Thursday, February 18, 2010

An aspirin a day MAY keep the cancer at bay

Recently it was reported that in a group of 4000 nurses that had had breast cancer, the ones who were taking aspirin daily had 70% less recurrence. This was not a controlled study: no standardized doses of aspirin, etc...just an observation. No mention why these women were on aspirin-arthritis? preventative for cardiovascular events? My primary several years ago suggested that I take aspirin daily as it allegedly prevented heart attacks. I said no as believe it or not, I was selling my NSAID-free blood monthly to my company to standardize their machines.

The article(Wall Street Journal but widely reported elsewhere)could not come up with a possible explanation for this phenomenon but of course(certo!!!) I think I can. Earlier I reported that there is a link between inflammation and cancer ( Inflammation per se does not cause cancer but it may provide an environment in which rogue cells could thrive. Aspirin is a classic anti-inflammatory agent-it may destroy the environment in which the cancer cells would grow. According to the Merck Manual, even a 1 cm tumor sheds a million cells/day. Almost all of these are destroyed by our immune systems or can not find a suitable place to grow.

Oh well, I am sure this idea will be followed up on.

So I am alone now. Steve has taken off before but usually there were kids in the house. Naomi did come over yesterday eating everything in sight so I need to buy more food.She especially liked the 'lacies' that I originally bought for my post-surgical friend but then decided to keep for my piggish self doling out one a day (I got healthier treats for the friend).

I was researching blood types. Some cultures put more stock in these than others: the Japanese in particular know theirs and some infer character traits to those possessing certain types. B types are not good in their book. Also it appears that B types in the past have been associated with being Jewish so there is some anti-Semitism there. I always found having O positive rather boring. So I have two kids that are A- and one who is A+. I can infer that Steve must be A something or other. His mom claimed that one of her babies needed a transfusion because she was Rh- and the baby was positive. But her younger babies are AB- and B-(both pretty rare). Steve must have been the positive baby but he was first. Maybe she had the transfusion. Steve hasn't had any major medical work so he has no idea about his blood. At some health fair, we tried to test the antigens ourselves and he clearly was A but we got a weak response for the B antigen. I should make him donate blood. That's how Josh and I know ours.

It's a sunny day. I will run and then go around running errands. Running comes first of course.


Teri B. said...

Because aspirin is so cheap, will there be any studies funded?...

Anyway, when Hannah was born, it said A+ on her little bassinet, which I thought was an evaluation of her as an ideal baby...until a nurse set me straight.
I am A-, Dick is O+, and Molly is another A+. I guess that arrangement would be a classic for a intro genetics textbook.

Sue in Italia/In the Land Of Cancer said...

So I guess it was Rhogam for you too.

They used to have kids test their blood in school as a biology project but then distressing info occasionally emerged e.g. why am I an A when Mommy and Daddy are Os? Why indeed!
I'm sure there will be plenty of studies, just not by drug companies. In the meantime, I'm predicting aspirin sales will go up, up, up.
Well I got one A+ baby. She had the highest Apgar scores too!


Blog Archive