The pathology results are in -- the five small polyps removed from President Bush's colon on Saturday are not cancerous.

White House Press Secretary Tony Snow announced today that microscopic evaluations of the five polyps confirm the preliminary diagnosis: tubular adenoma -- or as Snow called them: "garden variety polyps."

Nearly two-thirds of all polyps are adenomas, the vast majority of them tubular adenomas. It is not uncommon to find these polyps in routine colonoscopies.

Our bodies are good at telling us when something is wrong most of the time. It is important to listen to those messages and seek medical attention when specific symptoms arise. The June issue of the Mayo Health Letter covers symptoms that should not be ignored.

Seven symptoms not to ignore:

• Unexplained weight loss: This could be a symptom of such conditions as an overactive thyroid, depression, liver disease, cancer or other noncancerous disorders that interfere with how well your body absorbs nutrients.
• Fever: A fever can point to underlying infections. A fever accompanied by chills or one that is greater than 103 degrees should be evaluated immediately.
• Shortness of breath: Gasping for air or wheezing are medical emergencies. Shortness of breath can be caused by asthma, heart problems, anxiety, panic attacks, or a blood clot in the lungs.
• Severe headaches: A headache accompanied by a fever, stiff neck, rash, mental confusion, seizure, vision changes, weakness, numbness, speaking difficulties, scalp tenderness or pain when chewing are medical emergencies. Causes vary for headaches and may include stroke, blood vessel inflammation, meningitis, brain tumor, aneurysm or bleeding on the brain. Most headaches, are just that, headaches but it is important to know the warning signs for more serious underlying conditions.

There's this guy. His name is Matthew Zachary. He's a cancer survivor, a motivational speaker, a concert pianist, and the founder of a resource portal for young adults surviving cancer.

Steps for Living, Inc. -- also known as I'm too young for this -- was created by Zachary because he wants us all to know there are awesome cancer support services out there for adolescents and young adults. He means really awesome opportunities -- like spa retreats, online forums and blogs, social networking, camping excursions, fertility education, peer counseling, financial scholarships, and more.

You may be too young for cancer, but you are not alone, says Zachary whose mantra is Get Busy Living. And this is exactly what he is doing, despite challenges and setbacks in his own cancer recovery.

Think about this, an e-mail written by Zachary for those near and dear to his heart:

I am writing to share that I have suddenly gone deaf in my left ear. The condition is called Sudden Sensory Neural Hearing Loss.

After consulting with the country's best hearing experts as well as my oncologist, it has been determined that this is unequivocally a latent, long-term side effect of my post-operative cancer treatments from eleven years ago. Evidently, the excessive radiation dosages to the left hemisphere of my brain have caused irreparable neurological damage to my cochlea, which has ceased functioning.

There may be options (cochlear implants) but I will not know more for several weeks. As you can imagine, this is a devastating blow to my personal life and music career, especially since I remember fighting so hard to regain dexterity and muscle control in my left hand when it ceased functioning prior to my initial diagnosis in 1995.

That said, it has only reinvigorated me to stay the course and continue to advocate on behalf of the more than 500,000 young adults living with, through and beyond cancer each and every year. Now more than ever, I stress the importance of recognizing that remission is not a cure and that public awareness and adequate funding for adolescent and young adult cancer survivorship programming is tantamount to that of cancer research.

This is what it means to be a cancer survivor.

To read more about Zachary's powerful journey, click here for an unbelievably moving essay -- titled The Cost Of Living: No Cure For Cancer -- written by this unbelievably grounded guy.

One man. One cancer diagnosis. One feature-length film. About how 17,000 men gain membership every month in a group this one man calls, The Men's Club.

The man is Rocky Galgano. He is 58 years old. He is a retired police officer. And he happens to be a member of the very club he features in his film -- a club full of men living with prostate cancer.

Galgano created his documentary as a companion to all the densely-written books and resources he found filled to the brim with medical jargon about a disease that will strike 218,890 and kill 27,050 men this year alone.

Men are reluctant to talk about prostate cancer or get tested for the disease, says Galgano. And yet this form of cancer can be cured if caught early. So Galgano stepped to the plate and started talking. He talks about his personal experience, and he talks about different types of treatment. He has nine different doctors talk. He has cancer survivors talk. And he says he wants as many people as possible to see this film.

Galgano is working on distribution and says he's close to a deal with Amazon.com. He also plans to market the not-yet-rated film to urologists across the country, and he will soon sell his masterpiece -- a trailer can be seen here -- on his website for $19.95.

An independent report revealed recently that women employed at the Toowong site of ABC's former Brisbane studios in Australia were six times more likely to develop breast cancer than other women.

The site has been vacated. And the hunt is on -- for the cause of this unusually high rate of the disease.

No luck yet -- but new findings, while not definitive on what has caused this cluster, do indicate exposure to electromagnetic fields (EMF) is not a factor -- because the low frequency fields at the site were typical of other workplaces and residences, without any such cancer cluster.

Further testing will take place in an attempt to solve this on-going mystery, chronicled in the posts that follow.

ABC journalists walk out over cancer cluster concerns
Breast cancer cluster closes ABC studios in Australia
Connecting the clues in Australia cancer cluster

I tend to think of cancer as a gift. I think it helps me prioritize life's details. I believe it has taught me to stress less. I know it's made me more sensitive to others sharing this planet with me. Yes, cancer has made me a better person. And I consider that a gift.

This is not how writer Lauren Terrazzano describes her dance with cancer.

"The truth is, having cancer just pisses me off," says Terrazzano.

"I wish I could be one of those people who has had the epiphany, who believes the disease has given me valuable insight into life. OK, I occasionally feel that way, but it might just be the pain medication."

Neither of us is right. We just have different takes on living with a deadly disease. And our opposite viewpoints make for a rather enlightening study on how cancer affects us all so differently.

I regularly write about the blessings I've found in the midst of cancer. So for today's Thought for the Day, I present to you some thoughts from Terrazzano about how cancer is not always a gift.

Think about this:

On cancer making her a better person

I don't really remember what kind of person I was before cancer. While I may not be better, I am definitely blunter.

I often say whatever I want to whomever I want, whenever the moment strikes me. These flashes can be toxic to those around me. I once yelled at a homeless man who asked me for a dollar. I yell at my husband sometimes, arguing about stupid things like how to shove a brisket into the freezer, above the peas and spinach.

And I sometimes wish bad things on bad people. Mostly the high-octane evil people, like Osama bin Laden (Why can't he have to go through chemotherapy? Why can't he have a good dose of radiation?). Are these really the musings of a better person?

On living each day as if it's your last

Nope. Can't do it.

While sometimes I am the carpe diem sort of girl, I want to live each day like just another day. I want to watch When Harry Met Sally for the 17th time or surf the Internet for new pictures of Britney Spears' bald head. Then I want to cap it off by several hours of reading. Forget Tolstoy, though. I'd rather read People magazine. Why do I have to cram life into 20 seconds, while other people have the luxury of doing it over the span of 20 years?

On why she is not so brave

Firefighters and police officers who plunge head first into dangerous situations are brave. A child protective worker who gets paid next to nothing and tries to be a mother to as many as 50 dysfunctional families is brave. Those people chose their positions in life. Cancer chose me. It's not bravery that gets me up every morning to try to beat back the monster. It's a survival instinct that kicks in, pure Darwinism.

The fact is, most of the time I am scared to death. I wear Band-Aids far too long because I can't take the agony of pulling them off. I hate needles (though I don't know anyone who likes them). Why is it that people who hate getting blood drawn are the ones who usually end up with serious illnesses that require getting stuck often? It's a mystery of the universe, much like why tornadoes seem to seek out trailer parks to do their damage.

Men Bleed Too is a story written by Thomas Brown. Thomas kept a journal and recorded his wife Barbara's journey through breast cancer, starting in December of 1992, after a cancerous tumor was found in Barbara's right breast.

This book, compiled from the journal entries that captured Thomas's life while going through breast cancer with his wife, provides basic information to help the male caretaker though the process and journey of dealing with a loved one diagnosed with cancer. He talks about medical decisions, care management, medications, treatments prescribed, and the emotional roller coaster of feelings he had when confronted with bad or good news.

This book can give the caregiver of someone diagnosed with cancer a feeling that they are not alone in the daily issues they have to face.

Sadly, Barbara died two years after fighting the disease.

Thomas has since married Connie, who encouraged him to turn his journals into a book. He is also at work on his second book entitled She Taught Me How to Laugh Again. In this story he relates how he and Connie met, helped each other through the grieving process and moved forward with their lives.

Celebrex (celecoxib) does not seem to show any benefit in patients receiving second line chemotherapy for lung cancer. Second line chemotherapy refers to treatment given when the initial treatment does not work or stops working.

According to the results of a phase II clinical trial published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, the effectiveness of Celebrex is not seen when added to chemotherapy for patients with non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Researches conducted the trial among 133 patients with stage IIIB or Stage IV NSCLC. Aside from pain, the addition of Celebrex did not improve patient symptoms or outcomes. One year survival was 24 percent among patients treated with Celebrex and chemotherapy and 36 percent among patients treated with chemotherapy alone.

Celebrex is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory agent that inhibits the COX-2 enzyme, which plays a role in inflammation. There has been some evidence that COX-2 inhibitors may increase response to chemotherapy. Further research needs to be conducted since it is still possible that specific subsets of patients with NSCLC may benefit from COX-2 inhibitors.

The Cancer Research UK conducted a survey of breast cancer survivors and found more than half admit they have missed taking the scheduled doses of chemoprevention medication. The three most common reasons the women gave for not taking the medicine were: tablets hard to swallow, difficulty in coping with side-effects and the fact that drugs were a constant reminder of illness. In addition, some women simply forgot to take the prescribed medication in a timely manner.

Experts believe a lack of communication with women in regard to handling the side effects of drugs and the importance of staying with treatment the entire length of time prescribed to prevent recurrence, might be lacking. They also feel that more needs to be done to understand why women would willingly chose to discontinue or interrupt long-term chemoprevention drug treatment.

The study was a small one involving 131 women who were at least two years past initial breast cancer diagnosis, but I am certain that given a larger study researchers might realize the same findings. In my opinion, after breast cancer diagnosis -- surgery, chemotherapy, radiation -- or a combination of all three treatments -- is not only a physical challenge but an emotional one. Once past active treatment, the resources and support for breast cancer survivors can fall off dramatically while the difficult issues of being a breast cancer survivor remain.

Charlie Emrich, in Glowing chickens bring hope in fight against cancer, calls fluorescent chickens, "cool in a creepy, mad-scientist sort of way." When you consider that scientists have combined jellyfish DNA with chickens to create illuminated birds, you can kind of see it from Emrich's descriptive perspective.

The purpose of chickens that glow, is that scientists can track antibody-based therapies that might prove valuable in treating human cancers.

UC Davis Cancer Center Dr. Joseph Tuscano explains that, "One of the problems with modern drugs is that they're not very specific. Even aspirin is not very specific. Antibodies, on the other hand are highly, highly specific meaning that, like an archer's arrow, they can effectively target a disease. Antibody-based therapies are one of the biggest advances in cancer treatment in the last 40 years."

Emrich quotes researchers of the project and takes you through the purpose and process of genetically-modified glow-in-the-dark chickens in the potential development of antibody-based therapies to one day treat cancer here.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a health warning to consumers that drinking high-strength hydrogen peroxide products sold online are extremely corrosive and can lead to stomach irritation or ulcers; and injecting the solution intravenously could lead to blood vessel inflammation, bubbles in blood vessels and potentially life-threatening allergic reaction.

In addition, the FDA has issued warnings to two Texas-based firms, DFWX and Frad 35 Inc., who are illegally selling 35 percent hydrogen peroxide products to treat AIDS, cancer, emphysema and other serious diseases.

To understand the strength of the hydrogen peroxide the FDA is referring to, high-strength hydrogen peroxide is 35 percent while the strength of hydrogen peroxide solution sold over-the-counter for disinfecting wounds is only 3 percent.

According to the news release, Donald Worden, owner of Frad 35 Inc., said he would continue selling his 35 percent hydrogen peroxide product and that his website provided links to information about potential medical uses but that he was not promoting his products for that purpose.

The FDA has issued a warning about this product. You have been warned.

Based on a survey, researchers are suggesting that doctors might need to ask women patients specifically about the paternal history of breast cancer in their family because some women do not appear to know that both sides of the family tree are equally important -- or are simply underreporting that information. When 800 women were asked about a family history for breast cancer, more women reported the mother's family history for the disease, less for the father's family history for the disease.

Virginia Commonwealth University researchers speculate part of the reason for the lack of paternal history being reported is that men in a family are less likely to be told of a woman relative who has been diagnosed with breast cancer and therefore be unable to share the family history accurately.

In regard to this study, the American Journal of Preventive Medicine stated, "family history of breast cancer is a risk factor for the disease, so any underreporting could have serious consequences for the accuracy of screening for breast cancer."

This is our informal poll to see if we get different results than the survery did. Do you know both sides of your family history for breast cancer and do you report information about both sides as equally relevant? If you are a woman, when asked about family history for breast cancer, have you been asked about the history for both sides of your family?

Reuters has just issued an update on Eli Lilly's announcement that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, FDA, approved the use of Gemzar in the treatment of recurrent ovarian cancer, questioning why the company omitted information that the FDA approval goes against the advice of an FDA advisory panel earlier this year that strongly recommended against approval of the drug for this use.

The FDA approved use of Gemzar in combination with carboplatin, in chemotherapy treatment for women with advanced ovarian cancer that has relapsed at least six months after initial therapy. The reason the FDA advisory panel voted against the approval of the use of Gemzar in combination with carboplatin, were due to questions raised about Lilly's trial data and the way the company conducted the 356-person clinical study. The panel was concerned that patients in the late-stage clinical trial failed to survive longer than those taking carboplatin alone. The FDA went ahead and approved it after the drug company provided additional information.

What needs to be made clear is that Gemzar does not seem to prolong the life of women with recurrent ovarian cancer, and the drug company is only stating that Gemzar provides longer progression-free survival than patients taking carboplatin alone. Progression-free survival measures the time before the disease recurs or worsens.

According to Reuters, when a spokesperson for Lilly was asked why they did not mention in its release that the FDA advisory panel had voted against the approval of Gemzar, or the drug's failure to prolong life, he said, "I'm not sure that needed to be the focus."

There is no doubt that the new cervical cancer vaccine -- Gardasil -- is revolutionary. But writer Peter Sprigg, vice president for policy at the Family Research Council, shared yesterday on the washingtonpost.com that the public should consider two cautions when digesting the news of this breakthrough medical advance. He urges us, first, to understand that the vaccine is not 100 percent effective. It is 100 percent effective for the strains of human papillomavirus (HPV) it targets -- but it leaves 30 percent of HPV strains that cause cervical cancer untouched. And it does not prevent all cases of genital warts either. So it is largely effective. But it does not completely eradicate the disease.

Sprigg also believes that parents should determine whether or not their young girls get the vaccine -- that it should not be mandatory. Mandating the vaccine might be in order if HPV was spread through blood or casual contact. But it is not -- it is spread by sexual contact. And families of young girls might best address this issue through education on behavioral issues alone, without interference from the government.

The wonder of the cervical cancer vaccine is not in question by this writer and the council he represents. But there is often a full picture that lingers behind good news and sensational headlines. And Peter Sprigg offers his take on what he believes lingers behind.

Exercise and physical activity should benefit all areas of health, including cancer prevention, but in the case of ovarian cancer, researchers are stating that it doesn't seem to make a difference in the number of women who go on to be diagnosed with ovarian cancer.

Karolinska Institute in Stockholm researchers tracked 96,000 women from Norway and Sweden for over a decade, noting levels of physical activity at different points in each woman's life to ovarian cancer diagnosis among all women in the group, and found the risk of developing ovarian cancer was the same for women who were very physically active compared to women who did not move around too much.

Of course, the study lead Dr. Elisabete Weiderpass from the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm emphatically stresses that "Despite not protecting for ovarian cancer, physical activity has so many other positive health effects that women should be encouraged to exercise daily, if possible." I'd have to second that advice. There are too many good reasons why physical activity is essential to good health. While this study does not indicate a benefit to lowering ovarian cancer risk, later it might be found that there were other extenuating circumstances to the study that made it look like exercise was not a benefit when it turns out to be one. Studies can go that way.