than the risk of getting either a second breast cancer, or developing breast cancer.want to weigh the risks and the benefits. tamoxifen did increase the women's chances of three rare but life-threatening health problems... one of which was endometrial cancer. but the incidence of this occuring was quite small. dr. ganz: there's still critics... who are concerned about the drug, and... they can certainly raise their questions. but i think there's no question that we looked at the safety and efficacy of tamoxifen, and found that in fact, it did reduce the risk of breast cancer. women may take that information now, and decide that they want to be treated, or they may say, "gee, you know... it's still uncertain, and i don't want to do that." the challenges of treatment, the uncertainties of the disease, are difficult for any cancer patient to endure. ms. coscarelli: cancer, because it's a life threatening illness, comes with it a whole host of psychological issues that are presented or existential issues that come up as a result of a cancer diagnosis. and i think that bec

so, the breast cancer fund is a national organization that works to prevent breast cancer by eliminating the environmental exposures linked o the disease, mostly we talk about chemicals and radiation that are linked to breast cancer, we are a little different from your breast cancer organizations out there, we often associate breast cancer with pink ribbons and we're about to see an onslaught of ribbons in our stores, we don't identify with pink because that's mostly associated with cures and treatments and we're on prevention, we're not affiliated with other breast cancer groups, there are all different breast cancer organize sashes that do their own agenda setting and we are an independent group that we have a board that helps us make decisions as an entity, we're not focused on a cure, we focus exclusively on prevention and environmental links to the disease, we don't fund individuals and there are some amazing organizations that do that work, they'll provide extra money for treatment or food and bill payment, that's not what we do, and we don't provide direct services like support gr

emissions cars as being really important for maybe climate change but they also might be important for breast cancer because when fuel is burning and you guys are familiar with chemicals that, you know, come bust, lower emissions vehicle, one that's more efficient may reduce these pah's in our air and especially in urban areas reduce exposures to those compounds which is really pornts, so thinking about hybrid or electric, we're all lucky enough to take public transit and reduce those overall exposures or -- yeah? >> i believe so, is that true? yes, my science advisors, that's why they're here. >> [inaudible]. >> yeah. there are a lot of carcinogens in diesel exhaust, yeah. >> [inaudible]. >> well, you're still seeing an oil that combusts, some of them we know burn more cleanly than others but if it's combusting, you end up with productions of combustion, it may not be better for pollution on the other side, depending on how clean the air burns and that's a theme we end up talking about a fair bit unfortunately is that bio doesn't always mean it's safer, it can, it can definitely mane we're r

want to talk about that for just a moment more, so we have two major market-based campaigns with the breast cancer fund, the campaign with safe koz meats and cans, not cancer, they target the makers of products who are more agile than laws, it can take decades to pass a good law, we saw those in changes of health care, what year were we starting to talk about revising our health care policies, i think it was 93 and it was 2008 before there was passage of a law so it can take decades and dozens of years, but if we ask for safer products, the market can turn on a dime. in 2007-2008, everyone started talking about bpa in plastics, by 2009, bpa-free plastics were everywhere, so can, not cancer is getting bpa out of food cans and they chased a huge success this year when campbell's soup said we're going to take the bpa out, we're waiting for a timeline from them and waiting for them to replace bpa with something safer, taking that first step was huge, even more significant perhaps is the campaign for safe cosmetics which has been around for about 10 years saying that -- getting johnson & jn -- j

their own health care providers, but recent research has found that women who are at high risk of breast cancer because of braque of mutation who then screening at earlier and earlier ages may be particularly vulnerable to radiation, so for them, alternatives to radiation based screening need to be, you know, used either in lieu of or in addition to and that's a very personal decision and a medical decision, but that added risk for those women who are already at higher risk from the very -- the detect is a really important issue, so does that answer your question? >> [inaudible]. >> awesome, okay, so schools, i've talked about some changes that can happen at schools but the reason we wanted to highlight this is because we can talk about federal laws, about state laws and it can feel daunting to think about getting involved in legislation at that level, although we try to make that easy for most to do by signing on to online actions and stuff, but for parents with kids, changing policies at schools can be an accessible thing, joining pta's or talking to the school board about having integ

best studied exposure link to breast cancer and what can we do about that, some radiation is naturally occurring, but we know that since 1980, radiation exposures for the average person have doubled and most of that is probably due to a 600 % increase in medical radiation, we're being exposed to a lot more radiation from medical tests, sometimes that's the only option, it's worth that added risk because the alternative is really dangerous sometimes, but we want to ensure those scans and those medical imaging tests are the most appropriate, are at the right dose, especially for kids are a lot of times, they don't know how to scale down for a child-size body and the machines may not calibrate or have clear directions on how to make that happen so in our own lives, we can ask our health care provides, are there safer alternative, mri or ultrasounds for doing this test, and then if you have kids and they need a test, ensure and ask questions about the safest dose and if they have machines that can calibrate to kids, and then we have to see these changes with the laws so if fda has proposal

. >> a new discovery impacting how breast cancer is treated. how tweaking the recommendation for a certain drug could save lives. >> and... ♪ [ music ] >> remembering a local legend. out every thethe music and legacy of dave brubeck. ,,,, ?f< administration will reject a budget deal that doesn't ine higher taxes for the wealtht rcent of americans. >>> treasury secretary timothy geithner said the obama administration will reject a budget deal that doesn't include higher taxes for the wealthiest 2% of americans. >> and the "fiscal cliff" deadline is now a day closer and still no deal between the president and republicans. political reporter grace lee is live in the newsroom with what this gridlock could cost californians. grace. >> reporter: well, liz, now we have some very real numbers that's what's at stake if we go over the "fiscal cliff." the daily democrat predicts that our state could lose $4.5 billion and lose about 200,000 jobs and with 26 days until that deadline, the painful reality is just becoming more clear. >> at 3:00, they want to

breast cancer gene in 1994.after, they patented the discovery, and since then, the company has maintained complete control over testing and has aggressively marketed its own test. >> i found out my risk through brac analysis. >> more than 400,000 women have been tested for the gene, but professor andrews says that myriad's history of patent enforcement has inhibited research and is preventing better detection. >> here's the problem with having one company own the gene. there actually is better testing in countries that don't patent the genes, because then lots of different pathologists and laboratories can look at those genes, and some find mutations that the myriad tests missed. >> and there is the issue of cost. in most of europe and canada, where myriad's patents have been challenged or ignored, the test is given at a fraction of the $3,200 myriad charges. if the breast cancer gene was in the public domain, how much do you think it would cost for a woman to be tested? >> i think maybe $300. i've had people, g

related breast cancer maybe common. but doctors rarely ask about phones. i looked at this random case. would this be in a place where cell phone would have been carried? >> very likely. >> i would never wear a cell phone immediately next to my body. i would advise all women not to do that. >> reporter: nevertheless bras like these are now on the markets with pockets for cell phones. doctors say it may be the heat of the battery or the radio frequency radiation that make these risky especially for younger women. >> these young breasts are in the early evolution, are more sensitive to changes. >> reporter: breast cancer specialist john west are now sounding a warning. they say men are also getting breast cancer under cell phones in shirt pocket. the wireless industry denies there's a problem citing lack of scientific evidence. >> there is no evidence, that's because we haven't studied it. >> until further data disproves it. i would keep cell phones away from the body. >> reporter: you should read the manufacturer's fine p