Aspirine with Milk avoids Cancer

VascodaGama

I was recommended by the Walsh team to have a low dose daily aspirine in 2001. I thought it as anecdotal but would never contest a recommendation from such highly considered medical experts. And so that makes part of my breakfast ever since.
Now, the Mail tabloid on prostate cancer, writes excellent news in regards to the benefits of Aspirin with Milk, which may be of great interest to all our comrades. It says;
”A DAILY low-dose aspirin taken with a glass of milk could be a simple way to avoid dying of cancer, research has suggested. Taking aspirin for several years can cut the risk of death from a wide range of cancers by between a third and half, a landmark study found. Other evidence indicates that calcium in milk might enhance the drug's beneficial effects”.

For those of you that would like to read the whole story here are three sites:
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/health/aspirin-milk-mix-the-silver-bullet-in-cancer-war-15023420.html
http://www.windsorstar.com/health/Aspirin+with+milk+cuts+risk+developing+cancer/3938905/story.html
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1336849/Aspirin-really-beat-cancer.html

Wishing a great breakfast for all in this forum.
VGama

Beau2

Aspirin
Vasco,

Thanks for the link. I had not heard that the aspirin would work better with milk (calcium). Do you think calcium supplemented soy milk would also help?

VascodaGama

Beau2 said:

Aspirin
Vasco,

Thanks for the link. I had not heard that the aspirin would work better with milk (calcium). Do you think calcium supplemented soy milk would also help?

Aspirin Beau2
I really do not know what’s behind the good results of calcium/milk in aspirin, but the study is reliable. If you are looking for a substitute of milk in terms of calcium just try it. Aspirin itself is known to work wonders in regards to cancer.
Regards
VGama

Kongo

VascodaGama said:

Aspirin Beau2
I really do not know what’s behind the good results of calcium/milk in aspirin, but the study is reliable. If you are looking for a substitute of milk in terms of calcium just try it. Aspirin itself is known to work wonders in regards to cancer.
Regards
VGama

Possible Disconnect
Am not sure how the milk and calcium aspect of this worked its way into the newspaper stories but the original abstract (at least I'm pretty sure its the right abstract) mentions nothing at all about milk or calcium. The study size and authors are the same as what is quoted in the online news articles from the UK. You can find it a thelancet.com but I've copied the abstract below:

"Background: Treatment with daily aspirin for 5 years or longer reduces subsequent risk of colorectal cancer. Several lines of evidence suggest that aspirin might also reduce risk of other cancers, particularly of the gastrointestinal tract, but proof in man is lacking. We studied deaths due to cancer during and after randomised trials of daily aspirin versus control done originally for prevention of vascular events.

Methods: We used individual patient data from all randomised trials of daily aspirin versus no aspirin with mean duration of scheduled trial treatment of 4 years or longer to determine the effect of allocation to aspirin on risk of cancer death in relation to scheduled duration of trial treatment for gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal cancers. In three large UK trials, long-term post-trial follow-up of individual patients was obtained from death certificates and cancer registries.

Results: In eight eligible trials (25 570 patients, 674 cancer deaths), allocation to aspirin reduced death due to cancer (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0·79, 95% CI 0·68—0·92, p=0·003). On analysis of individual patient data, which were available from seven trials (23 535 patients, 657 cancer deaths), benefit was apparent only after 5 years' follow-up (all cancers, hazard ratio [HR] 0·66, 0·50—0·87; gastrointestinal cancers, 0·46, 0·27—0·77; both p=0·003). The 20-year risk of cancer death (1634 deaths in 12 659 patients in three trials) remained lower in the aspirin groups than in the control groups (all solid cancers, HR 0·80, 0·72—0·88, p<0·0001; gastrointestinal cancers, 0·65, 0·54—0·78, p<0·0001), and benefit increased (interaction p=0·01) with scheduled duration of trial treatment (≥7·5 years: all solid cancers, 0·69, 0·54—0·88, p=0·003; gastrointestinal cancers, 0·41, 0·26—0·66, p=0·0001). The latent period before an effect on deaths was about 5 years for oesophageal, pancreatic, brain, and lung cancer, but was more delayed for stomach, colorectal, and prostate cancer. For lung and oesophageal cancer, benefit was confined to adenocarcinomas, and the overall effect on 20-year risk of cancer death was greatest for adenocarcinomas (HR 0·66, 0·56—0·77, p<0·0001). Benefit was unrelated to aspirin dose (75 mg upwards), sex, or smoking, but increased with age—the absolute reduction in 20-year risk of cancer death reaching 7·08% (2·42—11·74) at age 65 years and older.

Interpretation: Daily aspirin reduced deaths due to several common cancers during and after the trials. Benefit increased with duration of treatment and was consistent across the different study populations. These findings have implications for guidelines on use of aspirin and for understanding of carcinogenesis and its susceptibility to drug intervention."

This study is in harmony with several other recent articles and papers that have been published that show aspirin really may be a true wonder drug with respect to cancer in general and prostate cancer in particular.

kooljay

Kongo said:

Possible Disconnect
Am not sure how the milk and calcium aspect of this worked its way into the newspaper stories but the original abstract (at least I'm pretty sure its the right abstract) mentions nothing at all about milk or calcium. The study size and authors are the same as what is quoted in the online news articles from the UK. You can find it a thelancet.com but I've copied the abstract below:

"Background: Treatment with daily aspirin for 5 years or longer reduces subsequent risk of colorectal cancer. Several lines of evidence suggest that aspirin might also reduce risk of other cancers, particularly of the gastrointestinal tract, but proof in man is lacking. We studied deaths due to cancer during and after randomised trials of daily aspirin versus control done originally for prevention of vascular events.

Methods: We used individual patient data from all randomised trials of daily aspirin versus no aspirin with mean duration of scheduled trial treatment of 4 years or longer to determine the effect of allocation to aspirin on risk of cancer death in relation to scheduled duration of trial treatment for gastrointestinal and non-gastrointestinal cancers. In three large UK trials, long-term post-trial follow-up of individual patients was obtained from death certificates and cancer registries.

Results: In eight eligible trials (25 570 patients, 674 cancer deaths), allocation to aspirin reduced death due to cancer (pooled odds ratio [OR] 0·79, 95% CI 0·68—0·92, p=0·003). On analysis of individual patient data, which were available from seven trials (23 535 patients, 657 cancer deaths), benefit was apparent only after 5 years' follow-up (all cancers, hazard ratio [HR] 0·66, 0·50—0·87; gastrointestinal cancers, 0·46, 0·27—0·77; both p=0·003). The 20-year risk of cancer death (1634 deaths in 12 659 patients in three trials) remained lower in the aspirin groups than in the control groups (all solid cancers, HR 0·80, 0·72—0·88, p<0·0001; gastrointestinal cancers, 0·65, 0·54—0·78, p<0·0001), and benefit increased (interaction p=0·01) with scheduled duration of trial treatment (≥7·5 years: all solid cancers, 0·69, 0·54—0·88, p=0·003; gastrointestinal cancers, 0·41, 0·26—0·66, p=0·0001). The latent period before an effect on deaths was about 5 years for oesophageal, pancreatic, brain, and lung cancer, but was more delayed for stomach, colorectal, and prostate cancer. For lung and oesophageal cancer, benefit was confined to adenocarcinomas, and the overall effect on 20-year risk of cancer death was greatest for adenocarcinomas (HR 0·66, 0·56—0·77, p<0·0001). Benefit was unrelated to aspirin dose (75 mg upwards), sex, or smoking, but increased with age—the absolute reduction in 20-year risk of cancer death reaching 7·08% (2·42—11·74) at age 65 years and older.

Interpretation: Daily aspirin reduced deaths due to several common cancers during and after the trials. Benefit increased with duration of treatment and was consistent across the different study populations. These findings have implications for guidelines on use of aspirin and for understanding of carcinogenesis and its susceptibility to drug intervention."

This study is in harmony with several other recent articles and papers that have been published that show aspirin really may be a true wonder drug with respect to cancer in general and prostate cancer in particular.</p>

milk?
im no expert, but i thought dairy products and milk itself was a no-no. ive been using soy milk, as a subsitute .

VascodaGama

kooljay said:

milk?
im no expert, but i thought dairy products and milk itself was a no-no. ive been using soy milk, as a subsitute .

Hi Kongo
Hi Kongo,
It is difficult to say if you will get an answer to your quest regarding the way data got into the newspapers. I recall ten years ago, when scientists and researchers at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, Johns Hopkins and Kisaratsu (Japan), were gathering information about statins and aspirin effects in prostate cancer. I made part of that investigation for several years and my job was to fill-up quarterly data sheets of trivial questions, like; How do you take the tablet, When do you take it, Which symptoms, What else are you taking, Which type, etc etc etc. These data was processed in several studies. Most surely my data sheets and the others end up in the results of those findings now being published.
If that is true, I hope that guys on PCa today get benefit from the researches conclusions.

Regards
VGama