Food, Inglorious Food - Part IV

Note: This is the fourth (and final, I promise!) post in this series. For background, read Part I first.

Again, here are my three simple reasons for trying to eat a healthy diet:

1. Maintain my weight. See Part II of this series.
   
   
2. Manage my cholesterol. See Part III of this series.


3. Within reason, avoid anything that might somehow trigger a future breast cancer.
   
   What are the odds that in the midst of a four-part post on diet and nutrition the World Cancer Research Fund and the American Institute for Cancer Research would publish an exhaustive report called "Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity, and the Prevention of Cancer: a Global Perspective"?
   
   Well, buy your lottery tickets, ladies and gents, because that's what happened today. And while I haven't had the chance to read all 517 pages, I did check out the section on breast cancer as well as the authors' overall recommendations.
   
   From what I have seen so far, my first goal above is right on target: the report is laced with references to excess weight (particularly around the abdomen) and adult weight gain as probable or even persuasive causes of breast cancer.
   
   Physical activity is also cited as a likely protector against breast cancer in post-menopausal women. (Exercise will be the next topic I tackle in what began as Breast Cancer Self-awareness Month but is clearly going to extend beyond the stroke of midnight tonight.)
   
   Based on the report, there are at least two things I should significantly limit in my diet: alcohol and processed meats.
   
   "The evidence that alcoholic drinks are a cause of breast cancer at all ages is convincing," the report says, and it's hard to imagine language starker than that. I've never been much of a drinker, so I don't expect to have to make a major lifestyle change here. The difference between a glass or two of wine a month and none at all is negligible and therefore not something I'm going to worry about.
   
   Meats that have been processed—salted, smoked, cured, or treated with preservatives—are likewise not a huge component of my diet. I have a slice or two of bacon maybe once a quarter, and only the nitrate- and nitrite-free kind at that. It's true that I am a fan of smoked turkey, but I am picky here, too—no nitrates or nitrates, organic when possible. Still, I will probably try to drop my consumption from occasional to very infrequent.
   
   I have to confess that there are two things I have consciously—and conscientiously—restricted from my diet ever since my first round of breast cancer, back in 2001, even though there hasn't been clear and convincing evidence of the need to do so.
   
   The first is meat or dairy products that were or might have been treated with hormones. Both of my tumors were hormone-driven, and I'm just not willing to take a chance that something I eat could provide any kind of fuel for hungry cancer cells that might still be in my body. I will feed a cold, but I'll be damned if I'm going to cater meals for cancer. The authors of today's report demurred on this question, citing a lack of epidemiological or other evidence.
   
   The other thing I eschew is soy, which can mimic estrogen in the body—that's why it's sometimes touted as a way to help mitigate the side effects of estrogen deprivation, such as hot flashes, that come with menopause. (I say this by way of explanation only—it's a fraught topic, and one that I am not remotely qualified to judge. I am absolutely not making a recommendation of any kind.)
   
   I never liked tofu, so that hasn't been a major loss. But I do like edamame and no longer have it. And I also avoid all of those nutrition bars marketed to women, because they feature soy as an ingredient.
   
   I took a special look at the report to see if there was news about soy (or "soya," as they call it), and here's what it says:
   
   "There is considerable speculation around a biologically plausible interaction of soya and soya products with breast cancer development, due to their high phytoestrogen content. . . . [T]here were insufficient studies available on soya consumption to allow a conclusion to be reached."
   
   The authors of this report spent six years working on it and reviewed more than 7,000 studies in the process. If they are unable to reach a conclusion about something, what is a layperson to do?
   
   In my case, I will do what I have done for the past six-plus years: make the best decisions I can in the face of incomplete, often contradictory information.
   
   That means redoubling my efforts in some areas—adding fiber, subtracting fats and carbs—and standing pat (or fine-tuning) in others: drinking rarely, making bacon and smoked turkey only occasional treats, and continuing to turn my nose up at anything that might contain stray hormones or soy, at least until the evidence says otherwise.
   
   I've still got more work to do—I'd like to meet with a nutritionist, for example—but I think I am off to a good start. After a whole month without fried, sugary, junk, or processed foods, I expected to spend November 1st indulging in all that I had given up. But now that I have some momentum behind me, I have to say that I'm not really even tempted.
   
   Yet.