Bras & Breast Cancer

To wear a bra or not to wear a bra…

by Marc Tardif

In 1995, medical anthropologist Sydney Ross Singer published findings which linked breast cancer to bra-wearing. As Singer himself says, “Disease is usually caused by something getting in the way of our bodies doing what they’re able to do.” Singer believes bras have been doing just that. The elastic construction and tightness of bras act as a tourniquet on the lymph nodes and vessels, which are responsible for draining away waste products and toxins from the breasts. These nodes and vessels are found under the skin in and near the breasts in areas that can be strangled by the straps, wires, and cups of a bra. According to Singer, the lymph system is the body’s “other” circulatory system. Blood carries oxygen and nutrients to cells and tissues throughout the body. The waste from those exchanges is carried in lymph, the fluids which bathe cells, tissues and organs. Lymph carries waste products to the lymph nodes which filter and cleanse the fluids and return them to the bloodstream. As Singer points out, if the flow of lymph is constricted, the nodes cannot flush the cells, tissues and organs of waste products, toxins and other chemicals (deodorant, cosmetics). Instead, the lymph fluids become backed up, pool in the breasts, and bathe the cells in toxins and cellular debris. This reduces the cells’ abilities to absorb nutrients and oxygen, and cripples their antioxidant systems, allowing for DNA damage. Medical research has shown that these pools of lymph can remain stagnant for at least two years, allowing for toxin build-up and irregular cell growth — a recipe for cancer. Singer and Grismaijer interviewed almost 5000 women, half of whom had breast cancer, and questioned them about their breast cancer history and bra-wearing behaviour. They noticed a higher incidence of breast cancer among those who wear a bra all day, and conversely, a dramatically lower incidence of breast cancer among those who never wear a bra. In their study, Singer and Grismaijer observed the following statistics:

Of the women who wore their bras 24 hours a day, 3 out of 4 developed breast cancer.
Of the women who wore their bras 12 hours a day, 1 out of 7 developed breast cancer.
Of the women who never wore a bra, 1 out of 168 developed breast cancer.

The take-home message is that women who are bra-free are 21 times less likely to develop breast cancer than the average North American woman. So it seems that millions of women are unknowingly and unwillingly increasing their chances of developing breast cancer by wearing a bra. But are Singer’s findings enough to make women unhook for good and permanently forgo their brassières? Maybe not in the short term, because the bra has become a cultural icon, a feminine necessity. Sadly enough, our culture dictates that women’s breasts are not acceptable in their natural state; a bra will enhance their appearance and/or reduce the afterbounce. Women may heed Singer’s warning, being well aware of the freedom and comfort of not having that constriction around their chests, but always ask themselves, “will my breasts sag more if I don’t wear a bra?”. Well, there is no evidence which proves that this is true. However, there are professional observations suggesting that bra-wearing causes breasts to sag more. The other question that also comes to mind is, “what will other people think if I’m not wearing a bra?” This hesitation is not without cause for women who go bra-free* are perceived by popular culture to be either feminists or setting themselves up for rape. And given that bra-free breasts are not the norm, there’s always the concern of being ridiculed or leered at. But just as the corset has fallen out of favour, perhaps it is only a matter of time before the same happens to the bra. Singer’s findings are becoming more valid as more and more women find various degrees of relief by trying this “alternative medicine” when conventional North American medicine fails to solve their breast problems. Posted on this site are testimonials of women who have unhooked for good, and have rid themselves of various breast ailments by doing so.

Breasts In The News

December 1996: a three-judge panel of the Province of Ontario’s highest court decided that women who bare their breasts in public should not be charged of committing an indecent act. This ruling is the outcome of a 5-year case against Gwen Jacob, a former University of Guelph student who decided for comfort’s sake to take off her shirt on a hot day in July 1991. Most Torontonians agreed that this ruling is “a step in the right direction”, but the truth of the matter is that most North Americans are not ready for it. Though the courts now legally recognize women’s right to go top-free* in public, the ever-influential media still propagates the notion that women’s breasts are sexual organs, and hence explains why the sight of bra-free or completely bare breasts if often equated with sex. The archaic solution: cover that which is the temptation. Now that the law is more favourable to women, attitudes need to change. Breasts are not inherently sexual, they are made so by the culture in which we live. The real victory will come when women’s breasts are regarded as being no more than what they really are.
October 1997: Sydney Ross Singer and Soma Grismaijer prepared a press release explaining that a Fiji follow-up study presents further evidence supporting claims made in Dressed To Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras. They also announced plans for a nation-wide media campaign to increase North American women’s awareness of their findings.
December 1997: an article published exclusively on this site explains how bra-wearing can cause breasts to sag more.

* In this document you will notice the occurence of both braless and bra-free. They are not meant to be used interchangeably. Though they both mean without a bra, they are perceived differently. The suffix less is a negative modifier, which means lacking that which is desireable. For example, the words careless, useless and senseless are negative words because caring, being useful and making sense are generally desireable. Furthermore, the words braless and topless themselves have culturally-imposed sexual connotations. However, the suffix free is a positive modifier, which means exempt from that which is not desireable. For example, the words fat-free, cholesterol-free and tax-free are positive words because cholesterol, fat and taxes are generally not desireable. So the words bra-free and top-free would imply that being without a bra or without a top are beneficial and positive experiences. Please feel free to send me an e-mail message with any comments or questions you might have: Marc Tardif Thank you for reading this document.

References

Singer, Sydney Ross and Soma Grismaijer. Dressed To Kill: The Link Between Breast Cancer and Bras. Garden City Park, New York: Avery Publications. 1995. 192 pages.
Reed, Ralph L. Bras And Breast Cancer.
Ralph L. Reed has compiled a list of references to provide a background for discussion and further research on the link between bras and breast cancer.