More Evidence to Link Between Risk and Drinking Alcohol

voraciousreader

sandy..i recalled you mentioning your DH being a cardiologist...you clearly know your risks and benefits...but...I STILL wish for women that the evidence be more robust. I also think that there is growing evidence that UNstable plaque on and between brittle blood vessel membranes MIGHT be the culprit of strokes and heart attacks and that might explain why heart attacks and strokes occur in people with normal cholesterol numbers. The DH's cardiologist who is the Chief at Mt. Sinai in New York has always said that he doesn't treat cholesterol numbers...he treats the patient. And, another leading cardiologist at Mass General, who treated my best friend's husband when he had a massive heart attack claimed that up until 24 hours before he was to have had the heart attack, he had no risk factors that would have flagged him. I am not implying that no one or everyone should be taking a statin, I just think that despite the best evidence for who should take a statin, there still is a segment of patients who truly might benefit and are not being perscribed it, while with others who are taking it, might not need it.

And then there is inflammation...could inflammation be the cause of brittle vessels and cause the unstable plaque to break off and cause the heart attack? I think researchers are looking into the idea that perhaps statins have anti inflammatory properties and that is the key to preventing heart attacks...perhaps that low dose aspirin that interfers with clot formation also reduces inflammation and protects the heart....

Like cancer researchers, I wish those heart researchers could give us better evidence that could make our treatment choices easier....

Meow13

I just read that peanut butter and cancer have been linked. I was eating peanut several times a week. I think it is the pesticides they spray on the peanuts. Ugh.

Tinkerbells

Beesie, Thanks for pointing out that the study is more involved than what the title of the thread implies. I just dismissed it as more piling on regarding the risks of alcohol in relation to BC.

The study is very interesting in regards to lifestyle factors that may or may not contribute to BC. They do NOT take into account the role genetics, epigenetics, environment and random damage to DNA have on BC incidence and risk. However, what is important about these studies regarding lifestyle factors is that they are modifiable and completely within our control.

I wish they would provide some clarification on the numbers regarding absolute risk (and this is probably really difficult to do) so that we may all make decisions on an individual basis. The studies are also very reductive in a certain sense- consumption of dairy decreases risk- is that related to higher Vitamin D3 and calcium? You get what I am saying. Difficult to parse cause and effect.

Bottom line is that all lifestyle factors are choices. We can decide what works for us as they are within our control. But I wish they would be more realistic on how much lifestyle factors actually improve our relative risks of developing BC in the first place. I suspect less than they seem to suggest. Rant over.

Bluebirdgirl

My grandma is 98 years old and has had probably 2 to 3 rum and cokes a night for a LONG time. When she was admitted to the nursing home for a short tim, we got the okayfrom her doctor to keep a bottle of rum with the nurses so they could make her a drink in the evenings. They never put enough rum in it for her liking! Lol. She lives alone in the Keys now and has a fully stocked bar. Healthy as a horse. I agree, crap shoot!!

dtad

Bluebidgirl...wow I think its great that your grandma is living a long healthy life. However does she have breast cancer? That's what the study is about. Good luck to you...

muska

The point is, the grandma has been drinking all her life and did not get breast cancer.

My MO's recommendation was to follow the Mediterranean diet and when I specifically asked about wine, she said a glass of red with dinner would probably do more good than harm.

dtad

muska..thanks for the clarification. I misread it and have deleted the post.

ChiSandy

Red wine (other than port) has only half the sugar of Chardonnay.

wallycat

Alcohol also brings blood sugar down, which is why diabetics on insulin need to be careful.

Brutersmom

I drank about one drink wine or beer a month sometimes every two months. I still got breast cancer. It is only one small factor in many factors.

Wildplaces

Although I agree that a moderate to high alcohol consumption will be detrimental to overall health and this will be connected with an increase incidence of a number of malignancies - I find suggesting that one drink a day increases the incidence of breast cancer a little far fetched - the data is sketchy at best - if you open the PDF it's a metaanalysis - of epidemiological work - with no explanation why Europe and the States numbers are not the same - it appears it's ok for the Europeans to have one drink - are they drinking red wine ?? Or not spraying all their grapes....

Well having said that I would be very much like to see MORE discussion on pesticides and breast cancer.

This is an oldie but a goodie ( for me..)

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12405...

😊

Momine

So glad to read this thread, especially Beesie's contributions, old and new. I like wine. I do not drink actual booze, never did much anyway. But I like a small glass of wine with dinner. I did give it up for a while, but for me it is a QOL issue. I have given up a lot of things because of BC, so to feel halfway normal, I like to keep some things just for the enjoyment.

Several people mentioned coffee, but I have not seen anything to indicate that coffee is a problem. I gave up coffee when I was pregnant, because there was a scare-campaign at the time. It was horrible. By far the worst aspect of being pregnant. By the time my kid was a year or two old, a new report came out saying that moderate coffee consumption during pregnancy was fine. I vowed never to give it up again, and I haven't.

I would so like to see some studies of actual patients and lifestyle choices in terms of impact on survival. As others have pointed out, studies like these tell us nothing about how alcohol affects those of us on tamox or AIs, for example.

Traveltext

Always love it when this perennial topic comes up, so thanks Mods for getting people on the post to clarify things for BCO. As if we haven't had enough of life's pleasures taken from us. Thanks to Beesie and others for cutting through the crap to explain exactly what these reports mean. I'll stop my nightly glass of wine when I no longer get any joy from it,and not before. And I'm not up for a guilt trip on this issue, thanks very much.

Wildplaces

momine,

My understanding is high caffeine has been related to poor bone mass and maybe osteoporosis - although if you look it up the observational studies are in people whose calcium intake is poor and caffeine intake high.

I too enjoy a cup of good coffee - and as everything balance and moderation is key. 😊

Wildplaces

Read the whole thread.

I have been moved by the steel of the women and men who posted.

This I carry with me:

Sadiesservant...biggest risk factor? ..I have breasts. The rest is crapshoot.

Meow13 Find a cure.

cse70

As the third generation to BC, I have to comment!

My grandmother never touched a drop of alcohol- Breast cancer

My aunt never touched a drop of alcohol-Breast cancer

My aunt never touched a drop of alcohol- died of ovarian cancer at 58.

Me-enjoy my wine- second dx of BC.

I think it's a crapshoot when BC picks its victims!

I agree....FIND A CURE!

Traveltext

CRAPSHOOT: the word most commonly used on BCO to explain a recurrence.

dtad

I agree! Crapshoot!

Kath1228

Momine - My guess for those of us on tamoxifen or AIs is that the increased risk is probably the same as for those not on it. Our risk doesn't not go to zero (unfortunately) on these drugs. If only that were true!!! So whatever risk we do have remaining is probably increased by the amount of alcohol consumption. Again, just a complete guess....and I know actual the % of increased risk is likely very small both in relative and absolute terms But we do still have some risk even though we are taking these drugs....maybe it does all go back to CRAPSHOOT!!!

Piscean

meow... not to worry, I've been a big consumer of "organic" food including peanut butter for years and years before diagnosis.

Crap shoot

Traveltext

KB870, you're seriously under the WHO drinking recommendations for sure Seriously, though, if we get scientific about this topic, we'd have to admit that all of us got bc whether we drank or we didn't. Or, Piscean, whether we ate organic or Maccas. As to recurrence, perhaps we need a study to see where the differences are. Finally, I do accept that I'm really just here rationalising my alcohol consumption, and to keep a part of my previous life that was a treat.

ChiSandy

Traveltext, you hit the nail on the head. Those of us who’ve been through initial treatment want more than anything (other than staying NED the rest of our lives) to regain as much as possible the things that to us now symbolize a normal life and make us forget we have/had cancer.

Meow13

I don't think anyone would argue that eating well and exercise is the best approach for good health. But as far as cancer is concerned these studies aimed at reducing cancer risk are not particularly helpful. I have had friends and coworkers question me as to why I got cancer. People think that they won't get it because they are low risk. Well I never had any health problem, no family history, ate well and exercised everyday, 1hr aerobic. My BMI was 21, not one health problem and pow. It scares the hell out of people the idea that you can get it even when your doing everything you are suppose to.

Instead of giving people false hope they need to find a cure. Stop blaming the victim and let people live the way they want to without the guilt. Now, if you will excuse me I am going to have a glass wine in my favorite glass. It might be 8 oz or more.

Fearlessfoot

Thanks for this article from Fred Hutch center. I am glad we have some credible evidence on the issue of what behaviors and lifestyle correlate with increased risks. However, I know SO many exceptions and people who statistically should not have gotten sick with cancer! So I am happy to read that since I have been treated with bilateral mastectomy, my risk of dying is not increased by light intake of alcohol. However, that doesn't mean I won't become sick from cancer and have to undergo more treatments! One study like this does not make a finding definitive. We believe what we want to believe. There's a study to support every opinion. Even the meta-analyses can be subject to interpretation. As a researcher myself, I know that not everything can be summed up clear-cut statistics. But still, we must keep researching risk correlations and ultimately causality: the fundamental question of what causes cells to become cancerous in the first place and what triggers metastasis.

cive

mods:  You should be quite happy with this discussion group!  Everyone more or less agrees.....

labelle

It does seem that there is a growing body of evidence linking alcohol consumption with an increased statistical risk of developing BC. Antedoctial stories like the rum drinking grandma are amusing, but don't really prove anything.

Smoking most definitely increases one's risk of developing lung cancer, but not all smokers do get lung cancer-in fact only about 15% of smokers get lung cancer- and not smoking does not guarantee you will not be diagnosed with lung cancer. Some people who've never smoked do get lung cancer. But that does not change the fact that smoking statistically increases one's risk, nor does it make it all a crapshoot. Not smoking definitively decreases one's risk of lung cancer.

Whether we will someday see similar conclusive evidence linking BC and alcohol use remains to be seen, but there is definitely emerging evidence that points in that direct. However, as someone who takes Tamoxifen, avoiding alcohol for the most part is, despite the fact I am a fan of good white wines, important. Tamoxifen usage has been linked to an increase in a variety of liver problems (per the insert I get each time I refill my Rx-I should definitely quit reading that thing, LOL). Alcohol has long been known to cause liver problems. Mixing the two is not a good idea, per my OC. So I now never have more than one glass of wine per sitting and only indulge on special occasions. I don't think (but not sure as I've never read the insert) this applies to AI users, but I think those of us taking Tamoxifen need to be very careful about alcohol consumption. All BC risks aside, I believe babying my liver by not drinking (much) while taking Tamoxifen is a good plan.

MelissaDallas

Cive, I wish we had a "Like" button. Big grin for your comment;)

Bluebirdgirl

Labelle, glad you found my rum-drinking grandma story amusing!! I got more where that came from.😊

Said grandma also survived plane crash, being hit by car on her bicycle, and golf cart crash on way to see her 100-year-old girlfriend. And still didn't get cancer. She also swam every day and ate lots of fish. So.....

Traveltext

I had a whiskey drinking dad who would consume a bottle a day (seriously) and he made it to 53 before his liver packed it in. He was a great father. Point is, us small-time drinkers are likely to die drinking, rather than because of drinking. Cancer not withstanding 😀

Beesie

"Smoking most definitely increases one's risk of developing lung cancer, but not all smokers do get lung cancer-in fact only about 15% of smokers get lung cancer- and not smoking does not guarantee you will not be diagnosed with lung cancer. Some people who've never smoked do get lung cancer. But that does not change the fact that smoking statistically increases one's risk, nor does it make it all a crapshoot. Not smoking definitively decreases one's risk of lung cancer.

Whether we will someday see similar conclusive evidence linking BC and alcohol use remains to be seen, but there is definitely emerging evidence that points in that direct."

I could not disagree more strongly. There is simply no comparison between smoking & lung cancer and alcohol consumption & breast cancer.

First of all, the evidence is actually quite clear that there is a link between alcohol consumption and breast cancer. We are not waiting for "someday". It's not that there have been one or two studies suggesting a possible link and we are holding our breath, waiting for more information and waiting for the other shoe to drop. No, there have been dozens of studies already done that have looked at the effect of alcohol consumption on breast cancer rates.

The conclusion of this particular report - which was a meta-analysis that for the 'BC and alcohol' findings combined and assessed the results from 16 studies for pre-menopausal women, and 34 studies for post-menopausal women - was that there is in fact a statistically significant link between BC and alcohol. What that means is that the research findings are not random or questionable (from at statistical standpoint) and if more research were to be done, it would be expected that the results would likely be in the same ballpark as the findings in this study. That's what "statistically significant" means.

What "statistically significant" does not mean is that the effect of alcohol consumption on breast cancer rates is "significant". What the findings from this study actually show is that while there quite certainly is some relationship between alcohol consumption and breast cancer rates, the impact of alcohol consumption on breast cancer rates is in fact very small; based on one small drink a day (mostly self-reported, so maybe it's a bit more than one small drink a day), the increase in risk is only 5% for pre-menopausal women and 9% for post-menopausal women. What this study also concludes is that it is not understood how or why this relationship exists, and it is hypothesized that there may not in fact be a direct link (i.e. alcohol consumption increases breast cancer risk) but rather an indirect link (i.e. alcohol consumption reduces nutrient absorption in the body and the lack of these nutrients is what increases breast cancer risk, and/or alcohol consumption increases estrogen levels and this in turn increases breast cancer risk). If the link is indirect, then it becomes much easier to mitigate the impact of alcohol consumption by addressing these other more direct factors (folate, carotenoids, etc.).

Smoking, on the other hand, is unquestionably directly linked to the development of lung cancer. From my quick research, it appears that smokers are at least 20 times more likely to develop lung cancer than non-smokers. That's a 2000% increase in risk (vs. 5% pre-menopausal / 9% menopausal for alcohol and breast cancer). While it is true that most smokers do not develop lung cancer, it is also true that approx. 85% - 90% of lung cancer cases are caused by smoking.

What this means is that if 15 people develop lung cancer, 13 of those cases will be directly caused by smoking.

On the other hand, if 15 people develop breast cancer, 1 case might have been indirectly and/or partially caused by alcohol consumption.

Looked at another way, if we have 100 smokers, 15 will end up with lung cancer as a direct result of smoking.

If we have 100 women who all consume 1 alcoholic beverage a day, 13 will end up with breast cancer, but less than 1 case will have possibly been indirectly caused by the alcohol consumption.

There is simply no comparison.

Edited for grammar error only.