Skip to main content

New story in Health from Time: Losing Weight May Reduce Your Risk of Breast Cancer



Excess body weight is an established risk factor for breast cancer. Research suggests that’s because too much body fat can elevate levels of sex hormones like estrogen, especially among postmenopausal women. But despite knowing there is a correlation between extra weight and breast cancer, it’s been difficult to study how losing that weight could affect an individual woman’s chance of developing cancer.

Now, a new paper published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute provides encouraging evidence that, for women 50 and older, virtually any amount of sustained weight loss translates to a reduction in breast cancer risk.

“We’re so thankful to be able to say it’s not too late to lower your risk if you’ve previously gained weight, even after age 50,” says study co-author Lauren Teras, scientific director of epidemiology research at the American Cancer Society.

The research drew on data collected through the Pooling Project of Prospective Studies of Diet and Cancer, an international set of studies that seeks to elucidate the relationship between diet and cancer among women without a history of the disease. For the new paper, researchers used data from about 180,000 women living in the U.S., Australia and Asia, all of whom were 50 or older and cancer-free when the studies began. Each woman also provided researchers with data about her weight and body mass index, as well as lifestyle and demographic characteristics.

The researchers monitored participants’ weight changes for 10 years after they joined the study, examining survey data collected every few years to see if their weight had gone up, gone down or remained stable. (Most studies used self-reported height and weight data.) After that decade, they tracked the women for another eight years or so to see how many developed breast cancer. Almost 7,000 did.

After adjusting for other factors that can affect breast cancer risk, such as exercise habits and use of hormone replacement therapy, the researchers found that the more weight a woman lost, the lower her risk of breast cancer became. Among women not using hormone therapy (which is sometimes used to replace hormones lost during menopause, and has been linked to breast cancer risk), losing about 4.5 pounds—and keeping it off—seemed to be enough to drive risk down by around 18%, compared to a woman of similar starting weight who did not lose any. Sustained weight loss of 20 pounds and up corresponded to a roughly 32% lower risk.

Given the relationship between excess body weight and cancer risk, the effects of weight loss appeared to be much stronger among women who started the study overweight. That’s an important takeaway, Teras notes, since about 70% of American adults are considered either overweight or obese. “Women who are at a healthy weight don’t need to lose weight,” Teras says.

Teras’ study could not prove cause and effect, only pick up on associations between weight loss and breast cancer. For that reason, she says, it’s not entirely possible to say why dropping pounds could reduce cancer risk, though it likely reverses some of the hormonal activity sparked by weight gain.

While breast cancer is virtually always caused by multiple factors, the research highlights actionable advice for women seeking to minimize their risk—not to mention their chances of developing other chronic illnesses such as diabetes, heart disease and other types of cancer.

Popular posts from this blog

New story in Health from Time: Here’s How Quickly Coronavirus Is Spreading in Your State

The novel coronavirus pandemic is a global crisis, a national emergency and a local nightmare. But while a great deal of the focus in the U.S. has been on the federal government’s response, widely criticized as slow and halting , the picture on the ground remains very different in different parts of the country. A TIME analysis of the per capita spread of the epidemic in all 50 states and Washington, D.C. found considerable range in the rate of contagion, and, in some parts of the country, a significant disparity compared to the national figure. The U.S., unlike nations such as South Korea and now Italy , has yet to show signs of bringing the runaway spread of the virus under control. However, while no single state is yet showing strong signs of bending the curve , some are faring much worse than others. The following graphic plots the rise in the total confirmed cases of COVID-19 per 100,000 residents in each state, plotted by the day that each state reported its first case.

New story in Health from Time: We Need to Take Care of the Growing Number of Long-term COVID-19 Patients

On July 7, 2020, the Boston Red Sox pitcher Eduardo Rodriguez tested positive for the new coronavirus. He was scheduled to start Opening Day for the Sox, but the virus had other plans— damaging Rodriguez’s heart and causing a condition called myocarditis (inflammation of the heart muscle). Now the previously fit 27-year old ace left-hander must sit out the 2020 season to recover. Rodriguez is not alone in having heart damage from SARS-CoV-2, the virus that causes COVID-19. In a new study done in Germany, researchers studied the hearts of 100 patients who had recently recovered from COVID-19. The findings were alarming: 78 patients had heart abnormalities, as shown by a special kind of imaging test that shows the heart’s structure (a cardiac MRI), and 60 had myocarditis. These patients were mostly young and previously healthy . Several had just returned from ski trips. While other studies have shown a lower rate of heart problems—for example, a study of 416 patients hosp

New story in Health from Time: What We Don’t Know About COVID-19 Can Hurt Us

Countries around the world have introduced stringent control measures to stop COVID-19 outbreaks growing, but now many find themselves facing the same situation again. From Melbourne to Miami, the relaxation of measures had led to increasing flare-ups, which in some places has already meant reclosing schools, businesses or travel routes. Within the U.S. and among different countries , places with wildly varying public-health policies have experienced wildly diverse outcomes. Most ominously, infections are rising rapidly in many places where they once were falling. So how do countries avoid an indefinite, unsustainable, cycle of opening and closing society? What is needed to prevent a future of strict social distancing and closed borders? To escape this limbo, we need to know more about each step in the chain of infection: why some people are more susceptible or have more symptoms, how our interactions and surroundings influence risk, and how we can curb the impact of the re