2010 – Top 10 Cancer Headlines
Here is the top 10 cancer news of 2010 from www.kcancer.com Actress Jane Fonda discovered she had a small tumor in her breast during a routine checkup. She underwent a procedure to remove the cancer. The cancer turned out to be non-invasive and she is currently cancer free. Jenn Vonckx became the first human being to have stem cells injected into her brain to try to cure her brain cancer. Neural stem cells with a special enzyme are injected into the brain. The stem cells seek out and attach themselves to the tumors. The patient then takes a pill containing a non-toxic drug that enters the brain. When the drug interacts with the enzyme in the stem cells, it instantaneously creates an active chemotherapy drug. The hope is that chemo will kill the tumors and leave healthy brain tissue alone. Elizabeth Edwards was first diagnosed with breast cancer in 2004. The cancer returned in 2007 and she died on December 7, 2010. She was separated from her husband, John Edwards, who was the former U.S. Senator from North Carolina, the 2004 United States Democratic vice-presidential nominee, and one-time presidential hopeful. Study shows a direct link between reduced hormone therapy and declines in breast cancer. Women taking a combination of progestin and estrogen face a higher risk of breast cancer and other potential health hazards. Postmenopausal women are strongly advised to refrain from long-term hormone therapy or to use the lowest dose possible for the shortest time to relieve hot flashes and night sweats. Two Ontario women faked terminal cancer and collected donations to help fight deadly cancers they never had. Ashley Kirilow fraud breast cancer and Jessica Leeder pretended having stomach and lung cancer. They obtained thousands of dollars from sympathetic donors to fund their cancer treatments. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced new measures to discourage people from smoking. Terrified graphic images, including a mother blowing cigarette smoke into the face of her baby, a man suffering a heart attack, image of lungs and mouth damaged by smoking etc, are going to post on cigarette packs. Provenge is the first-ever cancer therapeutic vaccine approved by FDA. It is a breakthrough treatment that uses a patient’s own antigen-presenting cells to stimulate the body’s immune system against prostate cancer. On August 16, 2010, Actor Michael Douglass announced that he was suffering advanced throat cancer. He underwent chemotherapy and radiation treatment. His prognosis is good and he has fair chance of beating the disease. Avastin was approved for breast cancer in 2008 under a fast-track process to make promising the drug available, subject to further studies. Follow-up studies indicated that Avastin did not prolong life of breast cancer patients and FDA thus moved toward revoking approval of Avastin as a treatment for breast cancer. This decision does not affect the use of Avastin against other types of cancer. Annual CT scans of current and former heavy smokers reduce their risk of death from lung cancer by 20%. The findings represent a significant advance in cancer detection that could potentially save thousands of lives annually. Lung cancer will claim about 157,000 lives a year in US, more than the deaths from colorectal, breast, pancreatic and prostate cancers combined. Most lung cancer patients discover their disease too late for treatment, and 85 percent die from it.
No Routine PSA Screens for UK Men
The United Kingdom’s National Screening Committee has recommended against routine screening for prostate cancer risk with prostate specific antigen (PSA) testing.
The U.K. screening committee concluded that the PSA test’s potential harms — including worry and anxiety due to the reported high number of false positives — outweigh any potential benefits.
The panel noted that benign enlargement of the prostate or a urinary infection can also lead to elevated serum PSA levels.
Still, the committee recommended giving a PSA test to any patient who requests one.
“The ‘informed choice’ program should ensure men receive clear and balanced information about the advantages and disadvantages of the PSA test and treatment for prostate cancer,” the committee wrote in its review documents.
The screening committee’s findings were based on evidence from three clinical trials — the European Randomized Study on Screening for Prostate Cancer (ERSPC), the Prostate, Lung, Colorectal, and Ovarian Cancer Screening Trial (PLCO), and the Prostate Testing for Cancer and Treatment Trial (ProtecT).
The U.K. panel began its review in March 2009, after a new analysis from the ERSPC found a 20% mortality benefit from prostate cancer screening (albeit with a “great deal of ‘over diagnosis,’ ” the committee noted).
Subsequent models by the School of Health and Related Research in Sheffield, England, found that a single screen at age 50 has little effect on age-specific incidence of prostate cancer, and found little benefit for annual or biannual screens.
The committee’s main conclusions included the determination that PSA is “a poor test for prostate cancer and a more specific and sensitive test is needed,” and that the test is “unable to correctly identify those cancers which will progress and those which … may be safely watched.”
The panel also emphasized that data related to incidence, prevalence, and treatments are poor and “renders planning very difficult.”
The policy will be reviewed again in three years unless there is “significant new peer-reviewed evidence,” the committee added.
Source: MedPage Today 12/6/2010
Obama to BP: “You will pay for ‘assaulting our shores and our citizens’!”
Given the current, tough political environment, Obama has every incentive to go overboard in punishing BP and holding BP financially responsible for as much “damage” caused by this spill as possible. The environmental cleanup (in and of itself) is going to be extremely costly. But in the end, that “cost” will be minimal compared to what Washington will charge is BP’s “overall liability”.What about the fishing industry? Tourist industry? Local merchants? Beach front real estate developers? What’s stopping any/every Gulf of Mexico state from blaming all their economic troubles on the BP oil spill?! Nothing.The reason BP has hired Goldman Sachs and other Wall Street banks is that BP knows that Obama will (and politically needs to) go after BP in the most aggressive way possible.Every American apparently agrees that we should hold BP accountable. However, what is lost on Obama is the following – every other company doing business in the US is watching Obama’s actions and is painful aware of the current hostile business environment in Washington.The Washington message is clear: ”I need to get re-elected, and my poll numbers are way down. If I can gain votes by bashing your company (or industry), watch out. I will take you out.”So…just how is Obama encouraging business creation? Does he realize that we need business creation to save our economy? Or is that too long-term focused.
Deleveraging & Growth – What We Need for Recovery
Here’s a great market summary by Bill Gross of PIMCO: ”A deleveraging process based upon too much debt and too little growth to service it.” ”…4-6% annualized returns for a diversified portfolio of stocks and bonds is the likely outcome.” In other words, buckle up. It’s going to be a long road back to recovery. We need to get through the deleveraging process and see growth BEFORE we start to recover.
Are We Really in a Recovery?
In the last month or two, I have read several articles stating the case for the US economic recovery.I just don’t buy that. Previously, I had based my simple economic outlook on the following fact: ”You can’t have stability or growth in the US housing market without growth or stability in the employment market.” However, I just stumbled on this great 25 questions for all those that think we are out of the (recessionary) woods – courtesy of http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com. (Don’t get depressed.)
#1) In what universe is an economy with 39.68 million Americans on food stamps considered to be a healthy, recovering economy? In fact, the U.S. Department of Agriculture forecasts that enrollment in the food stamp program will exceed 43 million Americans in 2011. Is a rapidly increasing number of Americans on food stamps a good sign or a bad sign for the economy?
#2) According to RealtyTrac, foreclosure filings were reported on 367,056 properties in the month of March. This was an increase of almost 19 percent from February, and it was the highest monthly total since RealtyTrac began issuing its report back in January 2005. So can you please explain again how the U.S. real estate market is getting better?
#3) The Mortgage Bankers Association just announced that more than 10 percent of U.S. homeowners with a mortgage had missed at least one payment in the January-March period. That was a record high and up from 9.1 percent a year ago. Do you think that is an indication that the U.S. housing market is recovering?
#4) How can the U.S. real estate market be considered healthy when, for the first time in modern history, banks own a greater share of residential housing net worth in the United States than all individual Americans put together?
#5) With the U.S. Congress planning to quadruple oil taxes, what do you think that is going to do to the price of gasoline in the United States and how do you think that will affect the U.S. economy?
#6) Do you think that it is a good sign that Arnold Schwarzenegger, the governor of the state of California, says that “terrible cuts” are urgently needed in order to avoid a complete financial disaster in his state?
#7) But it just isn’t California that is in trouble. Dozens of U.S. states are in such bad financial shape that they are getting ready for their biggest budget cuts in decades. What do you think all of those budget cuts will do to the economy?
#8) In March, the U.S. trade deficit widened to its highest level since December 2008. Month after month after month we buy much more from the rest of the world than they buy from us. Wealth is draining out of the United States at an unprecedented rate. So is the fact that the gigantic U.S. trade deficit is actually getting bigger a good sign or a bad sign for the U.S. economy?
#9) Considering the fact that the U.S. government is projected to have a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit in 2010, and considering the fact that if you went out and spent one dollar every single second it would take you more than 31,000 years to spend a trillion dollars, how can anyone in their right mind claim that the U.S. economy is getting healthier when we are getting into so much debt?
#10) The U.S. Treasury Department recently announced that the U.S. government suffered a wider-than-expected budget deficit of 82.69 billion dollars in April. So is the fact that the red ink of the U.S. government is actually worse than projected a good sign or a bad sign?
#11) According to one new report, the U.S. national debt will reach 100 percent of GDP by the year 2015. So is that a sign of economic recovery or of economic disaster?
#12) Monstrous amounts of oil continue to gush freely into the Gulf of Mexico, and analysts are already projecting that the seafood and tourism industries along the Gulf coast will be devastated for decades by this unprecedented environmental disaster. In light of those facts, how in the world can anyone project that the U.S. economy will soon be stronger than ever?
#13) The FDIC’s list of problem banks recently hit a 17-year high. Do you think that an increasing number of small banks failing is a good sign or a bad sign for the U.S. economy?
#14) The FDIC is backing 8,000 banks that have a total of $13 trillion in assets with a deposit insurance fund that is basically flat broke. So what do you think will happen if a significant number of small banks do start failing?
#15) Existing home sales in the United States jumped 7.6 percent in April. That is the good news. The bad news is that this increase only happened because the deadline to take advantage of the temporary home buyer tax credit (government bribe) was looming. So now that there is no more tax credit for home buyers, what will that do to home sales?
#16) Both Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac recently told the U.S. government that they are going to need even more bailout money. So what does it say about the U.S. economy when the two “pillars” of the U.S. mortgage industry are government-backed financial black holes that the U.S. government has to relentlessly pour money into?
#17) 43 percent of Americans have less than $10,000 saved for retirement. Tens of millions of Americans find themselves just one lawsuit, one really bad traffic accident or one very serious illness away from financial ruin. With so many Americans living on the edge, how can you say that the economy is healthy?
#18) The mayor of Detroit says that the real unemployment rate in his city is somewhere around 50 percent. So can the U.S. really be experiencing an economic recovery when so many are still unemployed in one of America’s biggest cities?
#19) Gallup’s measure of underemployment hit 20.0% on March 15th. That was up from 19.7% two weeks earlier and 19.5% at the start of the year. Do you think that is a good trend or a bad trend?
#20) One new poll shows that 76 percent of Americans believe that the U.S. economy is still in a recession. So are the vast majority of Americans just stupid or could we still actually be in a recession?
#21) The bottom 40 percent of those living in the United States now collectively own less than 1 percent of the nation’s wealth. So is Barack Obama’s mantra that “what is good for Wall Street is good for Main Street” actually true?
#22) Richard Russell, the famous author of the Dow Theory Letters, says that Americans should sell anything they can sell in order to get liquidbecause of the economic trouble that is coming. Do you think that Richard Russell is delusional or could he possibly have a point?
#23) Defaults on apartment building mortgages held by U.S. banks climbedto a record 4.6 percent in the first quarter of 2010. In fact, that was almost twice the level of a year earlier. Does that look like a good trend to you?
#24) In March, the price of fresh and dried vegetables in the United Statessoared 49.3% - the most in 16 years. Is it a sign of a healthy economy when food prices are increasing so dramatically?
#25) 1.41 million Americans filed for personal bankruptcy in 2009 - a 32 percent increase over 2008. Not only that, more Americans filed for bankruptcy in March 2010 than during any month since U.S. bankruptcy law was tightened in October 2005. So shouldn’t we at least wait until the number of Americans filing for bankruptcy is not setting new all-time records before we even dare whisper the words “economic recovery”?
Is China the Next Bubble to Burst?
Great debate in today’s NY Times Editorial page regarding China’s economy. On the one hand, you have investor James Chanos saying that China is a screaming short. Chanos states that it could be the next “Dubai times 1,000 – or worse” and boldly states that he is looking for every possible way to short China.
On the other hand, author Thomas L. Friedman states that he would never bet against China. His thesis can be summarized as: “Sure, China has problems and may have bounced back a bit too quickly. However, don’t bet against a centralized Chinese government that is thoughtful attacking problems (inflation) and has the resources (savings) and commitment to do so.”
Could both guys be right?
Short term, few would argue that China’s recovery may be a bit “too fast, too soon”. So the hedge fund manager Chanos may make some money taking a contrarian bet on China’s growth. However, few would argue against (and certainly not bet against) China’s growth engine.
The more interesting angle is the following. Does the US feel threatening by China’s growth prospects and success? Many in Washington DC and (Main Street, USA) are nervous that China’s success is coming from a country that is certainly NOT a democracy. China created the fastest growing economic engine with a mix of a tightly controlled communist regime AND capitalism. This contradicts some very basic, core US values. As Americans, we have been taught that these two (Communism and Capitalism) don’t go together. Does China success prove that our “models” are all wrong?
The US is certainly nervous and threatened by China’s success. I guess it’s OK to be nervous. But no American should be cheering for China to crash and burn. China’s growth may be the only thing that can bail us out of this global recession!
Healthcare Reform: Ditch The Public Option
Is “the public option” really we really want (or need) to fix our healthcare system? Think about it. Do we really want the Federal (or state) government running one of the biggest, most important industries in the US. (Healthcare is currently 16% of US GDP.) Show me one example where the government has been able to do that successfully? Medicare is an absolute disaster on all accounts. The US Postal Service? Amtrak? TSA?
What are we thinking? The public option is a bad idea.
Did I just read that “Cancer Screens are Bad for You”? What?!
Last week Dr. Otis Brawley, Chief Medical Officer of the American Cancer Society (ACS), said that the benefits of cancer screens, especially breast and prostate, have been overstated. His message is complex. However, the gist of Dr. Brawley’s message goes something like this: According to the ACS, PSA tests and mammograms can be a bad thing for two reasons: 1) PSA tests and mammograms are not very good screens for prostate and breast cancer, respectively. (Note, however, they are the only screens commercially available today.) 2) Wide spread cancer screening leads to overdiagnosis and overtreatment of patients who would be better off “watchful waiting” and not doing anything with their “benign” cancer.In the case of breast cancer, for every 100 women told they have breast cancer, 30 have cancers that are slow growing and unlikely to be life threatening. Thus, treating these patients would actually increase their risk rather than lower it. Similarly, 70 out of 100 men diagnosed with prostate cancer would be better off not undergoing treatment.I have two problems with Dr. Brawley’s message. 1) As a quantitative person, I believe that more knowledge/data is better than less. I do not subscribe to the “I am better off not knowing” philosophy. If I were the patient, I’d like to have as much information as possible about my illness. Thus, the idea that “screening is bad” is (in my book) offensive. I say this even if we safely assume that today’s screens are not ideal and will (hopefully get better) in the future. 2) Dr. Brawley’s timing is suspect. This smells like the beginning of Obamacare were services and screens will be rationed. I could scarily see insurance companies reading Dr. Brawley’s remarks and concluding that they will no longer pay for PSA tests and mammograms going forward. That would be a disaster for the US healthcare system and a huge step backwards.