Breast Cancer and Vitamin d status.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Serum 25 hydroxyvitamin D levels in early and advanced breast cancer (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17046848&query_hl=10&itool=pubmed_docsum) This research concludes Serum levels of 25(OH)D are significantly higher in patients with early stage breast cancer compared to those with locally advanced and/or metastatic disease.
The implication that some may draw is that keeping vitamin d status as high as possible it may possibly prevent the early stage progressing to the advanced.

Cancer survival is dependent on season of diagnosis and sunlight exposure. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=16671100&query_hl=15&itool=pubmed_docsum) More research supporting the theory that vitamin d status may impact on the progress of the condition.

similar work from Norway. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15017127&query_hl=15&itool=pubmed_docsum)

Sunarc Map of Breast Cancer mortality in USA (http://www.sunarc.org/breastcancer.htm) Anyone spot the relation between latitude and incidence. The further North the more cancer deaths and the weaker the sun in Winter.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Solar ultraviolet-B exposure and cancer incidence and mortality in the United States, 1993-2002 (http://www.biomedcentral.com/content/pdf/1471-2407-6-264.pdf).....Weaker evidence of an inverse relationship was observed for six sites: breast, kidney, leukemia, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, pancreas, and small intestine......For several sites (breast, colon, rectum, esophagus, other biliary, vulva),the relative risks of mortality are higher, possibly suggesting that the maintenance of adequate vitamin D levels is more critical for limiting tumor progression than for preventing tumor onset......Among the cancer sites for which this inverse relationship has been repeatedly found are prostate, female breast, and colon and rectum.......Where incidence and mortality risks differed substantially, the higher risk tended to be for mortality, as seen for colon, rectum, other biliary, vulva, breast, esophagus, and miscellaneous sites.

Sunlight and mortality from breast, ovarian, colon, prostate, and non-melanoma skin cancer: (http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=13603146)
Vitamin D3 from sunlight may improve the prognosis of breast-, colon- and prostate cancer (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15017127&dopt=Abstract)

[Ted Hutchinson]

Season of diagnosis is a predictor of cancer survival. Sun-induced vitamin D may be involved: A possible role of sun-induced Vitamin D. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17229569&query_hl=14&itool=pubmed_docsum)The calcidiol level in a group of Norwegians (14,000 individuals, age range 16-80) was found to be highest in late summer. The seasonal variation was larger for young than for old persons. The calcitriol concentration was practically constant throughout the year. Younger persons had less calcidiol and more calcitriol than older persons, indicating that the conversion of calcidiol to calcitriol is more efficient in younger persons. A seasonal variation of prognosis of cancer (colon-, breast-, prostate- cancer and Hodgkin lymphoma) was found. The survival is highest for summer and autumn diagnosis, corresponding to maximal calcidiol levels. Thus, calcidiol may act synergistically with traditional treatment modalities. In view of these calcitriol and calcidiol data, the seasonal variation of cancer survival may be related to the calcidiol gradient, indicating that this Vitamin D metabolite may be more important than believed so far.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D regulates the phenotype of human breast cancer cells. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17288543&query_hl=10&itool=pubmed_docsum)1alpha,25-dihydroxyvitamin D(3) (1,25(OH)(2)D(3)), the most active vitamin D metabolite, regulates proliferation, survival, and differentiation in many cell types. 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) and several less calcemic analogs are in clinical trials against various neoplasias. We studied the effects of 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) on a panel of human breast cancer cells, which show similar vitamin D receptor (VDR) content but variable transcriptional and anti-proliferative responsiveness. In MDA-MB-453 cells, one of the responsive lines, 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) increased cell and nuclear size and induced a change from a rounded to a flattened morphology. By phase contrast, laser confocal and electron microscopy, we found that 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) changed the cytoarchitecture of actin filaments and microtubules and nuclear shape, induced filopodia and lamellipodia, and promoted cell-to-cell contacts via large cytoplasmic extensions. However, although claudin-7 and occludin content in the cells increased upon exposure to 1,25(OH)(2)D(3), these proteins were not located at the plasma membrane probably due to the absence of E-cadherin expression. Additionally, 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) induced the accumulation of alpha(v)-integrin, beta(5)-integrin, focal adhesion kinase (FAK), and paxillin in focal adhesion plaques, concomitant with the increased phosphorylation of the FAK. 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) enhanced MDA-MB-453 and MDA-MB-468 cell adhesion to plastic but decreased adhesion to laminin. The expression of the mesenchymal marker N-cadherin and of the myoepithelial marker P-cadherin was down-regulated by 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) in several breast cancer cell lines. Other myoepithelial proteins such as alpha(6)-integrin, beta(4)-integrin, and smooth muscle alpha-actin (SMA) were also repressed by 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) in MDA-MB-453 and MDA-MB-468 cells. Accordingly, mice lacking VDR (Vdr(-/-)) showed abnormally high levels of SMA and P-cadherin in their mammary gland. These findings show that 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) profoundly affects the phenotype of breast cancer cells, and suggest that it reverts the myoepithelial features associated with more aggressive forms and poor prognosis in human breast cancer.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Expression of splice variants of 1alpha-hydroxylase in mcf-7 breast cancer cells. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17287116&query_hl=10&itool=pubmed_docsum)1,25-Dihydroxyvitamin D(3) (calcitriol) is the most active natural metabolite of Vitamin D(3). It has strong antiproliferative and differentiating effects on various cell types including breast cancer cells.

[ainee]

My research has found that some cancers have anaerobic (living without oxygen) cells. A cancer specialist also verified this. I found that areas of the body which are prone to cancer - breast, overies, postrate, brain etc., need an almighty amount of oxygen to stay healthy. So if there has been an illness, injury or toxin contact, there could be a decrease in the oxygen to the body and to these areas. Anaemia is one of the first signs of many illnesses - anaemia lacks oxygen in the blood.
I know a lot of people get cancer without ever being unwell before. In my case, I developed horrific neurological (nerve) symptoms. How did I get those - I was a pretty fit, healthy person at the time. Then my research revealed that injury and/or toxins, even undetected, forgotten about or years before the onset of an illness, can cause damage to the body later on.
I had a benign breast lump removed years ago. I had the lump removed in a country hospital, then had to wait days for the results to come back, so I can understand a little bit about the worry that it might be cancer. Several family members have also suffered cancer - breast, stomach, prostrate, brain tumors - so when I came across the above information about the lack of oxygen, I was very interested.

Research and my experimentation has found that by raising the body's temperature, which increases the heart rate - as if excercising - also increases breathing, increases the blood and oxygen content to the body, brain, tissues and cells. I found that MOT - Mini Oxygen Treatment - taken 3 or 4 times a day, increases the oxygen content, without drugs or machines - the oxygen comes naturally from the atmosphere by way of deeper breathing 24/7. This suppressed and eventually after months of research and experimentation, has reversed most of my neurological symptoms.
I read that if a man includes several large helpings of onion, leek or garlic in his diet each week, there is less chance of him getting prostrate cancer. These vegetables have a volitile compound in them, which raises the temperature of the body. So I now include more onion and other vegetables in our meals, which seem to have the same benifit. My treatment included large doses of VB1, VC - both have water soluble properties - and several other things which probably have never been scientifically tested for medicinal purposes. I found the things with high water soluble properties of carbon and hydrogen or which have a volitile compound, entered the system quickly, to increase the oxygen content. There are many Vitamins and other suppliments which have oily to greasy solid properties, which passes through the system without the desired effect.

By NO means am I suggesting that this is a treatment for cancer - or a cure for anything else - I believe through my research and experience, that MOT may give better health to many, by delivering more oxygen to the whole body. I've posted info on BT in Success stories - My Story May Give Hope - by ainee, and several other threads.
I hope this information may be of some benifit to someone else.
ainee.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Identification of novel mediators of Vitamin D signaling and 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) resistance in mammary cells. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17254776)Since the discovery of the Vitamin D receptor (VDR) in mammary cells, the role of the Vitamin D signaling pathway in normal glandular function and in breast cancer has been extensively explored. In vitro studies have demonstrated that the VDR ligand, 1,25(OH)(2)D(3), modulates key proteins involved in signaling proliferation, differentiation and survival of normal mammary epithelial cells. Anti-proliferative and pro-differentiating effects of 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) have also been observed in VDR positive breast cancer cells, indicating that transformation per se does not abolish Vitamin D signaling. However, many breast cancer cell lines are less sensitive to 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) than normal mammary epithelial cells. Reduced sensitivity to 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) has been linked to alterations in Vitamin D metabolizing enzymes as well as down regulation of VDR expression or function. In this report, we describe results from a proteomics screening approach used to search for proteins involved in dictating sensitivity or resistance to Vitamin D mediated apoptosis in breast cancer cells. Several proteins not previously linked to 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) signaling were identified with this approach, and a distinct subset of proteins was linked to 1,25(OH)(2)D(3) resistance. Follow-up studies to determine the relevance of these proteins to Vitamin D signaling in general are in progress.
the above is further information about the role of Vitamin d in breast tissue.

It would be helpful if others wishing to discuss matters not related to Vitamin d and it's role in the prevention or progress of Breast cancer started their own threads to discuss those interests. I'd like to keep this thread on the Vit d3/breast cancer topic as it is clear from research such as Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels in early and advanced breast cancer. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17046848&query_hl=9&itool=pubmed_docsum) and the links previously supplied that as Serum levels of 25(OH)D are significantly higher in patients with early-stage breast cancer than in those with locally advanced or metastatic disease, so it follows that raising Serum levels (or preventing them dropping in Winter) may be a worthwhile strategy to prevent or delay the progress of the condition to more aggressive stages.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D may lesson the pain for those on Arimidex (http://blog.healthtalk.com/breast-cancer/life-with-breast-cancer/vitamin-d-may-lesson-the-pain-for-those-on-arimidex/) Interesting blog that may be helpful to some readers here.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Research and my experimentation has found that by raising the body's temperature, which increases the heart rate - as if excercising - also increases breathing, increases the blood and oxygen content to the body, brain, tissues and cells. I found that MOT - Mini Oxygen Treatment - taken 3 or 4 times a day, increases the oxygen content, without drugs or machines - the oxygen comes naturally from the atmosphere by way of deeper breathing 24/7. Ainee's remarks here have made me wonder if the protective effect of Vitamin d in Breast Cancer may be the result of Lipid peroxidation, oxidative stress genes and dietary factors in breast cancer protection: a hypothesis. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17224037&query_hl=32&itool=pubmed_docsum)


Lifetime physical activity and the risk of breast cancer: (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17296272)lifetime total physical activity is associated with decreased breast cancer risk. They also suggest that recreational physical activity at ages 14-20 years is the most beneficial

This fits in with what we know about exercise and cancer survival.
Cancer Survival: Time to Get Moving? Data Accumulate Suggesting a Link Between Physical Activity and Cancer Survival (http://www.jco.org/cgi/content/full/24/22/3517)

Differential regulation of survivin expression and apoptosis by vitamin D3 compounds in two isogenic MCF-7 breast cancer cell sublines. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=15608672) may explain what is happening. I am not a scientist doctor or health professional and may be getting several different processes totally mixed up but even if I am totally wrong in implying there may be a connection it is still worth noting that exercise and vitamin d both help improve breast cancer prognosis.

It's a bit of a downer hearing that it's your vitamin d status and the exercise you did the year before your diagnosis that is most important but The International Agency for Research on Cancer (http://www.hc2d.co.uk/content.php?contentId=2054) said 1,900 more deaths from breast cancer were recorded last year than the total of 130,000 recorded for 2004.

Breast cancer deaths continued to rise in spite of the screening programmes, which were thought to be behind the 16% increase in new diagnoses compared with 2004.

We really do have to motivate people to reduce where possible their cancer risk. Outdoor exercise, which both increases Vitamin d status via sun exposure and is protective on it's own, is relatively cheap and effective lifestyle modification which can safely be encouraged.

[ainee]

Ted
I guess we will always have to keep looking for possible causes, preventions and treatments.
Through my research, I've found the properties of Vitamin D as from Vitamin D3 = C27 H44 0 to Vitamin D4 = C28 H46 O. The others, Vitamin D1 and D2, have properties which are similar.
These are oily to greasy solid properties and may not work as well or as fast as what I have discovered. Many drugs also have oily to greasy properties. The VB1, VC and other treatments I take, have water soluble properties of carbon and hydrogen or have a volitile compound - which increases the temperature of the body, and quickly increases the breathing and oxygen circulation and oxygen content to the body, tissues and cells, which through my experimentation, lasts for a few hours. So by taking the safe, easy, cheap, MOT 3 or 4 times a day, the oxygen benifit is had 24/7.

I've discovered that excercise also increases the body temperature, increases heart rate, breathing etc., but only for a short time til the respiratory system levels out - then it's back to normal - and if the person's lungs aren't breathing in enough oxygen to keep them well in the first place - then we're back to square one.
Heat treatments - and the sun - also raise the temperature, breathing etc., but the effect is discontinued within a short time, once the heat is taken away.
At school we were taught to breath deeply - they might have had something there! - but I couldn't keep deep breathing 24/7.
Something else I've discovered - I heard a scientist say that there is 40% less oxygen in the atmosphere now, than there was 100 years ago. Perhaps this is the reason when some get ill, they cannot get better.

I'm NOT saying for anyone to go off their medication or change it in any way without seeing their doctor - but maybe if they talk to their doctor about taking MOT as a suplementary treatment along with other medication. Even if some don't want to take extra pills and vitamins, there are certain foods that we can include in our diet, which also have the same effect of raising the temperature, breathing etc.

Ted, I don't want to step in where I'm not suppose to be. I'm not a scientist, doctor or health professional either - but I have done much research since becoming ill and even though I am reasonably well now - most of the time - I continue to research and post about my experiences - which doesn't seem to be in any health manuals yet - in the hope that it may help others to gain better health.
ainee.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D again linked to lower breast cancer risk (http://www.foodnavigator.com/news/ng.asp?n=75094-vitamin-d-breast-cancer-dietary-recommendations)

Increased vitamin D levels during youth, from the sun and the diet, may reduce the risk of breast cancer later in life by over 30 per cent, suggests a new epidemiological study....................increased exposure to sunlight during adolescence was associated with the highest protection against breast cancer risk later in life, with a risk reduction 35 per cent...........We found strong evidence to support the hypothesis that vitamin D could help prevent breast cancer. However, our results suggest that exposure earlier in life, particularly during breast development, maybe most relevant," concluded the researchers in the journal Cancer Epidemiology Biomarkers & Prevention.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D and prevention of breast cancer: Pooled analysis. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17368188)BACKGROUND: Inadequate photosynthesis or oral intake of Vitamin D are associated with high incidence and mortality rates of breast cancer in ecological and observational studies, but the dose-response relationship in individuals has not been adequately studied. METHODS: A literature search for all studies that reported risk by of breast cancer by quantiles of 25(OH)D identified two studies with 1760 individuals. Data were pooled to assess the dose-response association between serum 25(OH)D and risk of breast cancer. RESULTS: The medians of the pooled quintiles of serum 25(OH)D were 6, 18, 29, 37 and 48ng/ml. Pooled odds ratios for breast cancer from lowest to highest quintile, were 1.00, 0.90, 0.70, 0.70 and 0.50 (p trend<0.001). According to the pooled analysis, individuals with serum 25(OH)D of approximately 52ng/ml had 50% lower risk of breast cancer than those with serum <13ng/ml. This serum level corresponds to intake of 4000IU/day. This exceeds the National Academy of Sciences upper limit of 2000IU/day. A 25(OH)D level of 52ng/ml could be maintained by intake of 2000IU/day and, when appropriate, about 12min/day in the sun, equivalent to oral intake of 3000IU of Vitamin D(3). CONCLUSIONS: Intake of 2000IU/day of Vitamin D(3), and, when possible, very moderate exposure to sunlight, could raise serum 25(OH)D to 52ng/ml, a level associated with reduction by 50% in incidence of breast cancer, according to observational studies.

For those in countries where ngmol/l are used instead of ng/ml to convert the figures divide by .4 so 52ng/ml=130nmol/L

Optimal levels are around 50 ng/mL (125 nmol/L).
UK readers need to know that almost without exception most White UK residents are well below this level in Winter and 6 out of 10 of us remain so during the Summer. (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/abstract/85/3/860) the situation isn't much better in the USA even though there is more sunshine available for a longer period and milk is fortified to a limited extent.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D and reduced risk of breast cancer: (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17372236) a population-based case-control study.
We found strong evidence to support the hypothesis that vitamin D could help prevent breast cancer. However, our results suggest that exposure earlier in life, particularly during breast development, maybe most relevant.
Reduced breast cancer risks were associated with increasing sun exposure from ages 10 to 19 for the highest quartile of outdoor activities.
So the message is that most of the prevention of BC by exposure to sunlight while the breasts are developing between the ages of 10-19. So we really do need to encourage our kids (grandchildren in my case) to regularly spend time outdoors in the sunshine.
Do be aware that this latest research is in no way a contradiction of the beneficial effect on prognosis those with the highest levels of vitamin d at the time of diagnosis and benefit obtain.
Of course it is better if you don't get BC in the first place but as you cannot now return to your misspent youth and retrospectively spend more time outdoors, But you can now make sure your Vit d status stays high so there is less chance of a BC moving from the least aggressive to most aggressive stage and also ensure that should that happen, your Vit D status stays optimal (around 50ng/mL 125nmol/L) so you are in the group with the best or at any rate least worst, prognosis.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Synchronized seasonal variations of mammographic breast density and plasma 25-hydroxyvitamin d. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17507618&query_hl=11&itool=pubmed_docsum)[i].....Dietary vitamin D has been associated with lower mammographic breast density, a strong biomarker for breast cancer risk. Blood 25-hydroxyvitamin D [25(OH)D] is an integrated measure of vitamin D status (from food, supplements, and sun exposure) and varies with season.......In premenopausal women, changes in blood vitamin D seem to be inversely related to changes in breast density with a lag time of about 4 months. This finding encourages further investigation of the possibility that vitamin D could One worrying thing about this research is that the highest smoothed mean 25(OH)D levels were seen at the end of July (81.5 nmol/L) and the lowest in mid-April (52.4 nmol/L). It is very worrying that mean Vitamin D level of Quebec premenopausal women participating in this project was at best only just above the minimum level of 80 nmol (32 ng/mL) so for most of the year parathyroid hormone (PTH), intestinal calcium absorption, and skeletal density measurements will be less than optimal.
When humans are sun (or dietary) replete, the vitamin D endocrine system will function in a fashion as do other steroid synthetic pathways, not limited by substrate. The level at which circulating vitamin D(3) and its metabolic product-25(OH)D(3) create an optimal ratio is 100nmol/L

The level at which you achieve maximum muscular strength is 125nmol/L
As the cost of buying (see links from the Vitamin D Council website) is so trivial it really is sad that the average Quebec woman is for most of the year Vitamin D insufficient.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D and breast cancer] (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?db=pubmed&cmd=Retrieve&dopt=AbstractPlus&list_uids=17437690&query_hl=11&itool=pubmed_docsum)Active vitamin D increases the differentiation and exerts antiproliferative effects in cancer cells. Recent data suggest that vitamin D is activated locally in cancer cells. Ecologic studies have shown an inverse correlation between breast cancer mortality and sun exposure and dietary vitamin D intake. In clinical studies an impaired vitamin D status is associated with a 20-30% increased breast cancer incidence and 10-20% increased mortality. As vitamin D insufficiency is common, it is important to clarify whether vitamin D status affects the risk and prognosis of breast cancer

For those who wish to remain safe while the penny finally drops the cost of sufficient Vid D3 (including P&P to UK) to remain Vit d replete through the 2 Winters is £13.50ish depending on exchange rate that's assuming you relied on regular limited(20-4mins) safe full body (or as near to as possible) prone exposure to sunshine between April and September and just used 5 X 5000iu capsules each week through October to March.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Intakes of Calcium and Vitamin D and Breast Cancer Risk in Women (http://archinte.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/abstract/167/10/1050)
During an average of 10 years of follow-up, 276 premenopausal and 743 postmenopausal women had a confirmed diagnosis of incident invasive breast cancer. Higher intakes of total calcium and vitamin D were moderately associated with a lower risk of premenopausal breast cancer; the hazard ratios in the group with the highest relative to the lowest quintile of intake were 0.61 (95% confidence interval, 0.40-0.92) for calcium (P = .04 for trend) and 0.65 (95% confidence interval, 0.42-1.00) for vitamin D intake (P = .07 for trend). The inverse association with both nutrients was also present for large or poorly differentiated breast tumors among premenopausal women (P.04 for trend). By contrast, intakes of both nutrients were not inversely associated with the risk of breast cancer among postmenopausal women.

Conclusions Findings from this study suggest that higher intakes of calcium and vitamin D may be associated with a lower risk of developing premenopausal breast cancer. The likely apparent protection in premenopausal women may be more pronounced for more aggressive breast tumors.

Discussion of this article can be found here (http://www.forbes.com/forbeslife/health/feeds/hscout/2007/05/29/hscout604969.html) and Calcium and vitamin D 'cut breast cancer risk by a third' (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/femail/article.html?in_article_id=458309&in_page_id=1879)

It seems the Cancer promotion industry aren't happy as they continue to say "At this point in time, a recommendation that women take vitamin D or calcium to decrease their breast cancer risk is not warranted." But they clearly don't want to put their jobs at risk by losing customers.

A risk/benefit analysis tells us the risk of doing nothing is potentially great while the risk of treating vitamin D deficiency is minimal (http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/85/1/6), simply good medicine, and the better choice.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Calcium and Vitamin D May Cut Premenopausal Breast Cancer (http://broadcaster.medpagetoday.com/t?r=2&ctl=368E:1BDF48374F8C6C4E873D2B0530675AC7)

[Ted Hutchinson]

New research shows vitamin D slashes risk of cancers by 77 percent; cancer industry refuses to support cancer prevention (http://www.newstarget.com/021892.html) One group of women was given calcium (around 1500 mg daily) and vitamin D (1100 IU daily)

Bear in mind this is Omaha latitude 42 UK is lat 52 800mls further North and UK milk is NOT forified and contains no Vit d. So UK readers need to add to the 1100iu daily vitamin D.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Study Shines More Light on Benefit of Vitamin D in Fighting Cancer (http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/532669/)

raising the serum 25(OH)D levels to 55 ng/mL was optimal for cancer prevention. This is the first study to recommend optimal vitamin D serum levels which, Garland said, are high enough to provide the needed benefit but which have been found by other scientists to be low enough to avoid health risks.


Interesting to see how the level for optimal status is gradually being raised as a result of new findings.

55ng/mL = 137.5nmol/L bear in mind that most UK women are around the 25ng/ml = 67.5nmol/L you can see there is a long way to go.

Each 400iu Vitamin D3 capsule raises status by between 7-12nmol/. You get a bigger increase the lower your status and as you get nearer optimal it becomes progressively harder to raise status. But for the UK 2000iu/daily/D3 should be the minimum amount and not the upper limit.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Vitamin D and prevention of breast cancer (http://www.chinaphar.com/1671-4083/28/1373.htm)Epidemiologic data have demonstrated that breast cancer incidence is inversely correlated with indices of vitamin D status, including ultraviolet exposure, which enhances epidermal vitamin D synthesis. The vitamin D receptor (VDR) is expressed in mammary epithelial cells, suggesting that vitamin D may directly influence sensitivity of the gland to transformation. Consistent with this concept, in vitro studies have demonstrated that the VDR ligand, 1,25-dihydroxyvitamin D (1,25D), exerts negative growth regulatory effects on mammary epithelial cells that contribute to maintenance of the differentiated phenotype. Furthermore, deletion of the VDR gene in mice alters the balance between proliferation and apoptosis in the mammary gland, which ultimately enhances its susceptibility to carcinogenesis. In addition, dietary supplementation with vitamin D, or chronic treatment with synthetic VDR agonists, reduces the incidence of carcinogen-induced mammary tumors in rodents. Collectively, these observations have reinforced the need to further define the human requirement for vitamin D and the molecular actions of the VDR in relation to prevention of breast cancer.



From the conclusion Thus, data from both human tissues and animal models support the concept that the VDR and its ligand induce a program of gene expression that contributes to maintenance of the differentiated phenotype in breast cells, a concept that is consistent with a role for vitamin D in both prevention and treatment of breast cancer.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Dietary vitamin d and calcium intake and premenopausal breast cancer risk in a german case-control study. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17927502)
Our data support a protective effect of dietary vitamin D on premenopausal breast cancer risk independent of dietary calcium intake.

[Ted Hutchinson]

Diet and Breast Cancer Risk Reduction. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17927928)
Additionally, alcohol increases the risk for breast cancer even at moderate levels of intake, and women who drink alcohol also should take sufficient folate, which can mitigate this excess risk. Interesting questions for future research include the role of soy products, red meat, energy balance, and vitamin D, with particular attention to timing of exposure in early life.

"The first thing that has shown up and is well established now is that alcohol consumption is related to increased risk of breast cancer. It's surprising that quite small amounts, say like one drink every other day does measurably cause a small increase in breast cancer," said Willette. "And if we have two drinks a day it increases our risk by about 25 or 30 percent compared to a woman who doesn't drink."

So drop that drink and get vitamin D in your system instead.

"For breast cancer specifically, in the nurses health study, we've seen about a 25 percent lower risk of breast cancer among women with the highest blood levels of vitamin D," Willette said. (http://www.thebostonchannel.com/health/14328420/detail.html)

[Ted Hutchinson]

Sunlight May Reduce Advanced Breast Cancer Risk in Some Women (http://www.medpagetoday.com/HematologyOncology/BreastCancer/tb/7045)Increasing sun exposure almost halved the risk of advanced breast cancer in women with light-pigmented skin

[Ted Hutchinson]

Serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D and risk of postmenopausal breast cancer - results of a large case-control study. (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/sites/entrez?Db=pubmed&Cmd=ShowDetailView&TermToSearch=17974532)Our findings strongly suggest a protective effect for postmenopausal breast cancer through a better vitamin D supply as characterized by serum 25(OH)D measurement, with a stronger inverse association in women with low serum 25(OH)D concentrations (< 50 nM).

Bear in mind the average UK postmenopausal woman spends most of the winter months with a vitamin d status >40nmol/L.
and older women are average 23nmol/l.

If we could raise the peak status at the end of summer to over 100nmol/l then the drop in winter would not reach such dangerously low levels. But that requires either regular short sun exposures when shadow is shorter than height (uvb available to make vitamin d) or an effective strength supplement 400iu raises status by 9nmol/l 2000iu/daily raises status 45nmol/l

[Ted Hutchinson]

I've just realised I got my > symbol the wrong way round.

Most UK adults Male and female spend from November to April with levels of vitamin D3 BELOW 40nmol/l/ <40nmol/l

In the above study, 1,394 women with breast cancer were case-controlled with a similar number of women without breast cancer. The women with breast cancer were three times more likely to have low vitamin D levels below
<50nmol/L