[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
Health See other Health Articles Title: Study lists dangerous chemicals linked to breast cancer Yahoo... Certain chemicals that are common in everyday life have been shown to cause breast cancer in lab rats and are likely to do the same in women, US researchers said Monday. The paper in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Health Perspectives lists 17 chemicals to avoid and offers women advice on how to minimize their exposure. They include chemicals in gasoline, diesel and other vehicle exhaust, flame retardants, stain-resistant textiles, paint removers, and disinfection byproducts in drinking water. "The study provides a road map for breast cancer prevention by identifying high-priority chemicals that women are most commonly exposed to and demonstrates how to measure exposure," said study author Ruthann Rudel, research director of the Silent Spring Institute. "This information will guide efforts to reduce exposure to chemicals linked to breast cancer, and help researchers study how women are being affected," she said. Some of the biggest sources of mammary carcinogens in the environment are benzene and butadiene, which can come from vehicle exhaust, lawn equipment, tobacco smoke and charred food. Other concerns are cleaning solvents like methylene chloride, pharmaceuticals used in hormone replacement therapy, some flame retardants, chemicals in stain-resistant textiles and nonstick coatings, and styrene which comes from tobacco smoke and is also used to make Styrofoam, the study said. Carcinogens can also be found in drinking water, researchers said. - Every woman exposed - "Every woman in America has been exposed to chemicals that may increase her risk of getting breast cancer," said co-author Julia Brody. "Unfortunately, the link between toxic chemicals and breast cancer has largely been ignored. Reducing chemical exposures could save many, many women's lives." Brody described the paper as the first to comprehensively list potential breast carcinogens and detail ways for experts to measure them in women's blood and urine. The study also recommends seven ways for women to avoid these chemicals: - Limit exposure to exhaust from vehicles or generators, don't idle your car, and use electric lawn mowers, leaf blowers and weed whackers instead of gas-powered ones. - Use a ventilation fan while cooking and limit how much burned or charred food you eat. - Do not buy furniture with polyurethane foam, or ask for furniture that has not been treated with flame retardants. - Avoid stain-resistant rugs, furniture and fabrics. - If you use a dry-cleaner, find one who does not use PERC (perchloroethylene) or other solvents. Ask for "wet cleaning." - Use a solid carbon block drinking water filter. - Keep chemicals out of the house by taking off your shoes at the door, using a vacuum with a HEPA (high-efficiency particulate air) filter, and cleaning with wet rags and mops. The research was funded by the Avon Foundation. The Silent Spring Institute is a 20-year-old organization made up of scientists who focus on the environment and women's health. It is named after the best selling environmental book "The Silent Spring" by Rachel Carson, who died of breast cancer in 1964, two years after the book was published. Dale Sandler, chief of epidemiology at the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, described the paper as a "terrific" resource for epidemiologists who study environmental causes of breast cancer. "This paper is a thorough review of toxicology data and biomarkers relevant to breast cancer in humans," he said. Poster Comment: Tee+26 Considering a majority of furniture makers use polyurethane foam in order to comply with California state LAW (that ended up affecting the ENTIRE NATION!) good luck with the recommendation mentioned above about "not buying furniture with polyurethane foam, or ask for furniture that has not been treated with flame retardants" If you try to buy furniture and mattresses without those disgusting chemicals, you'll pay TWICE as much! How about we REQUIRE manufacturers to find ALTERNATIVES to these chemicals?! We are the consumer, listen to us!! [Display Name] Back in the 1970s bread was amended with iodine, which prevents breast cancer and many other illnesses. Then for no good reason they switched the iodine to bromide, which is toxic. A simple search on bromide will shock and disappoint. After that cancer rates started to rise. Then they stopped putting as much iodine in table salt, and people stopped using table salt in favor of sea and kosher salts or even no salt. So now few people get iodine even in tiny amounts. It used to also be in the soil and was taken up by produce or grass which was eaten by farm animals and provided enough iodine. But now the dirt is barren of iodine and animals are fed a processed feed that has no iodine+24. [Display Name] Iodine can remove carcinogenic toxins from your body but it has to be done in very large doses and if your organs aren't super strong they will be strained by the process and you will get very sick. Small amounts don't remove toxins, though. There are many studies that can be found on the Internet explaining it. [BillR] Not only are sources of iodine greatly reduced, but substances like bromide chlorine and fluoride compete and prevent absorption of iodine. It is theorized that the longevity of the Japanese, and much lower incidence of cancer, is due to their high intake of iodine (1 - 3 mg./day) compared to Americans. High doses of iodine can cause health risks for people with thyroid disorders. Detoxing is best done slowly over time+6-1. [leyla] And avoid so caled "beauty" products, which are loaded with dangerous chemicals, and ironically offered to you as a gift during the awareness weeks. Hair colors, make-up, cleansing products. General rule of the thumb is: if you can't eat it, don't put in on your body! Ridiculous and gross. And yes, about the water: the spring water is polluted byt he plastic it rests in. So, it's loaded with cancer possibility as well. Use glass, and if you can afford, non BHA plastic. I guess it's not needed to mention- breathe clean air( as that's nearly impossible in industrial areas- get away to nature a lot!), and eat clean food? Or is it?+15 As an oncology RN, I was shocked to learn that carcinogens were in cosmetics...even some who contribute monies to breast cancer research! I could not find a skin cream I could recommend with any degree of confidence, so I made my own. After 16 years of research background, I felt I could make something organic, absent of any fragrance, and have no parabens, no phtalates, no GMO, no gluten, no estrogen disruptors and no flippin' carcinogens! My cream scored a "1" on the EWG website. What does yours score? elementalchemy(dot) org to learn more. Thx +2-2 GO Flossie - Floyd When I received my breast cancer diagnois I thought I would be swarmed with surveys but I wasn't. Either no one is interested in collecting life style data or it has been done for decades and there isn't anything practical to be learned. Not one doctor or oncologist asked what I eat or if I use a microwave and cell phone or live near power lines. Smoking is the only thing they seem interested in and I am a non smoker and eat naturally and still ended up with breast cancer.+26-1 Stags_Leap_Guy This is exactly what happens when you are the only first world country in the world that regulates food, food additives, chemicals, pesticides and other items using the Generally Assumed to Be Safe principal. This means that industry studies and word is taken at face value and new products can be released on the market with little to no verification of safety. Most other countries operate on the Precautionary Principal, which means that new foods, food additives, chemicals, pesticides, etc. are assumed to cause harm to humans and must first be proven safe before it can be released on the market. The United States puts the liability on the consumer to prove a negative (that something causes harm) before the product is pulled off of the market. Something that is very difficult to do. Everyone else puts the liability of safety on the manufacturer. Nothing is released on the market until safety is proven. That is why the US allows GMOs, food additives, and chemicals banned in Europe and other countries. It is also why we have 80K+ chemicals on the market and used in products that have never been tested for human safety+9-1 . concerned citizen +4-1 The EPA estimates that the lifetime cancer risk from wood smoke is twelve times greater than that from an equal volume of second hand tobacco smoke. One hour of exposure to wood smoke lowers your ability to fight off infection by 25 to 40%. Another research article states: 'Twice as many women with breast cancer had high PAH Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (a by-product of wood smoke) levels in their BREAST TUMORS compared with tissue of women without breast cancer.’ Also important to note: Health effects from particulate matter occur after exposures of 2-4 hours or less in duration of woodsmoke at the 12-29mcg range (Koenig et al. 1993). I know four women who have had breast cancer--they all had either wood burning fireplaces or wood stoves in their homes and lived in neighborhoods where wood burning is common. [leyla] leyla Not that I disagree, just curious, and seeking answers. I come from a nomadic, tribal lifestyle, and we eat, sleep, cook around open fire( entire lives, generation after generation). In my life I only met 1 woman with breast cancer,and she was a posh city dweller. None of my old-fashioned friends( or I) had ANY heath complications, even respiratory, and our skin is as healthy as it can be( in case blocked by smoke pores are of any concern. Then I wonder if the wood the city people use, is treated with substance that may cause the side-effects? Afterall, the cancer has been around from prehistoric times;and people have also been cooking, singing, living actually around fire since it's integration into our lifestyle. NObody thinks smoke of anything is healthy, and ideed wood smoke is worse than tobacco. Than, possibly the fact that the circulation is poor in closed spaces is what is more damaging to heath. Then I think of yurts and tipis I'm used to- takes some skill to get that smoke out! But again- nobody gets ill. Any ideas on this? +3-1 [kpr] Everything gives you cancer. There's no cure, there's no answer. Regular kneading of breast tissues will facilitate the body's defense mechanisms. Being happy also offers a large prophylactic defense to disease and malady of many kinds. See the regular kneading of breast tissue to get happy. Look up the number of nuclear explosions detonated since 1945 and you might find a reasonable explanation for cancer that doesn't involve household chemicals. While that doesn't rule out household chemicals as a source it does augment the list of potential sources. Better living through chemistry is a great catch phrase. Even after DDT and a host of pesticides were banned in 1972 you still can find DDE metabolites in the environment. I tested myself twenty years ago and was full of technical chlordane and DDE metabolites to the point of being illegal for consumption. No doubt there are any number of deniers walking around willing to tell you these things are as harmless as climate change. As long as people think it's a good idea to put scented devices in their homes and cars to mask the stench of rot there will be TV programs advertising the stuff.+10-1 DavBG Chemicals often cannot be processed by the liver, so as a backup system our immune system has to clean it up. So it makes sense that when the immune system is busy doing another job you will be left vulnerable to cancerous infections. So it all boils down to the level of exposure and strength of our immune systems.+1 [The Watcher] Shift work and sleep deprivation are strongly linked to breast cancer.+1 Tina Hormonal contraception is also a big culprit. Now pharmaceutical companies are including information about it. Basically women are giving themselves estrogen and other hormones on a very steady basis over a prolonged period of time (years).+2 James Salvestrols might be helpful for some one with cancer or for prevention of cancer. If anyone is interested they can google 'salvestrol case studies' and 3 time chemist royal society award winner Gerry Potter. Instead of mammograms people can look up the Navarro medical clinic hcg cancer measurement. [Soapbox Jill] The damage from chemicals are magnified by electromagnetic radiation from wireless devices. You won't hear this from any U.S. "health" agency because the telecom industry is a rich, powerful god with influence in high regulatory places. The sad truth is more younger women than ever are getting breast cancer. Those chemicals they mention have been around for a while. Focusing on these chemicals NOW may create a smoke screen of protection for radiofrequency radiation, especially since a brand new book calls attention to the biological damage from wireless radiation. This important new book by Katie Singer is titled, An Electronic Silent Spring, Facing the Dangers and Creating Safe Limits. (see website by same name for more details) IN FACT, the long-time past president of Microsoft Canada endorses the book, and says every person who uses technology should read it. People who want to protect nature should also read it. For science about EMF and breast cancer in young women, visit Electrical Pollution site and click on "breast cancer" on the left+16-4 Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
|
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||