(MailOnline) Nicotine in cigarettes linked to breast cancer for the first time

[ezmoose]

Nicotine in cigarettes linked to breast cancer for the first time | Mail Online

The findings, published in The Journal of the National Cancer Institute, could be a major blow to makers of nicotine-based products that help smokers to quit.

More ammo for the antis; all the more reason to test the vapor to eliminate fears (real, imagined or invented) that second hand vapor endangers others.

 

[PlanetScribbles]

Doesn't change the fact that e-cigs are less harmful than tobacco

 

[ezmoose]

Hyping of a non-result about nicotine Tobacco Harm Reduction: News & Opinions

As with anything scary (especially when it involves some evil chemical), the news media is trying to spin this as a scary new discovery. What is worse, though, is that anti-public-health activists among the anti-tobacco community will inevitably start spinning it as a reason to avoid harm reduction. They know that it will be pretty easy to trick women smokers who are paranoid about breast cancer (even though they should be more worried about lung cancer) into believing that this theoretical risk that has been shown to be very small, at worst, is evidence that they might as well smoke rather than switching to a low-risk nicotine source.

 

[IMWylde]

The substance that makes cigarettes addictive may also cause the growth of cancer tumours, scientists revealed today.

Key word is MAY. It looks like the NCI is begining to operate like the major news organizations spewing out questions disguised as something more.

 

[Vocalek]

Clever wording: "may cause the growth of cancer tumors" could be interepreted to mean, "may trigger new tumors to grow" when what the research actually showed was the possibility that nicotine increases the rate of growth of existing tumors.

The American Cancer Society does not list Smoking under the heading Lifestyle-related factors and breast cancer risk. Instead, this is found under the heading Factors with uncertain, controversial, or unproven effect on breast cancer risk.

Tobacco smoke

Most studies have found no link between cigarette smoking and breast cancer. Although some studies have suggested smoking increases the risk of breast cancer, this remains controversial.

An active focus of research is whether secondhand smoke increases the risk of breast cancer. Both mainstream and secondhand smoke contain chemicals that, in high concentrations, cause breast cancer in rodents. Chemicals in tobacco smoke reach breast tissue and are found in breast milk.

The evidence on secondhand smoke and breast cancer risk in human studies is controversial, at least in part because smokers have not been shown to be at increased risk. One possible explanation for this is that tobacco smoke may have different effects on breast cancer risk in smokers and in those who are just exposed to smoke.

What are the risk factors for breast cancer?

 

[Vocalek]

Newsflash: TobaccoHarmReduction.org has commented on the research.

Hyping of a non-result about nicotine Tobacco Harm Reduction: News & Opinions

 

[D103]

Obviously we have been somewhat effective in getting the message out there that it is the "smoke" which is related to most of the cancers and other smoking-related diseases and not the nicotine. So the "anti-movement" now is focusing on demonizing nicotine and attempting to scare the beejeezus out of people (manipulation). Look for many more studies to follow from every conceivable college, university, research facility, etc. supposedly "finding" some damaging evidence re: the harmful effects of nicotine. I would bet that very attractive incentives and large sums of money are being offered up for this line of research - as always, follow the money.

 

[Vocalek]

One of the comments to the Tobacco Harm Reduction post led me to this:

Cigarette Smoking in Relation to Risk of Ductal Ca... [Am J Epidemiol. 2010] - PubMed result

Am J Epidemiol. 2010 Aug 1. [Epub ahead of print]

Cigarette Smoking in Relation to Risk of Ductal Carcinoma In Situ of the Breast in a Cohort of Postmenopausal Women.
Kabat GC, Kim M, Kakani C, Tindle H, Wactawski-Wende J, Ockene JK, Luo J, Wassertheil-Smoller S, Rohan TE.

Abstract
In numerous studies, investigators have examined the association of active smoking with risk of invasive breast cancer, but to the authors' knowledge, no cohort study has assessed smoking in relation to the risk of in situ breast cancer, the postulated penultimate stage preceding invasive breast cancer. The authors examined the latter association using data collected at baseline from 63,393 women in the Women's Health Initiative Clinical Trial. A total of 486 cases of ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) of the breast were identified during 8 years of follow-up between 1993 and 2005. Cox proportional hazards models were used to estimate hazard ratios and 95% confidence intervals. For the primary analysis, invasive breast cancer was treated as a competing risk. After adjustment for covariates, associations with smoking status, smoking intensity, duration, pack-years, and age at quitting were all close to the null value and showed few meaningful trends. Sensitivity analyses performed to address different possibilities with respect to the natural history of breast cancer also did not provide consistent evidence of an association of smoking with DCIS. The results of this large cohort study provide little support for an association of cigarette smoking with risk of DCIS in postmenopausal women.

Translation: "In situ" means that the tumor is localized and has not spread. In situ tumors in the ducts are an early stage of breast cancer. The research appears to show that smoking is not a cause of this type of cancer.

 

[Vocalek]

Now we "middle aged" ladies have to give up our glass of wine with dinner, too!

Dispatch: Drinking and Breast Cancer > Facts & Fears > ACSH

 

[ezmoose]

Nicotine, Not Just Smoking, Linked to Breast Cancer

Just another outlet for the same dribble!

 

[Haytoni]

If your predisposed to cancer, then you probably will get cancer, regardless of your life style. I believe in half of what I see and none of what I read.

 

[MoonRose]

Ok, the way I understand it, the only way you can totally cut out your risk of ever getting cancer is to stop eating, drinking or breathing. Wait, that means I have to be dead to not get cancer!

 

[Vocalek]

Ok, the way I understand it, the only way you can totally cut out your risk of ever getting cancer is to stop eating, drinking or breathing. Wait, that means I have to be dead to not get cancer!

Exactly. Now that we don't get to drop dead quickly of a heart attack or stroke any time soon, we can all look forward to a lingering painful death -- either from cancer or some form of dementia.

 

[ezmoose]

The Hindu : Health / Medicine & Research : Nicotine linked to breast cancer for first time

More of the same.

 

[KDK]

The truth is, if you live long enough, you will get cancer. Something is going to kill each and every one of us. If something else doesn't get you first, cancer will.

 

[Satharra]

There were similar findings on caffeine a few years ago. They found that, in the laboratory, caffeine encourage growth of cancer cells.

Once they actually tested this on humans, caffeine was no longer contributing significant unique variance in the development of cancer. Thus, caffeine consumption was found to be unrelated to breast cancer.

I suspect they'll find something similar with nicotine. Either that or they'll ban tomatoes and eggplant along with the other nightshade edibles next.

The only thing for certain is that every single day we all get one day closer to our death, with or without nicotine.

 

[Vocalek]

The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) says the fears are overblown:

Dispatch: Headline Gets Burned > Facts & Fears > ACSH

 

[MoonRose]

The American Council on Science and Health (ACSH) says the fears are overblown:

Dispatch: Headline Gets Burned > Facts & Fears > ACSH

The problem is people won't look any farther than the original scare tatic to find the real truth.

 

[Vocalek]

The problem is people won't look any farther than the original scare tatic to find the real truth.

Sadly, you have that right. We live in a society that gets their news in 1 or 2 sentence sound bites, and looks no further.