The profile on her blog reads: Living in London. Working in ads. Currently undergoing treatment for Breast Cancer. And that about sums it up for this woman whose life has become hijacked by cancer. That's the way it goes. Cancer strikes and life revolves around it for so much longer than we'd like.

The 30-something Anne-Marie Weeden writes in a recent blog post:

I was genuinely confident at the beginning of this process that the whole chemo thing should not affect life too much. And in the first three treatments it didn't really. But the last three have just escalated in terms of the challenges they have thrown my way. They said it would be cumulative but I didn't realise it would accumulate on such a scale. I'd say the last two treatment cycles have been at least ten times as hard as the first one.

Hope is a complex concept and one that is often misunderstood by many people including health care professionals. Many people tend to interchange the terms of wishing, optimism, and hope, but the three have significant differences.

Wishing is usually specific in that you wish for something you desire. It is positive in nature. Optimism emphasizes the positive aspects of a situation and is considered to be a positive trait. Both of these have places in our lives but to live with a disease like cancer and to get through treatments, navigate health care systems, and to overcome society's negative views about cancer as a death sentence, a person must have a strong sense of hope.

In stumbling upon an article published by the National Coalition for Cancer Survivorship written by Elizabeth J. Clark, PhD entitled "You Have The Right To Be Hopeful", I realized that without this inner strength, this determined will power, this drive, that hope creates, there would be a lot less survivors in this disease. It is a good read and I am passing along the link to the free PDF file for others to enjoy and learn from.

1. Hope constitutes an essential experience in the human condition.
2. Hope means desirability of personal survival and the ability of the individual to exert a degree of influence on the surrounding world.
3. Hope is necessary for healthy coping.
4. Hope is a cognitive affective resource that is a psychological asset.
5. Hope is a mental willpower and is a sense of mental energy that helps move a person toward a goal.

UK researchers have developed a 3D laboratory model of human breast cancer, specifically ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS). The model, complete with normal cells and tumor cells, should help experts understand how the disease develops in its early stages, and it could replace the need for experiments in animals.

About one in five breast cancers in the UK start out as DCIS. Researchers wanted to learn more about how the early cancerous changes in cells develop into larger tumors, and they chose to fashion a 3D test tube model because it is more complex than a layer of cells in a Petri dish.

Once this experiment is proved successful, it could reduce and perhaps replace animal studies.

"With breast cancer, there is an urgent need to move away from animal research models because their similarity to human cancer can be so poor," says one expert who explains this model could help revolutionize breast cancer research -- because unreliable research costs time, money, and lives, both animal and human lives.

New hope may be an injection away for patients living with glioma, a terminal brain cancer that comes with a life expectancy of about 25 weeks post-diagnosis.

A new vaccine called Vitaspen is made by using tissue extracted from each person's cancerous tumor. The tissue is used as a unique footprint for the vaccine that targets destructive tumor tissue while sparing healthy tissue in the same region.

Vitaspen is only in the first stage of clinical human trials, but researchers are pleased with the promise of the new drug -- particularly the benefits trial participants are gaining form the treatment. They have reported no adverse side effects, and the drug has increased the overall survival rate.

Results of stage one trials will determine if the drug warrants stage two testing.

It's not yet clear if the drug Gardasil, the vaccine intended to prevent the human papillomavirus (HPV) in females, is effective for men. But some men are signing up for the chance to take the drug.

Gay and bisexual men in San Francisco are asking their doctors for the vaccine with hopes it will prevent anal and penile cancer, also caused by HPV.

"The prevalence of anal cancer among gay and bisexual men is very high," says Jason Riggs, spokesman for the STOP AIDS Project. "So that's why some people are looking at this as a possible preventive cure for anal cancer and HPV that causes anal cancer."

Anal cancer occurs among gay and bisexual men at a rate 35 times higher than that of the general population. And it occurs more in those infected with HIV.

I never would have predicted it -- that a tooth could become a tool for dispensing medication. But the refinement of such a creation is actually in the works and before long, you may be asking not for a gold or decorative tooth but for one capable of doling out your drugs in the exact doses and at the right times.

Think about this:

Researchers from Europe and Israel are working right now on a tiny dispensing system called IntelliDrug. Their goal is to create parts small enough they can fit into a false tooth placed in the back of the mouth. The device will release a specific amount of medication at certain intervals so patients receive the proper dosage right on schedule.

This invention, crafted by an Israeli dentist, could pick up the slack for people who forget to take medicine and could save lives for those whose lives depend on scheduled drug therapy. It could also allow for better absorption of medication into the body.

The IntelliDrug device will deliver medicine directly into the bloodstream through the lining of the cheek around the mouth. Saliva, meanwhile, mixes with the drug and carries it throughout they body in a manner more efficient than just swallowing a pill every few hours.

While researchers hope to one day turn their device into a replacement tooth, the apparatus -- consisting of a stainless steel housing, a pump, custom valves, a microprocessor, batteries, and a reservoir for the drug pill -- currently comes in the form of a block the size of two teeth. It is strapped to the the side of teeth and hugs the inside of the cheek. The unit can be removed, and a technician can refill the drug reservoir, clean the unit, and change batteries when necessary.

Clinical trials on pigs are ongoing. Human testing is expected to begin by the end of the year.

I've read stories about women whose breast cancer diagnoses were delayed because they explained away certain symptoms. One woman, an athlete, was told by her husband one day that her nipple looked different from the other. "It's probably just the jog bra I've been wearing all day," she assured him. They both moved on.

Some time later, this woman learned that her different nipple was a sign of breast cancer. And she had it. She just didn't know it. And so her diagnosis came late. Eight years later, this young mother of two small children died from a disease she explained away.

This is normal -- the art of explaining away all the odd messages our bodies give us. Perhaps it's the stigma of whining about every little ache and pain that keeps us from pursuing immediate medical attention. It could be the likelihood that our complaints are pretty normal, so we refrain from rushing to judgment.

I'm practicing this well-established art right now. It's odd for me because I've already had breast cancer, and I am usually ultra-sensitive to every twinge of pain I feel. So when I woke this morning, with a tight and aching feeling in my chest, one would have thought I'd be racing out the door, headed for the nearest emergency room. I considered the fact that perhaps I need to be seen, that a chest X-ray might be in order, but I took no action -- because I explained the feeling away. It went something like this:

It must be the way I slept. I slept in a different bed, with one child and one dog, and I don't think I moved an inch all night.

The feeling gets less intense with time. At this moment, I can only feel something -- and it's very mild -- if I inhale deeply.

If I have the same feeling tomorrow morning, I will pursue it -- no, I won't pursue it just yet because I wont' be sleeping in my own bed for a few more nights. I'll wait until I get back to my own bed and see what happens. Maybe this bed is not good for me.

This goes on and on. For me, I think it happens because I suspect nothing really is wrong with me. Perhaps I am dismissing something serious but mostly, I'm chalking this behavior to progress. Because there was a day when I ran to the dentist for a bump on the roof of my mouth -- it was nothing -- and I cried to get myself a next-day mammogram for some lumpy tissue I was convinced was cancer -- it wasn't -- and now, I am happy to feel more like a normal person. I am happy to have perfected my new art, which incidentally I will abandon in an instant if the discomfort persists.

My husband says he's had this feeling before when getting out of bed. I think I'm going to be OK.

In the April issue of the journal Radiology, researchers published a report that says they have used adult bone marrow stem cells to regenerate healthy human liver tissue.

When cancer invades the liver sometimes it is impossible to have surgery performed to remove the tumor. This is because there is not enough healthy liver left behind to support the body. These stems cells help to regenerate the healthy portion of the liver so surgery can be performed.

Gunther Furst, M.D, coauthor and professor of radiology, says "Our study suggests that liver stem cells harvested from the patients own bone marrow can further augment and accelerate the liver's natural capacity to regenerate itself."

The Human Papillomaviruses (HPV) vaccine called Gardasil can protect from the infection of four types of the HPV virus. Two of these types cause up to 70 percent of all cases of cervical cancer.

Recommendations were released by the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) regarding the use of Gardasil. The FDA approved Gardasil in June 2006.

The role of ACIP is to advise the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) about vaccine usage and vaccine-preventable diseases.

The recommendations published by the ACIP:

• Recommended age for routine vaccination of girls is 11-12 years.
• The vaccine can be given to girls as young as 9 years.
• Catch-up vaccination is recommended for girls and women between the ages of 13 and 26 years who were not vaccinated previously or who did not complete the full vaccine series (the vaccine is administered in three separate doses).
• Routine cervical cancer screening remains important following vaccination.

The ACIP's recommendations can influence policy and practice, but are not directly linked with school and daycare entry laws. These laws are made by individual states.

More than 47 percent of people view their pets as family members, according to a 2002 American Veterinary Medical Association survey. It makes sense then that people are routinely treating their pets for ailments that might strike a family member -- like arthritis, heart disease, diabetes, allergies, dementia, obesity, and yes, cancer.

New studies show that Americans are stuffing their pets with more drugs than ever before. They are medicating their dogs, cats, and sometimes other pets as much as they medicate themselves -- and they are doing it with many of the same human drugs they use for themselves, like steroids for inflammation, antibiotics for infection, anti-depressants for anxiety, and even new slendering drugs for obesity.

It's a big market -- pharmaceuticals for pets -- and for those who love their pets so much they can't let go, going to extremes is worth every penny.

Think about this:

• For dogs and cats alone, Americans spent $2.9 billion on pet drugs in 2005. While this is equal to only one percent of human drug sales, the market has grown by half since 2000.

• The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved more than 40 new pet drugs in the past five years.

• A single three-month course of pet chemotherapy can cost $3,000 -- and chemotherapy doesn't typically extend the life of an animal as much as it soothes symptoms of the disease.

• Health insurance for pets was nearly invisible in 2002 but has gained popularity over the past few years. Premiums can cost $30 per month, and the total market is expected to climb to $500 million in the next five years.

• Some human drugs leave pets with unexpected, sometimes deadly, side effects. The drug Rimadyl, made by Pfizer and used as a treatment for dogs with arthritis, has been shown to cause kidney and liver damage in some animals. More than 3,000 pet deaths have been attributed to this drug.

• Some question the priorities of a society that allows for medically treating pets like they are humans. Dianne Dunning, an ethicist at N.C. State's vet school is concerned that millions of animals are lost, unwanted, and euthanized while millions are spent on pet medicines. David Rothman, an expert in medicine's role in society from Columbia University, says, "If you can't get malaria drugs in some Third World countries, what are we doing with chemotherapy for cats?"

• Others don't flinch at the expense it requires to keep their pets alive. One man, whose dog was expected to die of lymphoma within weeks, still enjoys the company of his pet some two years later. Chemotherapy saved the dog's life and when asked if he thinks the drugs are too expensive, this man says NO -- because his dog is still here.
  

While it is true that women are far outnumbered in high level management positions in top 500 fortune companies, it is the backbone of the women in this country that lead the fund raising efforts in non profits. Women last year accounted for one out of 13 clout positions as an executive vice president or higher in the 500 largest U.S. companies. This figure was up from one in 40 as recently as 1995. Back then only one of those companies had a female chief executive officer and today seven do.

Women account for a higher percentage of executive positions in larger, self staffed non profit organizations. In 2005, the Non-Profit Times' "Power & Influence Top 50" list named the 50 top senior level executives in the non-profit sector and 26 were women. The role of women in non profit organizations was alive and well long before the concept came to exist. In the United States, the non profit sector encompasses an enormous range of organizations engaged in education, health care, research, the arts, religion, the environment, civil rights, and human services. The historical role of women in these sectors has always been significant and has evolved as the resources of the nonprofit sector have expanded and become formalized.

Women affirm their belief in humanity by providing services to millions of people every year, day in and day out. Many of the executive directors, board members, staff, and volunteers of these human services organizations are women, and they provide the backbone support for our community services.

As the major season for fund raising kicks off to bring in funds for cancer research and awareness, my many applauds to the multitudes of women, and also the men, who take their efforts seriously and have a strong commitment to community and a better quality of life to us all.

Merck, maker of the cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil, is backing off its lobbying campaign following pressure from medical groups and parents who believe the vaccine should not be mandated as a school attendance requirement for adolescent girls.

The public outcry that caused Merck to announce its stop order on Tuesday stems from the fact that the vaccine protects against the sexually transmitted human papilloma virus (HPV), which causes cervical cancer. School-mandated vaccines are typically for diseases spread through casual contact, such as measles and mumps.

Merck's medical director for vaccines, Dr. Richard M. Haupt says, "We're concerned that our role in supporting school requirements is a distraction from that goal, and as such have suspended our lobbying efforts," adding that the company will continue providing information about the vaccine upon request.

Gardasil, launched in June and the first vaccine to prevent cervical cancer, has inspired controversy since day one. There's the cost -- $360 for three required shots -- and all sorts of insurance concerns and conservative groups who worry the vaccine encourages premarital sex and interferes with parental rights. Even those in support of the vaccine -- like the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Family Practitioners -- question Merck's quick push to market this drug, especially in light of the company's withdrawn painkiller Vioxx.

"I believe that their timing was a little bit premature so soon after (Gardasil's) release, before we have a picture of whether there are going to be any untoward side effects," says Dr. Anne Francis, who chairs an American Academy of Pediatrics committee.

Legislatures in 20 states have taken steps to mandate the vaccine for young girls. And with the exception of Texas governor Rick Perry's February 2 executive order requiring Texas girls entering the sixth grade in 2008 get vaccinated, nothing has been made official so far.

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.

A study appearing in the Journal of Clinical Oncology reveals there may be something out there that can extend the lives of patients with recurrent prostate cancer.

This something is a new class of anti-cancer targeted drugs that scientists at Cedars-Sinai Medical Center in Los Angeles say are quite promising, despite their ineffectiveness in some prostate cancer patients with no previous chemotherapy treatment.

Pertuzumab, a molecular targeted compound that has been used successfully in ovarian cancer patients, has been shown to block the human epidermal growth factor receptor family by binding to and inhibiting the function of HER2 receptors. They essentially block a key pathway that leads to cancer growth. And this blockage can possibly offer a better, longer life for recurrent prostate cancer patients whose diseases no longer respond to traditional chemotherapy.

Pertuzumab, marketed under the brand name Omnitarg by Roche and Genentech, is just one of many targeted cancer therapies that give researchers hope that cancer may one day be a lifetime disease that can be skillfully managed.

Environmental groups claim some children's bath products contain a suspected cancer-causing chemical in amounts that reach or exceed safe limits. The chemical in question -- 1,4-dioxane -- is found in products made by companies such as Johnson and Johnson, Disney, Kimberly-Clark, and Gerber, says David Steinman, head of the environmental publishing company Freedom Press.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) calls this chemical, already known to cause cancer in animals, a probable human carcinogen. But there is no real regulation on the petroleum-derived chemical and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) only recommends cosmetic companies limit the concentration of 1,4-dioxane to 10 parts per million (ppm).

Studies show Johnson's Kids Shampoo Watermelon Explosion contains the maximum recommended level of 10 ppm. They also reveal that Kid Care's Hello Kitty Bubble Bath contains 12.3 ppm of the chemical. And two adult shampoos have been found to have twice the recommended level of this chemical that is typically a manufacturing by-product.

It's been reported that nearly 57 percent of all baby soaps contain 1,4-dioxane. But Iris Grossman, director of communications at Johnson and Johnson, stresses that all of her products are within FDA limits.

Cancer is not the only risky link to children's bath products. It seems these items are also linked to early puberty development. And this is concerning because a fast-paced growth rate combined with children's porous skin increases susceptibility to toxins that can enter the bloodstream. One breast cancer expert says an increase in breast cancer risk is linked to toxic exposures during the formative years of life.