Quitting smoking is very hard to do. If you succeed the short and long term rewards include improved lung capacity, circulation, greater sense of smell and taste, reduced risk of coronary artery disease, stroke and lung cancer.

BlueCross BlueShield of Central New York and the New York State Smokers Quitline offer seven steps smokers can take in their quest to quit.

Visualize success. Studies of successful quitters show that one of the most important ways to succeed is to believe that they can quit smoking.

Make a plan. Create a daily plan to follow that includes:

• Times when you want to smoke most and things you can do instead of smoking when you have a craving.
• Names of friends and family you can call for support.
• A reward for yourself when you have achieved your goal of being smoke free.

Women treated with Herceptin (trastuzumab) in combination with chemotherapy for early stage breast cancer showed that after five years the risk of congestive heart failure did not increase with time.

The findings of the National Surgical Adjuvant Breast and Bowel Project (NSABP) were presented at the 43rd annual meeting of the American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) in Chicago last week.

Heart damage occurs in around 5 percent of patients treated with Herceptin. It is the most significant side effect; women with existing heart conditions cannot take the drug. The study showed that women were either susceptible to heart problems or they weren't. The risk of long-term problems is the same as the risk that is there from the beginning.

Elizabeth Edwards, wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, has had many routine medical follow-ups since her 2004 breast cancer diagnosis. And all of them -- until just a few days ago -- resulted in what is generally termed a clean bill of health.

The term doesn't always come with a sense of relief for those of us surviving breast cancer -- or any cancer for that matter -- because it only really defines what our bodies are telling us at one specific moment. There are no magic blood tests, no special body scans, no conclusive ways of determining whether or not cancerous cells have gone astray and will one day surface again.

I asked my oncologist after my first six-month follow-up how he would know if my cancer returns. He told me it's really up to me to determine whether it comes back. It's up to me to get mammograms and ultrasounds and MRIs. It's up to me to report any symptoms and suspicions. It's up to me to track my general well-being so that it will be clear when something feels not-so-right. If I have a persistent cough or headaches that won't subside, my doctor will take action with X-rays and scans and tests. But as long as I feel fine and nothing troubling presents itself, then I remain in the clean-bill-of-health club.

Edwards no longer has a clean bill of health. But she is determined to use her newest diagnosis -- stage four metastatic cancer of the bones, considered treatable but not curable -- to work toward the best health she can acquire for as long as she can hold onto it. And that is about as good as any of us can do.

On December 8, 2006, I wrote about a Danish study investigating the possible link between cell phone use and cancer. This largest-ever study of it's kind put fears to rest. Cell phones do not cause cancer, said researchers who announced that cell phone users -- even long-term users -- are at no more risk of developing cancer than their non-cell phone using counterparts.

There's just no biological basis for concern about radio waves, reported the lead investigator of this study. But another newer study reports something entirely different.

Long-term mobile phone users are more likely to develop cancer -- brain cancer, on the side of the head where the phone is held -- according to the Radiation and Nuclear Safety Authority in Finland. It will all be detailed later this year in the International Journal of Cancer, but the general gist of the study is already circulating.

The study -- the second one to suggest an increased risk of cancer due to emissions from cell phones -- found that people who regularly used cell phones for more than 10 years were 40 percent more likely to develop nervous system tumors called gliomas. Comparisons were made between 1,521 people with gliomas and 3,301 people without the tumors. While no connections were initially made between the phones and cancer, a link was found when researchers specifically focused on those who had used their phones for more than 10 years.

Short-term use of cell phones has never been linked to cancer. That's good. But I tend to believe cell phones are going to become even more a staple of our technologically-driven lives than they are now. And so 10 years may actually be considered short-term one day -- which means we all may soon be at risk.

For now, until research becomes more conclusive, we get to pick and choose which study to stand behind. So take your pick -- and stay tuned for future scientific revelations.

Results presented at the 2006 annual San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium, says that it appears Nolvadex (tamoxifen) reduces the risk of developing cancer years following completion of preventative therapy among women who are at high risk of developing breast cancer.

Data from a clinical trial, including 7,145 women who were at high risk for developing breast cancer, was reevaluated at 10 years follow up. They found that breast cancer was reduced by 29 percent among women treated with tamoxifen compared to those taking the placebo. The preventative effect on breast cancer, specifically hormone-positive breast cancer, was actually improved at 10 years compared to the five-year follow-up.

The researchers concluded that women who are at high risk of developing breast cancer continue to benefit from tamoxifen, even five years following completion of treatment.

Talk to you doctor if fall in the high risk group for breast cancer. There are individual risks and benefits for tamoxifen and it may prevent physicians from recommending its use in certain women.

The National Cancer institute reports that about two to five percent of all malignancies diagnosed in the United States are head and neck cancers. About 39,000 new cases are diagnosed each year. In a long term study aspirin use taken over a long duration cut the risk of head and neck cancer by 30 percent. It wasn't so much the amount of aspirin that was taken but the length of time that people were on the drug that mattered.

Aspirin is a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug (NSAIDS). Experts believe that aspirin could be a cancer preventing medication but more studies need to be conducted to see if the rewards outweigh the risks of taking aspirin on a daily basis. There is a chance of gastrointestinal bleeding associated with daily use and it is not recommended that anyone start on an aspirin regime without discussing it with his or her physician first.

My sister recently ran into the surgeon who removed my breast cancer tumor almost two years ago -- on December 3, 2004. He asked my sister how I was doing, recalled the unprecedented rash I developed from the latex and Tegaderm tape used during my lumpectomy, and then talked about how terribly busy he has been.

This surgeon -- who spends countless clinic hours with women whose breasts are somehow diseased and then spends day after day in operating rooms trying to remedy these diseases -- said he is amazed and at how many breast cancer cases are consuming his time. It's sad -- the amount of women showing up with breast cancer -- but there is a silver lining to this cancer cloud, because according to this surgeon, the vast majority of these breast cancer cases are early stage. This means they were caught swiftly and quickly. And for the women behind these cases, there is a good chance of long-term survival.

And so maybe all the pink and all the press surrounding breast cancer is working. Maybe it's inspiring women to pursue self-breast exams, clinical exams, mammography, and other screening options. Maybe all the persistence and passion about breast cancer is the reason for this early detection -- the key to a good prognosis.

My surgeon closed his chat with my sister by telling her to call him if anyone in our family ever needs anything. But he told her he hopes he never has to hear from us. My sentiments exactly.

I have a new friend who is a new breast cancer survivor. She is surviving a new diagnosis, a recent lumpectomy, and the moments leading up to another surgery to further investigate the margins surrounding the tumor removed from her breast. She is surviving the first phase of her breast cancer journey. A phase full of uncertainty and fear and panic. A phase so new and so fresh and so raw, her mind is whirling. A phase that has her grasping for any bit of direction she can find as she navigates a terrifying, unfamiliar road.

My friend is a young wife and mother whose worries are consuming her. She e-mailed me today and asked if I ever have moments when I look at my young children and worry that cancer will take me from them while they are young. She asked if I have always been so sure I will be okay. And so I replied with this candid cancer confession.

Thirty percent of patients that are diagnosed with liver metastasis spread from the colon have a ten year survival rate according to an article recently published in the Annals of Surgical Oncology. Thirty percent might not sound so great but having breast cancer and knowing that metastasis to the liver can have a grave diagnoses this lifts me up a bit.

According to the article published surgical removal of the site of cancer or multiple sites as well as surrounding healthy tissue of the liver can improve survival rates. The researchers concluded that long-term overall survival of nearly fifty percent at five years and thirty percent at ten years can be achieved with the use of surgery. The researchers stated that "an aggressive approach is justified".

Speak with your doctor about your options for surgery for metastatic liver disease. Treatment may depend on the size of the cancer, the number of places on the liver that have metastasis and the location of the cancer on the liver.

I have heard the term chemobrain many times -- even here at The Cancer Blog when Dalene wrote about it. And I've started using the terminology myself -- to explain my new-found odd behavior. Like when I put a carton of ice cream in the refrigerator with no recollection of it. And when I took a cap off a pen, couldn't find it, and discovered it on top of an egg carton in the refrigerator. I don't think this is a refrigerator theme -- just a coincidence -- because I've also lost a clipboard at work, forgotten to hand a guest her glass of water immediately after I prepared it, lost library books and movies, and failed to remember responsibilities time and time again. This may seem like minor forgetfulness -- this is what my oncologist believes may be at work -- but for me, this is odd. I have always had a good memory, have always delivered on my promises, and have never felt as scattered as I do now. So I call it chemobrain -- a good excuse, I figure -- and am now trying to determine what exactly this word means.

My oncologist tells me he doesn't really like this term. He thinks it puts a negative spin on regular functioning. He believes those of us who have experienced chemotherapy look more closely at our post-chemo behavior and may interpret quirky stuff as more serious than it is. It probably existed before chemotherapy, he says. But now, we are more sensitive to it and find chemotherapy a good explanation. He may be right. But for me, something in my head has definitely been altered.

One patient advocate for Hurricane Voices: A Breast Cancer Foundation believes that something doesn't have to be scientifically proven to exist. And while chemobrain may not be completely proven, there are still studies that support its existence -- which manifests itself through aging-type memory problems, forgetfulness, distraction, and loss of the ability to calculate quickly. Some studies show that 20 to 30 percent of women who undergo chemotherapy for breast cancer, and some who receive similar treatment for lymphoma, score lower than average on mental function tests for as long as 10 years after chemotherapy. ''There's enough data now to at least know it's a real effect,'' said Dr. Ian F. Tannock, a psychiatrist who has studied this issue at Princess Margaret Hospital in Toronto. Some suggest that typical aging may be at fault -- and for premenopausal women who may be rushed into menopause, this effect may be due to hormonal issues. Regardless, it seems to stem from chemotherapy -- somehow. And somehow, this topic needs more attention, more research, and maybe a more positive name.

Herceptin -- a targeted breast cancer drug used to treat women who are Her2 positive -- has received rave reviews and has shown great promise in cutting down on recurrence of this aggressive form of breast cancer. Given over the course of 52 weeks, Herceptin is wondrous for its lack of short-term side effects. There is no hair loss, no compromise of blood counts, no significant sickness. For me, fatigue may have resulted from this treatment -- but it's unclear to me really whether it was the Herceptin or the two small boys I have living in my house that most contributed to my occasional exhaustion. Regardless, I functioned well while receiving Herceptin for the past year -- and I did not suffer anything more than a twinge of pain when my port was accessed for each treatment. In the short term, I have fared well. In the long term, the jury is still out.

I'm never quite sure about what foods I should eat and what foods I should not eat. Sometimes I hear that fish is healthy and recommended and then I hear that I should not eat fish at all due to concerns such as mercury levels. It seems that opinion on certain foods -- like fish and carbohydrates and dairy items -- sways and changes, which leaves me uncertain about how I might approach my diet in the best possible way. But opinion on red meat seems to be getting more and more consistent -- as more and more studies indicate that red meat is associated with a variety of health problems. And now red meat appears to raise the risk of developing pancreatic cancer, according to a Swedish report in the International Journal of Cancer.

More than 61,000 women were studied for possible effects of meat, fish, poultry, and egg consumption. After 17 years, 172 of these women were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer, and researches say it's because of the red meat. I suppose this could have been a coincidence -- and these women were destined for their diagnoses regardless of diet. But researchers conclude that long-term consumption of red meat is associated with an increased risk of pancreatic cancer -- one of the most deadly cancers that is seldom detected at an early, curable stage.

The good news from this study -- there does not seem to be a connection between pancreatic cancer and the consumption of fish and eggs. And the consumption of poultry may actually cut the risk of pancreatic cancer.

As they reach adulthood, the majority of childhood cancer survivors are unaware of the details of their treatment and the potential long-term health risks. As a result, many childhood cancer survivors do not seek the recommended aftercare from cancer specialists to monitor their health.

The researchers did report that childhood cancer survivors do see the family physician on a regular basis, but the experts feel these survivors should be seeing a specialist for the best in aftercare. I am not a childhood cancer survivor -- but I am a cancer survivor -- and I will tell you after active treatment for cancer I switched back to seeing my family physician as soon as I could for my aftercare. For me, it was psychologically beneficial. As long as I was seeing the oncologist, who happened to have her office in the same place where I received my chemotherapy, I was constantly reminded of the worst phase of my cancer. I felt stuck in time. I know if I develop any symptoms of cancer recurrence, my family physician will send me back to see a cancer specialist. In the meantime, when I go to see the doctor now, I feel like a normal person with a normal future. I am speculating, but this might be one of the reasons childhood cancer survivors seek their medical care from a family physician over an oncologist. I am not sure I feel the same concern as the experts do when it comes to where childhood cancer survivors go to receive aftercare -- as long as they are seeing a physician on a regular basis.