Ya know it is hard to muster up and comment on all of these articles on women’s health and the products marketed to us. But then I read an article like this and the snark just rises to the surface. This time not only the article about an new cancer vaccine is raising my ire – but then as I was posting it I read the tag line to ‘MORE’ magazine: for women of ‘style and substance’. Excuse me but if those readers had style and substance they would understand that a breast cancer vaccine is not to good to be true – it will be outright dangerous.
Cancer vaccines are a hybrid – an experiment – and who is the targeted market? Women. Take the HPV vaccine Gardasil and Cervarix ‘for cervical cancer‘. Bad idea. Turns out it is actually causing cervical cancer, abnormal pap smears and cervical dysplasia in a demographic of young women with a very low history of incident rate. Turns out the vaccines are killing and maiming innocent women.
But we bought into the ‘One Less Girl’ to get cervical cancer – why? because of the fear of ‘cancer’, yes – but also fear of a body part we cannot see – and the shame of carrying a virus labeled as a sexually transmissible disease.
Now that we know that mammograms harm more that help – (How X-Ray Mammography is Accelerating the Epidemic of Cancer), the pharmaceutical industry is creating a vaccine for a problem they created.
Please do not be fooled by a vaccine -it is what is in the vaccine that can and will potentially kill you – early – not the cancer. For myself, I would rather not be a woman of style and substance who is being marketed another vaccine/product based on fear.
We need to learn from the hell the girls who have been injured by the Gardasil vaccine. They were a medical experiment. The breast cancer vaccine is another medical experiment. And they are both targeted to women. Right?
We need to reclaim our bodies and our lives – and a shot in the dark – ain’t gonna do it.
A Vaccine Against Breast Cancer?
The Cleveland Clinic announced the possibility —but is it too good to be true?
By Melinda Dodd
It’s something generations of women could only dream about: a cancer vaccine that keeps malignant cells from taking hold in the breast, and stops tumors in their tracks. Announced earlier this week by the Cleveland Clinic, the proposed breast-cancer vaccine contains a small amount of alpha-lactalbumin,
a protein that researchers say is present in the majority of breast tumors. The vaccine is intended to create an immune response in your body that should help you beat back breast cancer. But does it work?
Immunologist Vincent Tuohy, PhD., of the Cleveland Clinic’s Lerner Research Institute, is leading the research, which draws on studies from the 1980s that have established a link between breast cancer and alpha-lactalbumin. In one experiment, his team vaccinated young mice with a genetic propensity for breast cancer, then waited eight months to see if tumors developed. They didn’t. When they vaccinated another group of mice with existing tumors, the tumors shrank. By contrast, mice that had an equally high risk for the disease, but received a sham vaccine, saw their cancers blossom.
Tuohy compares the new vaccine to a bouncer who removes an unruly patron from a bar. “It targets this single protein, alpha-lactalbumin, and makes millions of immune cells that recognize it,” he explains. “When your body next encounters the protein, it’s eliminated immediately.”
Alpha-lactalbumin is also present in women who breastfeed. Triggering the immune system to target this protein would ultimately engender a reduction in the production of lactose, making feeding painful and ineffective. For that reason, researchers have focused their efforts on vaccinating women over 40, who are more likely to have finished lactation. But in theory, Tuohy says, high-risk women in their thirties could be vaccinated, too, if their need outweighed these concerns.
Tuohy’s team is currently trying to raise money for a Phase I clinical trial that would evaluate the dosage, safety and optimal immune response of the proposed test vaccine; at the earliest, this work would begin at the end of 2011. It wouldn’t be until 2014, he theorizes, that the vaccine would be tested for effectiveness, most likely on women who have the BRCA-1 gene for breast cancer and a family history of the disease.
Will a vaccine that works on a high-risk mouse work for a healthy woman? Experts wonder. “It’s a great idea,” offers Freya Schnabel, MD, director of breast surgery at New York University’s Langone Medical Center. “But the research is preliminary right now, and it’s not clear how it translates into clinical use. I am concerned about whether this is the right protein to target, and about how well you can pinpoint the moment between the normal sequence of events with this protein and the abnormal development of breast tumors.”
Not done here yet – I was doing more research and I trying to find who was ‘funding the biotech company behind this – and I found some very interesting information on what will be known as the ‘pink’ vaccine.
Testing on Human Subjects
It works in the lab. Now, we need to see if it works in women.
Step 1 – Funding provided by the pharmaceutical companies (even thought there is a ‘donation plea’ – means studies and research data will be biased and reflect the desired outcome*
Step 2 – Desired outcome will be fast-tracked through the FDA
Step 3 – Human testing – another medical experiment
*Cleveland Clinic physicians and scientists may collaborate with the pharmaceutical or medical device industries to help develop medical breakthroughs or provide medical expertise or education.