Despite the news that cancer is set to explode in Asia, it's appearing as if adopting an Asian-inspired lifestyle may be the key to warding off cancer. Apparently, Asian and western women share the same genes that have recently been linked to an increased chance of developing breast cancer, and yet women in the west are more likely to develop cancer.

Asian lifestyles have long been touted as a way to stay healthy. The typical Asian diet is low in fat, meat and overall calories, and high in vegetables and soy, which is a stark change from the mainly animal-based North American diet, one that revolved around processed foods.

All that said, I don't think I could live on a fully Asian-style diet. I mean, I love sushi and Thai and many other Asian foods, but giving up my cheese? Say it ain't so.

What do you think?

A bundle of scientific reports indicate more than 200 chemicals, found in the air and in consumer products, cause breast cancer in animal tests.

Researchers report in an American Cancer Society publication that reducing exposure to such compounds could prevent many women from developing the disease.

Family history and genetic make-up are responsible for only a small percentage of breast cancer cases. Environmental and lifestyle factors, such as diet, are most likely involved in the majority of cases, say experts.

I had no idea my February 10 post Some children's bath products linked to cancer would spark such great debate. At the very moment I write, the post has received more than 64,000 hits and 70 comments.

I must admit when the comments started rolling in, I was a bit nervous. Even though I merely reported the facts on this topic, had no claim to any of the information, and didn't even share my opinion on the matter, the highly charged words written by so many well-meaning readers made me feel a bit like I was caught in the middle, like I started an argument and needed to jump back in, sort things out, and create harmony among those responding to my words.

But then I realized debate is not such a bad thing. It sheds light on all sorts of valid viewpoints. It educates. It raises awareness. And that's what cancer causes are all about.

Having read all the comments that now are officially assigned to this one post, I am so much more enlightened than when I summarized the story I came across revealing that some bath products contain a bit too much of a chemical called 1,4-dioxane, a probable human carcinogen that is already known to cause cancer in animals.

All I really knew at the time I wrote the post is that the FDA has no regulation over this chemical and that cosmetic companies must monitor themselves. Some don't do such a good job, and herein lies the debate.

Some readers say big deal, what's the harm really in a little extra dash of chemical in a whole tub of water. Perhaps if our children soaked all day for many days in this chemical, cancer might strike. But a quick bath with a tiny trace of 1,4-dioxane is not likely to do any harm. One reader wrote that we shouldn't stress so much about headlines that scare us into believing everything causes cancer, that we'll probably live a whole lot longer just living our lives free of constant worry.

Another camp of readers say a little bit of something bad is still too much. Over the course of a lifetime, how do we know our children won't pay for our mistaken belief that this hype is just -- hype. Some cancer surviving readers wonder if their cancer was caused by their plentiful childhood bubble baths. And some go to great lengths to find natural, organic, chemical-free products, whatever the financial cost.

A few consultants for these natural products left their own comments, claiming to help those consumed with anxiety. Others scolded these business people for capitalizing on the fears of others with products that have not been proved any safer.

There are advocates of moderation who wrote. And individuals seeking more information. And people who located resources for others to investigate.

There is indeed a rich commentary on the link between bath products and cancer that follows one short post I wrote late one night, after my own children were bathed -- with Dove soap and generic shampoo -- and put to bed. And I am indeed happy to know my small contribution on the topic has generated such a powerful windfall of thought and concern.

Scientists from Harvard University and Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) are developing a tiny implant that will allow doctors to see what's happening with tumors from the inside out.

If all proceeds according to plan, doctors will one day be implanting tiny sensors inside tumors to determine whether or not cancer drugs are shrinking the tumors. The sensors will also determine whether or not tumors are growing.

Cancer specialists have long wished for better methods of measuring the success of drugs. While blood tests can show if a drug has reached the bloodstream, they don't reveal much about the tumor itself. This small silicone cube, no bigger than two millimeters on each side and embedded in a tumor or lymph node, would remain in the body throughout treatment while essentially broadcasting what's going on inside the tumor.

MIT scientists hope to begin animal experiments within months. Their goal is to one day make the implant as thin as the pieces of led used in mechanical pencils.

This research, funded by the National Cancer Institute, is part of a long-term project to make medical technologies that will cure cancer. It's all part of journey toward complete targeted cancer treatment. And this little implant will have the power to communicate whether or not these treatments are working.

In an analysis of animal research used to understand and treat human diseases, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine researchers found that using animals, such as mice, had limited value. Only half of the research done using animals translated into the same outcome for humans.

In a BBC News report over the controversy that rages regarding the wisdom of using animals in research, Professor Ian Roberts is quoted as saying, "The debate over this issue is really quite hysterical. At the moment, there is too much emotion and not much science. Anti-vivisectionists say animal testing is of no use at all, and those who do them say we would have no safe and effective treatments if we didn't." Lead researcher Roberts believes animal studies should be used, but not in all cases of research.

The value of animal research was catapulted to front page news headlines earlier this year when six men experienced tragic life-threatening side-effects as they participated in a human clinical trial of the drug TGN1412, which had previously been shown safe and effective during animal studies.

Last March, six healthy young men volunteered at Northwick Park Hospital in London as participants in a clinical trial for a drug called TGN1412, designed to treat leukemia, autoimmune and inflammatory diseases. According to the men, they were told by doctors there would be no serious short-term or long-term side effects. They were each paid £2,000. Within hours, the worst that could happen did, and the men were plunged into a nightmare beyond anything they could have imagined.

The headaches began, followed by convulsions, bloating, organ failure and comas. The men came to be known as the Elephant Men because of the swollen faces and chests they suffered. One of the men suffered gangrene -- all his toes and three of his fingers were amputated. He also suffered heart failure, kidney failure, pneumonia, septicaemia and liver failure. Recently, another participant was told he might be developing cancer as a result of the drug trial. All have been told to expect early death.

Do you feel that animal research used to test drugs and medical procedures meant to treat human ailments and diseases, are credible enough to continue, or do you believe that research using animals should be abandoned?

Steve, my rat terrier, has been having a problem with his eye for about two months. After four visits to two different veterinarians I was referred to the Red Bank Veterinary Hospital in North Jersey. What an amazing place. I did not know that a place like this existed. It was a real hospital but for animals. I was taking my dog to an animal hospital nearby but this was an entirely different experience. I wish I would have gotten him to this place sooner. I scheduled an appointment for their ophthalmologist, Michael J. Ringle, DVM. He knew what was wrong with Steve after about 5 minutes of examination. He used special equipment to look at his eyes and had a diagnosis and plan of action right away.

I was sad when I learned what Steve had was a degenerative eye disease and that without surgery he could go blind. I was however thrilled to get a diagnosis so quickly and actually was expecting them to tell me they didn't know what was wrong with Steve since I have been hearing that for two months. Steve will get surgery next Tuesday and I'm confident he will be fine under the care of Dr. Ringle.

What does this have to do with cancer? Well, when I was in the waiting room I met a women who was with her dog who was getting his second chemotherapy treatment. He was diagnosed with lymphoma. I was so impressed with this place that I wanted to share some information about what they offer at the Red Bank Veterinary Hospital.

The Red Bank Veterinary Hospital offers the most state-of-the-art medicine. RBVH has become the country's largest privately owned veterinary hospital with a general medicine and surgery practice, 24 hour emergency and critical care service, and specialty practice, which includes Avian and Exotics, Cardiology, Critical Care, Dentistry and Oral Surgery, Dermatology and Allergy, Internal Medicine, Neurology, Oncology/Radiation Therapy, Ophthalmology, and Surgery.

By virtue of his profession as a cancer research specialist, Joseph Harris, 26, a doctor of molecular biology, faced a moral dilemma and his solution found him guilty of breaking the law.

Harris, convicted under the Serious and Organized Crime Act, will be spending the next three years in jail. The Times Online, in Brilliant cancer scientist had double life as animal rights sab, features the clandestine life of Harris, whose work in discovering treatments and potential cures for gastro-intestinal and pancreatic cancers collided with his compassion as an animal rights activist and his passion for a girlfriend who dumped him because she disapproved of where his research would eventually lead -- to animal testing.

Harris pleaded guilty to causing damage to the premises of three companies connected to animal testing, and painting ALF (Animal Liberation Front) on walls, windows and vans belonging to the companies. He got caught in the act at the third facility.

When the Northampton Crown Court judge spoke to Harris he said, "I am sorry that your conviction and the sentence I impose will seriously damage what was a very promising career. It causes me great discomfort in seeing you before the court having thrown so much away."

Harris claimed he found information about the animal abuse at the Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty website.

When children diagnosed with cancer undergo radiation treatments at the Hospital for Sick Children and Princess Margaret Hospital it can be scary -- the unknown is scary at any age. Traditionally, to help make a child more comfortable, they are given a plush animal as a radiation buddy.

Now Toronto hospitals have something more to help in the way of an animated interactive CD-ROM that shows what will be happening during radiation treatment.

Called Radiation for Kids, it is also written to ease concerns of parents about what their child will be facing in treatment by providing a glossary of medical terms and tips on how to talk to their child about cancer.

In Radiation for Kids, a child creates an animated character and follows it on a virtual tour into treatment. The program is written with different levels of age-related information, puzzles and games so that young children and teens can both benefit from Radiation for Kids.

According to the children and parents who have viewed Radiation for Kids, the information provided does lift fear and gives everyone a sense of confidence in what lies ahead. For information about obtaining a copy of the CD, visit the CBC News feature on Radiation for Kids.

Hopes of a vaccine for cancer received a boost this week following trials of a new therapy that successfully blocked tumor growth in animals. The experimental vaccine protected animals from cancer for up to five months, and stopped tumors growing bigger in those that already had the disease.

In a trial, researchers transplanted breast tumors into mice before giving them two injections of the vaccine, two weeks apart. The first injection primed the immune system and the second acted as a booster. The trial showed the vaccine triggered a release of antibodies that suppressed tumor growth for up to 150 days. The mice showed no side effects.

In a second trial, genetically engineered mice bred to develop breast cancer within 28 days were given a modified version of the DNA vaccine that also blocked a gene linked to cancer.  "Normally all these mice develop cancer within a month, but in the trial 80 per cent remained cancer-free and lived for up to one and a half years," said Holmgren, whose study was published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences on Monday.

The researchers believe the vaccine was successful because it works differently from previous DNA vaccines. Instead of targeting cancerous cells that are constantly mutating, the vaccine acts on healthy cells that the tumor recruits to build up its blood supply.  The researchers have teamed up with a Swedish company to manufacture antibodies that could be used in a human cancer vaccine. If the vaccine is effective in human trials, it could potentially help give protection against a range of cancer varieties.  A cancer vaccine could be used to prevent cancers returning in patients who have already been operated on, or received chemotherapy or radiotherapy.

Tiger, Auburn University Southeastern Raptor Center's 26-year-old golden eagle, has been diagnosed with skin cancer. According to veterinarians, the golden eagle's squamous cell carcinoma skin cancer tumor, located on her leg, has been removed several times and grows back just months after each operation. This type of cancer is rare in raptors making treatment and prognosis uncertain. If Tiger cannot make her pre-game flights this coming fall, there are other eagles who can fill in for her until she recovers. Tiger, also known as War Eagle VI, made her first pre-game flight in the fall of 2000. She has brought national attention to Auburn and wildlife conservation through those flights and her appearance at the 2002 Winter Olympics in Salt Lake City. The eagles are a part of the Raptor Center's wildlife conservation educational efforts, both in school classrooms and at the new Edgar B. Carter Amphitheater on the AU College of Veterinary Medicine campus.