Back in the news: the link between hormone replacement therapy (HRT) and breast cancer. This time, the connection is seemingly more conclusive than before, when some argued that many factors influence the risk of breast cancer, that HRT could not do the job all on its own.

Now, two separate studies offer up powerful evidence that HRT is linked to tumor growth. Case in point: when use of the therapy drops, so do incidences of breast cancer.

New figures in the New England Journal of Medicine suggest there have been 16,000 fewer cases of breast cancer nationwide since mid-2002, when women stopped taking their hormone pills following the federal Women's Health Initiative announcement connecting the therapy with increased risk of breast cancer, stroke, and heart attack.

Many did not want to believe HRT was to blame for so many breast cancer diagnoses. And maybe it's not the actual cause of the disease, but the fuel for tumors trying to grow.

These new findings do not appear to be a statistical fluke, says one doctor. Numbers have been computed and re-computed, and the message is clear: HRT is strongly implicated as the guilty party. There is just no other culprit, says a statistician at the National Cancer Institute.

Wyeth, maker of Premarin and Prempro -- two forms of hormone therapy -- continues to caution women against drawing any conclusions about HRT and breast cancer. There still may be broader explanation for the decline in cases, say their spokespeople.

Today, I've been asked twice to offer more specifics about the information contained in posts. I thought I'd communicate my thoughts on this matter publicly so you all may benefit.

First, let me share that blogging is like talking to a friend -- Hey, did you hear about that new study about the breast cancer vaccine?, I might say to my neighbor before I explain the overall gist of the news I happened upon. The purpose of blogging is to communicate a few details and to spark interest, not to capture every speck of information on the topic. Digging up the nitty gritty is for you, the reader.

Your quest for more knowledge takes just one click. Once you read a post, look to the bottom left and you will see a blue link titled Read. Click here and you'll land at the news source related to the post. If you don't find what you're looking for here, just type some key words into Google and search for more. If bloggers happen to find news but there is no internet link -- this happens with magazines and other print publications -- the source will be noted at the end of the post.

If a post contains personal perspective, like this one, you won't find a Read link -- that's because the source is in the blogger's head. You are welcome to leave a comment requesting more information about these posts.

Now this whole lesson on the Read link does not mean you cannot ask questions of bloggers -- please do -- but if you desire the quickest route to post details, this link is your best bet.

I hope this is clear. And I hope you find exactly what you seek in this world where cancer is one hot topic.

When Dr. Jian-Wei Gu went to Mississippi to study the cardiovascular system and the process of blood vessel growth, he had no idea he'd make national headlines about his research into the world of cancer.

Gu, assistant professor of physiology and biophysics at the University of Mississippi Medical Center, says his discovery of the mechanism by which alcohol consumption causes tumor growth was purely accidental.

And extremely significant.

Scientists have known for a hundred years about the link between alcohol consumption and cancer. A study from Paris in 1910 showed that 80 percent of patients with cancer of the esophagus or gastric track were alcoholics. More recently, scientists have found correlations between alcohol consumption and cancer of the mouth, pharynx, larynx, esophagus, liver, large bowel, and even the breasts. Yet lab experiments have always failed to show the effects in animals that investigators knew to be true in humans.

Until now.

It seems past studies used too much alcohol -- in concentrations of 20 percent -- and the animals just wasted away while showing no tumor growth. But when Gu used concentrations of one percent -- about one to two drinks per day in humans -- to study blood vessel growth, he detected stimulated tumor growth in both chick embryos and mice. Thus, his cancer discovery was born.

Gu has further concluded that melanoma cancers in mice grew significantly faster and larger in the mice who consumed the equivalent of one or two alcoholic drinks a day than the mice receiving no alcohol.

Gu's findings, now confirmed by other scientists, are evidence of what many have long suspected -- alcohol, even in moderation, increases cancer risk.

Advocacy runs far and wide. Thank goodness for that.

Think about this:

A new breast cancer non-profit organization has been launched especially for South Africans affected by the disease.

Founded by Samantha Galliet, the 31-year-old breast cancer survivor who made headlines with her "David and Goliath" battle to get life-saving Herceptin treatment, created PinkLink to give patients affected by breast cancer a voice.

PinkLink, focusing on the need for self-examination and awareness to encourage prevention and early detection of this silent epidemic, is intended to be a one-stop-shop with valuable South African based information on doctors, treatments, financial considerations, and health issues.

British researchers have found a connection between inflammatory polyarthritis, rheumatoid arthritis, and cancer. The connection -- a 40 percent increase in cancer mortality in patients with both arthritis conditions.

This is a striking finding, say researchers, whose study is published in the March issue of Arthritis & Rheumatism.

"The results of this study demonstrated that five-year cancer survival in patients with IP is substantially reduced in comparison with that in the general population, even after adjusting for differences in age, sex, and cancer site, whereas the overall cancer incidence does not seem to be increased," says study leader Dr. Alan Silman, an epidemiologist with the University of Manchester.

It's already been established that type 2 diabetes increases the risk of pancreatic cancer. And now, research indicates there is also a link between type 1 diabetes and this type of cancer.

The risk is relatively small -- but still, those with type 1 diabetes have a likelihood of developing pancreatic cancer that is twice as high as in non-diabetics. This is similar to the risk those with type 2 diabetes face.

There are many theories about the link between diabetes and pancreatic cancer, and this research -- published in the British Journal of Cancer -- helps narrow the scope of the theories.

For example, one researcher says the study rules out "a cancer-inducing role of the insulin-producing beta-cells in the pancreas, because in type 1 diabetes these cells have largely or entirely been destroyed."

Experts say people with diabetes should focus their attention on the most common complications of diabetes such as heart disease, eye disease, and kidney disease and not on the very small risk of cancer. In the whole scheme of things, pancreatic cancer is a rare disease -- and even twice the risk is not very significant.

I want to share some of the many new and exciting things I came across and learned about at the Young Survival Breast Cancer Conference. One online support group I found to be very helpful and innovative is called Pink-Link. It was started only a year ago and I think this is something that is needed in the breast cancer community.

The Pink-Link Breast Cancer Support Network provides valuable community and support resources for women affected by breast cancer.

Pink-Link is a nonprofit organization and all breast cancer support services are free. Pink-Link's key service, the online database of breast cancer patients and survivors, creates an intimate and personal link between breast cancer patients and survivors. The organization was founded by Victoria Tashman in 2005.

After completing a year of breast cancer treatment, Victoria wanted to give back to the community who supported her. Victoria had a wide support group of friends and family and met many women who were battling breast cancer on their own. Some of these women were afraid of talking to their doctors, asking them questions, and finding out more about their diagnosis and treatment.

Victoria realized that not all women take advantage of their local support groups, either because they didn't know about them, didn't feel comfortable in a group, or weren't able to go to group meetings.

She also realized that in most group meetings, the chances of meeting another breast cancer patient or survivor with the same diagnosis, recommended treatment, family situation, and other such details was very slim.

Victoria created Pink-Link to fill this void. By creating an on-line database of patients and survivors, Victoria envisions women diagnosed with breast cancer getting the particular, targeted support they need from the comfort of their own home. Victoria believes in the power of women helping other women and is positive that through Pink-Link, women with breast cancer can face their illness with increased knowledge and confidence.

Nearly a decade ago, women in Long Island began to worry about their high rates of breast cancer. So they advocated and lobbied and pushed until a public law was passed that allowed for the creation of the Long Island Breast Cancer Project. Funded by both the National Cancer Institute and the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, great data has emerged from this project -- like the data linking breast cancer and household pesticides.

Although much research has linked cancer with pesticides in work and industrial settings, few studies have investigated what these chemicals can do in households -- until now, thanks to research conducted as part of The Long Island Breast Cancer Project.

Published online in the December 13 American Journal of Epidemiology, researchers found an association between lifetime residential pesticide use and breast cancer risk in a sample of 1,508 Long Island women diagnosed with breast cancer between 1996 and 1997. These women were compared to 1,556 random controls. All women were asked to self-report their pesticide exposure and to offer blood samples for the study of organochlorine compound levels -- found in lawn and garden products.

As expected, researchers found an increased breast cancer risk for women whose blood samples showed the highest levels of organochlorine compounds. They also found it hard to find women who did not use lawn and garden pesticides to some degree.

Use of household pesticides has infiltrated our society, says researcher Susan Teitelbaum, assistant professor in the department of community medicine at Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York, who reports she is happy to see a movement toward use of alternative methods, like integrated pest management.

Teitelbaum has just one recommendation as result of this study. It's quite simple really -- stop using pesticides.

2006 will forever be the year linking the decline in breast cancer cases to the decline in use of hormone replacement therapy (HRT). This was big news on the cancer front, and while some argue other forces helped drive the breast cancer drop, there is still much speculation that the use of HRT somehow increases the risk of developing the disease. Even so, it is predicted that Wyeth's sales of hormone replacement drugs will have reached more than $1 billion as of yesterday, the last day of 2006.

Even more interesting is the prediction by analysts that revenue from the pills -- used to treat symptoms of menopause -- will rise five percent annually for the next several years.

It seems the sales growth, despite the overall decline in the HRT market, is primarily due to increased demand from wholesalers and price increases too.

It's hard to tell what will happen to the world of HRT in the year 2007 -- will women embrace what is considered the best therapy around for menopausal issues? Will they abandon the controversial treatment altogether? Will they find variations of HRT that meet their needs while minimizing risk for disease? Only time will tell.

Because no one likes a group who misrepresents the truth to promote a private agenda, The National Breast Cancer Coalition, NBCC, announced they were hosting the first annual Golden Boob Awards to expose the biggest boobs in the fight to stop breast cancer. The nominees in this year's Golden Boob Awards were the Coalition on Abortion/Breast Cancer (ABC) for threatening the integrity of serious efforts to find ways to prevent, treat, cure, and ultimately end breast cancer; and Mark For Life for trying to make money from a product with no impact in the fight against breast cancer.

By popular vote, the winner as this year's biggest boob is, as announced on the Golden Boobs Award website: "The Abortion/Breast Cancer Coalition (ABC) for asserting that abortion leads to an increased risk of breast cancer, despite lacking one shred of relevant proof to back up this claim. ABC's stock in trade - pseudo-science, fear mongering, and flat-out lies - has threatened the integrity of serious efforts to find ways to prevent, treat, cure, and ultimately end breast cancer."

In addition, NBCC is awarding a Dishonorable Mention Golden Boob Award to recent high-level presidential appointee as deputy assistant secretary for population affairs at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Dr. Eric Keroack, who is currently the medical director of A Women's Concern, an organization that also states a connection between abortion and breast cancer.

The NBCC is a grassroots advocacy group that works for increased federal funding for breast cancer research and with the scientific community to implement new models of research. The NBCC seeks to improve access to high-quality health care and breast cancer clinical trials for all women. To learn more about the winners, or to nominate the next biggest boob in the fight against breast cancer, visit Golden Boob Awards.

Sabrina Weill, CEO of Weill Media and former editor-in-cheif of Seventeen, accomplished a big thing on Monday. She launched her own website. And she hopes it will inspire others to do big things.

Weill is partnering with newspapers, television shows, magazines, radio shows, and websites and is asking professionals at these media spots to add a Halo Link to stories they feature about individuals in the midst of personal crisis who represent larger social issues such as autism, child neglect, poverty, cancer, crime, and natural disasters -- and who need financial assistance as they journey through difficulty.

The Halo Link will deliver readers directly to Weill's website where they can make a difference in the lives of those who need a little boost.

Weill's motivation comes from a news story she heard about a mother who saved enough money from recycled cans to send her four children to college. Weill wanted to send this woman a check but didn't know how to locate her. The next day, a friend shared she wanted to do the same thing but was stuck. Weill and her friend wanted to help. They just didn't know how to reach out.

Weill wanted to make it easier for others to locate potential recipients of their good will. And so ProjectAngelMom.com was born.

"In the wake of recent tragedies, and with the holidays upon us, I keep hearing people say they are looking for more personal ways to make a difference," says Weill. "Even if someone only has $5.00 to give, it adds up and can make a huge impact."

A new report published in the International Journal of Cancer refutes the long-standing argument from anti-choice advocates that abortion contributes to -- or even causes -- breast cancer. According to the study findings, neither induced nor spontaneous abortions (also known as miscarriages) contribute to the risk of developing breast cancer.

While researchers assert that full-term pregnancies resulting in birth do in fact contribute an element of protection against breast cancer -- no evidence of connection between breast cancer and induced abortion was found in the six-and-a-half year study of 267,361 European women. "Overall, the findings provide further unbiased evidence of the lack of an adverse effect of induced abortion on breast cancer risk," state researchers.

Breast density has something to do with breast cancer. This is not really news. It's clear there is some kind of link, some kind of relationship, some kind of risk related to breast density for both pre- and post-menopausal women. It's just not clear how exactly breast density -- how much fat tissue fills the breast compared to other tissue -- contributes to breast cancer risk. But once it is clear, medical professionals will have a whole new arsenal of power in the fight against this deadly disease.

Cancer News in Context, a regular series of podcast commentaries produced by the Harvard Center for Cancer Prevention, highlights two recent studies that add weight to the fact that breast density is an important tool in breast cancer prediction and identifies two areas that with futher study might help determine why breasts that are very dense are associated with higher risks for breast cancer -- and why density may be as important a factor as age in determining risk.

Currently, mammograms are the chosen method for measuring breast density. But measurement is not required, and there are no national standards for how to measure. Once federal groups issue requirements and direction on how to classify density, women will receive more accurate assessments of their personal risk.

There is also speculation that altering breast density through hormonal therapy may lower risk. Perhaps genetics are the strongest indicator of risk, making short-term solutions ineffective, but perhaps certain interventions can override genetics, helping women protect themselves from breast cancer.

There are many issues that must be ironed out before we really understand how breast density affects breast cancer. There is no doubt that density, when added to other risk factors, will surely help improve the accuracy of prediction. It's one tool, among many, that is poised to open all sorts of doors.

When we memorialize someone at the time of death, we often refer to the date of birth and the date of death. These numbers tell us something -- like the age of the person -- but they don't say much about the life that fills the gap between start date and end date. They don't tell of the life that was surely full of ups and downs and victories and struggles. And happiness and joy and sadness and sorrow. And family and friends and jobs and hobbies. They don't do justice to the true stuff of life that is so much more important than numbers. But there is something important about these two sets of numbers -- something that when really examined, tells the full story. This important something -- the dash.

The dash that separates these static numbers is what tells the story of life. So consider your own dash when contemplating life, while determining how to spend your time and fill your days. Make your dash matter. Make it worthwhile. Make it something that people will talk about long after your own numbers become a matter of permanent record. And when you memorialize loved ones in the future, think about what their dashes mean. Talk about them, remember them, honor them. And pass on this link -- www.thedashmovie.com -- so others will consider the meaning that flows from each simple dash.

A chemical found in hard plastics -- such as CD cases, baby bottles, food-storage containers, and even electronics parts -- has been loosely linked to incidences of breast cancer. Popular opinion cautions that if we were not worried about this news yesterday, we should not be worried about it today -- because studies are preliminary and nothing is definitive at this point. But there are definitely two sides to the debate over how harmful these hard plastics may be.

The chemical in question -- a pseudo-estrogen called bisphenol-A (BPA) -- appears to be absorbed by breast tumor cells, according to a new study published in the August 28 issue of Chemistry & Biology. Previous studies have linked small exposures of BPA to prostate abnormalities in mice that suggest a link between the plastic chemical and human prostate cancer. Some studies even theorize that embryonic and fetal exposure might influence mental retardation and birth defects. And because this pseudo-estrogen is a synthetic material that in human cells can trigger estrogenic effects, breast cancer now comes up as a disease that may result from this questionable chemical.

Critics say that average levels of the chemical found in urine is infinitesimally small -- about one part per billion. Some say the results of this research come from in-vitro studies that one expert says can never fully explain human disease. Yet the real crux of the matter, according to another expert, is that we are surrounded by all sorts of chemicals that are pseudo-estrogenic -- not just BPA -- and it's the cumulative effects that we do need to worry about.