Below are a number of articles about the dangers that can lead to cancer that have appeared in CANCERactives icon magazine. Just click on the title to read the piece.
FDA, albeit begrudgingly, issues on site warning on mercury
According to the new posting on the FDA’s web site "Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and foetuses. Pregnant women and persons who may have a health condition that makes them more sensitive to mercury exposure, including individuals with existing high levels of mercury bioburden, should not avoid seeking dental care, but should discuss options with their health practitioner.
The warning was one of the conditions that the American Federal Drugs agency agreed to in settling a lawsuit filed by several consumer health groups.
’Gone, gone, gone are all of FDAs claims that no science exists that amalgam is unsafe,’ said Charles Brown, a lawyer for Consumers for Dental Choice, while another plaintiff, Michael Bender of the Mercury Policy Project, added ’Its a watershed moment’
Mercury has already been fully identified as a neurotoxin, and can cause developmental problems in the foetus. It increases risk of brain and kidney damage. Mercury amalgams have been used for over 100 years, constitute 30 per cent of all fillings in the developed world. but are now known to release mercury vapour with every bite. France, Sweden and Canada ban them. The UK has not, and the USA did nothing until this court case.
Although recommendations by Government Scientists and experts were that mercury amalgams be avoided with pregnant women and children, the FDA did nothing, prompting the lawsuits. And federal judge Ellen Segal Huvelle agreed telling the FDA, ’This is your classic failure to act.’
As part of the lawsuit settlement, the FDA must reach a final decision on the regulation of amalgam by July 28, 2009.
Your turn Gordon Brown.
Return to top
Now everyday chemicals are linked to lung cancer spread
It seems that hardly an issue of Cancer Watch passes without us reporting that some common chemical increases the risks opf a cancer. But mainstream cancer bodies and the UK ’powers that be’ in cancer just ignore it all, with rarely the slightest mention on their web sites. And never a warning!
Now it’s the turn of phosphates, commonly used to raise the water content of hams and other dried meats like bacon and chicken.
Expert research from South Korea’s Seoul University has concluded that inorganic phosphates play an important role in the growth of lung cancer tumours.
Of course, we all know that we get lung cancer because it is our fault and we smoke. However, as Canadian research covered in icon a year ago showed, more than a third of people with lung cancer have never been near a cigarette, or asbestos.
The research, published in the American Journal of Respiratory Research ended with the conclusion that ’Dietary regulation of inorganic phosphate may be critical for lung cancer treatment as well as prevention’. I’m sure that the UK Food Standards Agency will act on this immediately.
Return to top
Will Obama victory reduce influence of pharmaceutical companies in USA?
Any moment now, had George Bush stayed on in power, there was to have been a Supreme Court ruling that ordinary folks could no longer take nice pharmaceutical companies to court if they or their loved ones suffered harm because of problems with the side effects of their excellent wares.
The argument runs that because the FDA has done due diligence and approved the drug, that clears the pharmaceutical company of any blame. It’s an argument that has failed a few times before but in February the Supreme Court did rule that makers of FDA approved medical devices were immune from prosecution. ’What’s the difference?’ say the drug companies.
This law, if passed, will help the industry enormously. After all, as we covered in icon previously, taking a cocktail of prescription drugs accounts for almost a third of all hospital admissions in the USA and deaths from prescription drugs have tripled in the last seven years. One agitated American doctor has even provided this drug cocktail disease with a name polypharmacy. The side effects of chemotherapy drugs, which were supposed to lessen as they became more ’targeted and sophisticated’ were even questioned by The Lancet who, in late 2007, worried about exposure to dangerous side effects in clinical trials.
Only recently, the Seattle Times (Oct 22, 2008) reported that ’the number of reports of serious reactions to pharmaceutical drugs has reached a new record high in America, In the first three months of the year, 20,745 serious adverse reactions have been reported, which is 38 per cent above the average, and the highest for any quarter. These reports include 4,800 deaths’.
Next, a report by the Florida Medical Examiners Commission has concluded that prescription drugs have outstripped illegal drugs as a cause of death. An analysis of 168,900 autopsies conducted in Florida in 2007 found that three times as many people were killed by legal drugs as by cocaine, heroin and all methamphetamines put together. According to state law enforcement officials, this is a sign of a burgeoning prescription drug problem.
We wish we could give you accurate figures concerning this problem in the UK, but we can’t seem to find any.
The US Supreme Court ruling would absolve Pharmaceutical companies from blame (http://www.naturalnews.com/024688.html). But while the Bush administration supports this blanket immunity, the Obama administration is very unhappy with Big Pharma’s influence over Washington. We’ll see.
But what of Britain? Who is in charge of all this? In America, if the FDA absolves Big Pharma Companies from responsibility and the drug harms you, can you sue the FDA? Who could you sue in the UK? Personally I don’t think it is a bad ruling. If the FDA - and in the UK, the Government - approves Thalidomide and then gets sued for millions when it maims people, won’t the approving bodies take a little more care over what they approve? Or, like the last decades of Banks and Mortgage companies irresponsibility, would they just expect that the tax payer to end up funding the damage?
Return to top
Study shows pets in danger from household chemicals
According to a study by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), high levels of 48 different industrial chemicals were found in the blood streams of household pets.
The group tested 20 dogs and 37 cats and found high levels of chemical toxins - from mercury to formaldehyde to fire-retardants and dichlorobenzene in air fresheners. Pets are felt to be particularly at risk of exposure to toxic household chemicals because they spend their lives on the floor, especially in the kitchen. This finding does not bode well for small children either.
Oakland, Calif. veterinarian Gary Richter said that the incidence of diseases linked to these chemicals has been increasing - an increase in cancer in dogs and cats, and an increase in hyperthyroidism in cats," he said. "Household toxins are concerning."
Return to top
German Government bans pesticide for killing Honeybees
Clothianidin, a best selling Bayer pesticide, has been temporarily banned in Germany along with its sister chemicals, following huge levels of dead honeybees appearing in certain regions of the country..
Researchers, for the state most affected, Baden-Wrttemberg, at the German Research Centre for Cultivated Plants concluded that nearly 97 per cent of the dead honeybees had a significant build up of the pesticide. The pesticide was used with rape and corn seed along the Rhine Valley. ’It can unequivocally be concluded that a poisoning of the bees is due to the rub-off of the pesticide ingredient clothianidin,’ said the federal agricultural research agency spokesman Julius Kuehn.
Clothianidin is a member of the neonicotinoid family. Like all neonicotinoids, it is a systemic pesticide that is applied to the seeds of plants. France has already banned all seven members of the neonicotinoid family. This German bans is in place until more information can be collected. Since the pesticide is used in many countries, accusations that it is behind the worldwide loss of honeybees are now being taken seriously by many observers.
Return to top
Beware dangerous chemicals when pregnant
The first three months of a pregnancy can have a major impact on a baby’s fertility in manhood according to. researchers from Edinburgh University. Exposure to commonly used chemicals in household, personal care and toiletry products in the first 12 weeks in the womb can affect sperm production in manhood and even result in increased risk of cancers like testicular cancer.
Professor. Sharpe, who led the study said, "There are lots of compounds in perfumes that we know in higher concentrations have the potential to have biological effects, so it is just being ultra safe to say that by avoiding using them your baby isnt at risk.
Of course the dangers don’t just come from perfumed products. A number of chemicals like toluene and BPA are oestrogen mimics or xenoestrogens. Many of these can be absorbed simply through the skin.
Return to top