Oh please! Increased skirt size:increased chance or breast cancer

What do you think of this?

sumofus.org/campaigns/myriad-a-us-biotech-company-just-faced-off-against-an-australian-woman-with-breast-cancer-and-won/

'Cancer can hit anyone anytime no matter what kind of lifestyle you have lead'

Yes, it can but it is much less likely to if you have a healthy lifestyle

I have only known one person who was a non-smoker and had lung cancer. Far outnumbered by people I have known with lung cancer who were smokers.

Cancer can hit anyone anytime no matter what kind of lifestyle you have lead.

It certainly can. My brother was born with a tumour in his stomach and underwent surgery before he was two months old - quite pioneering surgery in its day (he's now 64).

My TCC Kidney Cancer is normally caused by working with chemicals or smoking (according to my consultant) I have done neither in my life (not sure where I am going with this)

Wheniwasyourage Skirt sizes vary from brand to brand as well.

Just to confuse things a bit, I don't think that skirt sizes are the same now as they were in the 60s and 70s. I used to be a size 12, with the occasional 10, when I was at my slimmest, and now I am certainly not so slim but can still get into some manufacturers' 12s quite comfortably.

On another thread we're finding it takes approx 90 minutes to walk the recommended 10,000 daily steps.

NHS advice on how to read articles about health and healthcare.

Its always popular for cancer to be the fault of the person suffering.I think this is cruel. Cancer can hit anyone anytime no matter what kind of lifestyle you have lead.
There are non smokers who die of lung cancer.

The day is long in a newspaper office and sometimes the journalist or columnist has to get something out before they go home.

It's difficult to find up-to-date information janeainsworth as my search skills are not brilliant but I do remember a fair bit from a physiologist I worked for for many years but trying to see if that information is still current is another matter. Maybe any movement (even chairbound) is better than little or no movement at all and bear in mind that it doesn't have to be a straight run of 30 - 60 minutes, that can be broken down into 5 or 10 minutes stints.

I would add, however, the purpose of the link is as much about other things that affect fat accumulation and losing it - it's no wonder people feel demoralised when their efforts seem to achieve small results (especially when movement becomes restricted as I have found out); it's rarely, as ever, as simple and straightforward as many would have everyone believe. I just don't like people to be made to feel bad about themselves when there could well be other mitigating factors in their case.

Interesting link HD though I notice they are saying saturated fats should be reduced, and some scientists now dispute this.
Also the levels of exercise recommended are quite high - The starting point for bringing weight under control, in general, and combating abdominal fat, in particular, is regular moderate-intensity physical activity — at least 30 minutes per day (and perhaps up to 60 minutes per day) to control weight

Not sure how many of us could cope with that recommendation - I think targets have to be achievable to avoid people becoming completely demotivated.

As women go through their middle years, their proportion of fat to body weight tends to increase — more than it does in men. Especially at menopause, extra pounds tend to park themselves around the midsection, as the ratio of fat to lean tissue shifts and fat storage begins favoring the upper body over the hips and thighs. Even women who don’t actually gain weight may still gain inches at the waist.

Where a woman’s fat ends up is influenced by several factors. Heredity is one: Scientists have identified a number of genes that help determine how many fat cells an individual develops and where these cells are stored (which explains why some people put weight on very quickly and others can seem to eat what they like without gaining an ounce) (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, April 25, 2006). Hormones are also involved. At menopause, estrogen production decreases and the ratio of androgen (male hormones present in small amounts in women) to estrogen increases — a shift that’s been linked in some studies to increased abdominal fat after menopause. Some researchers suspect that the drop in estrogen levels at menopause is also linked to increased levels of cortisol, a stress hormone that promotes the accumulation of abdominal fat. (Cortisol is a hormone that is released during times of stress and axiety.)

Abdominal, or visceral, fat is of particular concern because it’s a key player in a variety of health problems — much more so than subcutaneous fat, the kind you can grasp with your hand. Visceral fat, on the other hand, lies out of reach, deep within the abdominal cavity, where it pads the spaces between our abdominal organs.

For now, experts stress that lifestyle, especially exercise, is the very best way to fight visceral fat.

www.health.harvard.edu/newsweek/Abdominal-fat-and-what-to-do-about-it.htm

Confused. Didn't the OP say skirt size - as in size 10, 12, 14, etc.? So that means an overall increase in size and weight, not just waists.

Also, when they are putting out 'facts' regarding risks factors and breast cancers, why do they never mention the very environment that the decision-makers have created?

This link is probably best not read by those who are worry-warts!

www.breastcancerfund.org/clear-science/environmental-breast-cancer-links/

and the correlation of chlorinated water and cancer just doens't seem to go away:

thearrowsoftruth.com/studies-show-link-between-chlorinated-water-and-cancer/ (I could have put links to the various studies but this link has most of them that anyone interested can look up for themselves).

Getting cancer of any description isn't as simple as don't do x, y or z.

essentially all that happened was that sometime during the night her heart stopped beating. She didn't have any medical condition that was overtly fatal. Just some minor problems that nobody dies of.

So wouldn't cause of death be heart failure?

We do not have to die of something.

My point was, just in case it was missed, we will all die of something sooner or later - unless immortality has been achieved and I failed to hear about it.

Yes, I was thinking that the waist measurement should be revised as you get older. Like you Bags, my weight is where it was in my 20s but my waist is quite a bit larger.

I think as you get older your spine contracts in some way, which is why so many old ladies are 'little', not necessarily osteoporosis.

Delete "having" in penultimate sentence of my last post.

Quotation from the article:

Prof Usha Menon of the Department of Women's Cancer, who led the study, told BBC News: "If skirt size could be confirmed by others as a good predictor of breast cancer risk in older women, this would be a very simple and easy way to monitor weight gain."

That important word "if" is at the start of the prof's sentence. So nothing has been proved at all.

My waist is bigger than it was when I was younger but my weight has been fairly steady since I was fifteen. I think having it's probably to do with general aging. Aging has quite a high correlation with breast cancer too, as it does with all sorts of health troubles.

Not a lot of hope for me then

An egg on legs! Yes, I agree that a lot of this statistics-based stuff is just soundbite nonsense.

But they do talk a lot of nonsense Ana and if not globular, at least egg-shaped.

You'd hardly be 'globular' with a measly extra 5" round your waist, absent!

Show-off...

Your waist should be less than half your height? Blimey, that would "allow" me room to expand by about 5 inches. I'd have to spend most of my waking hours eating to become that globular. Weight gurus do seem to come up with some very silly suggestions.

To be saved- we should all stop living !