FRIDAY, June 26 (HealthDay News) -- Cases of invasive breast cancer in the United States have declined overall, but the decrease is significantly less marked in poor women who live in rural areas, possibly due to differences in the use of hormone therapy (HT), a new study suggests.

Researchers at the Northern California Cancer Center studied national breast cancer incidence data for the years 1997 to 2004 to compare rates in rural and urban areas and poor and rich areas of the country.

"Between 2001 and 2004, incidence rates of invasive breast cancer declined more than 8 percent in the United States," study leader Christina Clarke said in a news release. "One possible explanation for this is widespread discontinuation of and/or failure to initiate HT. Because this cessation of HT use was more pronounced in rich/urban areas, we wanted to see if there was a corresponding difference in breast cancer incidence between these areas and poor/rural parts of the country."

She and her colleagues found that overall invasive breast cancer incidence declined 13.2 percent, with notable differences between urban (-13.8 percent) and rural (-7.5 percent) women, and those in counties with high (-9.6 percent), middle (-13.8 percent) and low (-13 percent) poverty rates.

The researchers noted that breast cancer incidence rates in rural counties peaked in 1999 and then declined steadily, while rates in urban counties fell dramatically after 2002. This difference may be because of variations in levels of exposure to news linking hormone therapy with breast cancer. The fact that women in urban areas had more exposure to media reports about the HT/breast cancer relationship likely contributed to a larger decrease in hormone therapy among those women.

"Understanding what specific populations were involved in breast cancer declines helps us to better plan prevention efforts for the future, especially with the aging of the baby boomer population into prime breast cancer age," Clarke said.

The study appears in the journal BMC Medicine.

More information

The U.S. National Cancer Institute has more about hormone therapy and cancer.

WEDNESDAY, June 24 (HealthDay News) -- Women are more likely than men to look away from less-than-cute babies, according to a study that challenges the idea of a mother's unconditional love.

The findings might reflect an evolutionary-based need to provide limited resources only to healthy offspring, suggest the researchers, from Harvard-affiliated McLean Hospital in Belmont, Mass.

"Our study shows how beauty can affect parental attitudes," study senior author Dr. Igor Elman, director of the hospital's clinical psychopathology laboratory and an associate professor of psychiatry at Harvard Medical School, said in a news release from the hospital. "It shows women are more invested in raising healthy babies and that they are more prone to reject unattractive kids."

The study included 13 men and 14 women who were shown photos of 80 infants, including 50 normal ones and 30 with abnormal facial features, and asked to score them on attractiveness.

The men's attractiveness ratings for normal babies were much lower than those given by women, whereas women and men gave abnormal faces similar unattractive ratings. However, women made a greater effort to avoid looking at the unattractive faces.

The findings suggest that a woman's parental love may be "determined by facial attractiveness," study first author Rinah Yamamoto said in the news release. "Women may be more sensitized to aesthetic defects and may be more prone to reject unattractive kids. Men do not appear to be as motivated. They didn't expend the same effort."

The study appears online June 24 in the journal PLoS One.

More information

The Nemours Foundation offers a guide for first-time parents  .

THURSDAY, June 18 (HealthDay News) -- Fallopian tubes removed from fertile women of child-bearing age during hysterectomies or other procedures might prove to be a new source of highly sought-after stem cells.

Researchers from the University of Sao Paulo in Brazil found that human fallopian tubes are rich in mesenchymal stem cells. The team isolated and grew these cells in a laboratory and differentiated them into muscle, fat, cartilage and bone cell lines without producing problems in the cell chromosomes, according to a report in the Journal of Translational Medicine.

"In addition to providing an additional potential source for regenerative medicine, these findings might contribute to reproductive science as a whole," study leader Tatiana Jazedje, of the university's Human Genome Research Center, said in a news release from the journal's publisher.

Past studies have also shown success with isolating and differentiating mesenchymal stem cells harvested from umbilical cords, dental pulp and body fat.

Together, these findings are of great interest, the researchers said. "Moreover, the use of human tissue fragments that are usually discarded in surgical procedures does not pose ethical problems," Jazedje said.

More information

The U.S. National Institutes of Health has more about stem cells.

THURSDAY, Feb. 12 (HealthDay News) -- Women who consume two or more cans of soda pop daily are almost two times more likely than other women to show early evidence of kidney disease, according to a U.S. study.

But there's no increased risk for men who drink lots of soda pop or for people who drink diet soda.

The researchers analyzed data from 9,358 adults in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey. As part of the survey, urine samples were collected, and participants provided information about their dietary habits.

Women who said they drank two or more sodas in the previous 24 hours were 1.86 times more likely than other women to have albuminuria, excess levels of a protein called albumin in the urine that indicate early kidney damage.

The study was published in the journal PLoS One.

It's not clear why drinking soda increases the risk of albuminuria only in women, said lead researcher David Shoham, an assistant professor in the department of preventive medicine and epidemiology at Loyola University Health System. He suggested there may be an underlying cause that's linked to both soda consumption and kidney damage.

Rates of diabetes, obesity and kidney disease are increasing in the United States, along with consumption of high fructose corn syrup, the sweetener used in most sodas. But the amount of sugar is more important than the type, Shoham said.

"I don't think there is anything demonic about high fructose corn syrup per se," he said. "People are consuming too much sugar. The problem with high fructose corn syrup is that it contributes to over-consumption. It's cheap, it has a long shelf life, and it allows you to buy a case of soda for less than $10."

A recent study found that nine of 20 samples of high fructose corn syrup from three manufacturers contained detectable levels of mercury.

"This adds the intriguing possibility that it is not just the sugar itself in high fructose corn syrup that is harmful, because mercury is harmful to kidneys as well," Shoham said.

More information

The U.S. National Kidney Disease Education Program has more about kidney disease.