Not too many years ago, I got breast cancer. I call it chance, coincidence, fate and on some days, even luck. For today's purposes, I'll call it foreshadowing.

I didn't know it then -- way back in 1993 when I did a genogram project in grad school for a counseling class -- but it seems cancer was in my cards. I hinted at the possibility in my research paper and commented on how my family history might put me in the direct line of fire. But my suspicions in no way caused me any worry for the 10 plus years that followed. And still, even after my breast cancer diagnosis and subsequent treatment, I didn't remember I'd predicted this might happen to me. Not until I pulled my yellowed, faded assignment from an old box in the garage a few days ago did I realize it's not all that odd that cancer headed right for me.

A genogram is a graphic representation of a family tree that displays detailed data on relationships among individuals. It contains names, genders, birth dates, death dates, levels of education, occupations, major life events, and chronic illness. It's not uncommon to find on a genogram patterns of alcoholism, depression, divorce, remarriage, and yes, cancer.

Daily consumption of red meat increases the risk of breast cancer. Daily consumption of red meat doesn't increase the risk of breast cancer. Ahhh. Which one is it?

In a previous post, I cited research that supported the increased risk. And now I've come across something new.

Think about this:

A nutritionist from New Zealand is disputing research, published in the British Journal of Cancer, claiming that women who ate more than100g of meat each day had the highest risk of developing breast cancer.

The second issue of the magazine Beyond: Live & Thrive After Breast Cancer will hit newsstands March 20.

The magazine, one of many targeting individuals with manageable conditions and diseases, such as allergies, heart disease, diabetes, and rheumatoid arthritis, stands out as an upbeat, positive, feel-good package of information and inspiration.

University of Mississippi journalism professor Samir Husni says magazines of this sort that succeed are the ones offering up a good dose of chicken soup for the soul. This is definitely a magazine good for the soul.

Beyond editor Martha Miller Johnson calls the magazine a purveyor of hope and information, a source of reliable facts, figures, and features for the growing community of survivors living with breast cancer. Beyond is for "the women who has been through her initial treatment and now sees her life through a different prism," says Johnson.

"Her body's changed, her skin's changed. To her, it's not a death sentence; it's a condition she just has to live with. More and more women are living with breast cancer."

The soon-to-be-released publication spotlights breast cancer survivor Deanna Favre with husband Brett Favre and includes stories about breast cancer and black women, chemotherapy and weight gain, and the most important questions to ask your doctor.

Why pick up a copy of Beyond's Spring/Summer issue this March 20? Because breast cancer attacks so many aspects of our well-being, says one survivor of the disease.

"It's your identity, it's your sexuality, it's your womanhood. Fertility. For many of us, it throws us into menopause early," she says. "Every aspect of your emotional and psychological well-being is impacted by cancer and the treatment. So that kind of puts it in its own category, I think. So you combine that with the fact that there are so many women going through it, and I think you do have a market there for something like this."

I couldn't have said it better.

In a radical new approach to attacking cancer, researchers will soon attempt to kill tumors by infecting them with viruses that cause ailments like the common cold.

This virus therapy treatment -- considered the third pillar alongside chemotherapy and radiation -- could one day become standard battle against cancer.

One Belfast doctor says anything that could improve the lives of cancer patients is worth a try. And try is exactly what Leonard Seymour, Professor of Gene Therapy at Oxford University, plans to do when he begins leading trials later this year.

Seymour, who has been working with viruses that kill cancer cells while sparing healthy tissue, will use a stealth virus masked from the body's immune system with a polymer coat that could travel through the bloodstream and reach tumors.

Two viruses are likely candidates for study in the first clinical trials -- adenovirus, cause of a cold-like virus, and vaccinia, cause of cowpox and a component in the smallpox vaccine.

Preliminary research on mice shows that virus therapy works well on tumors resistant to standard cancer drugs. But several years of trials will be necessary before the therapy can be considered for use on all cancers.

Twenty years from now, no one will die of cancer and heart disease, according to an expert in Perth, who believes advances in genetic technology will one day leave death by cancer in the dust.

Professor John Shine, director of the Garvan Institute for Medical Research in Sydney, says people will still get cancer -- they just won't die from it. He shared last week at a genetics conference in Perth, "I think there's no doubt death from cancer will be confined to the annals of history, And I think a very similar thing will apply to heart disease."

Despite reservations from some about genetic technology, Shine believes the desire to combat cancer -- once and for all -- will prevail over political opinion. And so that leaves only technical obstacles in the way. It's just a matter of time before these scientific hurdles are no longer issues.

Shine, known as the father of cloning, pioneered gene research in the 1970s when he identified the genes for insulin and the human growth hormone.

Dr. Chandra Belani, Professor of Medicine and Oncology at the University of Pittsburg Cancer Institute, is a leader in the study of lung cancer. During a podcast interview, Belani shares some thoughts on the state of lung cancer -- currently the most common cause of cancer death in the United States.

Belani reveals that progress in the areas of lung cancer prevention, screening, diagnosis, and treatment can best be described as modest. There has been some progress -- and there are many on-going studies in these areas -- but there are no major breakthrough stories. Belani says there has been modest progress in diagnosis with the use of CT scans and PET scans -- and a combination of the two. There has been modest progress in chemotherapy treatment options. There has been no significant advance in detection -- and prevention is mostly in the hands of each individual since 90 percent of lung cancer cases are related to smoking.

Belani shares that true achievement would come with the discovery of a biomarker to detect lung cancer early and to lower overall mortality rates. He would also like to determine why he is seeing an increase in lung cancer cases among non-smokers.

The bar is being raised, says Belani. But it's slow going.

If we made no further progress in breast cancer research from this day on, the number of women dying from breast cancer five years from now would still drop substantially because we've progressed so much over the past few years, says MD Eric Winer in the October 2006 issue of Oprah magazine. Winer, director of the Breast Oncology Center at Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and associate professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, is right. There has been a lot of progress. Breast cancer research is on a roll. And here are seven reasons why.

Former New York City cab driver and NASCAR Winston Cup Series champion Benny Parsons said in an interview that when people find out he has been diagnosed with lung cancer, the first question they ask is, "are you a smoker?" At one time, yes he did smoke, but he quit in 1978. Parsons says since quitting he grew to dislike smoking so much that he prohibits his golf buddies from smoking around him.

Parsons is a Daytona 500 and Coca-Cola 600 winner in addition to being a NASCAR champion. Today, he works as a NASCAR television and radio commentator. He was diagnosed with lung cancer after he developed trouble breathing and went in for a checkup. He plans to keep working as an analyst on NBC and TNT's coverage of Nextel Cup racing and hosting Fast Talk with Benny Parsons on the Performance Racing Network while undergoing cancer treatments.

In 1989, Parsons won the CableACE Award for the best sports analyst on cable television in his first year in broadcasting with ESPN. In 1996, Parsons won an NASCAR Emmy for his NASCAR racing telecasts is called The Professor because of his humorous remarks and relaxed personality.