<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Health &#38; FamilyCategory: Breast Cancer &#124; Health &#38; Family &#124; TIME.com</title>
	<atom:link href="http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://healthland.time.com</link>
	<description>A healthy balance of the mind, body and spirit</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Jun 2013 21:30:56 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='healthland.time.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://healthland.time.com/osd.xml" title="Health &#38; Family" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://healthland.time.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
		<title>Susan G. Komen for the Cure Cancels Half Its Races</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/05/susan-g-komen-for-the-cure-cancels-half-its-races/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/05/susan-g-komen-for-the-cure-cancels-half-its-races/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 05 Jun 2013 17:01:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AP / Jamie Stengle</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Race for the Cure]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[susan g. komen]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=87809</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Susan G. Komen for the Cure says it is canceling half of its 3-day charity races next year because of a steep drop in participation levels. The announcement comes more than a year after the Dallas-based breast cancer organization experienced intense backlash after its decision to stop giving grants to Planned Parenthood for breast screenings was made public. The funding was restored days later. Komen said this week that seven of its 3-day races will not return next year. Komen says &#8220;economic uncertainty&#8221; has affected participation levels, which have dropped 37 percent over the past four years. Participants must raise at least $2,300 to walk 60 miles over three days. The cancelled races are in Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Phoenix, San Francisco, Tampa Bay and Washington, D.C.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=87809&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/05/susan-g-komen-for-the-cure-cancels-half-its-races/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/sbk.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/sbk.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/sbk.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">susan g. komen splits with planned parenthood</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cbef58d71daefb9ddab6c6b20018290c?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">timeassociatedpress</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Gene Flaws That Raise Breast Cancer Risk Are Common In Black Women</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/04/gene-flaws-that-raise-breast-cancer-risk-are-common-in-black-women/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/04/gene-flaws-that-raise-breast-cancer-risk-are-common-in-black-women/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jun 2013 14:00:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>AP / Marilyn Marchione</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=87678</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Gene flaws that raise the risk of breast cancer are surprisingly common in black women with the disease, according to the first comprehensive testing in this racial group. The study found that one-fifth of these women have BRCA mutations, a problem usually associated with women of Eastern European Jewish descent but recently highlighted by the plight of Angelina Jolie. The study may help explain why black women have higher rates of breast cancer at young ages &#8211; and a worse chance of survival. Doctors say these patients should be offered genetic counseling and may want to consider more frequent screening and prevention options, which can range from hormone-blocking pills to breast removal, as Jolie chose to do. &#8220;We were surprised at our results,&#8221; said the study leader, Dr. Jane Churpek, a cancer specialist at the University of Chicago. Too few black women have been included in genetic studies in the past and most have not looked for mutations to the degree this one did, &#8220;so we just don&#8217;t have a good sense&#8221; of how much risk there is, she said. (MORE: When Celebrities Battle Cancer: Photos of 20 Inspiring Survivors) Churpek gave results of the study Monday at an American Society of Clinical Oncology conference in Chicago. The researchers include Mary-Claire King, the University of Washington scientist who discovered the first breast cancer predisposition gene, BRCA1. Jolie revealed a few weeks ago that she carries a defective BRCA1 gene, giving her up to an 87 percent risk of developing breast cancer and up to a 54 percent risk for ovarian cancer. The actress&#8217;s mother had breast cancer and died of ovarian cancer, and her maternal grandmother also had ovarian cancer. An aunt recently died of breast cancer. Children of someone with a BRCA mutation have a 50 percent chance of inheriting it. In the U.S., about 5 to 10 percent of breast cancers are thought to be due to bad BRCA genes. Among breast cancer patients, BRCA mutations are carried by 5 percent of whites and 12 percent of Eastern European<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=87678&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/06/04/gene-flaws-that-raise-breast-cancer-risk-are-common-in-black-women/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/141089933.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/141089933.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/06/141089933.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">141089933</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/cbef58d71daefb9ddab6c6b20018290c?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">timeassociatedpress</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Angelina Effect: TIME&#8217;s New Cover Image Revealed</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/15/the-angelina-effect-times-new-cover-image-revealed/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/15/the-angelina-effect-times-new-cover-image-revealed/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 16:31:23 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Jeffrey Kluger</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[angelina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[angelina jolie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brad pitt]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double mastectomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=86769</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Angelina Jolie has never lacked for influence. When she adopted a baby from Ethiopia, inquiries at U.S. adoption agencies about other Ethiopian orphans doubled. When she named other children Vivienne or Maddox, those names shot up the popularity charts for American newborns. So this week, when a woman known for her powerfully iconic beauty announced that she had undergone an elective double mastectomy to reduce her genetically high risk of breast cancer, it was a cultural and medical earthquake — a revelation so arresting it became the subject of TIME&#8217;s newest cover story (visit time.com/angelina to read the story; free for subscribers or purchase a digital pass. Jolie, by nearly universal agreement, made the right choice for her. She tested positive for the breast-cancer-related BRCA1 gene, putting the probability that she would develop the disease at a terrifying 87%; after her surgery, her doctors put that number at just 5%. But a lot of experts worry that we may overread the lessons. Genetic screening is a young science, and while we may have detected genes linked to a host of ills — Alzheimer&#8217;s disease, prostate cancer, rheumatoid arthritis, diabetes, heart disease — we often do a terrible job of calculating our resulting risks. Just over one-tenth of 1% of all women carry the same BRCA mutation Jolie has, and yet doctors expect a stampede of women requesting the test. In the U.S., 36% of women who test positive opt for preventive mastectomy, but some doctors argue that regular MRIs and other screening tests may be sufficient to detect the disease, and that less radical procedures, like lumpectomies, may be sufficient to treat it if it does occur. (Read Cover Story on The Angelina Effect, Why Her Mastectomy Raises Key Issues About Genes, Health and Risk) Similar misunderstanding of risks is common in the case of prostate cancer too. The familiar PSA screening test detects blood antigens related to the disease, but levels of the marker can rise as a result of inflammation, infection and even riding a bicycle. Still, many men who test<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=86769&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/15/the-angelina-effect-times-new-cover-image-revealed/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/angie_v.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/angie_v.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/angie_v.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">TIME Magazine Cover, May 27, 2013</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/f2cdfe953fad799c6100332224e6ecb9?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">jkluger</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Angelina Jolie’s Double Mastectomy: It’s Not the Only Option</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-its-not-the-only-option/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-its-not-the-only-option/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2013 00:45:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alice Park</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[angelina jolie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brca]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double mastectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genetic testing for cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mastectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[oophorectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ovarian cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ovaries]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[prophylactic mastectomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=86690</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Genetic testing can be both a boon and a curse, experts say, since more information often means more, and often confusing, options. Genes can be remarkably loose-lipped. Mutations can expose hidden disease processes, and the products that emerge from the DNA code they spell out — enzymes, hormones, proteins and the like — are also giveaways for what’s going on in the body. And these molecular motormouths are particularly useful when it comes to pinpointing diseases like cancer. At the most basic level, it’s possible to identify certain genes, or aberrations in genes, that people inherit from their families and confer a higher risk of developing the disease. (MORE: Angelina Jolie&#8217;s Double Mastectomy: What We Know About BRCA Mutations and Breast Cancer) That’s the case with BRCA1 and BRCA2, two genes that normally work to keep cells from growing abnormally. Some mutations in the DNA that encodes them, however, give tumors relatively free reign to divide out of control. Women like Angelina Jolie, who inherited the harmful mutations, can have anywhere from a 40% to 90% increased risk of developing breast cancer in their lifetime (not all BRCA mutations are created equal; some are more dangerous than others). That’s a fivefold increased risk of cancer compared with women without the mutations. (MORE: Cracking Cancer&#8217;s Code) So for the 1% of women with breast cancer who test positive for a BRCA mutation, doctors say it’s not unreasonable to consider something as radical as a double mastectomy — before they even find any signs of cancer. “It’s one of the truly unique situations where most medical professionals would say if a woman chose to have both breasts removed, it’s a pretty reasonable thing to do,” says Dr. Eric Winer, of the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute. Prophylactic double mastectomies, as they are called, are one of the most common options that women in the U.S. choose if they are diagnosed with BRCA-based breast cancer. It’s a way to prevent disease before it even occurs, but it’s not the only strategy available to patients; women can opt to have<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=86690&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-its-not-the-only-option/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr2x2n8.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr2x2n8.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/rtr2x2n8.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Angelina Jolie at the 18th annual Screen Actors Guild Awards in Los Angeles, on Jan. 29, 2012.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/69fc92d1c4598c5b98d03fde16cdfa74?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">apark7</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Hard Choices Angelina Jolie Faces About Testing Her Kids for Breast Cancer Genes</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolie-faces-hard-choices-about-testing-her-kids-for-breast-cancer-genes/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolie-faces-hard-choices-about-testing-her-kids-for-breast-cancer-genes/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 22:52:01 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bonnie Rochman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pediatric Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[AAP]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ACMG]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[angelina jolie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brca]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genetic testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mastectomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=86678</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Most women who get breast cancer each year have no family history, but Angelina Jolie’s story was different. Her mom died at age 56 of ovarian cancer, a related disease. Doing her best to make sure that her own six kids don’t lose their mother to breast cancer motivated Jolie to have a preventive double mastectomy, a process she revealed in a bold and candid op-ed in Tuesday’s New York Times. We often speak of “Mommy’s mommy,” and I find myself trying to explain the illness that took her away from us. They have asked if the same could happen to me. I have always told them not to worry, but the truth is I carry a “faulty” gene, BRCA1, which sharply increases my risk of developing breast cancer and ovarian cancer. As a BRCA1 carrier, Jolie stands a 50% chance of having passed the faulty gene to each of her three biological children. While that possibility can provoke tremendous anxiety in parents, most experts don&#8217;t recommend childhood genetic testing for diseases like breast cancer that don’t often affect young children. &#8220;In a typical situation, most people would counsel her to wait until her biological children are mature adolescents or young adults before discussing this with them,&#8221; says Dr. Robert Green, a medical geneticist at Harvard Medical School. &#8220;But given that she&#8217;s a public figure, it&#8217;s going to be harder to shield them.&#8221;   (MORE: Will My Son Develop Cancer? The Promise (and Pitfalls) of Sequencing Children’s Genomes) In February, both the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG) recommended against testing a child for adult-onset diseases such as breast cancer. However, the experts who developed the statements told TIME that if parents insist on testing their kids, they should be allowed to proceed: While the earlier statements from the AAP and ACMG firmly advised against genetic testing in children to determine future risk of disease, the updated policy acknowledges that parents are the ultimate decision-makers when it comes to childhood-onset conditions. Predictive genetic testing for adult-onset conditions<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=86678&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolie-faces-hard-choices-about-testing-her-kids-for-breast-cancer-genes/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Kids and DNA</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/kids-and-dna/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/131901349.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/131901349.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/131901349.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Brad Pitt And Angelina Jolie Arrive Tokyo</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/ccc18529897902c0767bf2d7d088828e?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">brochman</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>When Celebrities Battle Cancer: Photos of 20 Inspiring Survivors</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/breast-cancer-gallery/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/breast-cancer-gallery/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 20:35:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Kayla Webley &amp; Tanner Curtis</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=86649</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Tuesday&#8217;s announcement by Angelina Jolie, that she elected for a double mastectomy in the face of overwhelming odds that she would develop breast cancer, made headlines around the world. We look back at other luminaries that have gone public with their cancer battles.<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=86649&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/breast-cancer-gallery/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2013-05-14t080947z_926769212_gm1e95e18.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2013-05-14t080947z_926769212_gm1e95e18.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2013-05-14t080947z_926769212_gm1e95e18.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Angelina Jolie</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/70ed4d3924bb7fd88021174e9c19bb4e?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">kaylawebley</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Angelina Jolie&#8217;s Double Mastectomy: What We Know About BRCA Mutations and Breast Cancer</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-what-we-know-about-brca-mutations-and-breast-cancer/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-what-we-know-about-brca-mutations-and-breast-cancer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 17:09:14 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alice Park</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[angelina jolie]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brca mutations]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[double mastectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mastectomy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[ovarian cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[preventive double mastectomy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=86620</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[She doesn’t have cancer yet, but like many women with breast cancer mutations, she had the radical surgery to lower her risk. Describing her decision as “My Medical Choice,” the 37-year-old actress revealed in an op-ed in the New York Times that she carries the BRCA1 gene mutation, which gives her an 87% risk of developing breast cancer at some point in her life. The abnormal gene also increases her risk of getting ovarian cancer, a typically aggressive disease, by 50%. To counteract those odds, Jolie wrote that she decided to have both her breasts removed. (MORE: Cover Story: How to Cure Cancer) While radical, her decision to pre-empt any future cancer is a common one, and backed by studies. In 2010, Australian scientists found that women with the BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations who chose to have preventive mastectomies did not develop breast cancer over the three-year follow-up. What’s more, since the genetic abnormalities increase the risk of ovarian cancer, women who had their ovaries and fallopian tubes removed also dramatically lowered their risk of developing ovarian or breast cancers. TIME’s story about the study explained: They were 89% less likely to develop ovarian cancer and 61% less likely to develop breast cancer over three years than their counterparts who did not have prophylactic surgery. Among the 250 study participants who underwent preventive mastectomies, none developed breast cancer during the study follow-up. Additionally, a patient’s surgical choice affected overall mortality rates, both cancer related and not: only 3 percent of surgery participants died at the time of the study follow-up versus 10 percent of those who avoided the surgery. (MORE: The Changing Face of Breast Cancer) And while the mutations are inherited – a mother with either aberration has a 50-50 chance of passing it on to her children – women who don’t get the mutation are not at increased risk of developing breast cancer, even if they belong to families with a history of the disease. Previous studies had suggested that women who did not have the mutations but had a<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=86620&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/14/angelina-jolies-double-mastectomy-what-we-know-about-brca-mutations-and-breast-cancer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/1663012761.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/1663012761.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/1663012761.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">Angelina Jolie leaves Lancaster House after attending the G8 Foreign Minsters&#039; conference in London, on April 11, 2013.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/69fc92d1c4598c5b98d03fde16cdfa74?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">apark7</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>How Exercise May Lower Breast Cancer Risk</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/08/how-exercise-may-lower-breast-cancer-risk/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/08/how-exercise-may-lower-breast-cancer-risk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 08 May 2013 09:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[cancer prevention]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[estrogen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[estrogen metabolism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[exercise and cancer]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=86237</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Breaking a sweat does more for your body than just trim your waistline. Exercise may lower a woman&#8217;s risk for breast cancer and researchers are finding out why. Scientists from the University of Minnesota in St. Paul conducted a study of 391 inactive, healthy, premenopausal women whom they split into two groups. They found that the 179 women in the intervention group, who received 30 minutes of moderate-to-vigorous exercise five times a week for over 16 weeks, showed changes in their estrogen metabolism that could explain the anti-cancer benefits of working out. (MORE: Regular Exercise Can Help Lower Breast Cancer Risk) “Ours is the first study to show that aerobic exercise influences the way our bodies break down estrogens to produce more of the ‘good’ metabolites that lower breast cancer risk,” said Mindy Kurzer, a professor in the Department of Food Science and Nutrition at the University of Minnesota in a statement. The researchers measured the levels of three parent estrogens, E1, E2 and E3, and nine breakdown products called metabolites in the women&#8217;s urine samples. At the end of the study period, the exercise group had healthier BMIs and cardiovascular sustainability, but they also had a 25% increase in the metabolite ratio 2-OHE1/16-alpha-OHE1, which has been linked to a lower breast cancer risk. More 2-OHE1 and less 16-alpha-OHE1 have been associated with a lower risk since 16-alpha-OHE1 is thought to encourage cancer cell growth. These changes were not seen in the control group of women who did not exercise over the study period, according to the study, which appears in the journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers &#38; Prevention. (MORE: Dropping a Few Pounds Could Lower Breast Cancer Risk) The findings give cancer researchers more insight into how exercise interacts with estrogen to reduce cancer risk. This is especially important since estrogen is a large contributing factor in breast cancer development. If exercise can help women protect themselves against breast cancer, they&#8217;ll be eager to know just how much effort can provide a measurable benefit, which is what researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill are exploring. Last June, the researchers studied more than<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=86237&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/05/08/how-exercise-may-lower-breast-cancer-risk/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/168450270.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/168450270.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/168450270.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">168450270</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Alcohol Doesn&#8217;t Affect Ability to Survive Breast Cancer</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/04/10/alcohol-doesnt-affect-ability-to-survive-breast-cancer/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/04/10/alcohol-doesnt-affect-ability-to-survive-breast-cancer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:00:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[alcohol]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer survival]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[drinking]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heart Disease]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=84301</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Breast cancer patients who raised a glass or two a week may even enjoy slightly longer lives than those who didn&#8217;t drink. While alcohol can benefit the heart, bone and even brain, studies showed that even moderate drinking &#8212; three to six glasses a week &#8212; could boost the risk of breast cancer by 15% compared to those who abstained. But a new study found that drinking before and after a breast cancer diagnosis did not hurt women&#8217;s survival from the cancer; in some cases, alcohol even seemed to improve survival. “Our findings should be reassuring to women who have breast cancer because their past experience consuming alcohol will not impact their survival after diagnosis,” study author Polly Newcomb, head of the Cancer Prevention Program at Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center said in a statement. “This study also provides additional support for the beneficial effect of moderate alcohol consumption with respect to cardiovascular disease.” The researchers followed nearly 23,000 women who participated in a study of risk factors for breast cancer for about 11 years. They found that the type of alcohol women drank prior to their cancer diagnosis did not influence their likelihood of dying from their breast cancer. As previous studies showed, however, alcohol did provide survival benefits when it came to heart disease; women consuming three to six glasses of wine per week during the years before they developed cancer were 15% less likely to die of heart disease related conditions compared to women who didn&#8217;t drink. The benefit was strongest for wine, while beer, other spirits and heavier drinking did not translate into lower death rates from heart problems. The trends were the same when the scientists looked at the women&#8217;s drinking habits after their breast cancer diagnosis. Drinking following the diagnosis did not seem to affect the participants&#8217; survival from breast cancer, but it did reduce their risk of dying from heart disease; women who drank in moderation enjoyed a 39% to 50% lower risk of heart-related death during the study period compared to those who didn&#8217;t drink. (MORE: Just<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=84301&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/04/10/alcohol-doesnt-affect-ability-to-survive-breast-cancer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/158546098.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/158546098.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/158546098.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">158546098</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Study Supports Less Frequent Mammogram Screening</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/19/study-supports-less-frequent-mammogram-screening/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/19/study-supports-less-frequent-mammogram-screening/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 19 Mar 2013 11:00:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast density]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[hormone replacement therapy]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mammograms]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[screenings]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[USPSTF]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=82457</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Mammograms every other year do not increase the risk of breast cancer compared to yearly screening. In 2009, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) amended its longtime recommendations for screening for breast cancer, advising women to start mammograms at age 50 instead of age 40, and to get the tests less frequently — every other year instead of yearly. Although some studies have reported that up to 20% of breast cancers among women in their 40s could be missed under the revised USPSTF guidelines, the task force found that the risks of false positive results, over-diagnosis and unnecessary biopsies and treatment outweighed any benefit from diagnosing the few cancers among women in their 40s. (MORE: Study: For Some Women in their 40s, Routine Mammograms May Be Worth the Risks) The latest study, published in JAMA Internal Medicine, evaluated the benefits and risks of the new mammography recommendations taking into account the women&#8217;s age, breast density, and postmenopausal use of hormone therapy (HT), all of which increase the risk of breast cancer. Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco analyzed data from mammogram facilities participating in the Breast Cancer Surveillance Consortium (BCSC) mammography registries from January 1994 to December 2008. Among the participants, 11,474 women had breast cancer and 922,624 women did not. Focusing on the women&#8217;s last two mammogram screenings, the scientists concluded that women aged 50 years to 74 years who got mammograms more than 18 to 30 months apart (or every other year) showed a similar risk of advanced-stage cancer and large tumors and a lower overall risk of false-positive results than women who were screened yearly. This risk was the same regardless of their breast density or use of hormone replacement therapy, thus supporting the USPSTF&#8217;s 2009 advice in urging less frequent screening. (MORE: Higher Risk for Women With False-Positive Mammogram Results) However, that wasn&#8217;t the case for women aged 40 to 49 with extremely dense breasts or who took estrogen and progestin therapy at menopause. Among this group, receiving screenings every other year was associated with a higher<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=82457&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/19/study-supports-less-frequent-mammogram-screening/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/312450-001.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/312450-001.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/312450-001.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">312450-001</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Radiation for Breast Cancer Linked to Slight Increase in Heart Disease</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/15/radiation-for-breast-cancer-linked-to-slight-increase-in-heart-disease/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/15/radiation-for-breast-cancer-linked-to-slight-increase-in-heart-disease/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 15 Mar 2013 19:02:18 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Heart Disease]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[radiation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[radiotherapy]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=82404</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[It&#8217;s a lifesaving treatment for some, but radiation therapy can carry risks that last for decades. Researchers in Europe report in the New England Journal of Medicine that women with breast cancer who were treated with radiation slightly increased their risk of dying from heart disease or a heart attack in the years following their therapy. For most women with no history of heart disease, the risk was small — about 2% for having a heart attack in the 30 years following radiation treatment — too small to trump the benefits of radiation in controlling cancer, doctors say. Since previous reports hinted at potential increased risk of heart problems among women radiated in the chest area, the scientists studied the records of 2,168 women who had radiation for breast cancer from 1958 to 2001 in Sweden and Denmark. Among the participants, 963 had “major cardiac events”— like a heart attack — at some point in the 30 years after their breast-cancer radiation treatment. The researchers also estimated the dose of radiation to which the women&#8217;s hearts were exposed. The heart risks increased within a few years after exposure and continued to increase for several decades. There was some risk at the lowest level of exposure, but the higher the dosage, the higher the risk overall. Most women in the study received about 4.9 units, called grays, of radiation to the heart as part of their breast-cancer treatment. With every increase in gray, the risk of heart problems, including compromised blood flow to the heart and heart attack, increased by 7.4%. (MORE: Exercise Keeps Muscles Young, Even in Elderly Heart Patients) The results, while sobering, also need to be considered in historical context. Doctors say that improved technology has led to lower doses of radiation to treat cancers today (some of the women in the study were treated in the 1960s). Dr. Nancy Snyderman, the chief medical editor at NBC News, said in a segment on NBC News that radiation doses are now both smaller and more precise, and that procedures today can<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=82404&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/03/15/radiation-for-breast-cancer-linked-to-slight-increase-in-heart-disease/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/108268588.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/108268588.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/108268588.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">108268588</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Herceptin May Benefit Wider Group of Breast Cancer Patients</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/27/herceptin-may-benefit-wider-group-of-breast-cancer-patients/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/27/herceptin-may-benefit-wider-group-of-breast-cancer-patients/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2013 17:08:50 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[her2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HER2 negative]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[HER2 positive]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[herceptin]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[trastuzumab]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=81074</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The breakthrough drug, which targets a small percentage of breast tumors, may be effective against more cancers, according to the latest study. About 20% of women have breast cancers that are HER2 positive, meaning the tumor cells carry a protein on their surface that helps tumors grow faster. Herceptin (Trastuzumab), which binds to these proteins, blocks these cells from obtaining the nutrients they need to thrive, and in combination with other therapies, including chemotherapy or surgery, can dramatically reduce the recurrence rate of additional cancers. Now researchers from the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center report in the journal Cancer Research that Herceptin may help women with HER2 negative tumors as well. The revelation emerged from a study in which 174 women without HER2 receptors were miscategorized as having tumors with the protein, and were treated with Herceptin. Surprisingly, the treatment worked for them too. &#8220;These women essentially given Herceptin for a year by mistake. The surprising thing was when the data was analyzed, those women actually benefited more from the Herceptin than the women whose tumors were HER2 positive. Their reduction in recurrence was 50%, even though their tumors were so-called HER2 negative,&#8221; says study author Dr. Max Wicha, a professor of oncology and director of the University of Michigan Comprehensive Cancer Center. (MORE: Genetic Study Identifies Four Main Types of Breast Cancer) Wicha and his team believe the results are driven by a small group of cancer stem cells that represent 1% to 5% of the cells in a tumor, but are largely responsible for spreading cancer to other tissues and locations. These cancer stem cells in many HER2 negative breast cancers may still make HER2, but not in enough quantities to register the cancer as HER2 positive. But because they are the cells responsible for metastases, or spreading the cancer, blocking their growth with Herceptin may lead to fewer recurrences for patients. &#8220;These are like the seeds of the cancer because these are cells that cause metastasis and have the unlimited potential to reproduce, whereas the other 90% to 95%<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=81074&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/02/27/herceptin-may-benefit-wider-group-of-breast-cancer-patients/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/128593502.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/128593502.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/128593502.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">128593502</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Women with BRCA Gene Mutation at Higher Risk for Early Menopause</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/01/29/women-with-brca-gene-mutation-at-higher-risk-for-early-menopause/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/01/29/women-with-brca-gene-mutation-at-higher-risk-for-early-menopause/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2013 10:45:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Infertility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Reproductive Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Health]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[brca]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA1]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[BRCA2]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[breast cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[early menopause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[early onset menopause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[infertility]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[menopause]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[reproductive health]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=78995</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A study finds the first genetic links that predict timing of menopause. Researchers from the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) found that women with mutations in the BRCA1 or BRCA 2 genes, which are associated with an up to five times higher risk of developing breast and ovarian cancers, were more likely to enter menopause early compared to women without the gene. The finding, reported in the journal Cancer, has important implications for women trying to get pregnant, since those with the genetic mutations may be more vulnerable to infertility. The study included 400 female BRCA gene carriers in northern California and compared the timing of their menopause onset to 765 women without the gene mutation from the same region. They found that the BRCA carriers were likely to enter menopause on average at age 50, compared to age 53 for the other women. (MORE: Study: No Higher Risk for Women With Breast Cancer Genes in the Family) &#8220;What is really complicated about these patients is that because they have a higher risk of breast and ovarian cancer, they’re under a lot of surveillance and a lot of pressure to remove breast tissue and ovaries to reduce cancer risk,&#8221; says senior study author Dr. Mitchell Rosen, director of the UCSF Fertility Preservation Center and associate professor in the UCSF Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Reproductive Sciences. Still, Rosen and his team found early menopause among women with the BRCA mutations who had not undergone surgery to remove their ovaries, and other studies have shown that these women may be prone to ovarian failure, possibly related to the effects of their genetic changes. For smokers, the findings are even more somber. Smoking has been known to alter estrogen levels and menstrual cycles, and the researchers found that women who were considered heavy smokers—smoking over 20 cigarettes a day—tended to experience menopause even earlier, at around age 46. The research adds an additional dilemma for women carrying the gene who still want a family, and may even help to identify new genetic factors underlying infertility. &#8220;This means there<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=78995&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/01/29/women-with-brca-gene-mutation-at-higher-risk-for-early-menopause/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Reproductive Health</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/reproductive-health-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/100480417.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/100480417.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/100480417.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">100480417</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Among Breast Cancer Screens, Pricey Isn&#8217;t Always Better</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2013/01/08/among-breast-cancer-screens-pricey-isnt-always-better/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2013/01/08/among-breast-cancer-screens-pricey-isnt-always-better/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2013 17:15:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=77373</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[For older women, cheaper methods of detecting breast cancer may be as good as more expensive ones, according to the latest research. Medicare spending on breast cancer screenings like mammograms adds up to just over $1 billion each year, but how effective is that spending in treating tumors? In a study published in JAMA Internal Medicine Dr. Cary Gross, an associate professor of internal medicine at Yale School of Medicine and director of the Cancer Outcomes, Public Policy, and Effectiveness Research (COPPER) Center at Yale and his colleagues studied national estimates for breast cancer screening costs and compared these to screening outcomes. MORE: The Mammogram Melee: How Much Screening Is Best? They reviewed results from more than 137,200 female Medicare beneficiaries between the ages of 66 to 100 without any history of breast cancer before 2006. The team followed the women for two years and monitored their screenings, cancer diagnoses and costs. They found that spending for breast cancer screening varied widely across the country, ranging from $40 to $110 per woman. Higher costs came primarily from newer screening technologies such as digital mammograms and computer-aided detection. And the more expensive screens also seemed to come with a higher health price: women living in regions with higher screening costs were 78% more likely to be diagnosed with early breast cancer. (MORE: The Mammogram Mess: The Most Difficult Decision for Women in Their 40s) That suggest that the more advanced screening methods are picking up smaller tumors at earlier stages, which is the goal of screening. Indeed these women were less likely than those living in areas where screening costs were lower to have advanced stage cancers detected. But that doesn&#8217;t necessarily mean that the higher costs of screening are justified. For women of this age group, these diagnoses could lead to unnecessary treatment for cancers that would never harm them during their lifetime. That&#8217;s the reason that the U. S. Preventative Task Force (USPTF) last year loosened its recommendation for regular mammogram screening for women aged 75 and older; they concluded there<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=77373&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2013/01/08/among-breast-cancer-screens-pricey-isnt-always-better/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/78617012.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/78617012.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/78617012.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">78617012</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Certain Fruits and Vegetables Linked to Lower Breast Cancer Risk</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/07/certain-fruits-and-vegetables-linked-to-lower-breast-cancer-risk/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/07/certain-fruits-and-vegetables-linked-to-lower-breast-cancer-risk/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2012 19:00:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alexandra Sifferlin</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nutrition]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supplements]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=75483</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When it comes to foods that lower cancer risk, color may count. Researchers report in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute that women loading up carotenoids, the micronutrients found in red, yellow and deeply colored fruits and vegetables such as carrots, sweet potatoes spinach and kale, showed lower rates of breast cancer than those who didn&#8217;t eat as many of these foods. Previous studies looking at the link between carotenoid levels and breast cancer had varying results, with some reporting high levels associated with a reduced cancer risk and others finding no such link. Dr. Heather Eliassen, assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School and her colleagues analyzed the data from eight cohort studies that cover over 80% of currently published research on carotenoids in the blood and breast cancer rates. The researchers took the data, which covered over 3,000 participants and nearly 4,000 controls, and standardized the carotenoid levels measured in the blood by re-analyzing the participants&#8217; blood samples at the Harvard School of Public Health. (MORE: Healthy Diet Can Lower Risk of Recurrent Heart Attack and Stroke) Women with carotenoid levels in the the top 20% of measured ranges had a 15-20% reduced risk of breast cancer compared to those with carotenoid levels in the lowest category. &#8220;It looks like it is a linear relationship,&#8221; says Eliassen. &#8221;The higher you go, the [lower] your risk is. There is some benefit at a moderate level of carotenoids and there is even more benefit at a higher level.&#8221; There is also encouraging news for women with a type of breast cancer that is notoriously difficult to treat—those that are missing receptors for estrogen, so-called estrogen-receptor negative (ER-) cancer. The lower risk was especially strong among women with these types of tumors, suggesting carotenoids are an adjustable risk factor for these cases. &#8220;I think this is an interesting finding given that the common risk factors we know about are a lot more profoundly associated with the ER + tumors, like having children, breast feeding, the age you go through menopause and weight gain and older women. We<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=75483&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/07/certain-fruits-and-vegetables-linked-to-lower-breast-cancer-risk/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/83545667.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/83545667.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/83545667.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">83545667</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://1.gravatar.com/avatar/dd9dc95ff828efb70c16a5a509a75150?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">asifferlin</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Cancer and Foggy Thinking: Is Chemotherapy Really the Cause?</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/07/cancer-and-foggy-thinking-is-chemotherapy-really-the-cause/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/07/cancer-and-foggy-thinking-is-chemotherapy-really-the-cause/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 07 Dec 2012 15:00:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Alice Park</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[chemo brain]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=75655</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Foggy thinking is a well-known side effect of cancer treatment, but is chemotherapy to blame? Women who receive chemotherapy to treat breast cancer have long reported confusion, disorganization, difficulty concentrating and problems recalling conversations following therapy. And because these symptoms occur so soon after exposure to life-saving but toxic drugs, patients have assumed that so-called chemo brain is a direct result of the potent tumor-fighting drugs they have just received. But in the latest study investigating the phenomenon, researchers led by Bernadine Cimprich, an associate professor emerita at the University of Michigan School of Nursing, says the changes in cognition actually occur before chemotherapy begins, and may worsen after treatment. MORE: Heavy Women May Be More Likely to See Breast Cancer Recur In a presentation at the annual CTRC-AACR San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, Cimprich reports that stress and fatigue related to receiving a cancer diagnosis and anticipating chemotherapy may be responsible for triggering muddled thinking. While previous studies have documented the phenomenon of chemo brain, this is the first to link the symptoms to fatigue and stress before treatment. She and her colleagues studied 28 women who received chemotherapy, 37 who received radiation, and 32 healthy controls without cancer. At the start of the study, all the participants completed verbal working memory tasks while their brains were scanned using functional MRI. They performed the same tasks one month after their chemotherapy or radiation treatment. Even before any of the treatments began, Cimprich says the cancer patients scored lower on the memory tests than the healthy controls. There was a difference among the cancer patients as well, with those anticipating chemotherapy recording the lowest scores and those facing radiation treatment with slightly higher scores. These patterns continued after cancer treatment, with both chemotherapy and radiation patients showing worsening scores on the cognitive tests. MORE: Cold May Spare Your Hair from Chemo: Who Knew? “We really don’t know what the independent effects of chemotherapy are,” says Cimprich. “What we are saying is that there are likely other factors that may be<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=75655&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2012/12/07/cancer-and-foggy-thinking-is-chemotherapy-really-the-cause/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/cancer/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/1500_foggy_1207.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/1500_foggy_1207.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/1500_foggy_1207.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">1500_foggy_1207</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/69fc92d1c4598c5b98d03fde16cdfa74?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">apark7</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Mammogram Mess: The Most Difficult Decision for Women in Their 40s</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2012/11/30/the-mammogram-mess-the-most-difficult-decision-for-women-in-their-40s/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2012/11/30/the-mammogram-mess-the-most-difficult-decision-for-women-in-their-40s/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:45:43 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bonnie Rochman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=75109</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I have dense breasts, a physiological fact that was neither here nor there until July 25. That’s the day I turned 40, which consequently marked the day I was supposed to start paying close attention to my breasts. They’ve served me well, nourishing three kids and ensuring my tops fit the way they should. But they’d suddenly become suspect, literally overnight. Barring a family history of breast cancer, a woman’s 20s and 30s are typically carefree, breast-wise. Do your self breast exam (I do) or don’t in those years — there are differing opinions on this — but celebrate your 40th, and women are suddenly plunked into the incredibly confusing and contradictory world of screening mammography. It wasn’t always this complicated. Until 2009, 40 marked the age at which women were supposed to start scheduling their annual screening to see whether their breast cells had turned traitor. But three years ago, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF) upended the guidelines and advised women to wait until 50  — and to get mammograms only every two years until age 74. Meanwhile, the American Cancer Society and the American College of Radiologists advocate sticking with the long-time recommendation to begin yearly screening at 40. And with that, an entire decade of women ages 40 to 49 has been thrust into diagnostic limbo. To screen or not to screen: that is the question. It’s maddening to try to make sense of the data, a mass of contradictory research that feels like a medical point-counterpoint. It would be borderline amusing if our health was not at stake. (MORE: The Screening Dilemma) It hardly helps that conflicting studies are coming out all the time, including one this week that found that up to 20% of breast cancers among women in their 40s could be missed under the new USPSTF guidelines. On the other hand, the analysis the USPSTF relied upon found that screening women in their 40s can lead to false positives, overtreatment and more risk than harm. Last week, a much talked-about report in the<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=75109&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2012/11/30/the-mammogram-mess-the-most-difficult-decision-for-women-in-their-40s/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/picture-4.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/picture-4.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/picture-4.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">A woman looks at the mammography photo to see the absence of the tumor in Israel on Aug. 27, 2012.</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/ccc18529897902c0767bf2d7d088828e?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">brochman</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Can Your Job Increase Your Risk of Developing Breast Cancer?</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2012/11/20/can-your-job-increase-your-risk-of-developing-breast-cancer/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2012/11/20/can-your-job-increase-your-risk-of-developing-breast-cancer/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:00:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Olivia B. Waxman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Women's Health]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=74208</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A study explores the occupations with the strongest links to breast cancer. As the most common cancer among women, breast cancer&#8217;s potential triggers — from genes to behaviors to lifestyle and even environmental exposures — are relatively well studied. But researchers in Canada were interested in understanding how one factor in particular — the work environment — can affect a woman&#8217;s risk of developing the disease, and found that some jobs that expose workers to potential hormone-disrupting chemicals and carcinogens may contribute to a 42% higher risk of developing breast cancer compared with women who did not work in those settings. (MORE: Why Having a Large Baby May Raise Your Risk of Breast Cancer) The study included 1,006 women with breast cancer and 1,146 women without the disease living in Essex and Kent counties in Ontario, where there is a diverse distribution of agricultural and industrial occupations. The region is also known to have a relatively high cluster of persistent breast-cancer cases, which makes it a useful location for studying the effects of different occupations on risk of the disease. Reporting in the journal Environmental Health, the researchers say that over a period of 10 years, women involved in manufacturing car plastics, canning food, as well as those who spent time in bars, racetracks or casinos, more than doubled their risk of breast cancer compared with those with other occupations. Women who worked in agriculture experienced 34% greater odds of developing breast cancer compared with those not in farming, which the authors believe reflects the longer time that women may be exposed to potentially cancer-causing compounds in those settings, since most farmers start working at an early age. Previous studies provide some hints as to why workers in these jobs may be particularly prone to higher cancer rates: exposure to pesticide residues during food-canning processes might be responsible for triggering breast tumors among workers, while secondhand smoke was the primary culprit in bars and gambling establishments. Potentially carcinogenic vapors emitted during the molding process of plastic were likely contributing to higher<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=74208&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2012/11/20/can-your-job-increase-your-risk-of-developing-breast-cancer/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Breast Cancer</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/medicine/breast-cancer-medicine/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/factoryworker.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/factoryworker.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/factoryworker.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">factoryworker</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://2.gravatar.com/avatar/b9704e5c0d64fde15dc0d56feb4f86c3?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">timeolivia</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Why Cheaper Genetic Testing Could Cost Us a Fortune</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/26/why-cheaper-genetic-testing-could-cost-us-a-fortune/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/26/why-cheaper-genetic-testing-could-cost-us-a-fortune/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2012 09:40:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bonnie Rochman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alzheimer's Disease]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Arthritis]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Autism]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Family]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Family & Parenting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Health Insurance]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kids and DNA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Parenting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pediatric Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Policy & Industry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[DNA testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[dna tests]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genetic discrimination]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genetic testing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genome sequencing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genomics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[health insurance]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=72569</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Dana Nieder was at a loss. Doctors had been trying to figure out what was wrong with her daughter Maya since she was 7 months old. Now 4 1/2, Maya didn’t learn to walk until long after her second birthday and still can say only a few words. After exhausting other possibilities, Nieder decided to have part of Maya’s genome sequenced in a test so new that health insurers have balked at paying for it. &#8220;It seemed to be our only chance to find a genetic answer,&#8221; says Nieder, a former middle school science teacher from New York City. Unlocking the secrets of human DNA is one of the most promising avenues of medical research. (Read TIME&#8217;s complete series on genetic testing and families.) But along with a host of scientific and ethical issues, genome sequencing raises some tough economic questions at a time when U.S. health care costs are already spiraling. How much is this going to cost, and who’s going to pay? Whole-genome sequencing (WGS) is already relatively inexpensive — labs can analyze a person’s entire genetic code for under $10,000 — and the cost is dropping fast. But for some patients, this initial DNA report is the beginning, not the end, of their medical odyssey. And whether those journeys will increase the nation’s health costs isn’t clear. In an ideal scenario, genetic analysis could save money by catching diseases early, offering targeted treatments and underscoring the most effective preventive measures. In the worst case, it could deluge an already swamped health care system, as patients with ambiguous results begin to seek frequent screenings — and potentially unnecessary procedures — for diseases they might never develop. Princeton health care economist Uwe Reinhardt sees a future that skews toward the latter: “If someone held a gun to my head, I would have to say it will cost a lot more and it will create an enormous amount of anxiety. A certain amount of ignorance is really bliss.” More than half of the 1,254 doctors surveyed this year by UnitedHealthcare<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=72569&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/26/why-cheaper-genetic-testing-could-cost-us-a-fortune/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Kids and DNA</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/kids-and-dna/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/20121020_dananieder_0138-edit.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/20121020_dananieder_0138-edit.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/20121020_dananieder_0138-edit.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">image: Dana Nieder turned to friends and strangers to help pay for her daughter Maya&#039;s exome sequencing</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/ccc18529897902c0767bf2d7d088828e?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">brochman</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/kidsanddna.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">kidsanddna</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Test Your DNA for Diseases — No Doctor Required</title>
		<link>http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/23/drugstore-genomes-whos-pushing-the-sequencing-industry/</link>
		<comments>http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/23/drugstore-genomes-whos-pushing-the-sequencing-industry/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 23 Oct 2012 10:50:45 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bonnie Rochman</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Alzheimer's Disease]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Breast Cancer]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Disease]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Family & Parenting]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Kids and DNA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Medicine]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Pediatric Genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Research]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[23andMe]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Amar Kamath]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Anne Wojcicki]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[APOE-4]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GeneDx]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genetics]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[genome sequencing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Illumina]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Knome]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Martin Tolar]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[sequencing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Sergey Brin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://healthland.time.com/?p=72171</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[When Anne Wojcicki’s son was a baby, she ran a swab across the inside of his cheek, collecting DNA to send to a lab. Last year, when she was pregnant with her daughter, she tested her amniotic cells. The goal in each case: to get a glimpse of her children’s genes and determine whether they contain certain kinks that increase the risk of developing anything from gallstones to multiple sclerosis. “As a parent,” says Wojcicki, “the most responsible thing I can do is get as much information about my children as possible so I can then think through how I can make them as healthy as possible.” Wojcicki isn’t just any random parent, though. She’s a Yale-educated biologist and the co-founder and CEO of 23andMe, a company in Mountain View, Calif., that sells DNA analysis directly to consumers — no doctor required (See TIME&#8217;s inside look into 23andMe&#8217;s genetic testing lab here). “Your information is your information,” says Wojcicki, who is married to Google co-founder Sergey Brin. “If you want it, you should be able to have it.” Genetic tests have been around for years, but in 2003 scientists took the field a step further, announcing the first complete mapping of a human genome — an entire genetic code. Sequencing, or &#8220;reading,&#8221; a person’s genome is one of the newest, most controversial tools in the medical arsenal because of the mother lode of information it contains about future disease risk. Genetic markers for heart disease or cancer may spur consumers toward healthier behavior. But when it comes to conditions such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson&#8217;s that can&#8217;t be prevented, many experts are divided on whether knowing is helpful or harmful. Yet even as physicians and bioethicists wrestle with the implications of revealing dark DNA secrets, entrepreneurs like Wojcicki are planning to make whole-genome sequencing (WGS) available directly to the public. Other companies, like San Diego–based Illumina, are already offering the test to what its CEO, Jay Flatley, calls a “healthy and proactive” demographic. So far, these tests have been aimed mainly at early<img alt="" border="0" src="http://stats.wordpress.com/b.gif?host=healthland.time.com&#038;blog=8684427&#038;post=72171&#038;subd=timewellness&#038;ref=&#038;feed=1" width="1" height="1" />]]></description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://healthland.time.com/2012/10/23/drugstore-genomes-whos-pushing-the-sequencing-industry/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	<primary_category>Kids and DNA</primary_category><primary_category_link>http://healthland.time.com/category/kids-and-dna/</primary_category_link><featured_image>http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/time_anne_wojcicki_035.jpg?w=240</featured_image>
		<media:thumbnail url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/time_anne_wojcicki_035.jpg?w=240" />
		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/time_anne_wojcicki_035.jpg?w=240" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">TIME_ANNE_WOJCICKI_035</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/ccc18529897902c0767bf2d7d088828e?s=96&#38;d=http%3A%2F%2Fs0.wp.com%2Fi%2Fmu.gif&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">brochman</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/kidsanddna.jpg" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">kidsanddna</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/time_23_and_me_lab_038.jpg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">TIME_23_AND_ME_LAB_038</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://timewellness.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/time_23_and_me_lab_028.jpg?w=360" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">TIME_23_AND_ME_LAB_028</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
