Half of All Breast Cancers are Tied to Pollution
by www.SixWise.com
Breast cancer rates in the United States have been on the
rise since the 1940s. Today, one in seven women will be diagnosed
with breast cancer during her lifetime -- a rate triple the
number in the 1960s.
What is behind this significant rising trend that has made
breast cancer the most common cancer among U.S. women? Conventional
medical literature states that age (over 65), family history
and lifestyle factors (including not exercising, being obese
and drinking a lot of alcohol) all affect the risk.
|
Bisphenol-A, a compound used to make plastic baby bottles,
food storage containers, children's toys, soda cans
and more may be causing breast cancer in women.
|
But, says Nancy Evans, health science consultant for the
Breast Cancer Fund and principle author of a new report "State
of the Evidence," the cause of a large number of breast
cancer cases remain unexplained.
"You just can't blame it on lifestyle factors, like
when you have children, or if you have children," Evans
said. "Half the cases are not explained by genetics or
the so-called 'known risk factors.' There's something else
going on."
50 Percent of Breast Cancer Cases Not Caused by Genetics,
Lifestyle
The report, produced by the two groups Breast Cancer Fund
and Breast Cancer Action, found that lifestyle factors and
genetics were not involved in half of the breast cancer diagnoses
in 2005. And with 211, 240 women diagnosed last year, this
represents a hefty number -- and a grossly overlooked factor
(or several of them).
After analyzing more than 350 studies on breast cancer, the
researchers determined that only one in 10 breast cancer cases
are due to genetics. The majority of cases arise, they say,
from a combination of factors, including environmental pollution
and exposure to low-dose radiation.
Why Plastics May Actually be Dangerous
Low-dose exposure to chemicals such as bisphenol-A (BPA)
-- especially as a child -- may be having a profound effect
on women.
Bisphenol-A is widely used in plastic containers, tin can
and soda-can linings, baby bottles, children's toys and more.
Close to 6 billion pounds are produced every year. However,
studies find that it is far from an inert compound -- instead,
it appears to be capable of altering cells.
One study, published in the journal Endocrinology, for instance,
found that pregnant mice exposed to levels of the compound
similar to what a human would typically be exposed to had
alterations to the development of their mammary glands.
The mammary glands of their female offspring grew in a way
that made them more susceptible to breast cancer development,
and also responded unusually to estrogen, which promotes breast
cancer in humans.
Further, due to the bisphenol-A exposure, the mice were less
able to get rid of damaged cells that could be cancerous than
mice that were not exposed.
"This is of tremendous concern because this is clearly
a study that is relevant to human exposure levels to this
chemical," said Professor Frederick vom Saal, of the
University of Missouri-Columbia.
What does industry have to say of these findings? "When
you look at this body of evidence in total, we didn't find
any evidence that there is a marked, repeatable-across-laboratories
effect that has any clear scientific standing," said
Lorenz Romberg, a consultant and former U.S. Environmental
Protection Agency scientist (who has testified before the
government for the chemical industry).
Early Mammograms May Also Warrant Concern
The American Cancer Society recommends that women over the
age of 40 get mammograms, despite the fact that research suggests
they're not effective until age 50.
Now new research from the National Academy of Sciences suggests
that even the lowest possible doses of radiation increase
cancer risk.
"We have to have a replacement for mammography. It's
so aggressively promoted, especially for young women,"
Evans said. "I'm not saying they should or shouldn't
[have a mammogram]. They need to be aware of the risk. An
additional 10 years of radiation is not insignificant."
|
The state of California has agreed with a 1,200-page
report that found exposure to secondhand smoke causes
breast cancer in younger women.
|
It appears that a combination of factors is likely to blame
for rising breast cancer rates. As of today, no one knows
what happens when a person is exposed to low doses of chemicals,
combined with low doses of radiation and other pollution.
Secondhand Smoke Officially a "Toxic Air Contaminant"
in California
California regulators have recently ruled that secondhand
smoke causes breast cancer in younger women. The first-of-its-kind
ruling could lead to tougher measures to fight against smoking
in the state.
The 1,200-page report from scientists at the California Environmental
Protection Agency was unanimously approved by the state's
Air Resources Board. It found that women under 50 who were
exposed to secondhand smoke had an increased risk of breast
cancer compared to those not exposed. State law in California
will now list secondhand smoke as a "toxic air contaminant."
"There should be an even stronger effort to eliminate
secondhand smoke exposure, particularly for our young girls,"
says Laura Esserman, a surgeon and researcher at the University
of California-San Francisco.
Aside from avoiding exposure to environmental toxins as much
as possible, there are also dietary measures you can take
to help prevent breast cancer -- including consuming plenty
of these
eight key nutrients.
Recommended Reading
Eight
Key Nutrients to Help Prevent Breast Cancer -- and Where to
Find Them
The
Most Dangerous Toxin that Almost No One Knows About
Sources
USA
Today January 26, 2006
The
Argus January 25, 2006
Endocrinology.
2005 Sep;146(9):4138-47.
Scientists
Link Plastic Food Containers With Breast Cancer