Discussion Board

Well, I don't have much time and have to look it over fast, but to me, it doesn't look that consistent or so strongly associated...

... as I said... I'm not defending drinking... I hate the stuff, myself, and have seen it ruin many lives... however... from what I hear about the world... everybody on earth, practically, seems to drink quite a bit.

There might be a dose-related increase, from one location to another, yet, I think, countrywise, some countries that drink heavily still have fairly consistently lower rates of breast cancer than a few others that might not even drink as heavily.

I have no stats to back up that thought, but I believe one can just observe what they see of the world and say it's a fair guess as to how it is.

Like I said... I don't drink, have always hated it. But something seems not quite right about that association... somethin' else is missing... just like with fat vs. breast cancer... not quite so evident. Same reason as with alcohol...neither seems to be the culprit, to my thinking, or at least not the entire culprit.., at least not that i've seen from general observation.

As far as any disease it usually works like this. Let's take breast cancer. Maybe alcohol consumption counts for a few percent of the cases, maybe fat intake counts for a few percent. Maybe smoking counts for a few percent, maybe lack of exercise, etc. So when you look at the different countries and allow for different lifestyles and diet they are going to be all over because all these risk factors are different in each place. Some will have only one or two risk factors, others may have many!!! (Like us) Looking for some single cause is probably futile.
f1jim

Of course...

and I'm not into looking for a single cause... but what I'm saying is some of these epidemiological reports don't amount to much useful information.

If I enjoyed alcohol... I wouldn't see enough here, compared to what I said above about just observing disease patterns vs. lifestyle patterns across the world... wouldn't really see enough that would bother me much about that.

Alcohol... to my thinking with what's been presented and what you can just see happening in the world... to my thinking, doesn't seem to be a big player... heavy drinkin' countries (some of them) have low breast cancer stats ...everybody has to make up their own minds about what constitutes safe vs. unsafe lifestyle choices, of course... but to me, some of these reports only add to all of the multitude of unanswered questions. I don't see much useful information coming from them at all. Just my humble, groundhog, extremely sober opinion, of course.

I hope you are not suggesting that your "passing glance" of the data provides a better understanding then...

" the largest and most comprehensive ever done on the relationship between lifestyle and cancer and involved over 100 scientists from 30 different countries whose content is derived from an independent panel of 21 world renowned scientists. The Expert Panel reviewed more than 7,000 large-scale studies and worked for five years to assess the research. Their conclusions and recommendations are firmly based on the available scientific evidence. "





Quite the contrary...

Alcohol intake and breast cancer risk: the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition (EPIC)
Cancer Causes and Control
Volume 18, Number 4 / May, 2007
Category Original Paper
DOI 10.1007/s10552-006-0112-9
Pages 361-373

Abstract
Objective Most epidemiologic studies have suggested an increased risk of breast cancer with increasing alcohol intake. Using data from 274,688 women participating in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study (EPIC), we investigated the relation between alcohol intake and the risk of breast cancer.

Methods Incidence rate ratios (IRRs) based on Cox proportional hazard models were calculated using reported intake of alcohol, recent (at baseline) and lifetime exposure. We adjusted for known risk factors and stratified according to study center as well as potentially modifying host factors.

Conclusion This large European study supports previous findings that recent alcohol intake increases the risk of breast cancer.

In Health
Jeff

LOL... well it could be.

Who are we quoting on that interpretation of the stats????

Anyway, when I had to rush through, which I'm also having to do right now, unfortunately, I didn't see that much that seemed like it was so big an association. Regardless, whoever quoted that... I won't argue.

What I would like to see, though, is if someone charted out rates of breast cancer globally, compared with rates of drinking habits globally.

That would be interesting... especially if they didn't leave a lot of places out of the charts.

I know there might be many complicating factors... only one of which would be differences in countries' screening, or whether they screen at all... but... that idea is likely to get us going in another direction... i.e., wehter cancers found through screening are best undiscovered... and people should treat only cancers with symptoms in most cases, or whether screening itself really does have any impact... another chart needed to have a look at that one...

Thanks for getting back with me!

grroundhog

The WHO, FAO and now the EPIC have done this and some of it is reported in the above study. A clear association.

In Health
Jeff

Ugh... trying to get away from email thismorning... LOL... I just can't resist when another one pops up there...

Anyway... Okay, so they've done this charting somewhere; I've never investigated it myself, I guess because I just never got curious enough, being a teetotler.

I will look into it some time when I've got the chance. I just hope the whole world is there, charted... including areas where there is little or no drinking at all. It would seem certain religious groups would have less breast cancer... although I know there are many causative factors... if the alcohol association is as strong as you are saying, then it seems it should be noticed among certain religions, lesser tendency... I haven't seen that, but I would like to see something like that charted out too. I'll have to look some day, but don't have access to stuff I used to, so don't know if I'll be able to track it down or not.

From what I can see, the entire world drinks... and a LOT. We Americans seem to have more difficulty handling the liquor and behaving ourselves at the same time than many other places... from personal observation.

Are you aware of any research indicating rats that enjoy wine, booze and beer have more breast cancer?

I've read that coffee-drinking rats have less breast cancer and more "boyfriends," hmmmm... wonder what the dumpsters at Starbucks are like on moonlit Saturday nights?????

International Agency for Research on Cancer
PRESS RELEASE
N° 175
28/03/2007

Breast and colorectal cancers are associated with alcohol consumption

Alcohol drinking has long been known to cause cancers of the oral cavity, pharynx, larynx, oesophagus, and liver (IARC Monographs Volume 44, 1988). The addition of breast cancer and colorectal cancer, two of the most common cancers worldwide, to this list indicates that the burden of cancer attributable to alcohol consumption is higher than previously thought.

"The scientific evidence relating alcohol drinking to an increased risk of cancer continues to grow as does the contribution of alcohol drinking to the global cancer burden. The clear association with increased risk of breast cancer associated with even modest levels of alcohol drinking is a major concern particularly in view of the changing drinking patterns of women in many countries.

Public Health action against alcohol consumption, especially excessive alcohol consumption, needs to be stepped up", said Dr Peter Boyle, Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC), the cancer research agency of the World Health Organization.

This is the newest evaluation from the IARC Monographs programme
In February, 2007, 26 scientists from 15 countries met at IARC in Lyon, France, to reassess the carcinogenicity of alcoholic beverages. This assessment will be published in volume 96 of the IARC Monographs. A summary of the meeting appears today in The Lancet Oncology (Carcinogenicity of alcoholic beverages, Robert Baan et al., Policy Watch, The Lancet Oncology, Volume 8, Issue 4 , April 2007, Pages 292-293) and on the Monographs programme website.

Alcohol one of the top-10 risks for health

...The WHO has identified alcohol drinking as one of the top-10 risks for global burden of disease. In 2002, more than 1900 million people (>=15 years of age) around the world were estimated to be regular consumers of alcoholic beverages, with an average daily intake of 13 g of ethanol (about one drink).

Targeted organs

The Working Group reviewed the epidemiological publications on the possible association between alcohol consumption and cancer at 27 anatomical sites.

More than 100 epidemiological studies that assessed the association between alcohol consumption and breast cancer in women consistently found an increased risk with increasing alcohol intake. A pooled analysis of 53 studies on more than 58 000 women with breast cancer showed that daily consumption of about 50 g of alcohol is associated with a relative risk of about 1.5 (95% confidence interval 1.3-1.6), compared with that in non-drinkers. Even for regular consumption of 18 g of alcohol per day, there is a small but statistically significant increase in relative risk.[/b]

Risk linked to alcohol, not to type of drink

As these associations were observed with different types of alcoholic beverages, and given the carcinogenicity of ethanol in animals, ethanol in alcoholic beverages was classified as "carcinogenic to humans (Group 1)".

Alcohol + Tobacco = multiplied risk.

The adverse effects of drinking and smoking do not simply add up, but seem to be multiplicative.


In Health
Jeff

Here's my take on the whole alcohol issue. In my opinion, I don't need any type of scientific study to tell me that alcohol is bad for the body. I've seen it destroy people I love...almost as if the alcohol was a cancer itself. And I do know of the joys and pleasures of drinking, at one time, I could drink anyone under the table. However, just because drinking can be social, relaxing and fun...doesn't mean it isn't bad for you. Anything that alters your mind and that your body literally has to detox (hangover) is not good for you. People can justify it all they want and lie to themselves all they want...I use to lie to myself about a lot of things, but the truth is....your body doesn't want or need it. Hey, each to his own on the drinking thing, I'm sure not here to judge or preach (I'd be the last person to do that), but lets not argue about whether or not alcohol is good or bad for you. Deep down, we all know the answer to that.

And thanks Jeff for the alcohol + tobacco information. I know that from experience too. I had NO IDEA how bad I felt or how bad a shape I was in until I quit smoking and drinking!! I feel like a totally different person than I use to, heck, I feel like a teenager again! Thank God the body is so miraculous and forgiving...if it weren't, I'd be 6 ft. under by now, or look like it anyway.

As I said, I've learned to be slow to process epidemiological reports... I just need to match what they say, what their interpretations of their numbers say, and what I see elsewhere... so, while i'm processing, but not convinced.. although I agree what we've seen from alcohol here in the U.s., there's some ruined lives and families because of it... yet, people I've known from some other places grew up drinking and never knew the difference... drank a lot more than most people here and remained responsible and kind, family-orietned, etc... so... I don't know if the whole world can be judeged in the same way...

Anyway... I'm supposed to already be en route to someplace else by now, but I found this interesting bunch of stats about who in the world drinks a lot and who abstains.

Looks like UK, Uganda, Nigeria, etc., the women outdrink those here... from this, it appears we don't drink very much here in the U.S.:

http://www.greenfacts.org/en/alcohol/fi ... table7.htm

I haven't had a chance to see where we are with abstainers:

http://www.greenfacts.org/en/alcohol/fi ... table6.htm

Gotta run... again, I'm not defending drinking.

But go to the Mediterranean areas and tell 'em this stuff, I think they would laugh out loud. Plus, they don't get breast cancer statistically like here in the U.S.

CAn't forget whatcha see with your own eyes...that has to make sense WITH the reports.

Once again, you refuse to acknowledge the real research and data. You are a drive-by commentator and value personal anecdotal info over hard research. You have time to ask questions but no time to respond to the answers someone took personal time to research for you. Then you shrug it off like it was valueless compared to your anecdotes. All the answers to your question were right their in front of you, pointed out twice, and you still don't really want to see it do you? Between this and a couple of your other threads it's clear you really have some other agenda besides an honest answer to your questions. READ THE DATA, or don't ask!!!
f1jim

No, I did look at the research... it's observational, not a controlled study, and the link is there, but weak.

Like, if the risk for the average woman is 3 percent for getting breast cancer, and she drinks and raises it by 30 percent... her risk goes to 4 percent of getting breast cancer. I'm saying it's not impressive... it seems weak and not a very big deal.

I'm afraid there are unanswered questions that make this sort of info not so helpful, in my thinking...

For one, populations that drink heavily don't seem to be the ones who have high rates of breast cancer always... some do, but then again, some don't match up right with what you would expect.

For another thing, sorry I don't have the stats before me, and as I said, no longer have free access to various journals/ monographs, etc., but from memory, I am fairly certain that alcoholic women in the U.S. have breast cancer no more than the ordinary population. I'm not saying what I remember is gospel... I'm saying since I remember it, if someone feels like it, they might dig it up... I know I could be wrong.

But overall... I am not impressed by this research that much. Researchers do like to interpret their results in a geniunely dramatic way, as we have seen from Atkins, for example... and one must often read the conclusions knowing that they are reporting what they wanted to report... but the numbers are not that impressive to me.

Sorry... that's what I'm seeing.

Groundhoggpeggy, hang in there. I'm not on your side of the argument, but Nortin M. Hadler, MD, author of Worried Sick, seems to sympathize with your point of view. I quote from pg. 58:

"Epidemiology falls flat on its face when it tries to tease minor exposures and minor health effects by observing all the glorious variability that is humanity. Biases and confounders lie in wait for any epidemiologist trying to tease minor events and influences out of the complexity of life. Condemnation lies in waiting for any epidemiologist who is willing to analyze data with the goal of supporting a preconceived notion ("data dredging") rather than testing a hypothesis."

Members of this forum may be less than impressed after they read this quote from pg. 62: "I am convinced that a low-fat diet is a silly way to seek a longer, healthier life."

And this final quote:"If I am teaching as intended, the reader will smirk."

It all depends on what you call a low-fat diet. That is such a vague term it could be interpreted many different ways. It is primarily used to refer to the ADA guidelines, which I think we all agree aren't very good. Lots of sugar and other refined carbohydrates are allowed with lots of animal products, fats and not very high in whole, unprocessed foods.

Michael