No announcement yet.

Do Bras Cause Breast Cancer? – A Primal Question

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    a study would be excellent, indeed.

    Undoubtedly there are a bunch of other factors involved - number of children, breastfeeding duration and so on. In my experience, bra wearing does interfere with success of breast feeding for various reasons, including increased sensitivity, and the pressure on the milk ducts makes mastitis much more likely (one of the first bits of advice you get is to get rid of the bra). I've often wondered if bra wearing alters the shape and makes it harder for the baby to attach correctly.
    If we’re not supposed to eat animals, how come they’re made out of meat? Tom Snyder


    • #17
      so i'm a believer in the damage that emf's can produce (as i sit in front of a giant computer screen and watch the fly's droppin' dead from it)LOL;-)
      apparently the metal underwire can pick up these harmful emf's. so i try to go w/o a bra as much as possibe and also use plastic or no underwire.
      i think there is a lot more factors to consider such as:
      deodorant, nut. deficiencies, environmental toxins etc.
      bras can also prevent proper lymph drainage which could possible lead to cancer. but i'm sure if you eat a wholesome clean diet and avoid poisonous things that you'll be just fine! remember that grokette's never wore bras;-)
      Red meat is not bad for you. Now blue-green meat, that's bad for you! ~Tommy Smothers


      • #18
        This is an explosive thread.

        I liked:

        The authors also point out that breast cancer is rare in countries where bras are not as commonly worn.
        Of course, those might also be countries where vegetable oil, margarine, and processed foods are not consumed. Did the authors cross-check for that?

        Who knows why the length of time throughout the day different groups of women wore (or didn't wear) their bras correlated with rates of breast cancer. However ... correlation is not causality.

        Let's invent a reason for that. Perhaps bra-wearing is seen as polite in the West. Therefore, women who are more susceptible to social pressure might be more likely to wear a bra and for more of the day. But people who are more susceptible to social pressure are also more likely to take notice of adverts for commercial foodstuffs and to follow guidelines on public health (which are, unfortunately, influenced by slanted "studies" and direct political lobbying paid for by agribusiness).

        I just made that up. But the fact remains that correlation is not causality. If this gentleman can't show a plausible mechanism by which bra-wearing causes cancer, then he's got nothing.


        • #19
          Large breasted women can be prone to cysts when they go braless (or so my OB/GYN told me).

          "Can constant exposure to an unnatural irritant ever cause cancer?"

          I don't know, but the natural irritant (chafing! Oooooh the chafing!) is bad enough that I wear bras.

          There are so very many variable between cultures that wear bras regularly and ones that don't, I don't think you can pin it down to being just bras that are the problem.


          • #20
            Darn. . . I thought this thread would be vindication for not wearing a bra They're f'ing uncomfortable, so I'll continue to go without.


            • #21
              Originally posted by Bushrat View Post
              Firstly, correlation does not equal causation. Secondly, always ask what other variables may be affecting the results.

              Although skin damage has occured with bra too tight / cutting in...
              Another suggested reason for increased breast cancer rates was aluminium in deoderant? No idea what happened to that idea though, but "aluminium free" is seen on some "natural" deoderants.


              • #22
                I've worn underwire-less bras for the better part of the last...5 or 6 years I think? I only have 1 underwire bra in my wardrobe right now in fact, and it doesn't get worn much. I'm not big-chested though, so I don't know what it's like to really need support, I just know that it's much more comfortable to go without or have a good non-underwire bra for "coverage".
                You are what you eat,
                and what you eat eats too - Michael Pollan


                • #23
                  @northernmonkey girl: the alum. free is a much better alternative, but beware that there may be other chem. hiding in there and it's going right into your lymph system. why not use some gse or coconut oil to kill odor killing bacteria? much safer and cheaper! i've been smelling pretty sweet since goin' primal too;-)
                  Red meat is not bad for you. Now blue-green meat, that's bad for you! ~Tommy Smothers


                  • #24
                    If research shows that tight underwear causes testicular cancer then we may have something here. I don't know, I haven't done the research but it is interesting. It has been shown to cause sperm loss, who knows? Bra's were not a part of our evolution and neither was restrictive underwear. Then again, correlation does not prove causation. We have to look at all factors.
                    Last edited by BlazeKING; 07-20-2010, 03:42 PM.


                    • #25
                      From time to time as years passed after "Dressed to Kill" was first published, I'd do Internet searches looking for any reports of studies or further research that might put the issue to rest one way or another.

                      I didn't find the research reports that I'd hoped for. But I did at one time find another hypothesis relating to causation by a PhD biochemist who theorized that breasts unconfined by bras had more movement, and that the movement tended to "pump" lymph and blood through vital breast tissue. Thus avoiding stagnation and ensuring good circulation of immune components. And now that we know, maybe circulation of essential vitamin D.


                      • #26
                        So, My mom just went through breast cancer. It was caught very early. LUCKY!

                        Anyhow, in her research, she found that some 90+% of tumors are located (started) at the side of the breast just next to the lymphs.

                        Now, I don't think that a bra could even remotely cause cancer. I think there is something inside the body going wrong. But it seems somewhat intuitive that if your lymphs are blocked somehow, (but wouldn't there be swelling? Because there IS swelling when the lymphs are removed.) then perhaps you are retaining whatever toxins in your body, instead of processing them, and kicking them out.

                        That said, When mom had her tumor removed, they did this nifty little trick. They placed a catheter at the site of the tumor. During surg. they pump in some dye that will show on cancerous locations (no idea how this actually works). So instead of doing the STANDARD total lymph removal, they only remove those that light up. All women should know this is doable. We shouldn't have parts of our bodies unnecessarily removed just to be safe!

                        Also, it seems that these tumors are tested and are often full of crap toxins. Chicken? Egg?

                        Hey Blaze... My DH had TC. And he doesn't wear tight undies. I hate those! Nor do the other guys we know (that have had TC)... But they ALL lived in some toxic environment at one time or another. Interestingly enough, He also had a wild case of epididymitis at the SAME TIME: OUCH is all I can say. Which basically ended up cutting off blood flow. So, I would liken that to tight underwear to an extreme... no? And guess what? When they removed his testicle and tumor, the tumor was dying! (so was the testicle) but the loss of blood flow, they speculate, caused the tumor to not be able to feed. His doctor had never seen anything like it.

                        Now I can report with absolute certainty that mom had ZERO D registering on her blood tests, OR IRON. She's an indoor person ALL the time...

                        And DH is a chef. So he may as well work in a cave. He's also Native American. He's whiter than me, now that he works indoors (I'm nearly see through!), and I often speculate that his DNA has NOT adapted to the CW diet that he likes so much. His D has never been tested. But I got a feeling!


                        • #27
                          I read antiperspirants cause breast cancer because it plugs the pours, and that is not good for us. Whereas Deodorant just masks the smell just a bit without plugging and pours.


                          • #28
                            Honestly, I think if your pores were clogged with ANYTHING you'd be breaking out big time.

                            That said, I do avoid deodorants with chemicals now a days... 'cause I just don't know... and it's not really necessary.

                            Have found a stellar natural deodorant. It does NOT mask odor, it prevents it. The Crystal I use the pomegranate roll on. Smells awesome, and so do I! Does not prevent sweating. Which is fine... our bodies do what they must.
                            Last edited by twinmama; 07-20-2010, 09:20 PM.


                            • #29
                              UNDER FORUM RULES BTW it says: Don't post spam and advertisements of products or other websites


                              • #30
                                Thanks Forum police... didn't mean to make finding anything easy... kinda weird that we can link all over the place though... gonna have to ask about that!