“Whom can you trust when your culture is the biggest enemy of your health? Can you trust your culture’s leading authorities? Can you trust your culture’s government? Can you trust your culture’s private industry?”We asked those questions in 1995, at the end of our book, Dressed To Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras. Before writing our book, we sent details of our research to the National Cancer Institute, American Cancer Society, President’s Cancer Panel, American Women’s Medical Association, National Organization for Women, National Women’s Health Network, and National Women’s Health Resource Center. There was no response. Not one. Given the lack of interest, we decided to publish our findings in a book, getting the information directly to the women who needed to hear it.But are women getting the message?It has been 12 years since our book was first published. Over that time, more than 500,000 women in the US alone have died from breast cancer, with another 2,000,000 having been diagnosed with this terrible disease — a disease that is in most cases preventable by simply loosening up or eliminating the bra. And yet, this lifesaving information has been actively suppressed and censored by the medical and lingerie industries.Examples of Suppress and CensorshipA large public relations firm in New York City was willing and eager to help us release this information to the public. “My wife just had breast cancer, and I’m sure you are right,” the head of the firm confessed. A big media announcement and celebration were planned. Days later, however, the firm withdrew its offer to help, stating that one of their clients, a large medical center, objected to their working with us.A Sydney, Australia public relations firm agreed to help publicize our work when we were doing outreach efforts in their country. But it, too, reversed itself. We had asked if they had any conflicts of interest, such as lingerie industry clients. They said they had none. But as it turned out, they did represent a pharmaceutical company that makes a breast cancer treatment drug, and the prevention of breast cancer and its treatment are in conflict, they explained.The Intimate Apparel Council (which is the US trade association for the multi-billion dollar bra industry) threatened our publisher, Avery Publishing Group, with a lawsuit if Dressed To Kill was released. The publisher said the publicity would help spread the word. The lawsuit never materialized.After the book was released, the NBC television news show, Dateline, was interested in doing a story on our work. We were extensively interviewed by a skeptical reporter who became a supporter. The story was then abruptly terminated. The producer confidentially explained that the policy of General Electric, which owns NBC, is to avoid airing news stories that can adversely impact on other GE interests. As it happens, GE is a manufacturer of mammography machines.Women’s magazines, such as Glamour, Self, and others, ran critical stories condemning our work, and finding “experts” to encourage women to continue wearing bras. Elle magazine planned a positive story about the bra/cancer link, but was coerced into pulling the story by bra advertisers. In various newspapers around the world, such as the Guardian in the UK, stories were pulled prior to publication because of fear that they may “panic the public”, including their lingerie advertisers.The British Fashion Council (which is the UK’s equivalent of the Intimate Apparel Council) published the Breast Health Handbook in 1996 to oppose our efforts. They announced the formation of the Breakthrough Breast Cancer Foundation, which was to receive donations from bra sales to fund genetic research into breast cancer. The book criticized our work, claiming, “The idea that wearing a bra encourages cancer by trapping toxins was recently put forward by researchers at the Institute for Culturogenic Studies (sic) in Hawaii. Researchers from more august establishments promptly dismissed it as claptrap.” Without any medical evidence or research, the book informs women that wearing bras is a health necessity, and should be worn as early in life as possible to prevent breast damage.Our original publisher, Avery, was purchased by giant Penguin Putnam in 1998. The new publisher did not list the book for three years and refused to revert publication rights to the copyright holders, Singer and Grismaijer. The book was virtually unavailable, and it was thought to have gone out of print. Finally, after repeated requests, the publishing rights were released to us in October, 2001. (ISCD Press has been keeping it in print since then.)A television documentary was produced in the year 2000 by Channel 4 in the UK, called, Bras- The Bare Facts. In the documentary, 100 women with fibrocystic breast disease went bra-free for 3 months to document the effect on breast cysts and pain. Two prominent British breast surgeons conducted the study. The results were astounding, and clearly demonstrated that the bra is a serious health hazard. We were interviewed for the program to discuss the bra/cancer connection, which was considered highly plausible and important by the doctors interviewed. Some theorized that, in addition to lymphatic impairment, the bra could also cause cancer by overheating the breasts. The documentary made newspaper headlines in British Commonwealth countries throughout the world, but no mention of it was made at all in the US. The following day, headlines in the U.K. tried to suppress fears of the bra/cancer link, and the doctors in the study quickly distanced themselves from the cancer issue, telling women to continue wearing bras. Their research for the documentary was supposed to be published in a medical journal, but never was. And no further research ever materialized to follow-up on their work, which they said they would do. Extensive news coverage of the program was available on the Internet soon after it aired, but most articles were removed shortly thereafter.No follow-up studies have been done to refute or confirm our research. None. While a Harvard study, published in the European Journal of Cancer in 1991, discovered that bra-free women have a lower rate of breast cancer, the results were not central to the research they were conducting and were considered unimportant and not followed-up. In fact, apart from our initial 1991-93 Bra and Breast Cancer Study, discussed in detail in Dressed To Kill, and our follow-up research in Fiji, discussed in our book, Get It Off!, there are still no other studies on the bra/cancer link. Not even a letter or discussion of the issue can be found in any medical journal. After decades of breast cancer research, the bra is still completely ignored as even being a potential factor for consideration. It’s like studying foot disease and ignoring shoes.Keeping the Public MystifiedThis lack of research, and the consequent ignorance, are then used by cancer organizations to justify further suppression of the issue. As the American Cancer Society states on its website, (ignoring the Harvard study), “There are no scientifically valid studies that show a correlation between wearing bras of any type and the occurrence of breast cancer. Two anthropologists made this association in a book called Dressed To Kill. Their study was not conducted according to standard principles of epidemiological research and did not take into consideration other variables, including known risk factors for breast cancer. There is no other, credible research to validate this claim in any way.” And they don’t seem interested in funding any such studies in the near future, either. There are other organizations that are similarly critical of the bra/cancer link for lack of research evidence, while at the same time discouraging any research on the subject.Of particular interest is when breast cancer organizations antagonistic to the issue declare the bra/cancer link to be “misinformation” or a “myth”, without any scientific study supporting their claims. They say bras are important for women to wear for support, without any evidence showing bras are safe or necessary. They then encourage regular mammograms, cancer prevention drug therapy (not realizing that “prevention therapy” is an oxymoron), and even preventative mastectomies (which means that those who are high risk for breast cancer but who don’t want to get it can have their breast removed as a prevention strategy). Of course, it is better to remove the bra instead of the breasts, but bra removal is not a billable procedure.Keep in mind that bras have been associated with other health problems, such as headaches, numbness in the hands, backache and other postural problems, cysts, pain, skin depigmentation, and more. And lymphatic blockage, which is the result of bra constriction, has already been associated with various cancers. Clearly, the bra/cancer link needs further research, while women take the precaution of loosening up.Why the resistance?What harm could there be in following our simple advice, or in even researching this issue? Why the defensive reaction?There are three reasons:1. The bra industry fears class action lawsuits. Many insiders have admitted to us that for years the industry suspected underwires were causing cancer. They know that tight bras cause cysts and pain. It is only a matter of time until a lawsuit is made against a bra manufacturer. As a defense, the industry is shifting the blame to the customer, claiming that most women are wearing their bras too tightly, and should get professional fittings. (How do you get a properly fitted push-up bra?) Breaking ranks with their industry peers, and trying to capitalize on the bad news, are several bra manufacturers that now offer newly patented bras claiming to mitigate the damage, including cancer, caused by conventional bras.2. The medical industry is making billions each year on the detection and treatment of breast cancer. As mentioned above, there is a conflict between the prevention and the treatment of disease, especially if the prevention does not include drugs or surgery. The fact is that our treatment-focused, profit-oriented medical system is making a killing treating this disease, and has billions to lose if breast cancer goes out of fashion along with bras.In addition, the bra issue will revolutionize the breast cancer field, embarrassing many researchers. Breast cancer research to date that has ignored the bra issue is seriously flawed as a result, which is why the “experts” are still unable to explain the cause of over 70% of all breast cancer cases. Career cancer researchers who have ignored the bra issue will have to admit this fatal flaw in their work, which they are not inclined to admit in their lifetimes.3. Finally, there is the dogmatic, fearful resistance from some women who find their personal identity so connected to their bras that they would rather risk cancer than be bra-free (which some women have actually told us.) Women are cultural entities, and so long as our culture scorns a natural bustline, many women will submit to the pain, red marks and indentations, cysts, and even the threat of cancer rather than face potential public ridicule (which never really happens.)There are also women who believe the myth that bras will prevent droopy breasts. The bra industry admits this is a myth, while it still promotes it to improve sales. In fact, bras cause breasts to droop, as the breasts become dependent on the bra for support and the natural supportive mechanisms atrophy from non use.Despite the resistance, however, some women have gotten the message. And many health care professionals, who have also suspected bras for years, are now spreading that message. As women hear the news and discover that eliminating the bra also eliminates cysts and pain, the news further spreads by word of mouth.There are now thousands of websites on this subject, many from health care professionals including medical doctors, naturopathic doctors, osteopathic doctors, chiropractors, massage therapists, lymphatic specialists, nutritionists, and others who care about women and helping end this epidemic. Grassroots efforts to keep this information alive and spreading have supplanted the traditional medical research approach, which has disqualified itself for lack of interest and conflict of interest.When a disease is caused by the culture and its habits, attitudes, fashions and industries, there is bound to be resistance to change. Industries that contribute to disease will be defensive, and industries that profit from disease will be conflicted. However, the truth has a way of getting out, despite the resistance and suppression. Thank Goodness the truth does have a way of getting out.
Alternative cancer treatment is a group of therapeutic remedies used in place of conventional medicine for the purpose of treatment of cancer. Alternative cancer treatments can be very effective. Alternative cancer treatment is a group of therapeutic cancer treatments seek to strengthen the body’s immune system, to enhance the quality of life during recovery, and to nourish and fortify the body through nutritional, homeopathic, or herbal therapies. There are many alternative cancer treatments that can have positive impact on your health.If you begin to research cancer treatments you will find that there is such a great amount of alternative cancer treatments available that are as effective if not more effective than traditional treatment options without the overwhelming cost, and side effects. If you begin to research cancer treatments you will find that there is such a great amount of alternative cancer treatments available that are as effective if not more effective than traditional treatment options without the overwhelming cost, and side effects.CancerCancer is not a death sentence, it is an opportunity to heal within. Cancer patients using or considering complementary or alternative therapy should discuss this decision with their doctor or nurse, as they would any therapeutic approach. Cancer is the modern plague and people are increasingly looking for natural, safe solutions. Cancer is a complex disease, and it is reasonable to do everything in one’s power to fight it. Cancer cells do not age, do not become weaker as they grow older, and therefore hold a huge advantage over our healthy cells.TreatmentsIf you begin to research cancer treatments you will find that there is such a great amount of alternative cancer treatments available that are as effective if not more effective than traditional treatment options without the overwhelming cost, and side effects.The Cancer Coalition (American Cancer Society, National Cancer Institute, FDA, Prominent Hospitals, and of course The Pharmaceutical ‘Godfathers’ want us to depend on them to come up with treatments, so we fund them with millions and millions of dollars, yet still no cure, not even a good treatment.They want us to trust them, so they bolster the true success rates of conventional cancer treatments. They want us to feel protected, so they legislate what treatments doctors can use, and label doctors that stray from those treatments and poor results as “quacks” or worse yet take away their license to practice. The fact that when you think of cancer, chemo, radiation and surgery pop into mind is a testament that they have run an incredible PR campaigned to make you think these treatments actually work. want us to depend on them to come up with treatments, so we fund them with millions and millions of dollars, yet still no cure, not even a good treatment. They want us to trust them, so they bolster the true success rates of conventional cancer treatments. They want us to feel protected, so they legislate what treatments doctors can use, and label doctors that stray from those treatments and poor results as “quacks” or worse yet take away their license to practice.The fact that when you think of cancer, chemo, radiation and surgery pop into mind is a testament that they have run an incredible PR campaigned to make you think these treatments actually work.DietVegetarian raw foods are a great method of Treating Cancer with a healthy diet. Alternate treatments for fighting cancer can range from faith healing to visualization, but one of your best bets is a whole food diet that includes raw vegetables and organic nutrients — things that promote body detoxification.A raw foods diet is a great alternative treatment: raw food is easy to prepare and if you use vegetables and other whole foods as your ingredients, your vegetarian meals can be so delicious.If you are anticancer and pro-life, choose the earth’s natural energy boosters and start enjoying the organic nutrients and health benefits of opting for a vegetarian raw food diet as one of your primary Treating Cancer with a healthy diets.All natural alternative cancer treatment has been working for a long time. Learning how to re-alkalise your body’s tissue and cell pH to healthy levels is extremely important and should not be overlooked in your alternative cancer treatment recovery plan.When you are considering alternative cancer treatments, ask for documented facts and stats from the representative to find out the success rate of the group. Also check to see if your health insurance will cover any alternative cancer treatment programs and be leery of programs demanding a large sum of money up front, or that state they can cure your cancer.The information presented here is no way meant to discourage you from undertaking conventional treatments for your cancer, but hopefully will support you and your medical doctor to undertake ‘smarter’, more effective alternative cancer treatment approaches to beat cancer.
Breast cancer is the second leading cause of cancer deaths in women. Every year, more than 40,000 women die in the U.S. from breast cancer. Early detection with routine breast cancer screening followed immediately with appropriate treatment could prevent many of these deaths. A doctor’s failure to recommend routine breast cancer screening to their female patients and to follow up on abnormal test results may constitute medical malpractice.Screening for breast cancerCancer specialists generally recommend that a doctor should order a yearly mammogram and conduct a yearly clinical breast examination on all female patients age 40 or older, even if the patient has no family history of breast cancer and has no symptoms. A doctor should perform a breast examination every 3 years for female patients in their 20s and 30s. If a patient is at moderate (15%-20%) lifetime risk the doctor should discuss the option of adding a yearly MRI as part of the screening process. For patients at high (>20%) lifetime risk, the doctor should add a yearly MRI to the screening process. The lifetime risk is assessed based on such factors as family history, the presence of gene mutations, characteristics of the breast, and personal medical history.The clinical breast examination determines whether there are any palpable lumps or other abnormality in the breast that could indicate the presence of cancer. The mammogram and MRI use imaging technology to identify changes or masses in the breast that may not detectable from a clinical breast examination. Should an abnormality be found, a biopsy (sampling of breast tissue) is then performed to rule out or confirm the presence of cancer.The progression of the breast cancer is tracked through stagesOnce breast cancer is diagnosed, the cancer’s progression is categorized using a five-level staging system:
Stage 0 (Also known as Carcinoma In Situ): There are 2 types – (1) Ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) which is a noninvasive condition which involves the presence of abnormal cells confined to the lining of the breast duct, and (2) Lobular carcinoma in situ (LCIS) which involves the presence of abnormal cells in the lobules of the breast.
Stage I: The tumor is less than 2 cm and has not spread outside the breast.
Stage IIA: Either (1) no tumor is found in the breast but cancer is found in at least one of the axillary lymph nodes (the lymph nodes under the arm), (2) the tumor is 2 cm or smaller and has spread to the axillary lymph nodes, or (3) the tumor is between 2 cm and 5 cm and has not spread to the axillary lymph nodes.
Stage IIB: Either (1) the tumor is between 2 cm and 5 cm and has spread to the axillary lymph nodes, or (2) the tumor is larger than 5 cm and has not spread to the axillary lymph nodes.
Stage IIIA:Either (1) no tumor is found in the breast but cancer is found in axillary lymph nodes that are attached to each other or to other structures, or cancer may be found in lymph nodes near the breastbone, (2) the tumor is 2 cm or smaller and the cancer has spread to axillary lymph nodes that are attached to each other or to other structures, or cancer may have spread to lymph nodes near the breastbone, (3) the tumor is larger than 2 centimeters but not larger than 5 centimeters and the cancer has spread to axillary lymph nodes that are attached to each other or to other structures, or the cancer may have spread to lymph nodes near the breastbone, or (4) the tumor is larger than 5 centimeters and the cancer has spread to axillary lymph nodes that may be attached to each other or to other structures, or cancer may have spread to lymph nodes near the breastbone.
Stage IIIB:The tumor may be any size and the cancer (1) has spread to the chest wall and/or the skin of the breast, or (2) may have spread to axillary lymph nodes that may be attached to each other or to other structures, or cancer may have spread to lymph nodes near the breastbone.
Stage IIIC:The cancer is operable if it is detected (1) in ten or more axillary lymph nodes, (2) is found in lymph nodes below the collarbone, or (3) is found in axillary lymph nodes and in lymph nodes near the breastbone. The cancer is inoperable if it has spread to the lymph nodes above the collarbone.
Stage IV: The cancer has spread to other organs in the body, usually the bones, lungs, liver, or brain. Breast cancer treatment and prognosisCancer specialists associate a statistic called the 5 year survival rate with each stage of the cancer. This statistic reflects, for each stage, the percentage of women who will survive 5 years or more after a diagnosis with that particular stage.For Stage 0, treatment options include a breast conserving surgery (lumpectomy or partial mastectomy) with sentinel lymph node biopsy or lymph node dissection and radiation therapy, mastectomy (for women at high risk a bilateral prophylactic mastectomy may be an option), and/or hormone therapy (such as Tamoxifen or an aromatase inhibitor). The 5-year survival rate is nearly 100% for Stage 0.For Stage I, treatment options include a lumpectomy (breast conserving surgery) with sentinel lymph node biopsy or lymph node dissection and radiation, mastectomy, and chemotherapy and/or hormone therapy. The 5-year survival rate is also nearly 100% for Stage 1.For Stage II, treatment options include breast conserving surgery (a lumpectomy or modified mastectomy) with sentinel lymph node biopsy or lymph node dissection and radiation, mastectomy, and chemotherapy and/or hormone therapy. The 5-year survival rate is 92% for Stage IIA and 81% for Stage IIB.For Stage IIIA, the treatment options remain the same as for Stage II. The relative 5-year survival rate is 67% for Stage IIIAFor Stages IIIB and IIIC, treatment options vary depending on whether the cancer is operable. Chemotherapy is often the initial treatment in order to attempt to reduce the size of the tumor. If the tumor is operable, then treatment options may include breast conserving surgery (a lumpectomy or modified mastectomy) or mastectomy with sentinel lymph node biopsy or lymph node dissection, radiation, and chemotherapy and/or hormone therapy. If the cancer is inoperable, the 5-year survival rate is 54% for Stage IIIB.For Stage IV, treatment normally consists of radiation therapy, hormone therapy and/or systemic chemotherapy, Tyrosine kinase inhibitor therapy, radiation therapy, surgery and medications to relieve pain, and clinical trials. The 5-year survival rate drops to approximately 20%.Failure to screen for breast cancer may constitute medical malpracticeUnfortunately, even though the statistics make it very clear that early detection through breast cancer screening saves lives, there are still doctors who fail to screen female patients for breast cancer. They fail to perform breast examinations and fail to order mammograms. And some doctors ignore abnormal breast examination results and even abnormal mammograms results. By the time the cancer is discovered – often because the patient sees a different doctor who finally conducts a clinical breast examination or orders a mammogram, or the patient starts to feel back pain or other symptoms – the breast cancer has already advanced to a Stage III or even a Stage IV. The prognosis is now much different for this woman than it would have been had the breast cancer been detected early through routine breast cancer screening. As a result of the failure on the part of the doctor to advise a female patient to undergo routine screening, or to follow up on an abnormal mammogram or MRI result, the breast cancer is now much more advanced and the woman has suffered a “loss of chance” of a better recovery. In other words, she now has a reduced chance of surviving the breast cancer.Contact a Lawyer TodayIf you or a family member suffered a delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer due to a doctor’s failure to recommend routine screening or to follow up on abnormal breast examination or mammogram results, you need to contact a lawyer immediately.This article is for informational purposes only and is not intended to be legal or medical advice. You should not act, or refrain from acting, based upon any information at this web site without seeking professional legal counsel. A competent lawyer with experience in medical malpractice can assist you in determining whether you may have a claim for a delay in the diagnosis of breast cancer due to a failure on the part of the doctor to offer breast cancer screening. There is a time limit in cases like these so do not wait to call.