Cancer Decisions - Free Newsletter -July 22, 2007

HERE AT THE MOSS REPORTS

We are dedicated to bringing our readers and clients the latest and most interesting developments in the field of cancer research and treatment.

The Moss Reports is a comprehensive series of detailed individual reports on more than 200 different kinds of cancer. Each of these diagnosis-specific reports analyzes the current available treatments, both conventional and alternative, and offers the cancer patient a clear-eyed, truthful assessment of the available options. If you would like to purchase a Moss Report for yourself or someone you love, you can do so securely from our Web site (www.cancerdecisions.com), or by calling 1-800-980-1234 (814-238-3367 from outside the US).

I also offer phone consultations to clients who have bought a Moss Report. A phone consultation can be enormously helpful in drawing up a treatment strategy and getting one's options clearly prioritized. A recent client offered the following comment:

"I want to express my thanks to Dr. Moss for the telephone consultation. I had done a fair amount of research before our conversation and had received advice about the treatments the oncologists felt I needed. The oncologists did not take into consideration my specific case, so it was so good to discuss my situation with Dr. Moss and receive advice and information I believe is not biased toward any specific treatment. It was so helpful and I have no doubts about the course I have chosen. Thank you so much." - S. F.

To schedule an appointment for a phone consultation, please email: Jacquie@cancerdecisions.com, or call 1-800-980-1234 (814-238-3367 from outside the US).

We look forward to helping you.

CURRENT TOPICS

A question that comes up very frequently in phone consultations with my clients is the issue of whether or not it is safe to take antioxidants while undergoing standard cancer treatments such as chemotherapy or radiation.

While there is mounting evidence to suggest that antioxidants are both safe and effective in counteracting the unpleasant side effects of chemotherapy and radiation, by and large the oncology profession tends to recommend strongly against the use of such supportive measures, citing concerns that antioxidants may interfere with the cancer-killing ability of standard treatments.

I have written an investigative report on this controversial subject, exposing the flaws in the arguments so often leveled against the use of antioxidants during cancer therapy. The report - Do Antioxidants and Chemotherapy Conflict? - is available for download from the Cancer Decisions web site: www.cancerdecisions.com.

This report is one of our Current Topics series - a growing list of in-depth analyses that focus on issues of importance to all who are interested in cancer prevention and treatment. Other Current Topics include:

On Guard - Gardasil (An in-depth discussion of the anti-cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil)
Do Antioxidants and Chemotherapy Conflict?
Mammography, Biopsy and the Diagnosis of Breast Cancer
Herceptin or Deceptin? (An evaluation of the use of Herceptin in breast cancer)
Avastin: Your Money Or Your Life. (A clear-eyed look at the targeted drug Avastin)
The Politics of Hope: Andrew von Eschenbach and the Decline of the National Cancer Institute
The Mexican Cancer Clinics in the Era of Evidence-Based Medicine

AUDIO NEWSLETTER

To hear the audio version of the newsletter, please click or go to:
http://www.cancerdecisions.com/audio/CD072207.mp3

SUSCRIBE TO OUR PODCAST

To hear the letter podcast on iTunes, please visit:
http://phobos.apple.com/WebObjects/MZStore.woa/wa/viewPodcast?id=215899747

If you do not have iTunes, you may also access our feed at:
http://www.cancerdecisions.com/mossreports.rss

SUICIDE BY SUNLIGHT? - PART ONE

This summer, the American Cancer Society (ACS) has become embroiled in a scandal over its advertising practices. Based upon input from various focus groups, the ACS decided to place ads in 15 national magazines strongly implying that skin cancer is a fatal disease but that these deaths can be prevented by mass screening.

A young woman in the advertisement holds up a picture of a smiling blonde. "My sister accidentally killed herself. She died of skin cancer," reads the headline. The ad cautions: "Left unchecked, skin cancer can be fatal." It urges readers to "use sunscreen, cover up and watch for skin changes."

Much of the public already has an almost obsessive fear of the sun. I have a friend who, even after the liberal use of sun block, a Tilley hat and other protective clothing, will never venture out into direct sunlight. To take a walk with her means to run from the shade of one tree to another. Apparently this kind of fear will drive people to spend serious money. This summer a Canadian company, Solestrom, is even marketing a bikini with a built-in UV meter and an alarm that beeps to tell the wearer when it's time to head for the shade. The cost is $189 - if you can find it. At the moment it's sold out. (To me, it looks more like a high-tech chastity belt than an anticancer device.)

"There's so much concern about sun exposure and skin cancer that we saw the demand and designed something to be safe for the wearer," Solestrom spokeswoman Emily Garassa said.

The attractive blonde in the ACS ad is not really a real skin cancer victim at all, but a professional model. Another dubious aspect of this so-called "public service announcement" was that it was paid for by the sunscreen manufacturer, Neutrogena, which stands to profit directly from any ensuing skin cancer panic. The relationship between ACS and its corporate sponsor is reciprocal: Neutrogena pays for the ACS ad campaign and in return gets to place the ACS logo on its products. But Neutrogena's sponsorship of the skin cancer ads was not disclosed to the public until it was revealed in the New York Times.

The manipulation of public opinion through advertising is nothing new for the ACS. After all, ACS became the nation's wealthiest charity largely through its public relations acumen. The man who primarily created the modern-day ACS was Albert Lasker, the celebrated Madison Avenue executive still remembered for his devastatingly effective cigarette advertising campaigns incorporating the slogan, "Reach for a Lucky [cigarette] instead of a sweet."

But isn't the ACS correct in telling the public that skin cancer is deadly? Well, yes - and no. There are certainly some kinds of skin cancer, such as malignant melanoma, that are deadly. But deadly forms of skin cancer comprise only 6 percent of the overall number of skin cancer cases in the US each year: the remaining 94 percent are not life-threatening. The trouble is that most people have only a fuzzy grasp of the difference between the rare but potentially fatal forms of skin cancer, like melanoma, and the much more common non-fatal kinds that afflict more than a million Americans each year.

These more common types of skin cancer, basal cell and squamous cell skin tumors, are not even counted as cancer in the National Cancer Institute's SEER database, which gathers epidemiological information on the incidence and survival of cancer in the US. Basal cell and squamous cell skin cancers rarely metastasize, are almost always readily cured, and very rarely ever kill anyone. I encountered a single fatal case 17 years ago, and it was so exceptional that I have remembered it all these years. (As a confirmation of this, try typing the phrase "deadly squamous cell skin cancer" or "deadly basal cell skin cancer" into the Google search engine (include the quotation marks). You will get exactly zero hits.)

Thus, to warn the general public that sun exposure will cause deadly skin cancers that are cutting people down in their prime - without distinguishing between rare melanomas and the much more common, garden variety, curable skin tumors - seems deliberately aimed at creating public anxiety, if not panic.

To be concluded, with references, next week.

--Ralph W. Moss, Ph.D.

**NOTE** To view this page in a more printable format, please CLICK HERE.

IMPORTANT DISCLAIMER

The news and other items in this newsletter are intended for informational purposes only. Nothing in this newsletter is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice.