The overall cure rate for the 20,000 children diagnosed with cancer in the United States each year is more than 75 percent. Sounds good -- especially when 50 years ago, most children diagnosed with cancer died. But considering that only one in three childhood cancer survivors remain healthy, perhaps this is not such good news.

Thirty years after diagnosis, about 40 percent of survivors have a serious health problem and one-third have multiple problems. Strokes, heart disease, and kidney failure are just a few of the major health concerns that plague many survivors who have entered adulthood.

Doctors have long known that cancer treatments can cause new cancers later in life. But the Childhood Cancer Survivor Study -- the largest ever childhood study of its kind -- shows there are other long-term health problems. Researchers studied 10,000 survivors -- past studies examined 200-300 survivors -- and found these survivors were eight times as likely as their siblings to develop severe and life-threatening conditions. They found survivors of bone tumors, nerve and brain cancer, and Hodgkin's disease faced the highest risk.

The source of these later-in-life health problems vary. Kidney failure may result from damage caused by chemotherapy or radiation or the infections children suffer when their immune systems are weakened. Drugs used to treat infections may also be to blame. Strokes may result from head and chest radiation.

Cancer treatment for people of all ages comes with a price. We buy time, we buy life in exchange for the unknown. But for children -- who stand to live longer than adults -- there is a greater unknown. Sadly, there is a dark side to surviving cancer.

In the past year, I have had three severe skin reactions characterized by red, itchy, burning bumps that start on my chest and without fail climb over my shoulders and onto my back. They last for a few weeks, are irritated by the Florida heat, and have had no known cause -- until today when I visited my dermatologist for a skin cancer screening and briefed her on this bizarre condition that has kept me away from sunscreen and out of the swimming pool and in hiding from the sun. I have suspected that sunscreen, chlorine, the sun -- or some combination of the three -- have been my potential irritants. So I've been avoiding them altogether. But I learned today that the sunscreen and the chlorine are not to blame. That leaves the sun, which is the most likely culprit -- and only because I have received chemotherapy with one very toxic drug. Adriamycin.

My dermatologist told me about a phenomenon called UV Recall that is associated with Adriamycin. Apparently the toxicity of this drug, even though administered long ago, can be recalled, causing a reaction when the UV rays of the sun soak into my skin. Sunscreen may help, my doctor told me, but she cautioned me that it is just a screen -- it does not offer full protection. And she said the best suncreen option would include zinc oxide. I think for me, though, staying out of the sun is my best bet. It's not ideal -- it means I will remain on the fringe of the swimming pool, hiding in the shade, while my boys swim their little hearts out. And tropical vacations will be off my wish list. And I will seek outdoor fun mostly after the sun goes down. But this is okay -- I knew there were long-term side effects of chemotherapy drugs. I am just thankful for now that my heart has not been compromised -- a side effect of both Adriamycin and the drug Herceptin that I have also received. And it's also not a bad thing that the steps I must now take to prevent skin reactions are also the steps that protect me from skin cancer. So in some sort of round-about way, my inconvenient skin issues may just help me stay healthy. And that's just fine with me.

As if the horrors of breast cancer are not enough -- surgery and recovery, chemotherapy and recovery, radiation and recovery, additional treatments and recovery -- weight gain often comes along and rounds out the full breast cancer package. It is most common for women who have chemotherapy -- the curse is not often seen for women who have surgery alone or surgery followed by radiation -- and while it may seem the lesser of all evils for some women, others may be plagued by an additional battle with weight. In addition to the self esteem blow that breast cancer delivers -- complete with scars and removal of breasts and reconstruction and hair loss -- weight gain in this body-image obsessed era can take its toll. There are also health concerns related to weight gain -- and an excess of weight is reported to sometimes influence a return of breast cancer and can be a risk factor for other cancers too.

The American Cancer Society reports that the average weight gain is five to eight pounds over a year's time -- but that gaining 25 pounds is not uncommon either. This phenomenon is somewhat of a mystery, although there are some theories about why women are at risk for this not-so-pleasant side effect of breast cancer. Some women get nauseated during chemotherapy and don't eat much -- but others have intense food cravings and tend to eat more. Body composition may also change and research shows that chemotherapy possibly diminishes lean body mass and increases fatty tissue. Menopause may also be to blame -- natural and chemically-induced menopause operate the same and both slow metabolism. So it takes more physical activity to burn what less activity accomplished prior to chemotherapy. Women experiencing treatment also tend to exercise less which can contribute to weight gain. And some women fault the Tamoxifen they take following chemotherapy -- although research does not support a strong link between the two. There are many possibilities. Yet none of them are definite. There is one definite, though -- a healthy menu, a healthy exercise routine, and a healthy support team can help women ward off this unfair consequence of an unfair disease.

Cancer go away.

The news is not good today. When someone is diagnosed with cancer, and there seem to be so many of us now, it does not diminish the initial response when you find out someone else has cancer. The news is still a shock to the spirit, a moment where the breath catches and pauses out of rythmn, and the heart drops into another pool of sadness. As a cancer survivor, you know what is to come for the newly diagnosed, not just the physical, but the mental, the emotional and the spiritual effects for the cancer patient and those who love them.

Cancer. I hate this disease.

You have just learned you have cancer, and I am surviving cancer. With all my heart, I want you to survive cancer too. I walk back through my mind, retracing my footsteps from the day of my cancer diagnosis to this, remembering all the things I did that might have tipped the scales in favor of my living and not dying. I cannot say I know the one thing that it might have been, or the combination of things I might have done, so I want to remember it all. I want to share all of it with you. I want you to be able to tip the scales in favor of life and not death too.

Here is how I approached my diagnosis of cancer, these are the perspectives I held and the steps I took during my cancer treatments and healing. Maybe there is something in all of it that matters, that made a difference, that if you know too, will help you in your healing too.

Stephen Daniells, a journalist and scientist, has worked both sides of the fence, and as such, has as qualified a voice as any in addressing the controversial debate that rages between science and the media. Scurrilous accusations of journalistic conspiracy are made by scientists when it comes to the sensationalism media employs when reporting scientific research and medical news -- and the journalists equally complain that scientists use the same tactics when they pull out the most attention-getting part of a study while leaving out the better but less interesting facts buried deep within the research findings.

Both sides seem to be exploiting the other by manipulative means. According to Daniells, currently a food science reporter with a PhD in Chemistry from Queen's University Belfast who has worked in research in the Netherlands and France, suggests that all the shaming and blaming needs to stop. The relationship between journalist and scientist must be mended and developed amicably if science is to get a fair deal in the press. Ultimately, where this all leads is to consumers being presented with balanced and accurate science and medical news coverage. Daniells writes an excellent commentary with great examples to support his observations and conclusions.

The Herald has published an interesting feature about the practice of hypnotherapy as a complementary therapy in cancer treatment. Gartnavel Hospital in Glasgow is offering their cancer patients hypnotherapy, massage and reiki as a means of alleviating stress, anxiety and pain. Pat Kavanagh is being treated for leukemia, and is going through chemotherapy before a bone-marrow transplant.

Kavanagh is quoted as saying, "With chemo, your body is changed, literally, by the chemicals. You look different, you have no sense of smell or taste. You feel like your body is not your own anymore. You have to give it over to doctors to treat. You feel as though you are no longer yourself. It's an awful feeling. Having hypnotherapy as a complementary treatment to my medical care has given me back a sense of being comfortable within my own body. At the end of the sessions I always feel more confident and at peace in my body. I don't know if the therapy affects your recovery time, but it must have some impact on your underlying chemistry."

Until recently, complementary therapies, like hypnotherapy, massage and reiki, were regarded as having no therapeutic value. But as the science and medicine are beginning to discover, successful treatment involves the whole person, and creating a relaxed state can facilitate the healing process. If you are interested in alternative and complementary therapies, the feature is a good read.

Beth Brophy is a mother, journalist, author and breast cancer survivor who blogs with humor, anger and intelligence about the issues of cancer. In The Blame Game, she features a health column written by Jane Brody, who wonders at the assumptions of blame some people make when they hear of a cancer diagnosis. Brody, a health expert who lives a healthy lifestyle based on the information she writes about, was diagnosed with breast cancer seven years ago. "It seems that many people believe that if you do everything right -- which is not to say that I did everything right, just most things -- bad things won't happen. But bad things can and do happen. And they happen to the best and the worst of us."

Brophy wonders about the same idea about disease. In her blog she writes, "Some people seem to want to blame you for your bad choices when you afflicted with a random illness. It seems to give other people, the unafflicted, the illusion that they have some control over fate. If someone has lung cancer, the first question is always: Did he or she smoke? If someone has breast cancer: Is that person overweight, or is there a family history of the disease? Yet countless studies have shown that in most cases, these factors may be entirely beside the point."

Brophy is being kind when she suggests the motivation for blaming others for their disease is a self-protective mechanism to comfort the healthy in giving them an illusionary sense of control over fate. I believe it is more arrogant and sinister that that, and reveals a profound lack of compassion. When my son was young, he asked me how people were able to do mean things to other people. I told him, like the Grinch of Dr. Seuss, there are hearts that grow bitterly dark and shrivel in size from a lack of love for themselves and others.