Discussions about cancer often include mention of age. We talk about how old someone is at diagnosis, how old a person is at each year of survival, the age of an individual at the time cancer claims his or her life. Age reveals a lot. It dumps us into statistical categories. Most patients diagnosed with gallbladder cancer, for example, are older than 65. Age sometimes predicts prognosis. Young women diagnosed with breast cancer tend to have more aggressive forms of the disease. This can compromise chances for survival. Age also solicits judgments. "You are too young," some people told me after learning I'd been diagnosed with breast cancer.

I think about my age all the time. I think about how I was 34 when I found my lump, how I happily arrived at age 35, how I made it to 36, and how today, I am 37. Come November, I will have survived my disease for three years. Three years will remain before I make it out of my 30s and land on 40 -- the age when women should begin receiving regular annual mammograms.

I didn't ask for much this year for my birthday. A candle, a bathing suit, dinner out with my husband, and time with family are all I really want -- because the best gift has already arrived. I turned 37.

When I told my husband that the use of cannabis is being linked to a five percent increase in lung cancer risk -- that's 15 new cases each year in New Zealand where a study was just conducted -- he seemed to think this risk is comparable to his dying from a grasshopper landing in his eye.

A scientist John is not, but his thoughts on the matter seem to parallel international thinking on the drug which goes something like this: the risk marijuana use has on cancer incidence is so very low it's hardly worthy of much worry.

A California study of more than 1600 people last year found no link between cancer and smoking the drug, despite researchers' prediction they would find some kind of connection.

New Zealand researchers have found a connection, though, and however small it may seem, they say it's significant.

They found the risk of developing lung cancer increased by about eight percent each year for people whose cumulative exposure equated to smoking one joint per day -- about the same as the increase for someone who smokes one pack of cigarettes per day. They also found the younger someone starting smoking cannabis, the greater the risk and that contributing risk factors include smokers' deeper inhalation and the tendency to hold smoke in their lungs.

Cannabis, the most commonly used recreational drug in the world with 161 million users, has been thought to have a protective effect against cancer due to its chemical THC, which appears to kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous. This study may prove otherwise.

As evidence mounts, it's becoming more and more clear that chemo brain, a mental fogginess that can result from chemotherapy, is a real concern and not just a convenient excuse cancer patients use to explain away their flighty and forgetful tendencies. It seems the brain really can suffer cognitive damage from the poisonous drugs that fight off deadly cancer cells. And sometimes, this damage is present years after treatment.

Add to chemo brain the normal aging process as well as brain conditions such as mild cognitive impairment and even schizophrenia and the brain might not stand a chance of ever remembering anything. Unless we buy into the new concept of mental training -- somewhat like physical fitness training -- in which case we may be able to bring back a level of sharpness to our lives.

Research suggests this type of training may delay mental decline. And Betty Hall, 85, who is taking a brain fitness class at her senior living complex in Illinois, says brain-enhancing activities are definitely helping her.

Hall is participating in an eight-week program where she spends one hour per day, five days per week using a computer to match words and listen for details in stories. She says it's helping her remember where she places her keys and her grocery lists -- and it's even helping her in her bridge club.

"I've won four times out of the last five at bridge club, and I think the players are going to shoot me because I keep remembering the cards people have," she said. "It's much easier for me to concentrate . . . and I brag about it everywhere I go."

One clinical professor of neurology says brain health programs will explode over the next few years because of the stunning findings on this front. One study shows relatively short training regimens, lasting just five or six weeks, improve functioning for as long as five years. And booster sessions help advance these gains. Study participants says their everyday tasks, like managing finances, are much easier after mental workouts. Another study of the computer software Hall uses shows the program shaves an average 10 years off the mental age of users.

Not all mental training is alike, and different cognitive difficulties may call for different training protocols. But the simple fact that I can work out my brain like I can work out my body gives me hope that I can possibly reverse the effects of chemotherapy on my own foggy brain, that I can one day not worry anymore that I might find my check book in the refrigerator and my cell phone in my sock drawer. Bring on the workouts!

Thanks to Bev, my brainy friend, for this story tip!

In 1971, when it was evident cancer deaths were rising, President Nixon and Congress declared a war on cancer. Finally, after 35 years, it seems we are winning the war.

Experts say the absolute decline in cancer deaths is quite amazing -- because our population is both growing and aging, both of which could contribute to an increased cancer death rate. But prevention, early detection, and early treatment are working wonders and are saving lives for three of the most common cancers -- breast cancer, prostate cancer, and colorectal cancer. More and more men are also surviving lung cancer due to cessation of smoking more than 20 years ago. The female lung cancer death rate is not declining, however, due to continued high rates of smoking.

The highest drop in deaths among the major cancers was for colorectal cancer -- thanks to effective screening methods. Deaths dropped by 1,110 for men and 1,094 for women.

According to an American Cancer Society review of U.S. death certificates, cancer deaths declined by 369 between the years 2002 and 2003. Between 2003 to 2004, the decrease was 3,014 -- more than eight times greater.

Experts predict cancer deaths will continue to decline over the years -- although some expect the obesity epidemic, which increases risk for all cancers, to pop the cancer death rate back up in the long run.

The earlier a cancer is detected, the greater the chances for cancer survival. One of the problems in surviving colon cancer is that people are reluctant to undergo colonoscopies, and therefore, colon cancer is not always detected in its earliest stages before symptoms develop.

Mount Sinai School of Medicine and EXACT Sciences Corporation are publishing study findings that show a DNA stool test can accurately predict colorectal cancer 88 percent of the time, regardless of where in the colon the cancer is located.

"This study confirms that stool-based DNA technologies can achieve high sensitivities for detecting colorectal cancer," stated Steven Itzkowitz, M.D., principal investigator and Professor and Associate Director of Gastroenterology at Mount Sinai School of Medicine. "For those individuals who are unwilling or unable to undergo colonoscopy, stool DNA testing offers a valuable and patient-friendly screening option. These results also underscore that as new markers and technologies are developed and validated, they can readily be incorporated into existing stool DNA tests to improve cancer detection and, ultimately, patient outcomes."

According to statistics, colorectal cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in the U.S. and more than half of the over 80 million people over the age of 50 have never been screened. I agree with the researchers who suggest that it is time to develop new non-invasive technologies for colorectal screening.

Breast cancer survivor, actress and anti-pharmaceutical advocate Suzanne Somers, author of Ageless: The Naked Truth About Bioidentical Hormones, suggests that if she had it to do over again, she would not undergo radiation treatment for breast cancer. During an interview Somers shares information on bioidentical hormones with The Desert Sun's Bruce Fessier, Somers is quoted as saying, "The whole time I was lying on that radiation table and I was so sick from it, I kept thinking, isn't it radiation that gives us cancer? I couldn't get that thought out of my mind."

At the time of her breast cancer diagnosis, Somers researched Iscador, a mistletoe extract, and chose to include the alternative therapy as part of her treatment. Somers said she refused to give up her hormones, insisting that she knew more about hormones than the doctor treating her for cancer.

Somers has critics in the medical and pharmaceutical communities, and perhaps rightly so. Manipulating hormones with bioidentical hormone therapy is not nearly as simplistic as she makes it sound, nor is cancer.

In her defense, while she does hold some unorthodox beliefs about health and cancer treatment, she readily adds that her approach to health is not something she advocates for everyone. Even with that caveat, people must be interested in what she has to say, as most of her books become bestsellers. Without a formal medical education and scientific expertise to back up what she has to say, I am not certain why so many seem to be listening.

I understand cancer is a scary diagnosis, and current treatments including chemotherapy, radiation and chemoprevention drugs are an inexact science. Not everyone diagnosed with cancer is cured. But cancer is also not a disease that allows the patient a great deal of time to experiment with various treatments.

As a breast cancer survivor, with a keen interest in cancer and cancer treatments, I believe there is a place for some alternative treatments. I also believe, in time, that some of the current conventional treatments will be replaced with more effective treatments. I am relatively certain that Suzanne Somers is a lovely woman. However, I try to chose my authority figures and the experts whose advice I value very carefully. Your thoughts?

I remember thinking when my grandma was a spunky 80-year-old -- still going to aerobics classes in her purple tights -- that it must be sad to be such an age when so many friends and acquaintances are falling ill and passing away. My grandma was always one to care for others, call on others, pray for others -- and often she seemed to be the only one in her circle who was thriving. Somehow, she took it all in stride and continued baking and gardening and sewing and living strong until her own death at the age of 86 -- when she left her remaining friends and acquaintances wondering if their own time on Earth was approaching a quick end. At the time, I thought this loss of friends was merely a side effect of aging. It didn't seem to concern me at my own young age of 30. I didn't really know any 30-year-olds who were dying. And I didn't predict anyone my age would be dying until I was closer to the age of 80. How wrong I was.

I am now 36 years old. And I know many women my age who have died -- most of them because of breast cancer, the same disease I have been fighting for nearly two years. So it's not only sad to me that people my age are dying, it's also quite personal and frightening -- for it could easily me in the same predicament. So I feel vulnerable -- so many years earlier than I imagined.

I think I know how my grandma must have felt when her loved ones were leaving her. And I think I will take her same approach to coping with this unfortunate fact of life. Although I couldn't possibly bake and garden and sew like she did, I can keep busy with my own hobbies and interests. And I can continue living strong until my own death -- which hopefully won't occur until after I've made my appearance in purple tights. About 50 years from now.

No one is suggesting that men start taking aspirin for prostate health if they are not already taking aspirin or other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) for other reasons. However, Mayo Clinic researchers do say that men who are already taking a daily dose of aspirin might be enjoying a better level of prostate health. According to researchers, aspirin seems to prevent or delay an enlarged prostate that can lead to urinary difficulties such as frequent urination, trouble urinating, weak urine stream and an urgent need to urinate.

While the researchers cannot state why NSAIDs benefit prostate health for benign prostatic hyperplasia, previous research has indicated aspirin provides certain prostate cancer prevention benefits. Many older adults already take aspirin, or other NSAIDs, for heart health and arthritis, and taking aspirin now appears to offer another added benefit in prostate health for men. Aspirin is not without its downside. Researchers do warn that taking aspirin can lead to stomach ulcers. As with any drug, one has to weigh the risk against the benefit.

I have heard the term chemobrain many times -- even here at The Cancer Blog when Dalene wrote about it. And I've started using the terminology myself -- to explain my new-found odd behavior. Like when I put a carton of ice cream in the refrigerator with no recollection of it. And when I took a cap off a pen, couldn't find it, and discovered it on top of an egg carton in the refrigerator. I don't think this is a refrigerator theme -- just a coincidence -- because I've also lost a clipboard at work, forgotten to hand a guest her glass of water immediately after I prepared it, lost library books and movies, and failed to remember responsibilities time and time again. This may seem like minor forgetfulness -- this is what my oncologist believes may be at work -- but for me, this is odd. I have always had a good memory, have always delivered on my promises, and have never felt as scattered as I do now. So I call it chemobrain -- a good excuse, I figure -- and am now trying to determine what exactly this word means.

My oncologist tells me he doesn't really like this term. He thinks it puts a negative spin on regular functioning. He believes those of us who have experienced chemotherapy look more closely at our post-chemo behavior and may interpret quirky stuff as more serious than it is. It probably existed before chemotherapy, he says. But now, we are more sensitive to it and find chemotherapy a good explanation. He may be right. But for me, something in my head has definitely been altered.

One patient advocate for Hurricane Voices: A Breast Cancer Foundation believes that something doesn't have to be scientifically proven to exist. And while chemobrain may not be completely proven, there are still studies that support its existence -- which manifests itself through aging-type memory problems, forgetfulness, distraction, and loss of the ability to calculate quickly. Some studies show that 20 to 30 percent of women who undergo chemotherapy for breast cancer, and some who receive similar treatment for lymphoma, score lower than average on mental function tests for as long as 10 years after chemotherapy. ''There's enough data now to at least know it's a real effect,'' said Dr. Ian F. Tannock, a psychiatrist who has studied this issue at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto. Some suggest that typical aging may be at fault -- and for premenopausal women who may be rushed into menopause, this effect may be due to hormonal issues. Regardless, it seems to stem from chemotherapy -- somehow. And somehow, this topic needs more attention, more research, and maybe a more positive name.

Cancer is not an inevitable outcome in the process of aging, but the older a person gets, the greater the odds for developing cancer. Aging have long been known as one of the greatest risks to developing cancer -- and not one that anyone has ever been able to alter.

In the Times Online Sunday edition Sue Armstrong writes the most compelling and engaging article about a gene that has the power to stop cancer -- but right now it comes wrapped in a conundrum of potential consequence in unknown disaster. She refers to the power of p53, a genetic miracle worker, a power discovered by sheer error on the part of researchers who created mice without the gene known to protect humans from cancer. As expected, these mice developed cancer early and often. In a different group of mice researchers created mice with the gene but in a more active form than is usually found. What came next surprised everyone.

Britain's television and radio fitness guru Diana Moran recently shared her breast cancer experience in an interview with BBC News. Back in the 80's, Moran led a national campaign for health and fitness with a program called Get Britain Fit. She gained the nickname Green Goddess for her trademark green leotards. When she was diagnosed with breast cancer, she said it came as a complete surprise to her. She had never felt better. She had no symptoms that told her anything was wrong.

Because Moran, at 47, was entering menopause, she had gone to the doctor to see if she qualified for hormone replacement therapy (HRT). It was then she had a mammogram and breast cancer diagnosis followed. From disbelief, to fear, to anger, she searched for information but back then, no one talked about breast cancer and little information was available. Moran decided, as a high-profile personality, to keep her breast cancer diagnosis and double mastectomy private, and in retrospect she feels that was wrong. Five years after the cancer diagnosis, she found herself in counseling working through all the intense emotions she had buried in putting on a strong front and concealing all that she faced as a cancer survivor. Her message is to connect with others, be open, share what is going on.

Moran, now 66, is still going strong and is the published author of numerous fitness and beauty books focusing on women's issues, ageism, health, fitness and beauty; is a sought-after public speaker; and well-known celebrity with more than four decades of work in television and radio. She devotes a considerable amount of time to charities involving cancer, cerebral palsy and older people.

Republican Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon calls home DNA kits for cancer and other diseases as nothing more than modern day snake oil and he believes consumers are being misled and exploited.

Smith, chairman of the Senate Special Committee on Aging, released a report from the Government Accountability Office on home DNA test products. He stated he is shocked to learn how little the federal government is doing to protect consumers in awareness and education regarding the uselessness of these products.

According to a Congressional report, home DNA tests or nutrigenetic tests, are not clinically valid and companies selling them are making unproven and ambiguous health-related predictions.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services said they were investigating the companies to determine is oversight was needed.

Welcome back from the weekend! Here is a review of what we were talking about during the second week in July in our other health blogs.

From The Cardio Blog:

• Bucindolol: experimental heart failure drug.
• Mammograms can find heart health problems.
• Eggs: bad or not bad for heart health -- which is it?
• The clock of life and time of day determines heart health.
• Extreme obesity raises mortality rate in women.
• Austrailian stem cell research innovates new heart treatment.
• Public physical activity program helps weight loss, lower blood pressure.
• Tuna imported from Latin America has highest mercury level.
• Eating less helps slow aging process.
• Teens helped to learn healthy diet habits with household food rules.
• Volunteer work helps seniors stay active and healthy.
• Working overtime worse for womens health.
• Aging and single living combined linked to higher heart disease risk.
• Tubby kids motivated to exercise by reward of TV time.
• Humidity and high temps linked to rise in summer heart attacks.
• Comedian Red Button dies of vascular disease.
• Migraine aura linked to increased heart attack stroke risk.
  

From The Diabetes Blog:

• Martial arts black belt uses youth group to fight diabetes.
• FDA approves GlaxoSmithKline diabetes drug.
• Pink Floyd Syd Barrett dies from diabetes complications.
• Update on fatal NC car crash involving diabetic driver.
• Major study links Type 2 diabetes and glaucoma risk.
• Life insurance industry plays catch-up.
• A1c Champions program trains diabetes mentors.
• Danish study confirms suspected diabetes, multiple sclerosis link.
• Debate continues on virtues, shortcomings of inhalable insulin, Exubera.
• Blogger's advice to T2 diabetics: follow in footsteps of movie producer Weinstein.
• Diabetes, obesity blamed for sky-high US kidney failure rates.
• Canadians await approval of inhalable insulin.
• Lifestyle ed could greatly reduce diabetes onset in older Americans, say researchers.

To your good health! To a great week!

If you count yourself among the working poor, or one of the vanishing middle-class in a constant struggle to make ends meet, do not read this -- it is not going to cheer you up.

The most significant and unavoidable risk factor that increases the chance of being diagnosed with cancer is the aging process. The older we get, the more susceptible we are to developing cancer. Because of this fact, research into the aging process, how we age, and why we age -- even if the research is not specifically looking at the link between aging and increased cancer risk -- still might one day provide some insight into the potential for reducing cancer risks associated with aging.

From the Homer Simpson D'oh Research Institute comes the results of a study ... No, wait. I'll start again. Baby boomers are aging. The largest percentage of cancer diagnosis occurs in the older population. When it comes to cancer, it is a true and unavoidable fact that the older one gets, the greater the risk for developing cancer.

One day, with continued advancements in prevention and research, that fact might change. But for now, that is where we are in the reality of cancer risks. The baby boomers, a generation born between 1946 and 1960, are reaching, in mass, people of a certain age. Old age. Don't say that to them. Baby boomers decided, upon reaching 40, that 40 was the new 30, and 50 was the new 40. But you can't fool mother nature, and like it or not, we are all getting older. The first baby boomers turn 60 this year.

Which brings me to the point of the isn't it obvious study from the Homer Simpson D'oh Research Institute.

With the healthcare system in crisis now -- with public and private providers scrambling to figure out how to pay for all the cancer treatments needed for all the patients who have been diagnosed with cancer now -- what is the future of healthcare going to look like, say in ten more years, as significant numbers of baby boomers continue to age and more get sick from age-related life-threatening diseases -- specifically cancer?

When it comes to baby boomers, it is difficult to predict. Since coming of age in the 1960s, they have influenced the cultural landscape as no other generation. They are, as a whole, innovatively affluent, and have in subtle ways, already begun to change the healthcare system. An example is the marketing hospitals do to attract baby boomers as patients with amenities unimagined in previous decades. Some hospitals now serve wine with the hospital meal.

Baby boomers are the premiere paradigm shifters. If there is no change in the current system, we are in terrible trouble in the next ten years. It will be interesting to watch how the baby boomers decide to define and shape the approach to health issues that old age brings. 

Disclaimer: The Homer Simpson D'oh Research Institute is an imaginary facility that does not conduct research because it doesn't exist in real life.