Most women who are faced with hair loss due to radiation or chemo usually get at least one wig and alternate wearing the wig with hats, bandannas, and scarves. Here are a few tips to get ready for wearing a wig and tips on choosing a wig.

If your hair is long, consider having it cut shorter so that switching to a wig or other head attire will be less noticeable. Once your hair begins falling out, many former patients advise shaving your head. This puts you in control of the situation and eliminates finding your hair all over the pillow or in the shower.

Some women rush out and buy an expensive natural hair wig and then regret it later because not only is it expensive but it requires a lot of upkeep. Synthetic wigs are less expensive and are easier to maintain and they look and feel natural. So keep in mind that six months after your last treatment you should have your hair back again. It may not be the same color and texture as before your treatments but it is natural.

Before starting treatments take a current photo of your hair and even save a swatch from the top front of your head in case you want to find a wig close to your present color. Use lighting near a window or outside to match the wig to your hair swatch or photo. if You want to purchase your wig before your hair falls out, measure your head with your hair slicked down. Always measure around the back of your head with a tape measure above your eyebrows and ears. If your head measures between size ranges, choose the larger size. You can also consider buying or using a hat sizer.

The wig will not look natural if it's pulled too far down in front and it should never be placed over your ears. Treat your wig like your own hair when styling and remember your beauty shop or hair salon personnel can always help you with styling your wig just like your own natural hair.

Nabilone, known as Cesamet, a synthetic imitation of an active ingredient found in marijuana, has been shown successful in treating cancer patients experiencing nausea, pain, anxiety and depression, according to University of Toronto researchers who conducted a study on the effectiveness of the synthetic drug.

During the study of 139 participants, a survey was conducted to rate how well the synthetic drug alleviated the adverse side-effects most commonly associated with chemotherapy. According to the study, cancer patients who were prescribed Cesamet indicated less pain, anxiety and depression.

A prescription drug approved for cancer patients who do not respond to traditional anti-nausea treatments, lead investigator Dr. Vincent Maida stated, "This is not a pot pill and has absolutely no street value."

The trouble with the synthetic drug, which is legal, is the stigma attached to marijuana use in general, even on the part of some physicians, who are said to be hesitant to prescribe a version of marijuana even if it is not marijuana. In our modern society, marijuana is sometimes associated with counter-culture populations, addiction and even as a gateway to more addictive drugs.

I would say I just do not get it when it comes to the denial of making cancer treatment for a cancer patient a little easier, but The Scientific American published a brief history of marijuana that brings us from ancient China to the present with, "In 1937 the U.S. Congress, against the advice of the American Medical Association, passed the Marijuana Tax Act, effectively banning use of the drug by making it expensive and difficult to obtain. Ever since, marijuana has remained one of the most controversial drugs in American society. Despite efforts to change its status, it remains federally classified as a Schedule 1 drug, along with heroin and LSD, considered dangerous and without utility."

As anyone who has undergone the grueling ordeal of chemotherapy can tell you, getting high is the last thing on their mind. However, alleviating the debilitating side effects of chemotherapy is critical.

Other medical marijuana-related posts include:

• Montel Williams: poster child for pot
  
• Medical marijuana pot pill approved for chemotherapy
• Breast cancer has made me a criminal patient story
• FDA rejects medical marijuana use
• Guru of Ganja: medical marijuana advocate faces new pot charges

In her award-winning documentary Toxic Bust, filmmaker Megan Siler takes on the issues and realities of toxic chemicals women are exposed to at home, in the community, and during work in relation to the potential links to breast cancer. Siler focuses on three breast cancer hot spots -- San Francisco and Silicon Valley in California and Cape Cod in Massachusetts.

Siler is not alone in her investigative work of environmental links to cancer risks. Even though the current percentage of federally-funded research dollars allocated to the links between cancer and exposure to environmental toxins is in the single-digits, there are those who have spent a good deal of time, energy and resources into studying the cause and effect of the environmental risks to cancer. In the last six years, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) has conducted extensive studies regarding toxic chemicals in the environment. Among the 72 people who participated in the EWG studies, a chemical body burden of 455 industrial pollutants, pesticides and other chemicals in blood, urine, and breast milk were found.

The Toxic-Free Legacy Coalition analyzed the hair, blood, and urine samples of ten study participants and found that every person tested had at least 26 and as many as 39 toxic chemicals in his or her body and the exposure to toxic chemicals came from everyday activities and products. Breast Cancer Action released State of the Evidence 2006: What Is the Connection Between the Environment and Breast Cancer? which provided compelling scientific evidence pointing to some of the 100,000 synthetic chemicals in use today as contributing to the development of breast cancer, either by altering hormone function or gene expression. The report also identifies radiation exposure, such as that from X-rays and CT scans, as the longest-established environmental cause of breast cancer. In the United States, a woman's lifetime risk of developing breast cancer has tripled in the last 40 years.

Wendy Mesley, co-host of CBC's Marketplace and breast cancer survivor, produced and hosted the investigative documentary Chasing the Cancer Answer, that provided revealing interviews with an outspoken American doctor, frustrated cancer victims in southern Ontario, pharmaceutical sales representatives in Paris, France, and activists working to increase awareness of prevention measures. Greenpeace issued a report that Chernobyl cancer deaths have been grossly underestimated. Award-winning and highly-respected journalist and public commentator Bill Moyers produced a PBS documentary Trade Secrets investigating the history of the chemical revolution and the body burden of synthetic chemicals that pose dangers to human health.

We have additional links related to the topic of environmental links to cancer risk at Earth Day: environmental cancer risks and Cancer Epidemic: are we poisoned from birth? Cancer defines about 100 diseases characterized by the uncontrolled, abnormal growth of cells. No one single factor is going to be the cause for all cancers. However, environmental exposure from toxic chemicals cannot be ignored as one, and perhaps multiple, contributing factors in raising the risks of developing cancer.

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.

Apoptosis is a mechanism that causes programmed cell death in our bodies. It all has to do with proteins and enzymes. The cancer cell mechanism is somehow broken and the enzyme that initiates programmed cell death does not work. This allows the cancer cell to grow into tumors.

Scientists have found a way to trick the cancer cells into committing suicide by using a synthetic compound that induces apoptosis. Paul J. Hergenrothers, a professor of chemistry at the University of Illinois states "By bypassing the broken pathway, we can use the cells' own machinery to destroy themselves."

The scientists think that this can lead to personalized anti-cancer therapy.

Daughters born to mothers who were prescribed the anti-miscarriage drug diethylstilbestrol (DES), a synthetic estrogen, during pregnancy are at increased risk of developing breast cancer, according to research done by a nationwide team of researchers. Between the 1940s through to the 1960s millions of pregnant women were given this drug.

"This is really unwelcome news because so many women worldwide were prenatally exposed to DES, and these women are just now approaching the age at which breast cancer becomes more common," said the study's lead author, Julie Palmer, Sc.D., professor of epidemiology at the Boston University School of Public Health.

For a little history on DES, back in the late 1930s, physicians believed that low levels of estrogen in pregnant women led to spontaneous abortions or premature deliveries. But in the early 1950s, a clinical trial showed no drug benefit in preventing miscarriage. However, use continued in the US until 1971 when researchers determined that DES greatly increased the risk of developing rare cancers of the vagina and cervix in DES daughters.

I assume most DES daughters at increased cancer risk are already aware. However, what makes this news, is that researchers believe that if excess estrogen in utero might increase breast cancer risk later in life, the concern becomes one where other environmental factors that increase fetal exposure to estrogenic compounds need to be given serious consideration.