Bucking the trend: Cody Kiser, bronc rider

Sun, Jul 24, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.thecalifornian.com
Author: Champ Robinson

Cody Kiser always had a fascination with the rodeo. The 25-year-old out of Carson City, Nevada competed in the high school rodeo as a bull rider, but Kiser used that term loosely.

cody

“I was more of a bull getter-oner than a bull rider,” Kiser joked. “I had a bad tendency of holding onto the rope until the very last second.”

This time, that bad habit would cause significant injuries during a high school rodeo competition when Kiser was 14.

“I hit the ground and I don’t know if I was on my chest or my back, but one foot (of the bull) landed on my face and the other on my chest or back,” Kiser said.

The impact of the bull crushed Kiser’s left side of his face that broke his hinge bone and jaw bone and shattered his cheek bone. Kiser had to undergo plastic surgery to fix the injuries which required two plates and eight screws to be inserted to do so. Kiser spent a year recovering from the accident before returning to riding – this time horses.

“Riding bucking horses was something I always wanted to do,” Kiser said. “My dad (P.D. Kiser), that’s actually what he did. I thought I’d give that a go and turns out I was a little better at it and now I’m here today.”

When Kiser returned to riding, the nerves were there, but in a good way.

“I think I was more excited than anything,” Kiser said. “Sure, you get nervous, but you can’t think about that. You can’t think about getting hurt. You got to think about winning and doing your best. Think about staying positive.”

Having competed in the PRCA for the past five years, this will mark only the second time Kiser has participated in the California Rodeo Salinas.

“The first time I was here was probably three years ago or so. I think I was on my permit still, so I was still new to the PRCA rodeo and I was just awestruck by the rodeo and the guys I was riding with.

“It was just a mind-blowing experience. Now I’m here this year, I’m excited. I got a good horse that I’m excited to get on and I’m just ready to go.”

Kiser said the stuff he’s learned in his five years in the PRCA has helped him improve as a bareback bronc rider tremendously.

“I’m able to break down my rides and think through what I did wrong and what I can do right next time. What I did really good and focus on that and move on for the next one and just have fun most of all and see all of these amazing places.”

When preparing for a run at an event, Kiser said there’s little time for thinking once the gate opens.

“It’s more of a reaction,” Kiser said. “I trained for this and mentally try to get myself prepared before I get on the horse where I can just relax and react to what the horse does.”

Kiser said he’s seen some success during his time in the PRCA, but the greatest accomplishment to him is outside of the arena as a spokesperson for the Oral Cancer Foundation.

“It’s just been a crazy experience to be a part of the Oral Cancer Foundation and help out with the message that they try to get out there,” Kiser said. “That’s one of the things I’m really proud of.

“There’s been some rodeo wins here and there over the years, but being a part of that is something I’ll never forget.”

Kiser said he became involved with the Oral Cancer Foundation through a classmate at the University of Nevada, Reno.

“Her sister works for the Oral Cancer Foundation and they were looking for a cowboy that didn’t smoke or chew,” Kiser said. “I ended up talking to the founder Brian Hill and one thing led to another and it’s just been a great partnership ever since then.

“It just kind of fell into my lap. I’m just the luckiest guy in the world really.”

Kiser said he’s never personally experienced a family member having to go through a battle with cancer, but credits the way he was raised as to why he decided to take part in this cause.

“I grew up in a family that instilled into me that you don’t want to smoke or chew and if you want to make it far in this game, you got to be an athlete so I just never did that.”

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

Alcohol consumption increases risk for seven types of cancer: Study

Sun, Jul 24, 2016

0 Comments

Source: perfscience.com
Author: Diana Bretting

An analysis of past health studies that have looked at the association between drinking and cancer has unveiled that having alcoholic beverages can increase the risk for seven types of cancer, including head, neck, esophageal, liver, colorectal and breast cancer.

The analysis carried out by Jennie Connor of the University of Otago, in New Zealand included comprehensive reviews conducted by the prestigious organizations, which include the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research among others.

The researchers came to know that the risk did not go down even if there were different alcohol types like rum, whiskey, wine or beer. The risk increases with higher consumption, which as per the researchers is known as a dose-response relationship.

Connor was of the view that there is little evidence suggesting that the risk lessens for head and neck and liver cancers when consumption declines. Dr. Susan Gapstur, Vice-President of the Epidemiology Research Program at the American Cancer Society, said that the analysis has strengthened what is already known about the link between alcohol and cancer.

Dr. Gapstur said, “This is a review of an existing body of literature. Essentially the author has interpreted the literature to help people to understand. But it’s not a study of any new data. These seven cancer sites have long been established”.

Health officials were of the view that the study might help regular drinkers to cut their drinking habit. Dr. Jana Witt, of Cancer Research UK said that the best way would be to not have alcohol for few days in a week. It acts as a great way to cut down on drinking. One can swap alcoholic drink with soft drink, having smaller servings of alcohol and not to keep a stock at home.

According to a report in CBS News by Mary Brophy Marcus, “Drinking alcoholic beverages can raise the risk for seven types of cancer, according to a new study. Even moderate drinking is linked with a higher risk. The cancers include head, neck, esophageal, liver, colorectal and female breast cancer, according to the analysis of existing studies looking at the association between drinking and cancer. The findings are published in the journal Addiction.”

“Having some alcohol-free days each week is a good way to cut down on the amount you’re drinking,” “Also, try swapping every other alcoholic drink for a soft drink, choosing smaller servings or less alcoholic versions of drinks, and not keeping a stock of booze at home.” The study also found that the risk of certain mouth and throat cancers was even higher among people who both smoked and drank alcohol.

A report published in the Live Science said, “Previous studies have found an association between drinking alcohol and a higher risk of developing certain cancers, according to the study. However, it was not clear from the studies if drinking alcohol directly caused cancer.”

The link between alcohol and cancers of the mouth and throat were stronger than the link between alcohol and other cancers, Connor wrote. For example, drinking more than 50 grams of alcohol a day is was associated with a four to seven times greater risk of developing mouth, throat or esophagus cancer compared with not drinking at all.(The number of grams of alcohol in 1 ounce of a drink can vary. For example, there are 2.4 to 2.8 grams of alcohol in an ounce of wine, but there are 1 to 1.2 grams of alcohol per ounce of beer.)

“Health experts endorsed the findings and said they showed that ministers should initiate more education campaigns in order to tackle widespread public ignorance about how closely alcohol and cancer are connected. The study sparked renewed calls for regular drinkers to be encouraged to take alcohol-free days, and for alcohol packaging to carry warning labels,” according to a news report published by The Guardian.

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

Despite medical backing, HPV vaccine rates remain low amid sexual and moral controversy

Sun, Jul 24, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.omaha.com
Author: Rick Ruggles, World-Herald staff writer

pharynx_cancer

The HPV vaccine can reduce the rates of certain cancers, including many cervical and oral cancers, physicians and medical organizations say. But opposition by some individuals is strong, and HPV vaccination rates remain low when compared with other kinds of vaccinations recommended for adolescents.

Because the human papillomavirus is sexually transmitted and seventh grade is considered the ideal time to receive the three-dose vaccine regimen, the issue is rife with sexual and moral implications. Perhaps more potent today, though, are Internet horror stories and concerns about side effects.

A World-Herald Facebook request for views on the HPV vaccine generated far more negatives than positives. “NO NO & NO!! There is NO reason for this vaccine,” one wrote. Another called it a “deadly shot.”

Two Omaha mothers who were interviewed expressed their belief that it’s wise to have children vaccinated, and said their kids suffered no side effects. But an Iowa man described health problems suffered by his daughter, and he and an Ohio physician believe the girl was injured by the HPV vaccinations.

So mediocre are HPV vaccination rates that GSK, the maker of Cervarix, plans to cease distribution of its HPV vaccine in the United States in September. It will continue to supply it in many other nations, such as Great Britain, Germany, France and Mexico. The departure of Cervarix leaves the market to Gardasil, a vaccine produced by Merck.

“GSK has made the decision to stop supplying Cervarix … in the U.S. due to very low market demand,” the company told The World-Herald last week by email.

Many doctors in the Omaha area express disappointment with the low HPV vaccination rates but are optimistic that the situation will improve.

“As pediatricians, we’re trying to change that,” said Dr. Katrena Lacey, a Methodist Physicians Clinic pediatrician in Gretna. “I think we’re on the right track.”

A survey of adolescents reported last year by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found that 39.7 percent of girls ages 13 to 17 had received the three-dose regimen of the HPV vaccine in 2014, and 21.6 percent of boys.

This compares with 87.6 percent of boys and girls who had received the tetanus-diphtheria-pertussis vaccination and 79.3 percent who had received the meningococcal vaccine.

Dr. Megann Sauer, a pediatrician with Boys Town Pediatrics, said parents accept use of the vaccine if it’s explained well and described as a cancer-prevention strategy. “It’s a huge responsibility for us as providers to offer this to our patients,” Sauer said. “My job is to keep my patients healthy.”

Gardasil was approved in the United States 10 years ago. It was met with concern that having a child vaccinated for HPV, which is the most common sexually transmitted infection, would promote promiscuity.

Today, the global Christian ministry Focus on the Family says it “supports universal availability of HPV vaccines,” but it opposes government-mandated HPV vaccinations for public-school enrollment. The mandates are in place in Virginia, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C.

Tom Venzor of the Nebraska Catholic Conference said the vaccine itself isn’t morally problematic. But “the promotion of chastity and parental consent should never be undermined in the promotion of the HPV vaccine,” Venzor said in an email.

The Kaiser Family Foundation estimates that there are more than 14 million new human papillomavirus infections annually in the U.S. Most resolve on their own, but some chronic HPV infections can embed in tissues and lead to cervical cancers and tongue, tonsil, anal, vulvar, vaginal and penile cancers.

The American Cancer Society estimated there will be close to 13,000 new cases of cervical cancer this year and 4,120 deaths. HPV was detected in more than 90 percent of cervical cancers, a 2015 study reported in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute said.

“If you’ve ever seen anyone die of cervical cancer, it will tear you apart, because it’s a nasty, nasty disease,” said Dr. Steve Remmenga, a specialist in gynecologic oncology at the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Remmenga advocates getting the vaccination.

The CDC recommends routine HPV vaccinations beginning at 11 or 12 years of age for girls and boys, but the series can start as early as 9 years of age. The second dose should be given a month or two later and the third at least six months after the first. The vaccinations may be completed by 26 years of age. The recommendations have been adopted by the American Cancer Society and other medical organizations.

The recommendations suggest children receive the vaccinations “so they are protected before ever being exposed to the virus,” the CDC said. The agency said clinical trials indicate the vaccination provides “limited or no protection” against HPV-related diseases for women older than 26.

The CDC says the vaccine has repeatedly been shown to be safe.

Kari Nelson, a biology instructor at the University of Nebraska at Omaha, said two of her daughters, Claire and Emma, have had the full regimen and her third daughter, Gretchen, is about to get her second shot.

“I definitely believe in protecting my kids as much as possible,” Nelson said. “I do always try to weigh the pros and cons of anything. I just feel that the pros far outweigh the cons in this case.”

The Nelsons’ pediatrician, Dr. Tina Scott-Mordhorst, supports children and adolescents receiving the HPV vaccine. Why, she asked, would anyone not get a shot that might prevent cancer? “It works,” said Scott-Mordhorst, a clinical professor in UNMC’s department of pediatrics.

A study reported this year in the journal Pediatrics found that among sexually active females ages 14 to 24, the prevalence of four key HPV types was 16.9 percent among the unvaccinated and 2.1 percent among the vaccinated.

Scientists say it can take many years for chronic HPV to turn cancerous.

Dr. Bill Lydiatt, a head and neck cancer surgeon at Methodist Hospital, said oral sex and the sexual revolution of the late 1960s have contributed to an increase in cancers of the pharynx, or tonsil and back of tongue. The cancer society reported there will be 16,420 cases of cancer of the pharynx this year, most of them in men, compared with 8,950 in 2006. More than 3,000 will die this year from that kind of cancer, the society says.

Lydiatt said scientists only about 10 years ago made the clear link between HPV and cancers of the pharynx and tonsils.

There are more than 150 strains of HPV and more than 40 that can cause cancer, the Kaiser Family Foundation reported. The first form of Gardasil protected against four strains, including the two believed to be most prevalent in cancers. Two years ago the FDA approved a Gardasil vaccine that protected against nine strains. The study in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute says that “current vaccines will reduce most HPV-associated cancers.”

The vaccines are expensive. The Gardasil nine-strain vaccine is close to $250 per dose at Kohll’s Pharmacy if a family pays out of pocket. But many insurers, such as Blue Cross Blue Shield of Nebraska, Aetna/Coventry and UnitedHealthcare, participate in the payment.

A Merck spokeswoman said GSK’s decision to cease supplying Cervarix to the U.S. market hasn’t affected Gardasil prices as of now. An Omaha pharmacist said it wouldn’t be unusual to see prices go up with the departure of a competitor. “The reality is that they can,” Mohamed Jalloh said. “I’m not saying they’re going to.”

Merck has applied to the Food and Drug Administration to market a two-dose regimen of Gardasil, which would reduce the overall price of the series.

Facebook posts and the Internet contain scathing reviews of Gardasil, including stories of children being hurt and families being scared of the vaccination.

Laura Hansen, a cancer researcher at Creighton University, said she wishes she could find the words to persuade people to get their kids vaccinated.

“About all of us have family members impacted by cancer,” said Hansen, a professor of biomedical sciences. By having their kids vaccinated, she said, “Every parent could make an impact on cancer deaths.”

She said it’s hard to fight Internet scare stories and “anecdotal science” as opposed to real science and legitimate studies. The discussion should be “more about facts and less about hysteria,” said Hansen, who saw to it that her two teen-age sons, Charlie and Jack, were vaccinated.

Jeff Weggen of Muscatine, Iowa, has an entirely different view. Weggen said his daughter, Sydney, had the vaccines about four years ago. Soon after, she began to lose weight, suffered back pain and became pale. Over a period of months she was hospitalized and saw specialists in state and out-of-state. She was eventually found to have a fungal infection and a large tissue mass in her chest.

Weggen eventually linked Sydney’s ongoing medical problems to Gardasil, he said. Online groups, other parents and the timeline of her vaccines and her illness helped lead him to this opinion, he said. An anti-Gardasil Facebook post introduced him to a doctor in Ohio who early this year generally confirmed Weggen’s suspicions.

Dr. Phillip DeMio of the Cleveland area said he has several patients he believes were sickened by Gardasil. DeMio, a general practitioner who said his practice focuses on chronically ill people, said some of his patients have been injured by other vaccines, too.

“These are challenging situations, no two ways about it,” he said. Most people have received a variety of vaccinations, he said, and he believes the aluminum in Gardasil and other vaccines can be a problem for some people.

He saw Sydney early this year. Based on the extensive testing that ruled out other diseases, the severity of her illness, the timing of vaccination and other factors, he said he believes “there’s a component of vaccine damage for her and for many of my patients.”

He said there are good reasons to have an adolescent receive Gardasil and mentioned the likelihood that some individuals will be sexually active. But it makes no sense to have a 9-year-old get it, he said. He said parents should be well-informed of the risks and benefits of Gardasil and other vaccines.

“I think people should have a choice,” he said. “I’m not saying I’m against the vaccine.”

The CDC sent a written statement saying that millions of doses of Gardasil have been administered.

Scientific studies have detected no link to “unusual or unexpected adverse reactions,” the CDC said.

Side effects can include pain from the shot and occasionally a patient might faint after any injectable vaccine, the CDC said. But “the benefits of vaccination far outweigh any risks.”

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

Obama’s Dysfunctional ‘Cancer Moonshot’ – The FDA is impeding promising research and techniques such as ‘biopharming.’

Mon, Jul 18, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.NationalReview.com
Author: Henry I. Miller
Vials

The Food and Drug Administration has a long history of dragging its feet in approving badly needed drugs. An extraordinary January article in the New York Times revealed how Richard Pazdur, who has headed the agency’s oncology drugs group since 1999, was widely viewed as an obstructionist bureaucrat . . . until his own wife developed ovarian cancer in 2012. (She died last November.) Suddenly, Pazdur became a self-described “regulatory advocate.”

But in government, there’s a longstanding tradition that no bad deed goes unrewarded: Pazdur has been promoted and will now head the new FDA Oncology Center of Excellence, an offshoot of the “Cancer Moonshot” announced by President Obama in his most recent State of the Union address. The new FDA entity will coordinate and review all cancer treatments regulated by the agency.

Characteristic of the Obama administration’s personnel choices, Pazdur, a power-hungry martinet, is a terrible pick, an insult to cancer researchers and a threat to patients with cancer, current and future. Speaking of bad picks, Vice President Biden, put in overall charge of the Moonshot by Obama, boasts no credentials at all for the job. At a “Moonshot Summit” held last month, Biden rambled, complaining about high drug prices and threatening to cut funding to medical-research institutions that don’t report their clinical-trial results in a timely manner — which he lacks the authority to do.

Overall, the “Cancer Moonshot” was vintage Obama: high-profile grandstanding accompanied by a profound lack of understanding of how to operate the levers of government to achieve public-policy goals. The director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr. Francis Collins, told PBS’s The News Hour in January, “We’re not lacking ideas” for cancer research. What he failed to say is that many of those ideas are stymied by government regulation before they reach the bedside.

One example is “biopharming,” which employs molecular genetic-engineering techniques to induce crop plants such as corn, tomatoes, and tobacco to produce high concentrations of valuable pharmaceuticals. Unfortunately, risk-averse, irresponsible regulators at the FDA and the Department of Agriculture have slowed progress in this promising field.

One biopharmed product received widespread attention during the 2014 Ebola outbreak in Africa: ZMapp, a mixture of three antibodies obtained from tobacco plants infected with genetically engineered plant viruses, was used to treat Ebola-infected patients. When tobacco is infected with the viruses, which are harmless to animals and humans, the plants synthesize large amounts of the antibodies. The tobacco is harvested and homogenized, the antibodies are purified and then can be used to treat patients infected with Ebola. Although circumstances made the design of the clinical trials of ZMapp less than optimal, it remains the best therapeutic candidate to date.

Last September, Stanford University chemical-engineering professor Elizabeth Sattely and her team reported the isolation of the intracellular machinery for making a widely used anti-cancer drug from the endangered mayapple plant, by transferring the entire multi-gene pathway into tobacco. The new host provides a controlled, efficient environment for producing the drug.

Obtaining medicines from plants is not new. Many common and important medicines, including digoxin, morphine, and codeine are all purified from plants, but biopharming offers vast new possibilities. The primary raw materials — water and carbon dioxide — are cheap. Biopharming also offers tremendous flexibility and economy. Expanding the acreage of a crop requires far less capital than increasing the capacity of a bricks-and-mortar factory. This allows drug companies to delay expensive investments in production facilities until later in the clinical-testing cycle or until the market for the new drug can be better estimated.

However, biopharming has run up against the risk-aversion and just plain bloody-mindedness of FDA regulators. A company called Ventria Bioscience purified two human proteins from genetically engineered rice and found that when the proteins were added to oral rehydration solution — typically water with sugar and salts — they shortened the episodes of diarrhea in children and reduced the incidence of recurrence. The company approached the FDA in 2010 for recognition that these proteins, which are found in human tears and breast milk, are “generally recognized as safe” under agency standards, but it received no response. It isn’t publicly available, because Ventria felt it couldn’t market the product without the FDA’s endorsement, a deadly and unconscionable loss for children in the developing world.

If we are to reap what biopharming sows, in addition to Moonshot funding we will need reasonableness from regulators. With Richard Pazdur running the show, I’m not betting the pharm on it.

Finally, let us not forget that Hillary Clinton, the odds-on favorite to be the next president, specifically named the pharmaceutical industry as one of her “enemies” in an October debate. Her administration would be heavily populated by policy wonks from what has been dubbed “Hillary’s Think Tank,” the radical Center for American Progress, whose “experts” would like to treat the drug industry like a government-controlled utility. They and Clinton want a vast new bureaucracy that would delay and limit choices among available therapies; she has said she would use executive actions to control the price of cancer drugs, how they are used and who will get them.

Under a Clinton administration, the best strategy for consumers would be not to get cancer in the first place.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.
Print Friendly
Continue reading...

Rate of HPV-associated cancers on the rise in U.S., according to new CDC report

Sat, Jul 16, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.curetoday.com
Author: Andrew J. Roth

Though the first preventive human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccine was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration 10 years ago, the incidence of HPV-associated cancers is on the rise.

From 2008 to 2012, the number of HPV-associated cancers diagnosed per year increased by approximately 16 percent compared with the previous five-year period, according to a new report by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

Nearly all sexually active individuals in the U.S. will get at least one type of HPV in their lifetime, making it the most common sexually-transmitted infection in the country. And though about 90 percent of HPV infections will clear a person’s system within two years, some infections persist and can cause cervical cancers and some types of vulvar, oropharyngeal, penile, rectal and cancers.

There are over 40 HPV types, and vaccines are available for HPV types 16 and 18 (which account for 63 percent of HPV-associated cancers), as well as for types 31, 33, 45, 52 and 58 (which account for an additional 10 percent). Type 16 is the most likely to persist and develop into cancer.

In this new report, the CDC analyzed data from its own National Program of Cancer Registries as well as the National Cancer Institute’s Surveillance, Epidemiology and End Results (SEER) database. In total, 38,793 HPV-associated cancers (11.7 per 100,000 persons), on average, were diagnosed annually from 2008 to 2012 compared with 33,369 diagnoses (10.8 per 100,000 persons) from 2004 to 2008. Researchers then multiplied the number of cancers that could have been associated with HPV by the rate actually believed to be attributable to HPV, and found that an estimated 30,700 (79 percent) of the cancers could have been attributed to the virus.

The report highlights numerous challenges to controlling HPV-related cancers. First, not enough adolescents are receiving all three HPV vaccines. The CDC recommends that all males and females should start the HPV vaccine series at the age of 11 or 12 years. The CDC also notes that males can receive the series through age 21 and females can receive it through age 26.

According to this CDC report, though, in 2014, just 60 percent of females aged 13 to 17 received at least one dose, 50.3 percent received at least two doses and 39.7 percent received three doses. Among males, the rates were worse: 41.7 percent received at least one dose, 31.4 percent received at least two doses and 21.6 percent received three doses.

Additionally, differences exist between races. In the 2008 to 2012 study, rates of cervical cancer were higher among blacks compared with whites and higher among Hispanics compared with non-Hispanics. Rates of both vulvar and oropharyngeal cancers were lower, however, among blacks and Hispanics versus whites and non-Hispanics, respectively. Rates of anal cancer were lower among black women and Hispanics, but higher among black men, compared with their counterparts.

HPV-associated cancer rates also differed based on geographic location: Utah had the lowest rate (7.5 per 100,000 persons) while Kentucky had the highest rate (14.7 per 100,000). The study’s authors noted that most states with rates higher than the overall U.S. rate (11.7 per 100,000) were located in the South.

Study authors pointed out that most cervical cancers can be prevented by regularly screening women aged 21 to 65 for precancerous lesions, though there are no effective population-based screening tools for other HPV-associated cancers.

The authors also reviewed two challenges with the report itself. Though the CDC and SEER databases are reliable, the authors wrote, “no registry routinely collects or reports information on HPV DNA status in cancer tissue, so the HPV-attributable cancers are only estimates.” The authors also noted that race and ethnicity data came from medical records and may be inaccurate in a small number of cases.

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

HPV-related cancer Is ‘epidemic’—but few get vaccinated

Mon, Jul 11, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.newser.com
Author: Michael Harthorne, Newser Staff

“Every parent should ask the question: If there was a vaccine I could give my child that would prevent him/her from developing six different cancers, would I give it to them?” Electra Paskett, co-director of the Cancer Control Research Program at Ohio State University, tells CBS News. The answer appears to be no. According to NBC News, a CDC report released Thursday shows a 17% increase in HPV-related cancers between 2004 and 2012 to nearly 39,000 per year. Dr. Lois Ramondetta, an expert in gynecologic oncology, says it’s become an “epidemic” especially for men, in whom HPV can cause cancers of the mouth, tongue, and throat. HPV increases the risk of those cancers by at least seven times, and unlike with HPV-caused cervical cancer in women, there’s no screening for them.
vaccine
The CDC report found 93% of all HPV-related cancers could be prevented with the currently available vaccine. That’s approximately 28,500 fewer cases of cancer every year, AFP reports. And yet in 2014, only 40% of teen girls and 22% of teen boys received the necessary three doses of the vaccine, which works best if administered before teens become sexually active. Paskett calls those numbers “extremely sad.” “We must change the perception of the HPV vaccine from something that prevents a sexually transmitted disease to a vaccine that prevents cancer,” she tells CBS. (Some British teens invented condoms that change color near HPV and other STDs.)

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

Rodeo Competitors Fight Smokeless Tobacco Use at Laramie Jubilee Days

Fri, Jul 8, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.y95country.com
Author: Nick Learned

Cody Kiser and Carly Twisselman

Two professional rodeo contestants will ride exclusively for the Oral Cancer Foundation this weekend as part of Laramie Jubilee Days with a goal of preventing young fans from using smokeless tobacco.

Cody Kiser and Carly Twisselman each aim to show rodeo fans, particularly the younger ones, chewing or using other forms of smokeless tobacco isn’t what makes them who they are. They promote the Foundation’s campaign which uses the slogan “Be Smart. Don’t Start.”

Their approach is anything but confrontational or aggressive. Rather than encouraging people to quit, they hope to encourage young fans to never pick up the habit in the first place. And where some rely on statistics to make the point, Kiser and Twisselman take a different approach. Simply giving attention to young rodeo fans is a big part of getting their message across.

“Its not the facts that they’re going to take home,” Kiser says. “Everybody knows that tobacco’s bad; you can get cancer and you can die. But the biggest impact that I see is just acknowledging those kids or acknowledging those people in the audience that want to know more, and you can show them what you can do without tobacco.”

“I’m not out there to tell anybody how to live their life or preach to them about needing to quit,” Kiser says.

“It’s not our place to do that,” Twisselman says. “People most of the time aren’t going to listen when you tell them something like that anyway.”

The pair will be wearing Oral Cancer Foundation gear and handing out buttons, wristbands and bandanas bearing campaign messaging.

As they travel the rodeo circuit, Kiser and Twisselman each say they often see other riders use various types of smokeless tobacco such as chew and snuff.

“It’s very common,” says Kiser. “You see it everywhere.”

“One of my traveling partners, he started when he was in high school. He was just around it all the time,” says Kiser. “It was just the ‘cowboy’ thing to do, I guess.”

“A lot of people are very respectful about it,” Twisselman says. “They’ll see me in my shirt and be like ‘oh yeah, you represent the Oral Cancer Foundation’ and they’ll spit their chew out. I think that in itself is a positive side effect of it.”

“I think a large part of a lot of these cowboys is, it’s the cowboy thing to do, so they start doing it,” Kiser says. “And that’s where I want to step in and show the younger generation that you don’t have to chew to be a cowboy. You can be a cowboy athlete and not chew and treat your body as best you can, because what we do is very difficult and it’s hard on the body.”

“A lot of folks started when they young,” Kiser says. “And I’ve talked to guys who started chewing later in life and they can’t quit, or it’s hard for them. It’s a vicious thing.”

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

Rodeo outreach program fights oral cancer

Wed, Jul 6, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.olivesoftware.com
Author: Stewart M. Green

image.ashx

Carly Twisselman, a spokesperson with the Oral Cancer Foundation’s rodeo outreach program, and her horse Chanel travel the Western rodeo circuit and talk with kids about the dangers of using spit tobacco. Photo by Stewart M. Green

Carly Twisselman brushed her horse Chanel outside a stall at the Norris-Penrose Event Center, home of the Pikes Peak or Bust Rodeo, which will roll into town July 13-16. “I’ve been rodeoing my whole life,” she said. “Now I do it at the professional level. This is my rookie year so I’m going really hard. I want to win the rookie title.”

Summer is the busiest time of the year for cowgirls and cowboys. “We call it Cowboy Christmas, the 4th of July run,” she said. Twisselman and her travel partner have recently competed in Utah, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, and just drove up from Pecos, Texas, to Colorado Springs for qualifiers. “It’s a crazy time,” she said. “Lots of traveling, but lots of money to be won.”

Twisselman, a 30-year-old barrel racer, grew up on a ranch near San Luis Obispo on the central California coast. “My family’s been ranching there for seven generations,” she said. “I was on the back of a horse all the time. I was riding before I could walk.”

While growing up in the Western ranching and rodeo culture, Twisselman was aware of the widespread use of spit tobacco by cowboys. “I’ve been around it my whole life and seen a lot of things that were negative and I was affected by it.”

Rodeo and tobacco have a long history together. Starting in 1986, the U.S. Smokeless Tobacco Company sponsored the Professional Rodeo Cowboys Association until the association ended its partnership with tobacco advertisers in 2009. Tobacco use, however, still thrives with cowboys and spectators at rodeos.

In 2014, the Oral Cancer Foundation, a nonprofit organization that supports prevention, education and research of oral cancer, reached out to pro rodeo athletes to spread the word about the dangers of tobacco use, with Cody Kiser, a bareback bronc rider, as their first rodeo spokesperson. This past year they added Carly Twisselman to continue creating awareness in the rodeo community.

“Honestly, it was God that they came to me,” said Twisselman. “Their goal was to reach rodeo people, people in the Western culture and people that were horse lovers because tobacco is a huge problem in rodeo.” The foundation asked Twisselman to be a spokesperson and she gladly accepted. “It’s an amazing thing to represent such a great organization. I can take this rodeo platform where I’m in front of thousands of people and use it for good.” While the Oral Cancer Foundation wants to help adults with tobacco problems, its rodeo focus is on children. According to The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 9.9 percent of high school-age boys use spit tobacco nationwide, while 10.5 percent of men ages 18-25 use it. Usage is higher in rural states like Wyoming, Montana and West Virginia. A can of spit tobacco packs as much nicotine as 40 cigarettes, and a 30-minute chew is like smoking three cigarettes, making addiction to spit tobacco one of the hardest to break. Spit tobacco, including smokeless tobacco, dip, snuff, chew and chewing tobacco, can cause gum disease, tooth decay and oral cancer. Almost 50,000 people will be diagnosed with oral cancer in 2016.

“We aren’t telling people they should stop,” Twisselman said, “but we show people why it’s not good to use tobacco. If someone is chewing, I’m not going to go lecture them.”

Twisselman and Kiser focus on helping kids make positive choices about tobacco use. “Kids look up to us as idols and if they see us doing good and not chewing tobacco then maybe they won’t either,” Twisselman said. “Our message is: ‘Be Smart, Don’t Start.’”

Twisselman also attends junior rodeos where she hands out wristbands, bandanas, pins, and buttons. “Kids love the freebies,” she said. She also wears Oral Cancer Foundation logos on her competition shirts.

Surprisingly, some rodeo women chew tobacco. “It’s not the problem it is with the men,” Twisselman said, “but I do see it. I find it really repulsive. Sometimes women who chew will see me and say, “Oh, you work with oral cancer” and they’ll take their chew out and throw it away because they don’t want to be disrespectful to me.”

Twisselman said she and Kiser are making a difference, noting people are becoming more educated about the dangers of throat cancer from chewing tobacco and learning that it’s not a healthy habit. “We’ve only been doing this for a year now and we’re still getting our feet wet,” she said. “It’s hard to know if fewer kids are chewing now but I’m getting the word out and interacting with them. Because we take the time to talk with kids and give them the little gifts, it has a huge impact on them.”

To learn more about oral cancer and its prevention, medical research, education and for patient support, then visit oralcancer.org.

*This news story was resourced by the Oral Cancer Foundation, and vetted for appropriateness and accuracy.

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

HPV vaccine important preventive tool for survivors of childhood cancer

Fri, Jul 1, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.curetoday.com
Author: Ellie Leick

As childhood cancer survivors are at an increased risk of developing second cancers later in life, James Klosky recommends that this population receive the human papillomavirus (HPV) series of vaccines.

A survey of 679 survivors one to five years out of treatment was conducted to evaluate how many received the vaccine compared with their healthy peers. A great disparity was discovered, as survivors — all of whom were between age 13 and 26 — were less likely to receive the vaccine. Researchers also investigated the reasons why many survivors did not receive it.

Klosky, an associate member and director of psychological services in cancer survivorship at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital, presented the findings from this research at the 2016 Annual Meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO), a gathering of 30,000 oncology professionals in Chicago. CURE spoke with Klosky at the meeting to discuss the key takeaways and the importance of the HPV vaccine to survivors of childhood cancer.

Can you give an overview of the study and its purpose?
The HPV vaccine is the first vaccine that’s designed to prevent cancers. We are particularly interested in the application of this vaccine amongst survivors of childhood cancers, who are at increased risk for HPV-related cancers in young adulthood relative to their healthy peers.

On average, the onset of these cancers occur seven years earlier in survivors of childhood cancers compared to their healthy peers. Additionally, survivors of childhood cancer have an increased risk of acquiring a second cancer. Therefore, the application of this vaccine is very important. We at St. Jude Children’s Research Hospital do everything we can to protect our survivors from second cancers, and the HPV vaccine is one mechanism we are able to utilize.

Why are second cancers more likely in survivors of childhood cancer?
As a general population, 80 percent of people who are sexually active will be exposed to HPV in their lifetime. For those of us who have a strong immune system, the virus will typically clear out of our systems in approximately two years. Often, there will not be any symptoms. However, for survivors of childhood cancers and other groups that have immune deficiencies, it appears they might be more likely for complications associated with HPV upon infection.

What did this study specifically find? What are the key takeaways?
This study compared survivors of childhood cancer with their peers in the U.S. We analyzed the rates of initiation of the HPV vaccine amongst survivors and then of the U.S. population, focusing on two different groups: those who are 13 to 17 years of age and those who are 18 to 26 years of age.

Within the 18 to 26 age group, the rates of the HPV vaccine initiation were essentially equivalent; 26 percent of survivors had initiated the vaccine whereas 24 percent in the general population had initiated it.

However, there were differences in the 13 to 17 age groups. Among survivors of childhood cancers, only 22 percent had initiated the vaccine compared with 42 percent of the general population.

It is important to note that the HPV vaccine is designed to be administered prior to sexual activity. It is important to get vaccinated as a young teenager because the HPV vaccine is protective, not therapeutic. Therefore, once a patient is exposed to the virus, there is not much we can do about it.

Among survivors of childhood cancers, were there predictors of not initiating the vaccine?
We found the most robust predictor was among survivors who stated their doctors had not recommended the vaccine. And essentially, one of the main messages here is that we really need our physicians to be recommending the vaccine because that should translate into a higher initiation rate.

Another strong influence against receiving the vaccine was hearing about it from a friend. Adolescents often talk about the negative aspects of the vaccine, such as the pain involved when receiving the vaccine and the fact that three vaccines are necessary to complete the protection. Hearing this does not encourage other adolescents to initiate the vaccine.

We also found those who are male and those who had never been sexually active are also more likely not to initiate the vaccine. That’s a bit concerning because although HPV is typically implicated in terms of cervical cancers and a lot of the gynecological-associated cancers, men can also have oropharyngeal cancers, anal cancers, penile cancers and other types of cancers within HPV ideology. Additionally, males are often the carriers.

Finally, those who do not feel receiving the vaccine makes you a responsible or good person are less likely to receive it.

What are the next steps for this project?
Overall, the lack of physician recommendation was most strongly associated with not initiating. Our next step in the research is to create intervention programs to get physicians to make clear recommendations with conviction and confidence to survivors of childhood cancer. This will hopefully translate into more survivors getting protected.

Is there ever a reason to refrain from receiving the HPV vaccine?
The indication of the vaccine is very broad. For survivors of childhood cancer who have had a particularly complex treatment history and are continuing to have severe late effects of childhood cancer, a conversation needs to happen between their oncologist, the family and the patient.

In terms of vaccine programs, they are designed as more of a public health tool; the vaccines should be safe for everyone. If there are any concerns about the vaccine, we want you to talk to your doctor.

Regardless of the direction of the effect, increasing these types of communications will hopefully translate to the best health care for our patients.

What are your hopes for this project?
If we are able to demonstrate the immunogenicity, safety and tolerability of the HPV vaccine among survivors of childhood cancer, we’ll have a platform for a vaccine program within this high-risk group. Protecting survivors from second cancers in any way we can is the ultimate goal. There’s not much I can do about patients’ genetics or other fixed factors, but getting the vaccine is something, behaviorally, I can influence. If I, my group or the consumers of this research have influenced conversations that translate into initiating and completing the three-vaccine series, then this research has been successful.

Print Friendly
Continue reading...

New study analyzes physical therapy for head and neck cancer survivors

Sun, Jun 26, 2016

0 Comments

Source: www.curetoday.com
Author: Andrew J. Roth

The aftermath of treatment for head and neck cancer can be particularly difficult, according to Ann Marie Flores. Flores, assistant professor, Department of Physical Therapy, Movement & Rehabilitation Science, Bouvé College of Health Sciences, Northeastern University, conducted a pre-pilot study looking at early physical therapy education for this patient population.

CURE interviewed Flores about her poster, which she presented at the 8th Biennial Cancer Survivorship Research Conference in Washington, DC.

Could you first give some background about this study? How did it come to be?
It was a spinoff of some studies that I began in breast cancer. I conducted a literature review of rehab needs of breast cancer survivors about 10 years ago and found that there was very little out there. Then, when I started a rehab oncology program at a previous institution, the patient population that were referred to the program tended to not be breast cancer patients, because they physically and functionally tend to do well in aggregate. Most of my patients referred were those with head and neck cancer. I went through the same process to look through literature critically to figure out what exists in terms of physical therapy and rehabilitation-based approaches. I’ve updated this over a long period of time and this poster is a systematic review of the quality of evidence. I combined this literature and data review with talking to a focus group of cancer survivors.

What did you find?
I asked the focus group if they needed more information and the answer was “Yes!” over and over again. The majority of comments I heard were exactly about physical therapy, self-care and efficacy—things we specialize in. They were also adamant about oral health and dental care, understanding salivary function, tongue motion, muscles and more. We also heard a lot about emotional and social support. So many of these survivors said they felt they were losing their mind because no one around them understood what they were going through after treatment.

It was very interesting to see the concordance of the systematic review results with our focus groups.

What is it about this population that you think creates such a need for information?
Head and neck cancer survivors make up about 4 percent of all cancer survivors. What many of these patients have are multimodality therapies, highly disfiguring surgeries, surgeries that contribute to high rates of disability. Many patients also get chemotherapy and radiation. These survivors can have impairments that can compromise key functions of life—breathing, eating and speaking.

Can these patients get the services they need? Where?
They should be able to, yes. I am a long-standing member of the American Physical Therapy Association and we have a task force that specializes in head and neck studies. We’ve published four studies looking at measuring physical therapy–related impairments that we can rehabilitate, such as shoulder dysfunction, trismus and lymphedema. With trismus, patients can’t open their mouths. Many patients with head and neck cancer have either had muscle tissue removed or have highly scarred jaw muscles. And with lymphedema, you can get that in any part of your body, including the head and neck. Many patients will have lymph fluid collect in the under part of their neck.

For a patient who has finished treatment and facing some of these issues, where should he/she go for support?
As a patient, I’d tell my doctor that I need a referral to a physical therapist. In fact, the next steps following on our research will be to pilot test our patient education materials to determine their clinical feasibility, acceptability, and impact on PT outcomes. We want to ensure that these materials are patient-centered and relevant across the survivorship trajectory.

Print Friendly
Continue reading...
Older Entries