An Aspirin A Day To Keep The Cancer Away

Aspirin therapy may be effective in preventing and even treating some cancers.

This is very promising news considering the high cost of medical care and the relatively inexpensive and highly accessible nature of aspirin.

There are drawbacks to using aspirin such as gastrointestinal bleeding, however these usally mild symptoms seemed to dissipate over time.

More studies need to be done, however the news is promising.

A new study finds that people who took a low-dose aspirin daily for at least three years were 25 percent less likely to develop cancer than people who didn’t take it.

Aspirin also reduced the risk of death from cancer by nearly 40 percent after five years, the researchers said.

The reduced risk of death may be due in part to a decrease in cancer’s ability to spread to other organs. In a second study, researchers found a daily dose of aspirin led to a 36 percent reduction in the risk of being diagnosed with cancer that spread to other organs.

Scientists Beginning To Understand Aspirin’s Role In Cancer Therapy

Aspirin’s anti-inflamatory effect plays a role in minimizing cancerous tumors.

The news is promising development in the treatment of cancer.

“This discovery unlocks a range of potentially powerful new therapies to target this pathway in lymphatic vessels, effectively tightening a tumor’s supply lines and restricting the transport of cancer cells to the rest of the body.”

New Ruling Allows Bone Marrow Donors to be Compensated

Bone marrow donors may be compensated for their donations.

This ruling will increase the odds of patients finding matches when in need of transplants, which must be a genetic match.

The court said that new technologies for transplanting bone marrow make the tissue more like blood and less like an organ.

The National Organ Transplant Act prohibits compensation for human organs, such as kidneys, but allows payment for renewable tissues such as blood.

A California nonprofit, sued U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder in 2009, challenging the ban on compensation for bone marrow donations.

They argued that allowing financial incentives for bone marrow donation was crucial because of the extreme difficulty of finding a genetic match.

The suit said the ban violated the U.S. Constitution because it treated bone marrow as a “human organ” while allowing payments for blood, sperm and eggs.

Related Posts