|
medpundit |
||
 |
 |
|
Saturday, July 20, 2002Women with breast cancer had, on average, fewer births than did controls (2·2 vs 2·6). Furthermore, fewer parous women with cancer than parous controls had ever breastfed (71% vs 79%), and their average lifetime duration of breastfeeding was shorter (9·8 vs 15·6 months). The relative risk of breast cancer decreased by 4·3% (95% CI 2·9-5·8; p<0·0001) for every 12 months of breastfeeding in addition to a decrease of 7·0% (5·0-9·0; p<0·0001) for each birth. You’ll notice that the number of births confers more of a decline in breast cancer risk than the duration of breastfeeding. You would think, therefore, that the emphasis would be given to having more children to prevent breast cancer. But that would be politically incorrect. Having too many children overburdens the earth, you know, not to mention the social welfare system. Instead, in the concluding comments, the author emphasizes the advantages of breastfeeding in cancer prevention: In the meantime, important reductions in breast-cancer incidence could be achieved if women considered breastfeeding each child for longer than they do now. About 470 000 women in developed countries and 320 000 women in developing countries were diagnosed with breast cancer in 1990. Based on the estimates obtained here, if women in developed countries had 2·5 children, on average, but breastfed each child for 6 months longer than they currently do, about 25 000 (5%) breast cancers would be prevented each year, and if each child were breastfed for an additional 12 months about 50 000 (11%) breast cancers might be prevented annually. There are obvious economic and social consequences to prolonging breastfeeding, and these results indicate that there are benefits to the mother, as well as the known benefits to the child. This paper came from England, where the National Health Service recently appointed a “breastfeeding czar” for Wales. It’s easier to get a paper published if it promotes the agenda of the prevailing healthcare system. The only problem is, this last bit of conjecture is based on the cumulative risk of breast cancer. That is, the risk of getting breast cancer by the age of 70. This cumulative risk has gone up in the last half of the twentieth century, not only because women are having fewer children and breastfeeding less over their lifetimes, but also because they are living longer. The longer a woman lives, the greater her chances of developing breast cancer, or any cancer for that matter. And the sad truth is, back in the days when women spent their child-bearing years actually bearing children, they died younger, whether they lived in the "developed world" or the "developing world". Die younger, avoid breast cancer. It's a stretch to suggest that women are doing society a disservice by not breastfeeding the requisite six months recommended by breastfeeding advocates. Maybe the rate of breast cancer would go down if everyone did, but we don't know that. It's all just supposition and theory. Breastfeeding remains a very intimate and personal decision. Every woman should have the right to decide for herself if and how long she wants to do it. This study has done nothing to change that. UPDATE: Looks like most of the world agrees. posted by Sydney on 7/20/2002 08:30:00 AM 1 comments 1 Comments:
Breast Cancer incidence
By |
|
