High Vitamin D levels may reduce breast cancer risk
New York, June 16: Higher levels of Vitamin D among women may reduce their risk of developing breast cancer post menopause, claimed a new study.
The study found that women with blood levels of serum 25-hydroxyvitamin D (OH) -- the main form of vitamin D in blood -- above 60 ng/ml (nanograms per millilitre) had one-fifth the risk of breast cancer compared to those with less than 20 ng/ml.
Thus, researchers from the University of California-San Diego determined that the minimum healthy level of 25(OH) in blood plasma should be 60 ng/ml, instead of the earlier recommended higher than the 20 ng/ml.
"Increasing Vitamin D blood levels substantially above 20 ng/ml appears to be important for the prevention of breast cancer," said lead author Sharon McDonnell from GrassrootsHealth, a non-profit public health research organisation.
The study, published in the journal PLOS ONE, analysed data from two randomised clinical trials with 3,325 combined women and a prospective study involving 1,713 women with average age of 63.
Participants were free of cancer at enrollment and were followed for a mean period of four years. Vitamin D levels in blood were measured during study visits.
"This study was limited to postmenopausal breast cancer. Further research is needed on whether high 25(OH)D levels might prevent premenopausal breast cancer," said Cedric F. Garland from UC-San Diego.
Let the Truth be known. If you read VB and like VB, please be a VB Supporter and Help us deliver the Truth to one and all.
Forcing wife to quit job constitutes cruelty: Madhya Pradesh High Court
Bhopal: The Madhya Pradesh High Court has ruled that forcing a wife to leave her job to conform to her husband’s preferences and lifestyle constitutes cruelty, thereby providing grounds for divorce.
A Division Bench comprising Chief Justice Suresh Kumar Kait and Justice Sushrur Dharmadhikari clarified that neither spouse has the right to dictate the other’s employment decisions based on personal choices. The Bench noted that the decision to live together must be mutual and devoid of coercion.
The judgment arose from an appeal filed by a wife against the decision of the Family Court in Indore, which had dismissed her divorce petition on the grounds of insufficient evidence, absence of police complaints, and lack of corroborating witnesses.
The couple married in April 2014, and the wife, employed as an Assistant Manager with LIC Housing Finance Limited since 2017, alleged that her unemployed husband coerced her into leaving her government job and living with him until he secured employment. She claimed this, coupled with mental and emotional harassment, forced her to live separately and seek divorce.
The wife further argued that her husband filed a petition under s. 9 of the Hindu Marriage Act, seeking restitution of conjugal rights, only after she initiated divorce proceedings. She contended that this was a counter-tactic rather than an effort for reconciliation.
The High Court observed that the Family Court had overlooked critical aspects of the wife's testimony, including her allegations of coercion and her earlier request for mutual divorce due to compatibility issues. The Bench also noted that the husband’s refusal to consent to a mutual divorce, despite the wife's clear intentions, amounted to cruelty.
In its order dated November 13, the High Court dissolved the marriage and overturned the Family Court's 2022 decision, granting the appellant a divorce. Advocate Raghvendra Singh Raghuvanshi represented the appellant.
