You should think about protecting your pets from secondhand smoke. According to researchers at Oklahoma State University, secondhand smoke has been determined cancer-causing for household pets, such as dogs, cats, and birds

"There have been a number of scientific papers recently that have reported the significant health threat secondhand smoke poses to pets," says Dr. Carolynn MacAllister, an Oklahoma State University Cooperative Extension Service veterinarian. "Secondhand smoke has been associated with oral cancer and lymphoma in cats, lung and nasal cancer in dogs, as well as lung cancer in birds."

The news about smoking just keeps getting worse and worse. When we will get the hint?

Wouldn't it be great if we could receive full-body scans every year to check for early signs of cancer and other disease? Even if possible and affordable -- right now, scans cost about $900 -- it still wouldn't be such a great idea.

Full-body scans often result in false alarms. People with harmless abnormalities may end up facing more tests, more risks, and more worry in order to rule out illness. The scan itself can present health hazards too. It exposes patients to more radiation than a chest X-ray and could slightly increase the risk of cancer, especially for those scanned every year.

How do we know, then, if something has gone awry in our bodies? Well, we can do our self-exams -- breast exams, testicular exams, skin exams -- and we can report for annual check-ups. We can respond to symptoms we experience -- if headaches are bothersome and persistent, your doctor may prescribe a head scan -- and we can pursue tests and screening that we really need for cancer prevention and early detection. Here are just a few:

Did you know that at least 200,000 people die every year from cancers related to where they work? The main reasons are from inhaling asbestos fibers and second hand smoke. This was reported today by the World Health Organization (WHO).

About 125 million people are exposed to asbestos at work, leading to at least 90,000 deaths per year. Benzene, an organic compound used in rubbers, dyes and pesticides, causes thousands to die of leukemia each year. Those subjected to second hand smoke have twice the risk of developing lung cancer than those that work in a smoke free environment.

This means that we could be preventing so many cancer deaths if the industries would tighten safety standards for their employees.

I think all the time about how I'm treating my body. Just yesterday, while making a tuna sandwich I wondered if I was using too much light mayonnaise. I considered the fact that tuna contains mercury, that I should monitor how much of this product I consume.

How much is too much anyway?

I worried that my tuna was slathered on white bakery bread, a true diet no-no, and I found solace in only two items -- my hand-picked strawberries and the water I poured in my cup.

Wait, the strawberries were pretty plump, ripe, red, and juicy -- an indication they were possibly pumped full of hormones and sprayed with pesticides before I washed and gulped them down.

How did I do overall at lunch? I think maybe not so good. I did run 2.5 miles and completed 20 push-ups, a bunch of sit-ups, and few core exercises. Maybe I come out balanced in the end. Maybe not.

I think about this sort of stuff every day because of cancer. I've already had it -- and I don't want it again. So I try to eat right. I exercise. I don't smoke. I don't drink alcohol. But here's my dilemma: I did all this before my cancer diagnosis (with the exception of an occasional drink), and the disease still lived in my body -- maybe for many years before I knew it was there. What should I do differently now when I didn't do all that bad before?

Shall I exercise all day long? Eat only the most pure and untainted of foods? Somehow that doesn't seem much like living. So I suppose I'll keep on doing what I do every day -- living in moderation -- with hopes that I've had my one and only brush with cancer and that the bout I had was caused by something other than how I treat my body.

When I told my husband that the use of cannabis is being linked to a five percent increase in lung cancer risk -- that's 15 new cases each year in New Zealand where a study was just conducted -- he seemed to think this risk is comparable to his dying from a grasshopper landing in his eye.

A scientist John is not, but his thoughts on the matter seem to parallel international thinking on the drug which goes something like this: the risk marijuana use has on cancer incidence is so very low it's hardly worthy of much worry.

A California study of more than 1600 people last year found no link between cancer and smoking the drug, despite researchers' prediction they would find some kind of connection.

New Zealand researchers have found a connection, though, and however small it may seem, they say it's significant.

They found the risk of developing lung cancer increased by about eight percent each year for people whose cumulative exposure equated to smoking one joint per day -- about the same as the increase for someone who smokes one pack of cigarettes per day. They also found the younger someone starting smoking cannabis, the greater the risk and that contributing risk factors include smokers' deeper inhalation and the tendency to hold smoke in their lungs.

Cannabis, the most commonly used recreational drug in the world with 161 million users, has been thought to have a protective effect against cancer due to its chemical THC, which appears to kill aging cells and keep them from becoming cancerous. This study may prove otherwise.

According to the American Cancer Society, smoking damages most organs in the human body and is linked to at least 10 different cancers. Smoking accounts for nearly 30 percent of all cancer deaths. Yet one in four Americans still lights up. So how many days are you taking away from the longevity of your life every time you light up.

According to studies on smokers, if you smoke 1 pack of cigarettes a day for 10 years you lose 2 years of your life. If you smoke 2 packs in 10 years time you lose 4 years. If you have smoked one pack of cigarettes a day for 20 years you lose 4 years off of your life and if you smoke 2 packs a day in 20 years you lose 9 years off of your life.

You are just as much at risk if you are breathing second hand smoke. Make the commitment today to quit smoking and live longer or help someone you love give up the habit that strips away years of their lives.

Business is business. Maybe it's about making a difference in the world of consumers but mostly, it's about making money. I get that -- and if I owned my own company and offered some sort of product, surely my goal would be to reap a financial reward. And if I wanted to increase my reward, I guess I would consider new markets, new advertising, and new techniques for hauling in loads of cash.

So I see what's going on with the new Camel No. 9 cigarettes, in their hot-pink fuscia and minty-teal green packages with the slogan Light and Luscious. I understand this brand is targeting female smokers with enticing wording that Camel maker R.J. Reynolds executives say is meant to suggest dressed to the nines, putting on your best. I even get that it's a pretty savvy strategy. But somehow, it all seems so wrong.

In a world where more women die of lung cancer than breast cancer -- by a large margin -- how can anyone, even business people whose sights are set on profits, feel OK with the decision to encourage women to smoke?

Think about these passages that just recently published in a New York Times article:

Wall Street analysts praise the introduction of Camel No. 9, in regular and menthol flavors, as a further step by the R. J. Reynolds, a unit of Reynolds American, toward a new marketing strategy. The goal is to refocus on the biggest, most popular -- and most profitable -- brands, which include Kool as well as Camel.

"What we're about is giving adult smokers a choice," says one executive, "with products we believe are more appealing than existing products." The introduction of Camel No. 9 is part of plans to "focus on products that are 'wow,' " she added, "that add fun and excitement to the category."

Fun and excitement? Believe me, there's nothing fun and exciting about cancer. Now if I could only package that truth and market it to the world. I suspect I'd be a rich woman -- and I don't mean financially.

Vincent Rennich, veteran casino worker and non-smoker, is suing the Atlantic City Tropicana Casino and Resort because he claims a quarter-century of inhaling secondhand smoke gave him lung cancer. And if that's not enough to make this man upset, getting fired seals the deal.

"They threw me under the bus," Rennich said yesterday, the day after a supervisor told him he was terminated from his job. "How can you fire a guy with lung cancer who's suing you? Maybe they don't realize the ramifications. Or maybe they're heartless. Or maybe all of the above."

Tropicana officials say that Rennich was not singled out in any way, that he was just one of many let go due to a restructuring of the company. Since last January, more than 200 people have been laid off.

Rennich, 49 and a table games supervisor, has been a vocal advocate of a total smoking ban in Altantic City's 11 casinos. He has been speaking out on behalf of everyone working on the casino floors, and for himself personally.

Rennich had a third of his right lung removed in September 2005 and sees a doctor every three months to ensure his cancer does not reappear. Now that he's been fired, his health insurance will lapse in 30 days, leaving him with a monthly payment of $800 in medical bills.

Atlantic City was slated to ban all casino smoking this past January. But fierce opposition from the casino industry, predicting an estimated revenue loss of 20 percent and job losses of more than 3,400, led to a compromise. And now, effective April 15, smoking will be restricted to no more than 25 percent of the gambling floor.

Rennich is not happy about this -- or his cancer or his termination. And while he is not sure what his next step will be, he says he is definitely not backing down from his anti-smoking platform.

Secondhand smoke rears its ugly head once again -- this time in the form of study results revealing high levels of secondhand smoke in the workplace can double the risk of lung cancer for non-smokers.

Researchers at the University of Illinois at Chicago looked at results from 22 studies conducted in the United States, Canada, Europe, India, Japan, and China. What they found -- and published in the American Journal of Public Health -- is a lung cancer risk 50 percent higher than normal for non-smokers exposed to smoke on the job for more than 30 years. They also found risk increases with level of exposure.

"We believe that our study provides the strongest evidence to date that smoking in the workplace does present a substantial risk to workers -- and particularly to workers who are working in highly exposed areas such as bar workers or restaurant workers," lead researcher Leslie Stayner said.

Previous evidence for increased lung cancer risk caused by secondhand smoke comes from studies of non-smokers married to smokers.

Secondhand smoke -- also known as passive smoke and environmental tobacco smoke -- is smoke from a cigarette, pipe, or cigar as well as smoke exhaled from the lungs of smokers and inhaled by non-smokers. It can cause cancer, respiratory problems, and asthma in non-smokers and is leading to increased efforts by communities to ban or limit smoking in the workplace.

This week in France, bans begin in offices, stores, schools, and hospitals. Come January 2008, cafes and restaurants must also comply with bans. For now, smoking in these areas is permitted in hermetically sealed rooms without any services.

Dr. Len Lichtenfeld, MD, is the deputy chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society. He is also a blogger and authors his very own blog -- called Dr. Len's Cancer Blog.

Dr. Len writes on his blog about all sorts of topics related to cancer. He shares his opinion on the recent drop in breast cancer cases (December 15, 2006), he promotes the Great American Smokeout (November 14, 2006), he sounds off on lung cancer screenings (October 25, 2006), and he urges parents to always slather sunscreen on their children (October 5, 2006). He has so much more to say -- and his blog is a great stop for those wishing for more information on hot cancer topics.

As this year comes to a close, Dr. Len offers a review of what he believes were the hottest cancer topics of 2006.

Dr. Len reflects in his blog about decreased cancer death rates that represent real progress in the fight against cancer. He calls the HPV vaccine a breakthrough and he recaps the STAR trial -- a comparison of raloxifene to tamoxifen to reduce the risk of recurrent breast cancer in post-menopausal women -- with emphasis on how raloxifene proved just as effective as tamoxifen, but with a better safety profile. He calls new targeted therapies a dream -- with a hefty price tag -- sure to garner debate and discussion in 2007.

Dr. Len reviews the Surgeon General's report on second-hand smoke -- it's harmful to non-smokers, the report says -- and he marvels at the capability of science to approach an understanding of what makes a cancer cell a cancer cell. He also remarks on how remarkable it is that chronic myelogenous leukemia is in fact chronic and no longer fatal, thanks to the drug Gleevec.

Of course, there is ample attention given to the declining incidence of breast cancer, reportedly due to less women using hormone replacement therapy, and the risks weighing on those who are overweight and obese, and survivors and supporters who gathered for Celebration on the Hill -- the site of one incredible American Cancer Society event.

Dr. Len closes his review of 2006 with recognition of three celebrities who lost their lives this year to cancer -- Dana Reeve, Ann Richards, and Ed Bradley. And while he recognizes there are other lives and other stories that deserve mention, there is simply not enough time or space for him to do justice to every noteworthy item.

"What we have seen over the past year is an incredible leap forward in cancer research, diagnosis and treatment, and I suspect there are going to be even more exciting developments in the coming year," says Dr. Len who looks forward to 2007 -- a year that is sure to deliver more hope and more progress in the fight against cancer.

This past summer, a man in the business of helping smokers quit, was diagnosed with inoperable lung cancer. Just months later, anti-smoking guru Allen Carr lost his battle with cancer. On November 29th, Carr died at his home in Malaga, Spain.

A heavy smoker for 33 years before quitting 23 years ago, Carr claimed to have found an easy way to quit smoking. From that discovery, he founded The Easy Way to Stop Smoking Program, which would eventually grow into 70 clinics in 30 countries. In addition, his company publishes how-to quit smoking books, CDs, tapes and DVDs.

Using cognitive therapy, Carr told smokers interested in quitting that they could do it without willpower, without suffering withdrawal and without gaining weight. The celebrity endorsements for his program include Sir Anthony Hopkins, Sean Bean, Marie Helvin, Johnny Cash, George Harrison, Lisa Stansfield, Sir Richard Branson, Britney Spears, Susannah York, Bruce Oldfield, Stefano Gabbana and Julie Christie.

Carr is credited with helping over 25 million people to quit smoking.

An Easy Way to Stop Smoking Program clinic spokesperson was quoted as saying, "Allen spent many years in smoke-filled rooms after he quit, while treating smokers for addiction. He is certain that had he not quit, he would have died 20 years ago." Near the time of his death, Carr wrote a letter to Tony Blair urging his government and NHS to accept the easy method program. Carr was 72.

Smoking is the biggest risk factor for lung cancer -- and 90 percent of all lung cancer cases are related to smoking. But family history is a risk factor too and can nearly double the risk of developing the deadly disease.

A study published in the October issue of Chest found by studying a population of Japanese adults that people with a first-degree relative -- mother, father, or sibling -- who had lung cancer had a 95 percent higher risk of contracting the disease. Those who smoked had the greatest risk, but those who did not smoke were still at risk. And women were more at risk than men. The type of lung cancer most associated with family history is squamous cell carcinoma.

The results of this study do not yet translate into recommended guidelines for screening. But those with a family history of lung cancer should make their physicians aware of their history. And perhaps one day people with family history will be identified as high-risk for lung cancer and will be included in further studies. In the meantime, these individuals should avoid all contact with all inhaled and second-hand smoke and should protect their children from all forms of tobacco smoke.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimates that more than 180,000 cases of lung cancer are diagnosed each year. About 170,000 die from the disease every year. It's the second leading cause of death for men and the third leading cause of death for women.

Firefighters pull off heroic maneuvers all the time. Heat and smoke and fire are their constant companions. Emergency scenarios keep them perpetually challenged. Risking their lives is a top job responsibility. I can't imagine taking on this line of work, yet I am amazed by those who do -- for their eagerness to save lives while compromising their own. And to read today that cancer is another occupational hazard for firefighters makes me appreciate them even more.

In Edmonton, a firefighter who was praised as a hero for saving the life of a rookie firefighter in 2003 died on Saturday of job-related cancer at the age of 47 -- just two years after doctors diagnosed him with a terminal form of multiple myeloma. Clarke Stevens was expected to live for five years.

Ken Block, president of the Edmonton firefighters union said Stevens' death is a reminder of the risks these heroes take. Block says firefighters are between two and four times more likely to develop certain cancers, and Stevens is the fifth Edmonton firefighter to die of cancer since 2004.

It takes a special person to make saving others' lives a priority. To risk death in so many ways -- for the benefit of strangers -- must be the true definition of selflessness. And thank goodness for these selfless individuals who help keep the rest of us safe.

Coletta Barrett believed her stomach pains were caused by a gall bladder attack after eating greasy fried food. She excused a tightening in her lower abdomen as irritable bowel syndrome, and she explained blood in her stool as a response to stress. Only after a referral to a gastroenterologist led to a colonoscopy did she learn that the upper portion of her colon was almost completely blocked by a large tumor -- a cancerous tumor. Barrett was diagnosed with colon cancer. Her colonoscopy saved her life.

Barrett never once predicted she might have colon cancer. She thought the disease mostly struck older people. She was just 42. Screening tests are not even recommended until the age of 50. She had no family history of this cancer and had no typical risk factors associated with the disease. She did not smoke, was not overweight, and drank very little. But she did in fact have colon cancer -- shocking as it was -- and doctors believed her tumor had been growing for 18 months before detected. Fortunately, Barrett learned that her cancer had not spread. And she learned a few other things that she now shares as advice -- from her survivor point of view. These tips come from an article about Barrett in the August 1 Women's Day magazine.

• Barrett says, "know your body." And don't ignore or dismiss any changes that occur.
• Don't let embarrassment stop you from seeking help. Some symptoms can be difficult to discuss -- such as change in size and frequency of bowel movements, bloody stool, cramping, and bloating -- but still ask your doctor about them. Early detection is critical, she says.
• If diagnosed with colon cancer, learn as much as you can about the disease -- a well-informed patient has a better chance at a better outcome.

Barrett offers sound advice. And I think it is global advice. Knowing your body, discussing symptoms, and education after diagnosis are key for anyone. For everyone.

According to experts, nicotine alone is not a cancer-causing agent. However, Srikumar Chellappan and University of South Florida researchers report that nicotine does promote cancer by stimulating cancer cells in the growth of lung cancer tumors.

The researchers explain that tobacco smoke contains a variety of tobacco-specific carcinogens, many of which are derivatives of nicotine that are formed during the curing of tobacco. Researchers studied receptors that bind nicotine, known as nicotinic acetylcholine receptors, nAChRs, and found this process to be in part responsible in the cell proliferation and the progression of lung cancer tumors.

The research article Nicotine induces cell proliferation in its entirety is available online as a PDF document.