studied women with both BRCA1 and BRCA2 and found the dramatic effect for BRCA1 and none for BRCA2. There are lots of studies suggesting a benefit for all women, but nothing like the magnitude of effect for people with BRCA1. There are other families with a higher risk of breast cancer who don't have either of these genes. No one has studied how breastfeeding effects their risk of getting cancer, it may have a huge effect, or none at all, but considering that it is really hard to find anything that you can do to actually change your risk of getting breast cancer, I would think that until we know more, breastfeeding should be condidered an important preventative measure (unless you know you have brca2).

The difficulty with screening during pg or bf, is mostly a matter of education. Lumps are not normal at anytime, and a workup shouldn't be delayed, but both women and doctors do delay. There is no reason that you can't get a mammogram during breastfeeding. It may be a bit harder to interpret (although this seems mostly like speculation I couldn't find any studies that actually show this - would be happy to share the few references I found if you want), or a bit more painful, but that isn't a reason not to get one.
For you, maybe you could even arrange to get the mammogram right after you deliver and before your milk comes in. Or, there is a recent study about MRI for breast cancer (I included the abstract), it may take a bit of effort to find a radiologist comfortable with this, but it sounds like it could be a great option!

I wish you and your sister al the best as you face this difficult time.

Aimee


As an aside, I found this great link discussing testing for brca1 and brca2 that you may find interesting.
http://cis.nci.nih.gov/fact/3_62.htm

This is the reference on MRI:

N Engl J Med. 2004 Jul 29;351(5):427-37.

Comment in:
N Engl J Med. 2004 Jul 29;351(5):497-500.

 
Efficacy of MRI and mammography for breast-cancer screening in women with a familial or genetic predisposition.

Kriege M, Brekelmans CT, Boetes C, Besnard PE, Zonderland HM, Obdeijn IM, Manoliu RA, Kok T, Peterse H, Tilanus-Linthorst MM, Muller SH, Meijer S, Oosterwijk JC, Beex LV, Tollenaar RA, de Koning HJ, Rutgers EJ, Klijn JG; Magnetic Resonance Imaging Screening Study Group.

Rotterdam Family Cancer Clinic, Department of Medical Oncology, Erasmus Medical Center-Daniel den Hoed Cancer Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: The value of regular surveillance for breast cancer in women with a genetic or familial predisposition to breast cancer is currently unproven. We compared the efficacy of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) with that of mammography for screening in this group of high-risk women. METHODS: Women who had a cumulative lifetime risk of breast cancer of 15 percent or more were screened every six months with a clinical breast examination and once a year by mammography and MRI, with independent readings. The characteristics of the cancers that were detected were compared with the characteristics of those in two different age-matched control groups. RESULTS: We screened 1909 eligible women, including 358 carriers of germ-line mutations. Within a median follow-up period of 2.9 years, 51 tumors (44 invasive cancers, 6 ductal carcinomas in situ, and 1 lymphoma) and 1 lobular carcinoma in situ were detected. The sensitivity of clinical breast examination, mammography, and MRI for detecting invasive breast cancer was 17.9 percent, 33.3 percent, and 79.5 percent, respectively, and the specificity was 98.1 percent, 95.0 percent, and 89.8 percent, respectively. The overall discriminating capacity of MRI was significantly better than that of mammography (P<0.05). The proportion of invasive tumors that were 10 mm or less in diameter was significantly greater in our surveillance group (43.2 percent) than in either control group (14.0 percent [P<0.001] and 12.5 percent [P=0.04], respectively). The combined incidence of positive axillary nodes and micrometastases in invasive cancers in our study was 21.4 percent, as compared with 52.4 percent (P<0.001) and 56.4 percent (P=0.001) in the two control groups. CONCLUSIONS: MRI appears to be more sensitive than mammography in detecting tumors in women with an inherited susceptibility to breast cancer. Copyright 2004 Massachusetts Medical Society


Here's the abstract from the original study:

Breast-feeding and the risk of breast cancer in BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers.

Jernstrom H, Lubinski J, Lynch HT, Ghadirian P, Neuhausen S, Isaacs C, Weber BL, Horsman D, Rosen B, Foulkes WD, Friedman E, Gershoni-Baruch R, Ainsworth P, Daly M, Garber J, Olsson H, Sun P, Narod SA.

Jubileum Institute, Department of Oncology, Lund University Hospital, Lund, Sweden.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported that the risk of breast cancer decreases with increasing duration of breast-feeding. Whether breast-feeding is associated with a reduced risk of hereditary breast cancer in women who carry deleterious BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations is currently unknown. METHODS: We conducted a case-control study of women with deleterious mutations in either the BRCA1 or the BRCA2 gene. Study participants, drawn from an international cohort, were matched on the basis of BRCA mutation (BRCA1 [n = 685] or BRCA2 [n = 280]), year of birth (+/-2 years), and country of residence. The study involved 965 case subjects diagnosed with breast cancer and 965 control subjects who had no history of breast or ovarian cancer. Information on pregnancies and breast-feeding practices was derived from a questionnaire administered to the women during the course of genetic counseling. Conditional logistic regression analyses were used to estimate odds ratios (ORs) for the risk of breast cancer. All statistical tests were two-sided. RESULTS: Among women with BRCA1 mutations, the mean total duration of breast-feeding was statistically significantly shorter for case subjects than for control subjects (6.0 versus 8.7 months, respectively; mean difference = 2.7 months, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.4 to 4.0; P<.001). The total duration of breast-feeding was associated with a reduced risk of breast cancer (for each month of breast-feeding, OR = 0.98, 95% CI = 0.97 to 0.99; P(trend)<.001). Women with BRCA1 mutations who breast-fed for more than 1 year were less likely to have breast cancer than those who never breast-fed (OR = 0.55, 95% CI = 0.38 to 0.80; P =.001), although no such association was seen for BRCA2 (OR = 0.95, 95% CI = 0.56 to 1.59; P =.83). CONCLUSIONS: Women with deleterious BRCA1 mutations who breast-fed for a cumulative total of more than 1 year had a statistically significantly reduced risk of breast cancer.

[emily]

Well, I too will be leaving this forum.

I am not happy with this thread one bit.

I wish you all the best of luck. This message board is supposed to be about HG. As I am not currently pregnant I don't really feel I need to be here and if I do face HG again and if it comes even close to what it was the first time around, I will not be able to post during my pg, so I really see no need to be here.

I am very disappointed indeed, but that is how things go.

I wish you all the best! Even you Leah. You are in a place right now where you can't see clearly and anything anyone says to you is going to go right in one ear and right out the other. We have all been there so I do understand. Hopefully you can use your experiences to help others rather than to pick on people in the future. GL!

Emily

[jjbeck]

Leah, there is always someone in my family struggling w/ cancer. My sister still has it though it is on her spine. Even after she had a mastectomy and relapsing cancer...she still has trouble w/ docs taking new complaints seriously. Just a few years ago she had a great deal of shoulder pain....they kept dismissing it...finally they told her it was dislocated....she thought it odd as she did nothing to dislocate her shoulder and it kinda was a gradual thing Any way turns out it was another tumor.
I have tons of lumps in my breasts all differ sizes right now...pea to marble sz. I asked my doc about them and she just smiled and said they were milk ducts....I just kind of sighed. I have been struggling with other health issues postpardum and really did not want to push the issue. I know it kind of seems foolish. My view on cancer is different than you my expect. I believe in prevention as well as the bodys ability to heal it self. I have been doing a semimacro diet as well as seeing an osteopath who has been helping a great deal.
Anyway...I here if you need me.

Aimee, I agree BFing can be a great preventitive measure in breast cancer. This topic was actually on fox news last weekend and I had heard it before. I think anything a person does that the body was meant to do is good prevention when it comes to cancer..including HAVING BABIES.
To me most of what some of these studies conclude seem to be common sense and I dont always understand why the heck so much $$$ needed to be spent coming up w/ such an obvious conclusion, but the problem I see is that just as fast as these studies come out there is another disproving it. To me that doesnt make a difference, but to those trying to make imp decisions. it may be confusing and make things more difficult.

[leah44]

I really want to thank both Aimee & Jen for your support & help.

Aimee, those studies are definitely informative. I do plan on doing a lot more research before giving birth in Nov. I really appreciate the obvious length of thought & research that went into your reply.

Jen, I really hope your sister makes it through this. My sister is on anti-depressants right now & that really helps her - maybe you should suggest that. I too am here for you anytime. I think we have similar situations -- I too have medical problems that are unresolved (and will never be resolved) and I am a vegan (and hoping that helps prevent cancer). My e-mail is listed so please feel free to e-mail anytime.

I do agree with Emily on one thing (and maybe one thing only) and that is that this is an HG board. I didn't mean for this topic to go so far astray. I was just trying to defend my position.

I am barely suffering from HG these days and had such an easy time bf (despite HG) last time that I thought I might be able to help. I know a lot of people helped me during my HG & I wanted to possibly help others. I signed up to be a buddy to do the same thing. However, when I got on this topic, I saw Laurie's post, read the article, and wrote the reply. I definitely went off the HG track but so did Laurie.

Emily, I think it's funny that you accuse me of being harsh when you are judging and being critical of me. I seriously could care less if you still post or not from a personal perspective but if you are helping others, then you should remain.

I see things very clearly. I see that there are people on the board who actually try to understand what's going on & try to help. Thanks again Jen & Aimee. I am done with this topic though. I'm obviously upsetting people (i've just read other posts on the bf board & see that i've stirred up some trouble) and since this topic obviously has nothing to do with HG, what I've started I will end. I wish everyone the best.

Leah