Nearly 20 percent of women and eight percent of men with lung cancer have never smoked, say researchers involved in a study of one million people in the United States and Sweden. The likely culprit in these lung cancer cases is secondhand smoke.

It's not yet clear why women are more likely to develop the disease. Perhaps they are more susceptible to all forms of smoking -- whether direct or secondhand -- or maybe because more men smoke than women, women are more likely to be exposed to secondhand smoke.

While smoking is the leading cause of lung cancer, there are other factors to blame for disease incidence. Radon, asbestos, chromium, and arsenic are all associated with lung cancer.

According to the American Cancer Society, lung cancer will be diagnosed in 213,000 Americans in 2007. The disease will kill 160,000.

It's not surprising marathon runners face an increased risk of skin cancer due to long-term sun exposure. What's surprising is that so many are not taking measures to protect themselves from the sun's damaging rays.

A team of Austrian researchers, all of them dermatologists, became interested in studying long-distance runners when they realized they had collectively treated eight ultra-marathon runners with malignant skin cancer over a period of 10 years. All researchers are themselves enthusiastic runners, and two of them participate in marathons. The topic was near and dear to their hearts.

Research was conducted on white runners, so it is unclear if the findings -- listed below -- apply to black runners.

• Only 56 percent of runners in the study reported wearing sunscreen. Most were unaware of the increased risk to their skin -- and even the running researchers report it is good to be reminded to wear the right gear and regularly use sunscreen

• Many runners race with a lot of skin exposed. And sometimes training clothing covers different areas than racing clothing. Shoulders that are covered during training may be exposed during the long hours of a marathon. During triathlons, most wear a bathing suit for the duration of the event, leaving most skin susceptible to burning. Runners can lower their risk by training during morning and evening hours and wearing water-resistant sunscreen. They can wear clothing made of new fabrics that screen harmful ultraviolet rays.

• It's possible that endurance athletes may have suppressed immune systems caused by repeated tissue damage, leaving them more vulnerable to skin cancer.

While some marathon runners take pride in a bronzed skin -- proof they are running in the elements -- researchers hope runners will consider the risk they face. In some races, volunteers offer to quickly apple sunscreen on athletes who don't want to lose precious seconds as they race for the finish line. It's a start.

Knowing the skin damage that results from prolonged sun exposure needed to achieve the golden tan, many fair-skinned people are staying out of the sun and turning to spray on or sunless lotion tans. These fake tans are skin dyes that do not change or darken skin pigmentation the way the sun might, but do give a temporary look of a glowing tan complexion. Advances have been made to these products so that the olden days of orange palms and streaky uneven lotion marks from sunless lotions are a mere memory, but still, it's not a real tan.

What if you could achieve a real tan, a tan where the skin pigmentation actually changes and darkens the same as it would if you spent hours in the sun, without spending hours in the sun exposing yourself to the premature aging, wrinkling and increased skin cancer risk damages of ultraviolet (UV) radiation?

In addition, what if this product, in actually darkening the pigmentation of your skin, provided protection from UV sun damage?

Although still in the experimental stages, scientists are working on just such a lotion, using a plant extract called forskolin, that prompts the pigmentation of the skin to darken. While the efforts are said to be focused on the treatment of individuals with medical pigmentation disorders -- if forskolin proves safe -- could a commercial product using the same compounds that safely promote a darkening of skin pigmentation -- a real tan -- and skin cancer prevention -- be far behind?

I am wandering through the BC Cancer Foundation website to post on the upcoming Weekend to End Breast Cancer and I noticed The Underwear Affair annual fundraiser. Is it just me that has taken notice, but do some organizations just know how to make fundraising more fun than other organizations? You can ask people to donate money, but so many charities are asking for donations, and while each is a good cause, there is a certain burn-out factor and charity fatigue that can set in when people are constantly solicited for money. Why not offer an event that is unique and fun to participate in and age-related -- like The Underwear Affair, or a service in exchange for a donation like the college kids do in Odd Jobs Humanitarians?

The Underwear Affair was launched this year, and in the first year they raised over $500,000 for below the waist cancers -- that according to the organizers of this event state -- are the embarrassing to talk about cancers -- prostate, colorectal, ovarian, testicular, bladder, cervical, and uterine cancers. The Underwear Affair hosted a 10K Run/5K Walk, followed by live bands, DJs and a dance, pole dance lessons and the bedtime EXPOsed afterparty. A contest was held for the best underwear costumes at the party, drawings for two new Vespas and a trip for two to Honolulu, Hawaii.

What do you wear to The Underwear Affair 10K Run/5K Walk and EXPOsed afterparty? Well, you can wear whatever makes you comfortable -- which might be exercise clothing. But you are encouraged to have fun, and the event planners suggest anything from trashy lingerie to your favorite well-worn plaid robe. That's the point. The encouragement of fun in raising money for cancer research into cancers below the waist and using frivolity to destigmatize cancers that embarrass some people. Hats off to The Underwear Affair!

It is a well-known research-based fact that women who breastfeed have a decreased risk for developing breast and ovarian cancer. Which makes the story of Victoria's Secret nebulous breastfeeding policy and the unfortunate experience of a breastfeeding mother from Wisconsin relevant.

Rebecca Cook was shopping with a friend at a Victoria's Secret store last week when she asked if she could use a dressing room to breastfeed her baby. The store clerk told her no and led Cook and her infant to an employee restroom. Cook says when the clerk opened the bathroom door, the inside of the bathroom was disgusting. At that, Cook told the clerk "No, I don't eat in the bathroom and my daughter doesn't eat in the bathroom."  According to Cook, the stork clerk told her that using the dressing rooms for the purpose of breastfeeding would be unsanitary because people change in them.

Cook, with other nursing mothers, staged a breastfeeding sit-in protest outside the Victoria's Secret store. They believe that a company that has made their fortune from breasts is discriminating against nursing mothers. In addition to the protest in Wisconsin, similar protests were held in front of Victoria's Secret stores in several states by nursing mothers who have been denied the right to breastfeed in a public place.

Breastfeeding being unsanitary is absurd and I have to question the attitude and motive of the sales clerk who handled Cook's request for a dressing room, or even just a place to sit in the back of the dressing room hallway, by leading her to an unclean employee restroom as the only place to breastfeed her infant. Victoria's Secret needs to make it abundantly clear they support nursing mothers who shop in their stores. If breastfeeding is a health benefit for the mother in cancer prevention, and she chooses to breastfeed her baby for the many benefits to her baby's health and her own, is she supposed to stay home for a solid year or more until she is done breastfeeding? What do you think?   

What are the odds? Six women working in the same hospital laboratory have been diagnosed with cancer -- and one of the women has already died. Naturally, the other five women are nervous. During the 1970s and 1980s, six women worked together as technicians in the sterile environment of the Mission Memorial Hospital searching for infections or evidence of diseases like leukemia, identifying electrolytes and white blood counts. Within a span of four years, one by one, all six were diagnosed with cancer.

According to one of the six women diagnosed with breast cancer, they were exposed to hazardous toxins and toxic fumes as maintenance workers burned biohazardous medical wastes, plastic IV bags and tubes, petrie dishes, syringes, and infectious materials in the incinerator near the lab. The Occupational Health and Safety Agency for Healthcare in B.C. (OHSAH) recently conducted a preliminary investigation of 63 technicians and acknowledges there is a cancer cluster tied to the lab. Further investigation is needed to determine the extent of the damage caused to the health of all those exposed. Of the 63 lab workers, the cancers include -- breast, ovarian, liver, thyroid, lymphoma, and skin cancer. If you would like to read more on how this could happen, and what exactly the maintenance workers were burning that created the toxic fumes, go here.