On Friday, Walgreen Co. was ordered by a jury to pay $25.8 million to the family of a cancer patient given a medication that caused a stroke and then several years later, death.

Beth Hippely was prescribed Warfarin, a blood thinner, in 2002 while being treated for breast cancer. According to court documents, the prescription she received at a Walgreen's pharmacy was 10 times what it should have been. The overdose caused a cerebral hemorrhage which led to permanent bodily injury, disability, pain, and then death. Hippely, a mother of three, died at the age of 46. Apparently, the error occurred when a 19-year-old pharmacy technician misfiled the prescription.

Hippely's family has been seeking justice for five years.

Millions of Americans use vitamins and supplements as a measure of protection against disease, including cancer. Some patients integrate such supplements into their treatment plans as a complement to traditional medicine.

Last Friday, the FDA said it will phase in a new rule that all manufacturers of vitamins, herbal and other dietary supplements will have to test the ingredients of such products for safety. This rule is intended to ensure that the ingredients on the label match up with the ingredients in the supplement and that no contamination has occurred.

According to an article in the Washington Post, Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of the Public Citizen's Health Research Group, is still not satisfied. Dr. Wolfe said, "You still don't have to show the product is safe. You don't have to prove it works."

While there still might be a lot of work to be done on this issue, this action is a step in the right direction.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has something important to say about the sugar substitute aspartame.

Think about this:

Italian researchers concluded in 2005 that aspartame causes cancer. But Laura Tarantino of the FDA Office of Food Additive Safety concludes after a review of the study data that the low-calorie sweetener is not a carcinogen.

A similar review by the FDA's European counterpart agrees. There is no evidence this substance, used for 25 years to sweeten soda, gum, dairy products, and some medications, causes cancer.

Italian researchers say they will release their latest aspartame study results on Monday.

How do we know what is safe when choosing vitamins? I did a post about vitamins and mentioned that I take Flintstones. Maybe Flintstones are not the best choice for an adult but I like them, they taste good. I try and eat lots of fruits and green veggies but thought that a daily supplement with lots of vitamins and minerals can give me what I might miss.

I received a comment from someone that got me thinking about what else is in the bottle of Flintstones besides the vitamins and minerals. I did look at the back of the bottle and saw a lot of strange ingredients that I know nothing about. So, I'm not advocating taking Flintstones to anyone. Just to make that clear.

If you are thinking about taking dietary supplements such as vitamins, herbals or botanicals as alternative or complementary cancer treatments you need to consider your choice carefully. Few governmental standards are in place to control the production and ensure the safety, effectiveness, and quality of dietary supplements. So, it falls to you, the consumer, to gather truthful information about using these products safely.

The American Cancer Society website lists guidelines for choosing dietary supplement products:

• First, speak with your doctor or other health care provider about any supplement you might consider taking. He or she can probably tell you if the supplement has any risks to your health and if the supplement is safe to take with other medications you may be taking.

• Find information on the product written by recognized medical experts or government agencies. Bring this information to your doctor's attention. You can start on the Web by visiting the National Institutes of Health's Office of Dietary Supplements at http://dietary-supplements.info.nih.gov/ and clicking on Health Information."

• When you shop for supplements, look for the USP notation on the package label.

• If you are shopping for a botanical supplement, make sure to find a product that uses only the effective part of the plant. Avoid botanicals that have been made using the entire plant, unless the entire plant is recommended.

• Remember that a product described as "natural" is not necessarily safer or more effective.

• Consider the name and reputation of the manufacturer or distributor. Is it a nationally known name? Large companies with a reputation to uphold are more likely to manufacture their products under strict, quality-controlled conditions.

• Does the label provide a way to contact the company if you have questions or concerns about their product? Reputable manufacturers will provide contact information on the label or packaging of their products.

• Contact the manufacturer and ask about their quality control procedures and manufacturing processes.

• Try to avoid mixtures of many different supplements. The more ingredients, the greater the chances of harmful effects.

• Avoid supplements priced significantly lower than comparable products; they are likely to be of lower quality.

• Avoid products that claim to be "miracle cures," "breakthroughs," or "new discoveries," to have benefits but no side effects, or to be based on a "secret ingredient" or method. Such claims are almost always fraudulent, and the product may contain potentially harmful substances or contaminants.

• Avoid products that claim to be effective treatment for a wide variety of unrelated illnesses.

• Avoid products that claim to be safe or effective based solely on testimonials.

Some scientists believe that surgery to remove a breast tumor may actually help the cancer spread and have recently reported that this same belief may be the exact reason black women are more likely to die of breast cancer.

There is apparently a widespread belief in parts of Africa and the United States that removing a tumor hastens death.

"I must say that I am sure there is more to this than just a myth," said Michael Retsky of Children's Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston, who shares his opinions in the International Journal of Surgery.

Retsky still urges any woman with breast cancer to have her tumor removed. And he says chemotherapy is such standard practice for any cancer threatening to spread. It's a safety net of sorts to catch the cells that get away. So if surgery causes cancer to spread, then in theory, chemotherapy should stop the spread.

Retsky, who is not suggesting any change in clinical practice, thinks the subject needs far more research. American Cancer Society experts, who tend to question this theory, agree.

"Whether or not the theory is correct, I have difficulty with the logic that they employed to get there," said oncologist Dr. Len Lichtenfeld of the American Cancer Society who says women should never delay treatment for breast cancer.

Retsky believes that perhaps surgery, by wounding the body, causes it to produce growth factors that fuel the growth of other, tiny tumors. Or maybe a primary tumor secretes some sort of factor that holds the other tumors in check. When the main tumor is removed, the smaller tumors grow.

But it could be that surgery does not cause a spread at all – and that any belief of this nature has no connection with breast cancer tendencies in black women. It may be that black women just have a genetic predisposition for more aggressive forms of the disease.

Wyeth officials say their hormone replacement therapy Prempro is not the cause of one Ohio woman's breast cancer. But two jury decisions prove otherwise.

The first jury, in October, awarded Jennie Nelson and her husband $1.5 million in compensatory damages, validating Nelson's claim that her breast cancer -- resulting in a double mastectomy, chemotherapy, and radiation -- was caused by the Prempro she took for six years. When this verdict was thrown out due to a mistrial, a retrial began.

The retrial concluded yesterday -- with a Philadelphia jury awarding the Nelsons this time with $3 million.

"Both times this case has been heard on terms established by Wyeth and still the juries have clearly found that Prempro causes breast cancer," says Nelson's attorney Tobias Millrood, adding that Wyeth puts sales ahead of patient safety.

Wyeth respectfully disagrees and argues that it acted responsibly in the promotion of its hormone replacement products and in disclosing with doctors and patients all therapy-associated health risks.

Millions of women have used Wyeth's hormone replacement therapies to control the effects of menopause, and the company, sanctioned in January to pay $1 million to an Arkansas breast cancer survivor, now faces more than 5,000 lawsuits of this same nature.

Despite a large-scale study revealing drugs like Prempro increase the risk of breast cancer if used for five years or more, the drug still remains on the market. And Wyeth is so sure their drug is not at fault for causing Nelson's breast cancer that they plan to appeal yesterday's verdict.

Katherine Schaefer was investigating methods for treating the inflammation seen in Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis when something terrible happened -- she noticed her carefully cultured cells were dead. And then something wonderful happened -- she realized she had stumbled upon a potential new method of attacking cancerous tumors that have become resistant to existing drugs.

Schaefer and her colleagues at the University of Rochester Medical Center in New York were testing a compound called a PPAR-gamma modulator -- a compound never considered a cancer drug, or a drug of any kind really -- when Schaefer made a calculation error and used a lot more of the compound than she should have. And her cells died.

Upon further study, Schaefer found the compound killed just about every possible epithelial tumor cell. These cells line organs such as the colon and also the skin. The compound, that works like taxane drugs but without eventual tumor resistance, also killed colon tumors in mice without making them sick.

The research team, whose findings are published in the journal International Cancer Research, plans more safety tests in mice. And eventually, if their outcomes are promising, they plan to design something they can patent as a new drug -- because they would love to see this disastrous lab experiment one day lead to treatment for cancers of the colon, esophagus, liver, and skin.

On December 8, 2006, I wrote about a Danish study investigating the possible link between cell phone use and cancer. This largest-ever study of it's kind put fears to rest. Cell phones do not cause cancer, said researchers who announced that cell phone users -- even long-term users -- are at no more risk of developing cancer than their non-cell phone using counterparts.

There's just no biological basis for concern about radio waves, reported the lead investigator of this study. But another newer study reports something entirely different.

Long-term mobile phone users are more likely to develop cancer -- brain cancer, on the side of the head where the phone is held -- according to the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Finland. It will all be detailed later this year in the International Journal of Cancer, but the general gist of the study is already circulating.

The study -- the second one to suggest an increased risk of cancer due to emissions from cell phones -- found that people who regularly used cell phones for more than 10 years were 40 percent more likely to develop nervous system tumors called gliomas. Comparisons were made between 1,521 people with gliomas and 3,301 people without the tumors. While no connections were initially made between the phones and cancer, a link was found when researchers specifically focused on those who had used their phones for more than 10 years.

Short-term use of cell phones has never been linked to cancer. That's good. But I tend to believe cell phones are going to become even more a staple of our technologically-driven lives than they are now. And so 10 years may actually be considered short-term one day -- which means we all may soon be at risk.

For now, until research becomes more conclusive, we get to pick and choose which study to stand behind. So take your pick -- and stay tuned for future scientific revelations.

I'm not a big sports fan. But everyone in my family is, and I live in Gainesville, Florida -- home of the Florida Gators -- so by default, I've come to know a bit about sports. And I tend to get caught up in the orange and blue spirit that lives in this town. It's contagious.

I am thrilled that the Gator football team beat Ohio State Monday night, earning the 2007 National Championship title. But I am even more thrilled that one player -- safety Reggie Nelson -- gets to claim this victory, for himself and for his mother, who passed away on December 21 after a three-year battle with breast cancer.

It must have been a bittersweet win for Nelson, who talked with his mom on the phone prior to each of his games. She was his biggest fan and one of his toughest coaches. She cheered him on and offered critiques all the same.

But there was no phone call Monday night -- before Nelson's biggest game ever. But his mom was surely present to witness the wonder and glory of her son. And Nelson surely made every move on that field in honor of her.

"My mom's my life and my best friend," he said prior to her death. "Everything I do is because of her. She's always in my mind."

Nelson did not speak to the media between the time of his mother's death and his match-up with Ohio State. According to the BCS contract, all players must be made available to the media during media day. But the University of Florida struck an agreement with the BCS to waive the clause for Nelson so he could begin to heal from his loss, without the stress of the Arizona media frenzy.

It's been a difficult time for Nelson who is now speaking out about his mom.

"A person never gets over losing his mother," Nelson said on the field Monday night, as confetti fluttered on the national champs. "I'm a Momma's boy at heart. All I wanted was to make her proud."

Previous posts about Reggie Nelson and his mom are as follows:
Florida Gator Reggie Nelson loses mom to breast cancer
Florida Gator would trade football for family

It has just recently been discovered that CT scans for children have been inappropriately used in two Ontario hospitals. As a result, some children have received excessive doses of radiation, putting them at greater risk of developing cancer later in life.

Staff at the two hospitals -- Peterborough Regional Health Centre is one -- reported that in close to 50 percent of selected cases, the appropriate equipment settings were not used.

Herein lies the problem -- developing organs are more susceptible to damage, and giving a small child an adult dose of radiation in a CT scan delivers the same amount of radiation as 4,000 traditional X-rays. Research shows that increased exposure to radiation over time can cause radiation-induced cancer.

CT scans are valuable diagnostic tools because they create 3-D images of organs, offering a better view of head injuries, chest trauma, cancer, and fractures. So they should not be disregarded -- but clearly, hospitals need to improve the management of all scanning procedures.

In Ontario, a diagnostic image safety committee has already been formed. The goal of this committee is to develop standards and do a better job of tracking radiation levels.

Experts are encouraging Ontario parents to refrain from worry unless their children have received many CT scans. And all parents are encouraged to speak up before their children receive CT scans. "Is my child receiving a pediatric protocol?" is all it takes.

Florida safety Reggie Nelson said recently he would give up football if he could ensure his mother would survive the breast cancer she had been battling since October 2003. Sadly, such a trade was not possible.

Mary Lakes died Thursday night, just after her son arrived at her Melbourne home following the second-ranked Gators' final pre-Christmas practice in Gainesville.

Lakes, whose illness prevented her from regularly witnessing the wonder of her All-American son -- a possible first-round draft pick -- was able to see Nelson play in September. And while she rarely got to sit in the stands, Lakes and Nelson had a very close relationship.

"Reggie had a special relationship with his mother," Florida coach Urban Meyer said. "She was a tremendous person and an inspiration for Reggie and many others. Our entire football program is deeply saddened and in mourning. We will remain by Reggie's side and provide emotional and spiritual support for him during this difficult time."

Nelson will soon head to Arizona where he and his Florida Gator teammates will take on the Ohio State Buckeyes for the 2007 National Championship title.

Cell phones don't cause cancer, according to a major study from Denmark that tracked 420,000 Danish cell phone users -- many of them users for more than 10 years and some for more than 20 years.

In the largest ever study to yield good news about the safety of cell phones, scientists matched phone records to the Danish Cancer Registry -- a listing that records every citizen who gets the disease -- and on Tuesday, the study results were revealed.

Cell-phone users are no more likely than anyone else to develop cancer.

But the lead researcher of this massive investigation says doubts will surely linger. There is really no biological basis for concern about radio waves, he says. But people still worry.

Cell phones beam radiofrequency energy that can penetrate the outer edge of the brain, causing suspicion about the origin of various cancers. Most research has found no link between cell phones and cancer, but the phones have never been given a definite clean bill of health either.

"As the body of evidence accumulates, people can become reassured that these devices are safe," says one cell phone researcher.

The evidence is stacking up. And it seems almost everyone will soon agree that exercising can help prevent a return of cancer for those who have already done battle with the disease.

The American Cancer Society just issued a report updating nutrition and physical activity recommendations for cancer survivors. Exercise tops the list of recommendations.

For some types of cancers, exercising for just one to three hours per week can lower the risk of cancer recurrence and death, as well as death from all causes. Exercise has also been shown to improve fitness, diminish fatigue, and boost quality of life for survivors.

The report also states that while a vegetarian diet may be healthful in some ways, there is no direct proof that the diet can prevent cancer recurrence. Survivors who do choose a vegetarian lifestyle should ensure they are receiving an adequate intake of nutrients.

A standard multivitamin and mineral supplement equivalent to 100 percent of the Daily Value can help survivors meet their nutrient needs when it's difficult to eat a healthy diet. Some supplements -- such as those high in folic acid or antioxidants -- may be harmful during cancer treatment.

According to the American Cancer Society, food safety is especially important for cancer survivors, especially during treatment that causes immunosuppression.

And then there's alcohol. Alcohol can affect the risk for new primary cancers and should be used sparingly -- or not at all.

If you live in the northern hemisphere, we are fully into the fall season. In the southern hemisphere, they are enjoying spring, and looking forward to the upcoming summer. To maximize daylight hours, we turn our clocks ahead one hour each spring, and turn the clocks back one hour each fall. However, this has become a bit of a debate in Australia, as Queensland Premier Peter Beattie is digging in his heels, locking his knees, and crossing his arms against his chest in refusing to follow fellow countrymen in Western Australia when it comes to considering the policy of instituting daylight saving time.

Beattie is well-intentioned but ill-informed in his concern that the extra hour of light might increase the already high risk of skin cancer in Queensland. Adding an extra hour at the end of the day -- or the beginning of the day -- depending on how you want to view it, will not increase skin cancer risks resulting from excessive exposure to sunlight. The hours of the day when the sun is most damaging, and most dangerous in increasing skin cancer risks, is the middle of the day from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.

According to The Skin Foundation, to reduce skin cancer risks, we need to protect ourselves year-round by staying out of the sun during peak hours of 10a.m. to 4p.m., by wearing a broad-spectrum sunscreen with a sun protection factor SPF 15 or higher, wearing a broad-brimmed hat and UV-blocking sunglasses, avoiding the use of tanning parlors and artificial tanning devices, keeping newborns out of the sun, teaching children good sun-protective practices, examining skin from head-to-toe once a month, having a professional examination annually, and avoiding sunburn.

For more information about skin cancer myths and fact, read Skin cancer myths debunked by dermatologists.

It is said that 79-year-old Leonard Kulisek had not suffered any major illness in the years before his unfortunate death, except he did have a prescription for his gout. The Walgreens pharmacist who filled Kulisek's prescription was working under the influence of OxyContin and hydrocodone. Instead of gout medicine, the bottle was filled with insulin pills. The next day, Kulisek slipped into a coma, and for the next 22 months suffered a series of health issues before he died.

The pharmacist admitted to being addicted to painkillers for eight years, and had stolen over 86,000 pills from the pharmacy where he worked. The jurors held Walgreens responsible for failing to catch the drug thefts or notice that the pharmacist had an addiction problem. Walgreens must pay $31 million dollars to the Kulisek family. Walgreens plans an appeal.

Medication errors can occur for a number of reasons. What can you do to avoid medication errors? According to Rx for Safety, the most common reasons that errors happen are:

• Incomplete information about a patient.
• Incomplete information about a medication, such as warnings or side effects.
• Poor communication regarding a prescription such as illegible handwriting, confusion between similar drug names, misuse of zeroes or decimal points or inappropriate abbreviations.
• Lack of appropriate labeling on the drug container or pharmacy shelf.

Before you leave the doctor's office, look at the written prescription. Can you read the handwriting? If you cannot, the pharmacist might have a problem reading it accurately. When you have your prescription filled, ask the pharmacist to answer any questions you might have regarding the medication. Check to make sure that printed literature is included with the prescription detailing information about side effects and proper dosages. On the side of the prescription bottle is a label that describes what the pill looks like. Check to make sure the description of the pill matches the pills inside the bottle.

For more information on additional safeguards, read Avoiding Medical Errors at RX for Safety.