From the News section of the Tuesday, January 29, 2008, Toronto Star, page A4, an article about the link between air pollution and heart problems:
TAKING AIR QUALITY TO HEART
Fine particulate pollution is causing cardiac disease, expert says as Ontario fails to meet standards
Joseph Hall
Health Reporter
There is growing evidence that chronic exposure to air pollution levels common in places such as Toronto may be causing heart disease in otherwise healthy people, a top cardiac researcher said yesterday.
While the harmful effects of air pollution on people with pre-existing heart conditions has been well documented, persistent exposure to bad air may be causing cardiac diseases in those with no other risk factors, University of Michigan cardiologist Robert Brook says.
Brook, one of the first researchers to link air pollution with cardiac deaths, was speaking after a Canadian Heart and Stroke Foundation news conference in Toronto, during which the group gave Ontario a failing grade in a new report card on pollution and heart health.
Ontario joined Quebec and parts of the British Columbia interior as the three areas in Canada where fine particle pollution perodically exceeded acceptable air quality levels over a three-year period.
Air pollution, especially fine particulate exhaust from factories and cars, is believed to cause some 6,000 deaths in Canada each year, with about 70 per cent of those linked to existing cardiovascular diseases.
But Brook, who spoke as a pollution expert at the conference, said there is growing evidence dirty air may be having long-term heart effects on young, fit people.
"There are studies ... that show that there may be a cumulative long-term effect of being exposed over a lifetime or over many years," he said in an interview.
Indeed, one major study of women in several American cities published last year showed pollution may increase the risk of heart disease in healthy people by as much as 76 per cent, Brook says.
He says animal studies have also shown that exposure to pollution can cause hardening of the arteries, high blood pressure and diabetes, all of which are risk factors for heart disease and stroke.
As well, Brook says, several studies have recently linked atherosclerosis - hardening of the arteries - in humans to high pollution levels.
"We need to see if air pollution is not only acting like a trigger to (kill) people who would have died in the next few days, or the next few years or weeks, but is shifting the risk of dying for the whole population."
Dr. Beth Abramson, a national foundation spokesperson, warned that high pollution levels were in no way confined to the industralized or heavily trafficked areas where the dirty air is generated.
She says the fine particle pollution that is most worrisome to heart specialists can travel as far as 8000 kilometres from its source.
"Air pollution is a pervasive and unavoidable health risk for heart disease that all Canadians face," Abramson says. "Most are unaware of its short- and long-term impact."
Abramson urged governments to make concerted efforts to cut pollution levels, through such things as better urban planning and increased public transit funding. She also urged people to forgo the car and walk or bike to work and other destinations as often as possible.
Those with known heart conditions, however, should keep an eye on daily air quality reports and avoid outside exercise when pollution levels are high.
The foundation also unveiled a new poll that showed only 13 per cent of Canadians have made the connection between pollution and cardiovascular disease.
In grading the various provinces and areas in Canada, the foundation looked at recorded levels of fine particulate matter that was 2.5 micrometres in diameter- about one fiftieth the diameter of a human hair- or smaller.
Particles this size, known as PM 2.5, can enter your lungs and blood stream, where their inflammatory effect on arterial walls may be responsible for aggravating or causing heart conditions.
Any province that recorded average PM 2.5 levels about 30 on any given day in a year, were given an F grade by the foundation.
Environment Canada has set a PM 2.5 level of 30 or lower as the standard for acceptable air quality.
Tuesday, February 19, 2008
Saturday, February 9, 2008
Trash as a Health and Environmental Hazard
In Naples, Italy, the way trash has been dealt with has caused health hazards - increased cancer rates - in people who live there, and an unpleasant smell for residents and tourists to deal with. From the World & Comment section, Toronto Star, Friday, January 18, 2008, pages AA, AA3:
TRASH LINKED TO HIGH CANCER RATE IN NAPLES' 'TRIANGLE OF DEATH'
Residents in the southern Italian city say years of illegal dumping and burning is poisoning them
Robin Pomeroy and Laura Viggiano
Reuters News Agency
Naples - Piles of trash building up in Naples have filled the air with a putrid stench and spoiled the view for tourists, but the city's waste crisis is also blamed in some deaths.
Standing in the barricades erected by local people to stop the authorities from reopening an old landfill in the Pianura neighbourhood, Salvatore Mele, whose son died of cancer, believes the illness was caused by pollution from trash. "I lost him when he was 21,"Mele said.
Besides fouling the port city's image and adding to risks to the Mediterranean from sewage and pollution, the waste in some are associated with higher death rates and certain types of cancer, studies have shown.
A government-appointed former police chief has been given army backup for a four-month quest to end the crisis, but local residents say years of illegal dumping is poisoning them.
"My mum got sick in 2004. We just had time to find what was wrong before she died, 15 days later, of a breast cancer. My father's sister died of the same thing a year later," said Pina Mangiapia, a 38-year-old housewife on the Pianura barricades.
Mangiapia blames the waste dump for three cancer deaths in the familiy, for the melanoma her husband had removed from his leg, and for her four-year-old son's chronic dermatitis.
Scientists say it can be difficult to assess the extent to which pollution is to blame for illnesses also provoked by genetic, soci-economic and lifestyle factors.
But there is proof that parts of Naples and its hinterland, in the shadow of the volcano Mount Vesuvius, have been steadily contaminated by decades of illegal waste dumping and burning.
Medical journal Lancet Oncology in 2004 dubbed part of the Campania region, of which Naples is the capital, "the triangle of death" because the air, soil and water are polluted by high levels of cancer-causing toxins believed to have come from waste.
Research released last year by Italy's National Research Council found that among people living closest to the least-regulated waste-disposal sites - where trash is dumped in fields or burned without any controls - the mortality rate was 12 percent greater than the norm for 2o men and 9 per cent greater for men.
Fatal liver cancers were much more common - up 29 per cent for women and 19 per cent for men in the most at-risk areas - and there were huge increases in congenital malformations of the nervous and urinary systems.
While more than half the places studied in the area did not show abnormal health problems, the study implies a significant health risk for those living in the worst areas.
"First we need to make the dumps safe, close them off, properly gather the bio-gas and control the runoff," said Fabrizio Bianchi, who conducted the research. "We have to get out of this crisis."
Naples' failure to deal with its household waste hit crisis point at the end of December when all rufuse collection stopped as waste dumps had reached capacity, leaving people with no choice but to throw it onto the streets.
Like many in and around the "triangle of death," those in Pianura say their council-run landfill was not properly managed and became a tipping site for hazardous waste.
But an even bigger source of pollution is the Camorra, the Naples organized crime syndicate that runs lucrative line in dumping and burning rubbish illegally.
Mre than domestic trash, the Camorra focuses on disposal of industrial waste which it brings to Campania from Italy's rich north - one of a string of crimes against the environment earning the mafia estimated $9 billion a year.
"The Camorra continues to control the cycle of industrial waste that comes from the north of Italy,"said Michele Buonomo of Legambiente, a campaign group which closely monitors the Camorra.
TRASH LINKED TO HIGH CANCER RATE IN NAPLES' 'TRIANGLE OF DEATH'
Residents in the southern Italian city say years of illegal dumping and burning is poisoning them
Robin Pomeroy and Laura Viggiano
Reuters News Agency
Naples - Piles of trash building up in Naples have filled the air with a putrid stench and spoiled the view for tourists, but the city's waste crisis is also blamed in some deaths.
Standing in the barricades erected by local people to stop the authorities from reopening an old landfill in the Pianura neighbourhood, Salvatore Mele, whose son died of cancer, believes the illness was caused by pollution from trash. "I lost him when he was 21,"Mele said.
Besides fouling the port city's image and adding to risks to the Mediterranean from sewage and pollution, the waste in some are associated with higher death rates and certain types of cancer, studies have shown.
A government-appointed former police chief has been given army backup for a four-month quest to end the crisis, but local residents say years of illegal dumping is poisoning them.
"My mum got sick in 2004. We just had time to find what was wrong before she died, 15 days later, of a breast cancer. My father's sister died of the same thing a year later," said Pina Mangiapia, a 38-year-old housewife on the Pianura barricades.
Mangiapia blames the waste dump for three cancer deaths in the familiy, for the melanoma her husband had removed from his leg, and for her four-year-old son's chronic dermatitis.
Scientists say it can be difficult to assess the extent to which pollution is to blame for illnesses also provoked by genetic, soci-economic and lifestyle factors.
But there is proof that parts of Naples and its hinterland, in the shadow of the volcano Mount Vesuvius, have been steadily contaminated by decades of illegal waste dumping and burning.
Medical journal Lancet Oncology in 2004 dubbed part of the Campania region, of which Naples is the capital, "the triangle of death" because the air, soil and water are polluted by high levels of cancer-causing toxins believed to have come from waste.
Research released last year by Italy's National Research Council found that among people living closest to the least-regulated waste-disposal sites - where trash is dumped in fields or burned without any controls - the mortality rate was 12 percent greater than the norm for 2o men and 9 per cent greater for men.
Fatal liver cancers were much more common - up 29 per cent for women and 19 per cent for men in the most at-risk areas - and there were huge increases in congenital malformations of the nervous and urinary systems.
While more than half the places studied in the area did not show abnormal health problems, the study implies a significant health risk for those living in the worst areas.
"First we need to make the dumps safe, close them off, properly gather the bio-gas and control the runoff," said Fabrizio Bianchi, who conducted the research. "We have to get out of this crisis."
Naples' failure to deal with its household waste hit crisis point at the end of December when all rufuse collection stopped as waste dumps had reached capacity, leaving people with no choice but to throw it onto the streets.
Like many in and around the "triangle of death," those in Pianura say their council-run landfill was not properly managed and became a tipping site for hazardous waste.
But an even bigger source of pollution is the Camorra, the Naples organized crime syndicate that runs lucrative line in dumping and burning rubbish illegally.
Mre than domestic trash, the Camorra focuses on disposal of industrial waste which it brings to Campania from Italy's rich north - one of a string of crimes against the environment earning the mafia estimated $9 billion a year.
"The Camorra continues to control the cycle of industrial waste that comes from the north of Italy,"said Michele Buonomo of Legambiente, a campaign group which closely monitors the Camorra.
Friday, February 8, 2008
Cosmetics and Cellphones
From the Toronto Star, Living section, Tuesday, January 15, 2008, pages L, L2, an article about the underlying health risks and environmental causes of cancer.
Cancer-Causing Agents
SUSPECTS AT LARGE
What do cosmetics have in common with cellphones? They both worry a leading cancer scientist about their potential as health risks
Nancy J. White
Living Reporter
First off, Devra Davis won't do the interview on her cellphone.
Call me back on the land line, she instructs. It's not the money she's concerned about. It's the microwaves.
She's also concerned about drinking diet pop, wearing a lot of cosmetics and eating non-organic red meat.
But make no mistake: she's not some trendy health-scare type. She's a blue-chip cancer epidemiologist, director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute with a Grade A scientific pedigree: a PhD from the University of Chicago, a decade at the National Academy of Sciences, an author of more than 170 published articles.
And she's worried about her environmental exposure to cancer.
"Everyone has to start where they're comfortable, taking control of their own homes," says Davis, who will be the keynote speakter at Women's College Hospital's health forum Friday. "Then they have to make sure they vote for politicians who understand the importance of this issue."
This issue is how we've let modern life, from the air we breathe to the products we use, poison our bodies.
"We've made remarkable progress in treating some forms of cancer," says Davis, 61. "But if we only improve our ability to find and treat the disease, without dealing with the underlying causes, we will not have made enough progress."
In her newest book, The Secret History of the War on Cancer, Davis argues that the long march against cancer has been misled too often by corporate interests and sidetracked by missed opportunities.
In 1936, more than 200 of the world's top cancer scientists convened in Brussels, a gathering of the best minds to create a new way forward in understanding and fighting the disease. When Davis unearthed the transcripts of those meetings, she was stunned to read how much those scientists knew about cancer's social and environmental causes.
Many widely used agents of the time, including ionizing and solar radiation, arsenic, benzene, asbestos, synthetic dyes and hormones, were recognized as cancerous in humans, she writes.
This knowledge came from researchers combining autopsies with medical, personal and workplace histories of cancer victims and conducting animal lab studies.
However, she says, these finds didn't seep into the mainstream medical practice of the day, due, in part, to the scant media coverage given scientific meetings back then. But mainly it was the timing, the brink of World War II. "The world had very different priorities," says Davis.
"Cancer is the ultimate long-term disease. To be concerned about cancer implies a certain optimism in the future."
In 1971, U.S. President Richard Nixon declared war on cancer, reflecting the idea that the type of ingenuity that built the A-bomb and put a man on the moon could wipe out cancer within the decade.
Rocket engineers from NASA held meetings ith medical researchers, setting up charts with overlapping diagrams and lots of arrows, mapping out how the war on cancer should be conducted, writes Davis. Most serious researchers viewed the idea of a single cure as preposterous, a political fuss, she says.
The war did not take aim at any of the known or suspected carcinogrens. Not even tobacco smoking, which the U.S. surgon general had declared a cause of cancer in 1953.
"There were very close ties between the tobacco industry and, later the chemical industry, and the development of the war on cancer," she says.
Today, the emphasis is not so much on declaring war aginst cancer as it is dealing with a chronic condition, says Davis. "We need to make changes in the infrastructures of our lives that will hep reduce the risks."
She's most worried about air pollution, such as emissions from coal-fired plants and growing vehicle traffic, that's distributed across the population. "It's important for people to understand tht the burning of fossil fuels that's warming the Earth is the same process increasing our health risks, including cancer in the long term.
There are several other issues that concern her, particularly because health officals aren't paying much attention to them:
Cellphones - New data from Sweden, she says, shows that people using cellphones for 10 years or more double the risk of brain cancer. She's worried about kids under 16 glued to their cellphones. "Would you let your child play Russian roulette?" she asks.
Aspartame - The artificial sweetener's negative effects in animal studies occurred in the last third of the creatures' lives, which corresponds to human beings in their 60s to 80s. Again, she is especially concerned about children consuming the product over many decades.
The doses that induced cancer in animals, she says, were not especially high: about two cans of diet pop, two yogurts and a couple of sticks of gum a day.
Diagnostic radiation - The medical community is becoming increasingly concerned about unnecessary Computed Tomography scans of children, she writes. A CT scan of a child's stomach can be equivalent to 600 chest X-rays and one of an infant's head may equal a few thousand.
While a CT scan may well be warranted in a medical emergency, she says, repeated follow-up scans may not be a wise idea.
Ritalin - Several papers have indicated that Ritalin, valuable for treating Attention Deficit Disorder, might pose a risk to the user's genetic makeup, says Davis. In one study researchers tested the blood of a dozen children before and after they were put on the drug, she writes, and found chromosome damage after three months' use.
Davis cautions that the numbers tested were small, no direct link to Ritalin was found and genetic damage and repair happens all the time. But given the widespread use of the drug in children, she says, governments and the private sector need to further investigate.
Overall, Davis believes the growing awareness of global climate change is sparking more concern about environmental health.
'The connection is obvious," she says.
"We only have one planet."
Cancer-Causing Agents
SUSPECTS AT LARGE
What do cosmetics have in common with cellphones? They both worry a leading cancer scientist about their potential as health risks
Nancy J. White
Living Reporter
First off, Devra Davis won't do the interview on her cellphone.
Call me back on the land line, she instructs. It's not the money she's concerned about. It's the microwaves.
She's also concerned about drinking diet pop, wearing a lot of cosmetics and eating non-organic red meat.
But make no mistake: she's not some trendy health-scare type. She's a blue-chip cancer epidemiologist, director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute with a Grade A scientific pedigree: a PhD from the University of Chicago, a decade at the National Academy of Sciences, an author of more than 170 published articles.
And she's worried about her environmental exposure to cancer.
"Everyone has to start where they're comfortable, taking control of their own homes," says Davis, who will be the keynote speakter at Women's College Hospital's health forum Friday. "Then they have to make sure they vote for politicians who understand the importance of this issue."
This issue is how we've let modern life, from the air we breathe to the products we use, poison our bodies.
"We've made remarkable progress in treating some forms of cancer," says Davis, 61. "But if we only improve our ability to find and treat the disease, without dealing with the underlying causes, we will not have made enough progress."
In her newest book, The Secret History of the War on Cancer, Davis argues that the long march against cancer has been misled too often by corporate interests and sidetracked by missed opportunities.
In 1936, more than 200 of the world's top cancer scientists convened in Brussels, a gathering of the best minds to create a new way forward in understanding and fighting the disease. When Davis unearthed the transcripts of those meetings, she was stunned to read how much those scientists knew about cancer's social and environmental causes.
Many widely used agents of the time, including ionizing and solar radiation, arsenic, benzene, asbestos, synthetic dyes and hormones, were recognized as cancerous in humans, she writes.
This knowledge came from researchers combining autopsies with medical, personal and workplace histories of cancer victims and conducting animal lab studies.
However, she says, these finds didn't seep into the mainstream medical practice of the day, due, in part, to the scant media coverage given scientific meetings back then. But mainly it was the timing, the brink of World War II. "The world had very different priorities," says Davis.
"Cancer is the ultimate long-term disease. To be concerned about cancer implies a certain optimism in the future."
In 1971, U.S. President Richard Nixon declared war on cancer, reflecting the idea that the type of ingenuity that built the A-bomb and put a man on the moon could wipe out cancer within the decade.
Rocket engineers from NASA held meetings ith medical researchers, setting up charts with overlapping diagrams and lots of arrows, mapping out how the war on cancer should be conducted, writes Davis. Most serious researchers viewed the idea of a single cure as preposterous, a political fuss, she says.
The war did not take aim at any of the known or suspected carcinogrens. Not even tobacco smoking, which the U.S. surgon general had declared a cause of cancer in 1953.
"There were very close ties between the tobacco industry and, later the chemical industry, and the development of the war on cancer," she says.
Today, the emphasis is not so much on declaring war aginst cancer as it is dealing with a chronic condition, says Davis. "We need to make changes in the infrastructures of our lives that will hep reduce the risks."
She's most worried about air pollution, such as emissions from coal-fired plants and growing vehicle traffic, that's distributed across the population. "It's important for people to understand tht the burning of fossil fuels that's warming the Earth is the same process increasing our health risks, including cancer in the long term.
There are several other issues that concern her, particularly because health officals aren't paying much attention to them:
Cellphones - New data from Sweden, she says, shows that people using cellphones for 10 years or more double the risk of brain cancer. She's worried about kids under 16 glued to their cellphones. "Would you let your child play Russian roulette?" she asks.
Aspartame - The artificial sweetener's negative effects in animal studies occurred in the last third of the creatures' lives, which corresponds to human beings in their 60s to 80s. Again, she is especially concerned about children consuming the product over many decades.
The doses that induced cancer in animals, she says, were not especially high: about two cans of diet pop, two yogurts and a couple of sticks of gum a day.
Diagnostic radiation - The medical community is becoming increasingly concerned about unnecessary Computed Tomography scans of children, she writes. A CT scan of a child's stomach can be equivalent to 600 chest X-rays and one of an infant's head may equal a few thousand.
While a CT scan may well be warranted in a medical emergency, she says, repeated follow-up scans may not be a wise idea.
Ritalin - Several papers have indicated that Ritalin, valuable for treating Attention Deficit Disorder, might pose a risk to the user's genetic makeup, says Davis. In one study researchers tested the blood of a dozen children before and after they were put on the drug, she writes, and found chromosome damage after three months' use.
Davis cautions that the numbers tested were small, no direct link to Ritalin was found and genetic damage and repair happens all the time. But given the widespread use of the drug in children, she says, governments and the private sector need to further investigate.
Overall, Davis believes the growing awareness of global climate change is sparking more concern about environmental health.
'The connection is obvious," she says.
"We only have one planet."
Saturday, February 2, 2008
Reyes Syndrome and Avoiding Giving ASA (Aspirin) to Children, Teenagers & Young Adults
From the Health Canada website, http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/iyh-vsv/diseases-maladies/reye_e.html, information about Reyes Syndrome and the necessity of refraining from giving ASA (aspirin) to children, teenagers and young adults as ASA is linked to Reyes Syndrome for these groups:
The Issue
Reye's Syndrome (RS) is a rare disease that affects mainly children or teenagers during a viral illness, such as chicken pox or influenza. It can be fatal. The use of ASA (Acetylsalicylic Acid) has been strongly linked with the development of RS.
Symptoms - What to do
The symptoms of RS may include:
- Lingering or returning symptoms of the original illness
- Personality changes such as hyperactivity, aggression, confusion and anxiety
- Frequent vomiting and/or dry-heaving, convulsions and delirium, possibly leading to a coma
If your child gets any of these symptoms, call your doctor immediately or go to your hospital's emergency department. RS is fatal in 20 to 30 percent of all cases, and can cause permanent brain damage in those who survive.
Often, victims get RS just as they appear to be recovering from the original illness. The use of ASA to treat the original illness is strongly connected to the development of RS. However, in rare cases, RS occurs without ASA being taken. We don't know how ASA triggers RS, nor why it primarily affects children, teenagers and young adults.
Protecting Against Reye's Syndrome
Both government and manufacturers have taken action to educate the public about RS. Regulations under the Food and Drugs Act now require manufacturers to label all over-the-counter products that have ASA with a warning about the dangers of giving ASA to a child or teenagers. ASA products are given to children only for relief of pain and not for fever.
The Food and Drugs Act regulations do not allow products containing ASA to be advertised for use by children or teenagers.
Minimizing the Risk of Reye's Syndrome
If your child has a fever, there are other things you can do to bring down the temperature.
- Give your child plenty of liquids to drink, preferably water, flat ginger ale, diluted apple juice or other sugared drinks.
- Avoid milk, carbonated drinks and tart drinks such as orange, cranberry and grapefruit juice. They might upset the child's stomach.
- Remove any extra covers and clothing and keep the room temperature around 18 degrees Celsius (about 64 degrees Fahrenheit).
- Bathe or sponge the child with lukewarm water.
- Use other drugs that help relieve fever, such as acetaminophen.
- If the fever does not come down, consult your family doctor.
- Never try to treat a feverish child under a year old without the advice of your doctor.
- Never give any drug containing ASA to a child, particularly if he or she has the flu or chicken pox, before consulting your doctor.
- Make sure that teenagers are also aware of the dangers of RS and how to prevent it.
The most important thing to remember is that some common symptoms are signs of more serious illnesses. If any symptoms last for more than two days or become worse, call your doctor.
Date Modified: 2006-12-07
The Issue
Reye's Syndrome (RS) is a rare disease that affects mainly children or teenagers during a viral illness, such as chicken pox or influenza. It can be fatal. The use of ASA (Acetylsalicylic Acid) has been strongly linked with the development of RS.
Symptoms - What to do
The symptoms of RS may include:
- Lingering or returning symptoms of the original illness
- Personality changes such as hyperactivity, aggression, confusion and anxiety
- Frequent vomiting and/or dry-heaving, convulsions and delirium, possibly leading to a coma
If your child gets any of these symptoms, call your doctor immediately or go to your hospital's emergency department. RS is fatal in 20 to 30 percent of all cases, and can cause permanent brain damage in those who survive.
Often, victims get RS just as they appear to be recovering from the original illness. The use of ASA to treat the original illness is strongly connected to the development of RS. However, in rare cases, RS occurs without ASA being taken. We don't know how ASA triggers RS, nor why it primarily affects children, teenagers and young adults.
Protecting Against Reye's Syndrome
Both government and manufacturers have taken action to educate the public about RS. Regulations under the Food and Drugs Act now require manufacturers to label all over-the-counter products that have ASA with a warning about the dangers of giving ASA to a child or teenagers. ASA products are given to children only for relief of pain and not for fever.
The Food and Drugs Act regulations do not allow products containing ASA to be advertised for use by children or teenagers.
Minimizing the Risk of Reye's Syndrome
If your child has a fever, there are other things you can do to bring down the temperature.
- Give your child plenty of liquids to drink, preferably water, flat ginger ale, diluted apple juice or other sugared drinks.
- Avoid milk, carbonated drinks and tart drinks such as orange, cranberry and grapefruit juice. They might upset the child's stomach.
- Remove any extra covers and clothing and keep the room temperature around 18 degrees Celsius (about 64 degrees Fahrenheit).
- Bathe or sponge the child with lukewarm water.
- Use other drugs that help relieve fever, such as acetaminophen.
- If the fever does not come down, consult your family doctor.
- Never try to treat a feverish child under a year old without the advice of your doctor.
- Never give any drug containing ASA to a child, particularly if he or she has the flu or chicken pox, before consulting your doctor.
- Make sure that teenagers are also aware of the dangers of RS and how to prevent it.
The most important thing to remember is that some common symptoms are signs of more serious illnesses. If any symptoms last for more than two days or become worse, call your doctor.
Date Modified: 2006-12-07
Wednesday, January 16, 2008
Link Between Toxic Chemicals and Breast Cancer?
Many chemicals used in food products and personal care or found in our water, air, and soil can be hormone disrupters, bioaccumulative, or carcinogenic. Breast cancer rates are increasing; it is not a stretch of the imagination to connect the widespread use of synthetic chemicals and health or reproductive effects, such as earlier ages of puberty in girls or lower sperm counts in men or increased rates of breast cancer.
From the Women's Health special section of the Toronto Star, Thursday, January 10, 2008, page V and V6, an article about breast cancer and environmental issues, such as toxins in the air or in the workplace:
Breast Cancer Research
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Six years ago, LaRose Lambert was diagnosed with breast cancer. The retired Sarnia nurse successfully dealt with it thanks to a lumpectomy, chemotherapy and radiation, but like many women who get the disease, she remains haunted by a simple question: Why me?
Terrence Belford
Special to the Star
LaRose Lambert says she has a pretty good idea why she contracted breast cancer.
Genetics may have played a role - her mother was diagnosed with the disease at age 70. But Lambert insists the real culprit was likely where she lived and what she did for a living.
"There was a cluster of seven of us out of 20 nurses at Sarnia General Hospital who all developed breast cancer in a short period of time," says Lambert, 65. "That has to tell you something.
"I think the real cause is environmental and workplace exposure to toxins. You may be born with a genetic disposition but the toxins surrounding us trigger the disease."
Lambert is not alone in her theory.
The idea that environmental factors are the most common cancer triggers is gaining widespread acceptance among researchers and the medical community. That acceptance may change the way we live and work.
While there may not be definitive scientific proof linking many manmade chemicals to cancer, there is an overwhelming body of anecdotal evidence, say leading researchers and environmental activists. The battle against cancer of all kinds must start with banning substances we can identify as harmful and demanding more testing on the safety of new compounds.
"We have known for 50 years of the dangers of things like bisphenol A," says Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence, referring to a substance found in the plastic used to line metal food cans and make baby bottles and rigid, water-cooler-sized water bottles. "In the body, it mimics estrogen, which obviously has an impact on breast and prostate cancers."
He cites research by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control that found 93 per cent of 5,000 people studied had bisphenol A in their bodies.
The ability to mimic or affect the production of hormones is shared by many man-made substances, adds Dr. Devra Davis, director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh and author of The Secret History of the War on Cancer.
"We are waging war against cancer but with the wrong weapons," she says. "We have known for decades about many man-made carcinogens but still continue to produce and use them."
When it comes to breast cancer, just one in nine women can trace the cause of the disease back to a genetic imperfection, she says. "The rest of them had something in the (genetic) makeup that reacted to an environmental trigger.
"We don't know all of them yet but we do know a good many and have ignored them."
At the heart of the debate over the environmental impact is a growing understanding of the causes and nature of many cancers, says Sharon Wood, chief executive officer of the Ontario region of the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation.
"Over the past 10 years, we have come to understand that the causes and relationships are increasingly complex," she says.
"In many cases there may not be single gene passed on, but perhaps a series of genes, all of which are susceptible to environmental factors. In fact, the seeds of cancer may be sown very early in life."
She cites the example of her own mother, who developed breast cancer in late middle age.
"She was raised on a farm and when the rest of the family worked in the fields, they put her in a seed bin to play with her dolls," she says. "The seed, however, was coated with formaldehyde to protect it against insects and rodents. We now know that formaldehyde is a carcinogen."
Lamber relates to Wood's story.
"Working in the emergy ward, we were constantly exposed to things we now know are carcinogens," she says. "We soaked instruments in formalin, which is based on formaldehyde. The fumes were enough to make you dizzy. We were exposed to X-ray radiation regularly. There were so many things that could have triggered the cancer."
Nor was there any relief off the job, she says. Sarnia, home to scores of chemical plants, has one of the highest incidences of cancers in the country.
"There is no such things as fresh air here," Lambert says."You get up in the morning and the car is always covered with this particulate. The air is full of toxins."
One of the paradoxes of the battle against cancer is that while we may have good reason to link many chemicals to cancer, politicians and courts demand scientific proof of that relationship before acting to ban them, points out Dr. Bruce Newbold, director of the McMaster Instittue for Environment and Health in Hamilton.
"Anecdotal evidence is not enough to take to court," he says.
In an effort to gain that scientific evidence, Lambert has been participating in a study on women's exposure to environment factors in the workplace, conducted by Drs. Jim Brophy and Margaret Keith of the University of Windsor. They are looking at the effects that toxins in the workplace have on women in agriculture, health care and auto manufacturing.
For Lambert, like most breast cancer victims, the priority is simple. "I just want to know what caused by breast cancer and why."
From the Women's Health special section of the Toronto Star, Thursday, January 10, 2008, page V and V6, an article about breast cancer and environmental issues, such as toxins in the air or in the workplace:
Breast Cancer Research
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
Six years ago, LaRose Lambert was diagnosed with breast cancer. The retired Sarnia nurse successfully dealt with it thanks to a lumpectomy, chemotherapy and radiation, but like many women who get the disease, she remains haunted by a simple question: Why me?
Terrence Belford
Special to the Star
LaRose Lambert says she has a pretty good idea why she contracted breast cancer.
Genetics may have played a role - her mother was diagnosed with the disease at age 70. But Lambert insists the real culprit was likely where she lived and what she did for a living.
"There was a cluster of seven of us out of 20 nurses at Sarnia General Hospital who all developed breast cancer in a short period of time," says Lambert, 65. "That has to tell you something.
"I think the real cause is environmental and workplace exposure to toxins. You may be born with a genetic disposition but the toxins surrounding us trigger the disease."
Lambert is not alone in her theory.
The idea that environmental factors are the most common cancer triggers is gaining widespread acceptance among researchers and the medical community. That acceptance may change the way we live and work.
While there may not be definitive scientific proof linking many manmade chemicals to cancer, there is an overwhelming body of anecdotal evidence, say leading researchers and environmental activists. The battle against cancer of all kinds must start with banning substances we can identify as harmful and demanding more testing on the safety of new compounds.
"We have known for 50 years of the dangers of things like bisphenol A," says Rick Smith, executive director of Environmental Defence, referring to a substance found in the plastic used to line metal food cans and make baby bottles and rigid, water-cooler-sized water bottles. "In the body, it mimics estrogen, which obviously has an impact on breast and prostate cancers."
He cites research by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control that found 93 per cent of 5,000 people studied had bisphenol A in their bodies.
The ability to mimic or affect the production of hormones is shared by many man-made substances, adds Dr. Devra Davis, director of the Center for Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh and author of The Secret History of the War on Cancer.
"We are waging war against cancer but with the wrong weapons," she says. "We have known for decades about many man-made carcinogens but still continue to produce and use them."
When it comes to breast cancer, just one in nine women can trace the cause of the disease back to a genetic imperfection, she says. "The rest of them had something in the (genetic) makeup that reacted to an environmental trigger.
"We don't know all of them yet but we do know a good many and have ignored them."
At the heart of the debate over the environmental impact is a growing understanding of the causes and nature of many cancers, says Sharon Wood, chief executive officer of the Ontario region of the Canadian Breast Cancer Foundation.
"Over the past 10 years, we have come to understand that the causes and relationships are increasingly complex," she says.
"In many cases there may not be single gene passed on, but perhaps a series of genes, all of which are susceptible to environmental factors. In fact, the seeds of cancer may be sown very early in life."
She cites the example of her own mother, who developed breast cancer in late middle age.
"She was raised on a farm and when the rest of the family worked in the fields, they put her in a seed bin to play with her dolls," she says. "The seed, however, was coated with formaldehyde to protect it against insects and rodents. We now know that formaldehyde is a carcinogen."
Lamber relates to Wood's story.
"Working in the emergy ward, we were constantly exposed to things we now know are carcinogens," she says. "We soaked instruments in formalin, which is based on formaldehyde. The fumes were enough to make you dizzy. We were exposed to X-ray radiation regularly. There were so many things that could have triggered the cancer."
Nor was there any relief off the job, she says. Sarnia, home to scores of chemical plants, has one of the highest incidences of cancers in the country.
"There is no such things as fresh air here," Lambert says."You get up in the morning and the car is always covered with this particulate. The air is full of toxins."
One of the paradoxes of the battle against cancer is that while we may have good reason to link many chemicals to cancer, politicians and courts demand scientific proof of that relationship before acting to ban them, points out Dr. Bruce Newbold, director of the McMaster Instittue for Environment and Health in Hamilton.
"Anecdotal evidence is not enough to take to court," he says.
In an effort to gain that scientific evidence, Lambert has been participating in a study on women's exposure to environment factors in the workplace, conducted by Drs. Jim Brophy and Margaret Keith of the University of Windsor. They are looking at the effects that toxins in the workplace have on women in agriculture, health care and auto manufacturing.
For Lambert, like most breast cancer victims, the priority is simple. "I just want to know what caused by breast cancer and why."
Thursday, January 10, 2008
Deadly Consequences of AIDS in Rwanda
From the Ideas section of the Sunday, January 26, 2008, Toronto Star, page ID3, is this article about photographic evidence of the effect of AIDS on people in Rwanda and a cooperative photojournalist project between Rwandan and Canadian photojournalists:
RWANDA
Chronicling the scourge of AIDS
Rwandan photographers learn from the best as they focus in on disease's deadly effects
Christopher Maughan
Special to the Star
Kigali - A weary, elderly woman stands against the wall of her tiny mud hut, huddling three of her grandchildren against her, squinting a bit as sunlight pours in through the doorway. The faded red letters of a French acronym - SIDA - loom large on a poster above her right shoulder, almost as if they're weighing her down.
The shutter snaps of two photographers who have come to take her picture are the only sounds that break an eerie silence. Mukandori, 72, waits patiently for them to finish their work.
She had 12 children, but only one is alive today. "Some died in war, others died of natural causes," she explains through a translator. "But when I remember the ones who died of AIDS, I still feel a deep sorrow."
Mukandori, who has just one name, is a Rwandan left to raise three of her grandchildren as a result of having lost three of her own children to a disease she calls "the scourge of all." She agreed to have her picture taken by Canadian photojournalist Steve Simon and one of his Rwandan counterparts, George Barya. The shoot was part of a unique, unprecedented effort to teach both the Rwandan and Canadian public about HIV-AIDS, a disease that has shattered Mukandori's family and so many others.
Simon is a long-time member of a Canadian photograph collective called Photosensitive. The group was founded in 1990 by former Toronto Star photographer Andrew Stawicki and Peter Robertson a former Star graphics editor. Over the years, they've dedicated themselves to non-profit social documentary projects, staging exhibits on homelessness, child poverty and literacy, to name just a few. Photosensitive current endeavour is their third on HIV-AIDS.
"This is an emergency situation; it's urgent," says Simon, explaining that his hope for the project is that it becomes a call to action for people in the west. "I think that people, when they are aware of it and they do help, they themselves are going to feel very good about doing so.
"If this scourge of AIDS were to hit the Western world the way it's hit Africa and now Asia and other parts, there's no question that it would be pushed up in terms of priorities," he says.
Cynics may wonder whether a simple photo exhibit can really fuel social responsibility, but Photosensitive's track record speaks. A 1996 project on Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children helped raise over $100,000. And a 2005 exhibit on Ontario's first native literacy camp helped secure funding for the opening of 35 more the next year.
For Photosensitive's latest project, seven journalists were in Rwanda documenting the social impact of HIV-AIDS. One photographer took pictures of HIV-positive prostitutes on the streets of Kigali. Another photographed women who contracted HIV as a result of being raped during the 1994 genocide. Others went into anti-retroviral and circumcision clinics and chronicled the latest efforts to stem the spread of the disease.
Stawicki says the key to Photosensitive's work isn't just that it educates or informs. It's that it makes people angry. "If they're angry, maybe they'll do something."
But what makes this year's project unique, Stawicki says, is that for the first time, Photosensitive is contributing to the development of foreign professional journalists. Over the course of their time here, each of the Canadians was paired with a local photographer. The Rwandans learned how to use modern, professional cameras (donated by Photosensitive and Getty Images) to produce images that go beyond traditional news pictures in their depth, quality and resolution. Those images will appear together as photo essays in each of Rwanda's major newspapers.
Local photographer Shyaka Anastase says the Canadian help is sorely needed. "A lot of people died or left the country during the genocide, and for that reason we don't have any great photographers here in Rwanda," he says, speaking in French. Anastase explains that because of the role of media in fuelling the killings, many potential journalists have shied away from the profession. This has left the country's few remaining reporters in charge of both writing articles and taking pictures, and as a result, photography in Rwanda has suffered.
"I used to think this aspect of journalism wasn't that important," says Anastase. "But in the last few days, what I've learned has instilled in me a love for taking pictures and has made me want to really do more."
Anastase has been working with Peter Bregg, a 40-year veteran who's covered everything from the Olympic Games to parliamentary news. Bregg, photo editor at Hello! magazine, says he's impressed with how far his trainee has come in such a short time.
"He's looking now to shoot things that he wouldn't have shot before," says Bregg.
Watching the two working together in the field, it's easy to get a sense of what Bregg is talking about. He's not a heavy-handed coach - instead, he teaches by example. Every so often on a shoot, Bregg will set up at an angle or in a spot that catches Anastase's attention, and Anastase will do his best to mimic the photo. If the results aren't the same, Bregg will take the opportunity to give a quick lesson on lighting, aperture opening, and shutter speed.
"After working with Peter, I think my pictures have much more feeling," says Anastase. "I learned a lot about how to avoid making mistakes after just a few days."
Anastase says he's been so inspired by his experience with Bregg that he hopes to create an association of Rwandan photojournalists in the hope that they might get together to plan more Photosensitive-style documentary projects.
In the meantime, a Photosensitive exhibit at the National University of Rwanda in Butare will serve as inspiration to the next generation of Rwandan journalists. Photosensitive plans to exhibit their work in to provide inspiration of a different sort - not to document, but rather to act.
"Whenever we bring AIDS to the front in Canada, it helps remind people the problem is still there," says Bregg. "And it's not insurmountable. A lot of our pictures will illustrate despair, but a lot will also illustrate hope."
Christopher Maughan accompanied photographers on the Photosensitive project. He is an intern with the Rwanda initiative, a Canadian and Rwandan journalism partnership.
RWANDA
Chronicling the scourge of AIDS
Rwandan photographers learn from the best as they focus in on disease's deadly effects
Christopher Maughan
Special to the Star
Kigali - A weary, elderly woman stands against the wall of her tiny mud hut, huddling three of her grandchildren against her, squinting a bit as sunlight pours in through the doorway. The faded red letters of a French acronym - SIDA - loom large on a poster above her right shoulder, almost as if they're weighing her down.
The shutter snaps of two photographers who have come to take her picture are the only sounds that break an eerie silence. Mukandori, 72, waits patiently for them to finish their work.
She had 12 children, but only one is alive today. "Some died in war, others died of natural causes," she explains through a translator. "But when I remember the ones who died of AIDS, I still feel a deep sorrow."
Mukandori, who has just one name, is a Rwandan left to raise three of her grandchildren as a result of having lost three of her own children to a disease she calls "the scourge of all." She agreed to have her picture taken by Canadian photojournalist Steve Simon and one of his Rwandan counterparts, George Barya. The shoot was part of a unique, unprecedented effort to teach both the Rwandan and Canadian public about HIV-AIDS, a disease that has shattered Mukandori's family and so many others.
Simon is a long-time member of a Canadian photograph collective called Photosensitive. The group was founded in 1990 by former Toronto Star photographer Andrew Stawicki and Peter Robertson a former Star graphics editor. Over the years, they've dedicated themselves to non-profit social documentary projects, staging exhibits on homelessness, child poverty and literacy, to name just a few. Photosensitive current endeavour is their third on HIV-AIDS.
"This is an emergency situation; it's urgent," says Simon, explaining that his hope for the project is that it becomes a call to action for people in the west. "I think that people, when they are aware of it and they do help, they themselves are going to feel very good about doing so.
"If this scourge of AIDS were to hit the Western world the way it's hit Africa and now Asia and other parts, there's no question that it would be pushed up in terms of priorities," he says.
Cynics may wonder whether a simple photo exhibit can really fuel social responsibility, but Photosensitive's track record speaks. A 1996 project on Toronto's Hospital for Sick Children helped raise over $100,000. And a 2005 exhibit on Ontario's first native literacy camp helped secure funding for the opening of 35 more the next year.
For Photosensitive's latest project, seven journalists were in Rwanda documenting the social impact of HIV-AIDS. One photographer took pictures of HIV-positive prostitutes on the streets of Kigali. Another photographed women who contracted HIV as a result of being raped during the 1994 genocide. Others went into anti-retroviral and circumcision clinics and chronicled the latest efforts to stem the spread of the disease.
Stawicki says the key to Photosensitive's work isn't just that it educates or informs. It's that it makes people angry. "If they're angry, maybe they'll do something."
But what makes this year's project unique, Stawicki says, is that for the first time, Photosensitive is contributing to the development of foreign professional journalists. Over the course of their time here, each of the Canadians was paired with a local photographer. The Rwandans learned how to use modern, professional cameras (donated by Photosensitive and Getty Images) to produce images that go beyond traditional news pictures in their depth, quality and resolution. Those images will appear together as photo essays in each of Rwanda's major newspapers.
Local photographer Shyaka Anastase says the Canadian help is sorely needed. "A lot of people died or left the country during the genocide, and for that reason we don't have any great photographers here in Rwanda," he says, speaking in French. Anastase explains that because of the role of media in fuelling the killings, many potential journalists have shied away from the profession. This has left the country's few remaining reporters in charge of both writing articles and taking pictures, and as a result, photography in Rwanda has suffered.
"I used to think this aspect of journalism wasn't that important," says Anastase. "But in the last few days, what I've learned has instilled in me a love for taking pictures and has made me want to really do more."
Anastase has been working with Peter Bregg, a 40-year veteran who's covered everything from the Olympic Games to parliamentary news. Bregg, photo editor at Hello! magazine, says he's impressed with how far his trainee has come in such a short time.
"He's looking now to shoot things that he wouldn't have shot before," says Bregg.
Watching the two working together in the field, it's easy to get a sense of what Bregg is talking about. He's not a heavy-handed coach - instead, he teaches by example. Every so often on a shoot, Bregg will set up at an angle or in a spot that catches Anastase's attention, and Anastase will do his best to mimic the photo. If the results aren't the same, Bregg will take the opportunity to give a quick lesson on lighting, aperture opening, and shutter speed.
"After working with Peter, I think my pictures have much more feeling," says Anastase. "I learned a lot about how to avoid making mistakes after just a few days."
Anastase says he's been so inspired by his experience with Bregg that he hopes to create an association of Rwandan photojournalists in the hope that they might get together to plan more Photosensitive-style documentary projects.
In the meantime, a Photosensitive exhibit at the National University of Rwanda in Butare will serve as inspiration to the next generation of Rwandan journalists. Photosensitive plans to exhibit their work in to provide inspiration of a different sort - not to document, but rather to act.
"Whenever we bring AIDS to the front in Canada, it helps remind people the problem is still there," says Bregg. "And it's not insurmountable. A lot of our pictures will illustrate despair, but a lot will also illustrate hope."
Christopher Maughan accompanied photographers on the Photosensitive project. He is an intern with the Rwanda initiative, a Canadian and Rwandan journalism partnership.
Friday, December 21, 2007
Monsanto Wants to Ban Hormone-Free Milk Labels
From the Friday, December 21, Daily Green, an article about Monsanto wanting Ohio to get rid of hormone-free milk labels:
MONSANTO URGES OHIO TO BAN HORMONE-FREE MILK LABELS
Let There Be Controversy: A Label Never Hurt Anyone
Whether or not there's any discernible difference in the milk produced by cows on recombinant bovine growth hormones and those not, many consumers look for the rBGH-free or rbST-free labels as a window on the farm that produced their milk.
It tells them whether cows are being forced to produce milk at unusual rates.
Whatever choice the "hormone-free" label helps them make, they may be denied access to that information if Ohio follows the advice of Monsanto, the chemical giant that introduced the artificial growth hormone to the market in 1994. Pennsylvania is the only other state to make such a move, but New Jersey is considering it, too. The Ohio Department of Agriculture's Dairy Labeling Advisory Committee is meeting today to discuss, and will decide within weeks what to do.
"If the state decides to outlaw labels on milk and other dairy products, they take away Ohio consumers' right to know about the foods they eat," said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director at the Washington D.C.-based Center for Food Safety. "Labeling gives consumers access to information on nutrition, freshness, and safety. How is it possibly in the public interest to take away their rights by keeping important dietary information from them?"
Ohio officials are hearing from consumers, however. Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, has raised objections, along with a group 70 strong of farmers, food makers, retailers, consumers, advocates and others.
The group has complained that the deck is stacked against them: Of 20 people on Ohio's advisory committee, six are farmers who use hormones to boost milk production and one is a former area market manager for Monsanto.
The Food and Drug Administration has decided the hormones pose no serious risk to humans or cows, and Monsanto objects to having its product maligned. But some people doubt the wisdom of using artificial hormones to produce milk.
Let there be controversy. The issue is simple: A label never hurt anyone.
MONSANTO URGES OHIO TO BAN HORMONE-FREE MILK LABELS
Let There Be Controversy: A Label Never Hurt Anyone
Whether or not there's any discernible difference in the milk produced by cows on recombinant bovine growth hormones and those not, many consumers look for the rBGH-free or rbST-free labels as a window on the farm that produced their milk.
It tells them whether cows are being forced to produce milk at unusual rates.
Whatever choice the "hormone-free" label helps them make, they may be denied access to that information if Ohio follows the advice of Monsanto, the chemical giant that introduced the artificial growth hormone to the market in 1994. Pennsylvania is the only other state to make such a move, but New Jersey is considering it, too. The Ohio Department of Agriculture's Dairy Labeling Advisory Committee is meeting today to discuss, and will decide within weeks what to do.
"If the state decides to outlaw labels on milk and other dairy products, they take away Ohio consumers' right to know about the foods they eat," said Joseph Mendelson, Legal Director at the Washington D.C.-based Center for Food Safety. "Labeling gives consumers access to information on nutrition, freshness, and safety. How is it possibly in the public interest to take away their rights by keeping important dietary information from them?"
Ohio officials are hearing from consumers, however. Consumers Union, the publisher of Consumer Reports, has raised objections, along with a group 70 strong of farmers, food makers, retailers, consumers, advocates and others.
The group has complained that the deck is stacked against them: Of 20 people on Ohio's advisory committee, six are farmers who use hormones to boost milk production and one is a former area market manager for Monsanto.
The Food and Drug Administration has decided the hormones pose no serious risk to humans or cows, and Monsanto objects to having its product maligned. But some people doubt the wisdom of using artificial hormones to produce milk.
Let there be controversy. The issue is simple: A label never hurt anyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)