Posts Tagged ‘radiation’
Wednesday, February 2nd, 2011
Do you get addicted to usage of mobile phones every time? Lot of people throughout the globe consider that they could not live without mobile phones since they like talking to family members and friends since they like to be in contact with them always. Mobiles have become usual communication medium throughout the globe but all the technical products on earth has both good and bad sides. Mobiles are definitely very helpful to people since they are helpful during emergency conditions but plenty of talks are going on about mobiles that they could lead to brain cancer which is definitely shocking news for its users.
Cell phone radiation has always remained a topic of debate between cell phone users, cell phone companies and scientists who know that this radiation can have serious impact on human health. Many health experts believe that cell phones emit dangerous signals and radiations that can really affect our brain but the topic still remains controversial. Few years ago, Ronald Herberman, Director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute sent a memo to entire staff warning them to cut down their daily use of mobile phones as it can cause brain cancer. The memo clearly indicated that people who use more cell phone can get affected with the cell phone radiation and can have brain cancer. Hence, it is better that we keep away from cell phones to avoid exposure to such radiations.
However, there are people and organizations that clearly oppose the idea that cell phones can give you brain cancer. Just five months later after the memo National Cancer Institute (NCI) came up with their story where they said that they have substantial evidence that cell phones cannot give out brain cancer because the radiations emitting from cell phones are not that strong. Apart from the NCI there are many other health care organizations that believe that cell phones do not have the power to cause so much radiation inside us and therefore causing brain cancer is out of question.
Mobile phones make use of radiations which are not same as x-rays that are ionizing in nature. X-rays cannot ionize atomic particles and electrons but mobiles which fall under this same category could cause radiations similar to microwaves which are used for heating purpose and cooking food.
The head of Epidemiology at California University, Jorn Olsen has stated that though mobiles do contain non-ionizing radiations they are not powerful enough for causing genetic material or DNA damage which could become as cancer, but long term mobile usage is still problematic. Hence this topic is still very much discussed between people looking for mobiles and people thinking that mobile technology must be changed quickly.
Buy Soma No Prescription and Buy Fioricet No Prescription
Tags: brain cancer, cancer of the brain, cell phones, mobile phones, radiation
Posted in cancer of the brain | No Comments »
Tuesday, September 14th, 2010
Prostate cancer is often found by doctors before men show any symptoms or signs of the disease. Signs are different from symptoms in a way that signs are detected by doctors through physical examinations and laboratory work. Symptoms, on the other hand, are what patients can see and feel.
Prostate Cancer Signs
* Prostate size or shape is abnormal. The presence of bumps in the prostate can be detected during a rectal examination.
* Increased PSA levels – If there is an elevation in the Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) levels, this can be a sign of cancer, but not definitive, as there may be other causes of PSA level elevation.
* Enlargement of the bladder – This can be detected through physical examination or ultrasound and MRI. Doctors would be looking for enlargement and the restriction of urine.
* Lesions on the bone – Other causes may be possible, but lesions on the bone as seen on a CT scan or other tests can be sign of cancer.
* Enlargement of the lymph nodes – If there is cancer in the prostate, it often attacks the lymph nodes near the groin area and causes the nodes to expand.
After a confirmed diagnosis of your cancer and your oncologist tells you the grade and stage of your condition, your doctor will make an evaluation and make a suggestion on the best possible treatments.
Possible Treatments
* Surgical treatment – Doctors would want to eradicate the cancer tissues from the prostate and other nearby organs that may be affected. They would also want to prevent its spread to other organs that do not have cancer cells. The most common surgery being performed as treatment for prostate cancer is radical prostatectomy where surgeons effectively remove the prostate organ and the nearby vesicles.
* Radiation – This is done by using x-rays or radiation to completely kill all cancer tissues that are present in the body of the patient. It damages the DNA that cancer needs in order to spread.
* Hormone Treatment – The hormone testosterone can help multiply and spread prostate cancer cells. A patient can then undergo hormonal therapy in order to restrict the growth, production, and use of these hormones.
If you want to see alternative well written articles composed by the publisher, click on the review articles relating to the cylinder vase as well as home decor vases.
Tags: bladder, cancer, cancer cells, cancer tissues, cancer treatment, health, hormone treatment, oncologist, painful urination, prostate cancer, Prostrate, Prostrate Cancer, radiation, surgical treatment
Posted in prostate cancer | No Comments »
Saturday, August 28th, 2010
As a chiropractor in San Diego, I feel like I need to set the records straight. If you are like many people, you probably think the sun causes skin cancer. Our chiropractic patients in San Diego regularly bring up this issue and ask about prevention. And why shouldn’t you? Some news coverage has demonized the sun as unsafe. It has sent many running from it like Vampires at dawn.
The truth is that overexposure to the sun can cause problems. What you probably don’t know – underexposure can be dangerous to your health. Here’s why: A new study looking at the relationship between vitamin D serum levels and the risk of colon and breast cancer across the globe has estimated the number of cases of cancer that could be prevented each year if vitamin D3 levels met the target proposed by researchers.
Cedric F. Garland, Dr.P.H., is a cancer prevention specialist at the Moores Cancer Center at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). Colleagues estimate that 250,000 cases of colorectal cancer and 350,000 cases of breast cancer could be prevented worldwide by increasing intake of vitamin D3. This is particular in countries north of the equator. Vitamin D3 is available through diet, supplements and exposure of the skin to direct sunlight.
The research paper which looks at the dose-response relationship between vitamin D and cancer will be published in the August edition of the journal of Nutrition Reviews. It stated that for the first time, we are saying that 600,000 cases of breast and colorectal cancer may possibly be prevented each year worldwide, including nearly 150,000 in the United States alone,” said study co-author Garland.
The study combined data from surveys of serum vitamin D levels during winter from 15 countries. It is the first such study to look at satellite measurements of sunshine and cloud cover in countries where actual blood serum levels of vitamin D3 had also been determined. The data was then applied to 177 countries to estimate the average serum level of a vitamin D metabolite of people living there.
The data revealed an inverse association of serum vitamin D with risk of colorectal and breast cancer. The protective effect began at levels ranging from 24 to 32 nanograms per milliliter of 25-hydroxyvitamin D concentration in the serum. The 25-hydroxyvitamin D level is the main indicator of vitamin D status. The late winter average 25-hydroxyvitamin D in the U.S. is about 15-18 ng/ml. The researchers maintain that increasing vitamin D levels in populations, particularly those in northern climates, has the potential to both prevent and possibly serve as an adjunct to existing treatments for cancer.
It was stated that the suitable dose of vitamin D in order to reach this level could be very small in a lifeguard in Southern California. On the opposite end of the spectrum, it can be quite a lot for someone in Northern Europe who tends to remain indoors most of the year. This could be best achieved with a combination of diet, supplements and short intervals of 10 or 15 minutes a day in the sun. It could be less for very fair-skinned individuals.
The serum level recommended by the study would correspond to intake of 2000 International Units per day of vitamin D3 for a meaningful reduction in colorectal cancer. The researchers recommend 2000 IU/day, plus, when weather allows, a few minutes in the sun with at least 40% of the skin exposed, for a meaningful reduction in breast cancer incidence, unless the individual has a history of skin cancer or a photosensitivity disease. Garland also recommends moderate sun exposure and use of clothing and a hat when in the sun longer than 15 minutes.
Want to find out more about spinal decompression therapy, then visit New Century Spine Centers site on how to choose the best chiropractor for your needs.
Tags: anti-aging, cancer, chiropractic, chiropractor, dermatology, disease, health, medical, nutrition, optimum health, radiation, skin, skin cancer, sunscreen, supplements, wellness
Posted in skin cancer | No Comments »
Sunday, August 15th, 2010
As a chiropractor in San Diego, I see more than just cases of back pain. Patients ask all kinds of health questions. For many years, we have known two things in regards to the sun to be true. First, the sun is bad for you. Therefore, exposure should be limited. Most people don’t know this, but the sun has three types of sun rays, not just two. The first is ultraviolet C light. This is also known as UVC. This ray usually does not reach our planet’s surface and this is good because it is believed only brief exposure to UVC rays is fatal to our body. Next is ultraviolet B radiation. This is also known as UVB rays. These have long been considered the tanning rays of the sun. They are strongest during the summer months when the Earth’s orbit is closest to the Sun. UVB rays are what produce a sun tan to our skin.
For many years, sunblocks and sunscreens only attempted to block UVB because science was unaware of the effects of UVA rays (the third type of sun ray) on the body. UVA was believed to be the safe ray in the 1980s, which spawned the growth and popularity of the artificial sun bed industry – some dermatologists even backed this artificial tanning! But, science now believes UVA rays actually do more damage than UVB rays! UVA rays are not dependant on how far the Earth is from the Sun – so the effects are the same all year round. What’s more, UVA penetrates light clothing and car windshields… even many hats. Over-exposure to the sun has been linked to premature aging and even deadly skin cancer.
For years, the sunblock industry has been booming with the promise their products protect you from the sun’s aging and cancerous rays. But, research now says these “truths” may not be so “true.” This brings us to the second so called truth which is limit exposure to the harmful rays of the sun by using high SPF sunscreens and sunblocks. For example, there is no consensus whether sunscreens prevent skin cancer. According to the Environmental Working Groups’ (ewg.org) finding, “The Food and Drug Administration’s 2007 draft sunscreen safety regulations say: FDA is not aware of data demonstrating that sunscreen use alone helps prevent skin cancer.” (FDA 2007). The International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) agrees. The IARC recommends clothing, hats and shade as primary barriers to UV radiation and writes “sunscreens should not be the first choice for skin cancer prevention and should not be used as the sole agent for protection against the sun” (IARC 2001a). Even worse, there is evidence emerging that sunscreen may actually increase the risk of skin cancer!
In 2007, the FDA published draft regulations that would prohibit manufacturers from labeling sunscreens over 50 SPF. The FDA stated that anything over 50 SPF was “inherently misleading.” Even an SPF of 50 can be misleading because of the way most people use sunscreen. Researchers speculate the cause or causes may be lack of UVA protection by most sunscreen for over 30 years, improper usage, staying in the sun longer with sunscreens and some of the ingredients. One big problem is the SPF (sun protection factor) myth.
A person using one-fourth the amount of sunscreen with an SPF of 30 only actually gets an SPF of 2.3. The same person using a sunscreen with SPF 100 ends up with only SPF 3.2. In the real world, tests show people apply only one-half to one fifth of the amount used when testing the sunscreen.
Then there are also the potential problems with the ingredients found in sunscreens. Retinyl palmitate (a form of Vitamin A also commonly used in sunscreens) may increase the risk of skin cancer. According to Environmental Working Groups, “The publicly available data from FDA’s new study suggest that when used in sun-exposed skin care products, retinyl palmitate and related chemicals may increase skin damage and elevate skin cancer risk instead of protecting the skin.” Also for example, oxybenzone which is a common ingredient, is a known hormone disruptor.
Also, according to Environmental Working Groups, 41% of all sunscreens contain retinyl palmitate. All of this may be surprising but what’s even more shocking is that the FDA first issued draft sunscreen regulations in 1978 and last updated the draft in 2007. The regulations are still not final, despite multiple announcements of impending completion. Until the agency formally issues its rules, companies are not required to verify their sunscreens work, including testing for SPF levels, checking waterproof claims or providing UVA protection. Nearly one in eight sunscreens does not block UVA rays. Many carry the seal of “The Skin Cancer Foundation.” According to the Environmental Working Groups, “The Skin Cancer Foundation (SCF) lends its logo to hundreds of sun protection products. SCF approval is easy, just document that your product has an SPF of at least 15 and provide results of basic tests (for SPF, skin reactions and water and sweat resistance, if such claims are made).
Confused? If you are, then you are not alone. Here’s something that will make the most of the confusion Disappear. Since sunscreens are probably not as safe as once thought, the best thing to do is stay out of the sun during its peak hours (10:00am – 2:00pm) and whenever possible, wear protective clothing instead of chemicals. Don’t forget, some sun is absolutely necessary for Vitamin D production and proper health. The amount of sun you should get depends on your skin type but you should NEVER burn.
Learn more about skin cancer. Stop by the back pain website site where you can get free information about chiropractic care and what it can do for you.
Tags: cancer, chiropractic, chiropractor, disease, health, melanoma, radiation, skin, skin damage, spf, sun, sun block, sunblock, sunscreen, tumor, UVA, UVB, UVC
Posted in cancer | No Comments »
|