Vitamin D is one of the latest, greatest hot cancer topics. Why? Well, it seems many of us women are vitamin D deficient. Such a deficiency might be linked to breast cancer risk so it's in our best interest to make sure we get a healthy dose of this vitamin. It's not as easy as adhering to the Dietary Reference Intake (DRI) guidelines, though. Follow them and you'll still come up short -- the Food and Nutrition Board, responsible for setting the DRIs, have not yet updated guidelines in light of cancer concerns. So what's a girl to do?

For starters, we need to understand that for overall health benefits, 1,000 IU (International Units) per day are necessary. The outdated DRI recommends 200 to 600 IU. This is based on preventing only bone diseases like rickets. Second, keep in mind it's safe to take up to 10,000 IU each day. Third, up your intake of this important vitamin. Here's how:

Fatty fish is the best source of vitamin D. But watch out for high mercury levels. Fortified milk is also good. It has 100 IU of vitamin D per eight-ounce serving, but cow's milk been linked to breast cancer risk as well.

Even though there has been much hype in recent years about the connection between dietary fiber intake to decrease the risk of colorectal cancer, results of a large study does not support such a link.

The findings were reported in the May issue of the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition. The conclusion came after analyzing more that 291,000 men and 197,000 women ages 50 to 71 years. "Our study did not show any association between how much dietary fiber you eat and your risk of colorectal cancer" said the lead author of the study.

However, the lead author did say that he found consumption of whole grain foods may lower the risk of developing the disease.

There's no mystery about how we might help prevent cancer. In fact, we don't even need to venture out of our own minds to figure it all out.

Consider this.

"We estimate that more than 50 percent of cancer incidence could be prevented if we act today on what we already know," says Graham Colditz, M.D., Dr.P.H., and associate director of Prevention and Control at the Siteman Cancer Center at Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis and Barnes-Jewish Hospital.

And now consider these seven methods for acting on what we already know about cancer prevention.

One. Lose weight and exercise more. It is estimated that 20 to 30 percent of the most common cancers in the United States are directly attributed to being overweight or physically inactive.

Two. Eat right. Plant-based diets help prevent cancer. Eating fruits and vegetables help prevent cancer. Diets high in red meat and animal fat increase the risk of cancer. End of story.

Three. Quit smoking. We all know smoking is associated with lung cancer, but it's also linked to cancer of the colon, kidney, pancreas, cervix, and stomach. Within five years to 10 years, there is a 50 percent reduction in cancer risk for those who stop smoking.

Four. Limit alcohol intake. While a few studies claim there are health benefits to drinking wine and other alcoholic beverages, most data show overconsumption of alcohol increases the risk of oral, esophageal, and breast cancers.

Five. Increase folate intake. Epidemiological studies suggest that low folate levels promote cancer development. Experts recommend taking a multivitamin with folate every day.

Six. Stay in the shade. Limiting long-term exposure to the sun and tanning beds, booths, and lamps minimizes the risk of developing skin cancer.

Seven. Avoid sexually transmitted diseases. Human papillomavirus (HPV) can cause cervical cancer. Hepatitis B and C viruses can cause liver cancer. Helicobacter pylori causes stomach cancer. It's critical that we protect ourselves during sexual contact if we wish to protect ourselves from cancer.

Once upon a time there were two groups of mice, all genetically engineered to develop prostate cancer. Each group was fed the same amount of calories. One group of mice lived in cages warmed to 80.6 degrees. The other group lived in cages kept at 71.6 degrees. The mice in the cooler quarters burned more calories to keep warm. And after three weeks, they weighed less than the toasty warm mice. They were also less likely to develop prostate cancer.

Then there were two other groups of mice, also genetically engineered to develop prostate cancer. Both groups were kept in cages with temperatures 80.6 degrees and 71.6 degrees -- like above. But these mice got to eat whatever their little hearts desired. The mice in cooler cages ate 30 percent more than the mice in warmer cages. They got just as fat as the warm mice. And they all got prostate cancer at the same rate, despite the extra calories.

The moral of the story is this -- being lean rather than obese has a greater protective effect against cancer. Excess calorie retention, rather than consumption, raises cancer risk. This moral stands in contrast to what most researchers believe -- that a restricted diet cuts the risk of and slows the growth of cancer and this is directly related to calorie intake.

Tim Nagy, Ph.D. and professor of nutrition sciences at the University of Alabama, Birmingham and lead researcher on the mice story says when you eat more calories than you burn, you store the extra calories as fat. It's the fat cells -- not the extra calories themselves -- that affect cancer risk.

It's not a good idea for humans to chill themselves to avoid cancer, Nagy says. But perhaps people could get the same effect by exercising more since that, too, burns calories.

Nagy's study appears in the January 1 issue of the journal Cancer Research.

In the continuing battle of the bulge, and realizing that more families eat out more often than ever before, the Food and Drug Administration, FDA, commissioned a report to discover ways to stop the growing weight gain epidemic. Based on the Keystone Report, the FDA is recommending that restaurants cut back on portions, serve more fruits and vegetables and provide nutritional and caloric information with the meals they serve.

You can imagine how well this is going over with the 900,000 restaurants and other food establishments in this country. For a restaurant to implement what the government is suggesting they do, the report itself notes that the laboratory work needed to calculate the calorie content of a menu item can cost $100, or anywhere from $11,500 to $46,000 to analyze an entire menu. That is not taking into account any menu changes. But who exactly is making us fat?