The Survive and Thrive Boomer Guide

Baby boomers: How much are you spending on anti-aging remedies and procedures?

By Rita R. Robison, Consumer Specialist

On Saturday, instead of a big banner headline on The Huffington Post screaming about political squabbles or the latest war report, baby boomers were featured.

The article, “Boomers Will Be Pumping Billions Into Anti-Aging Industry,” said spending on anti-aging products would rise from $80 billion to more than $114 in 2015.

Boomers, who want to be “forever young,” are expected to spend these funds on wrinkle creams, plastic surgery, supplements, hormone replacement therapy, workout regimes, and other remedies and procedures.

In the article, the National Institute on Aging advises boomers to eat a healthy diet, exercise regularly, and don’t smoke rather than spend money on anti-aging products.

The pros and cons of supplements, hormone replacement therapy, plastic surgery, and wrinkle care were discussed.

I don’t think the cons of plastic surgery were emphasized enough. I’ve written about the possible side effects. They aren’t pretty. See “Why You Should Think Twice Before Having Plastic Surgery” for details. In addition, take a look at “How Bad Is Botox for You?”

The article did a better job on wrinkle creams. It quoted the Consumer Reports tests that show there is little, if any, benefit from using the creams. See my articles “Wrinkle Creams Widely Used, But Don’t Do Much Good” and “You Can’t Erase Wrinkles With Cream” for details.

What are you doing to combat aging? Botox? Workouts? Walks? A face-lift? Eating organic food? Are you spending a lot of money?

Let me know in the Comment section below.

Copyright 2011, Rita R. Robison, Consumer Specialist

Why isn’t it Breast Cancer Prevention Month?

October is Breast Cancer Awareness Month. Shouldn’t it be Breast Cancer Prevention Month?

National Breast Cancer Awareness Month neglects to inform women how they can reduce their risks of breast cancer, says Samuel S. Epstein, M.D., and Rosalie Bertell, Ph.D., in the Huffington Post article “Breast Cancer Unawareness Month: Rethinking Mammograms.”

Epstein and Bertell say the evidence is clear that premenopausal mammography poses significant risks of breast cancer:

The routine practice of taking two films annually for each breast results in approximately 0.5 rad (radiation absorbed dose) exposure. This is about 500 times the dose from a single chest X-ray and is broadly focused on the entire chest rather than narrowly on the breast. This is also 25 times higher than is allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency for whole-body radiation from local nuclear industries (0.02 rad). Moreover, the breast is the most sensitive organ to ionizing radiation.

A great deal is known about other avoidable causes of cancer, which remain ignored by the American Cancer Society, Epstein and Bertell say. These include:

• Prolonged use of the Pill and estrogen replacement therapy.

• Prolonged consumption of milk from cows injected with a genetically engineered growth hormone to increase milk production. This milk is contaminated with high levels of a natural growth factor, which increases risks of breast cancer by up to seven-fold.

• High consumption of meat, as it is contaminated with potent natural or synthetic estrogens. These are routinely implanted in cattle before entry into feedlots, about 100 days prior to slaughter, to increase muscle mass and profits for the meat industry.

• Prolonged exposure to a wide range of hormonal ingredients in conventional cosmetics and personal care products.

• Living near hazardous waste sites, petrochemical plants, power lines, and nuclear plants.

Take a look at the article for information the risks of premenopausal mammograms and how the American Cancer Society is strongly linked to the mammography industry.

Epstein is professor emeritus of Environmental and Occupational Medicine at the University of Illinois at Chicago School of Public Health and Bertell is past president of International Institute of Concern for Public Health.

For more information on breast cancer prevention, see the website of the Breast Cancer Fund. Its new report on chemical and radiation links to breast cancer is must reading. The report catalogues the growing evidence linking breast cancer to synthetic hormones in pharmaceuticals, cosmetics, and meat; pesticides in food; solvents in household cleaning products; BPA in food containers; flame retardants in furniture; and radiation from medical treatments.

Copyright 2010, Rita R. Robison, Consumer Specialist

Health risks of hormone replacement therapy persist after women in test stopped drugs

When I began to have hot flashes, I did research on whether to take hormones.

My decision? No.

I found a study that indicated women taking hormone replacement therapy had a 1 percent increase in their risk of developing breast cancer for every year if they took HRT.

It wasn’t worth the risk to me – taking HRT for five or 10 years and increasing my risk of getting breast cancer 5 to 10 percent.

My general practitioner berated me for years for not taking HRT. She said it would protect me from heart attacks and strengthen my bones. I told her I didn’t want to have strong bones to put in the grave when I died of breast cancer.

My gynecologist also nagged me about it.

The Women’s Health Initiative study in 2002 brought about a big change in the thinking about HRT. It found that the overall risks of long-term use of hormone therapy outweigh the benefits.

Ironically, when I asked my general practitioner about natural hormones after the study results were announced, she cautioned me against them because no research had been done.

New follow-up results from the Women's Health Initiative confirm that the health risks of long-term use of combination (estrogen plus progestin) hormone therapy in healthy, postmenopausal women persist even a few years after stopping the drugs and clearly outweigh the benefits.

Researchers report that about three years after women stopped taking combination hormone therapy, many of the health effects of hormones such as increased risk of heart disease are diminished, but overall risks, including risks of stroke, blood clots, and cancer, remain high.

The study found that when women who had stopped taking estrogen plus progestin were compared to women who didn’t take hormones during the study, they:

• Were about 27 percent more likely to develop breast cancer.

• Had a 24 percent increased risk of developing any form of cancer.

• Had a risk of developing cardiovascular disease that was significantly higher – from a 29 percent increase in heart attacks to a 41 percent increase in strokes and nearly twice the risk of serious blood clots.

If women decide to take HRT, the researchers recommend it be taken for the shortest time possible.

CNN had a story Wednesday on the follow-up study.

Ideas for dealing with hot flashed offered were:

• Wear layered clothing.
• Avoid spicy foods, caffeine, and alcohol.
• Exercise and relaxation.