"Ten million cancers over the last thirty years were entirely preventable"

[donsu]

http://www.counterpunch.org/mckenna11212007.html


Devra Davies On the Offensive
Cancer Terrorists Unmasked


-snip-

These days whenever I think of cancer I think of another cancer fighter, a cultural warrior named Devra Davis. Her new book, "The Secret History of the War on Cancer" is a disturbing, beautifully rendered work that details how corporate suppression, government inaction and social amnesia have combined to cause an epidemic that makes a mockery of President Nixon's War on Cancer in 1971.

Ten million cancers over the last thirty years were entirely preventable argues Davis.

Secret History was twenty years in the making. In 1986 Davis was offered a hefty advance to write a book on all that was then known about cancer prevention. When she informed her boss at the National Academy of Sciences, an arm of the federal government, about the offer he told her that she would lose her job if she wrote it. Davis, now 61, is Director of Environmental Oncology at the University of Pittsburgh. With more than 170 peer reviewed publications, an extensive career as a Presidential appointed governmental researcher, and a National Book Award bronze medal under her belt (for When Smoke Ran Like Water in 2002) anything Davis writes on cancer commands widespread attention.

Consider her assessment of aspartame. An artificial sweetener now widely used in cookies, cakes and candies around the world, aspartame was judged to be unsafe by the FDA in the 1970s after widespread testing. It was suspected of being a possible cancer causer. In 1977 the FDA formally asked the US attorney general to indict Searle corporation, aspartame's major producer, for knowingly making false and misleading statements about aspartame's safety. Searle responded by hiring a top Washington official, formerly with the Defense Department, to be its chief Executive officer. Aspartame was defeated in 1980 when the FDA review board voted unanimously against its approval. Then, in 1981, after Ronald Reagan's election, Searle reapplied for approval, and its CEO "called in my marks" at the FDA. Within a year aspartame was approved for all liquids and vitamins. The name of the CEO? Donald Rumsfeld.

It sometimes seems that the entire Bush team cut its eyeteeth on undermining cancer prevention efforts. It is true for my cancer. It is not well known that sunscreen is a cause of melanoma since it generally does not protect well against UVA rays. People sopping on the gook or sprays have a false sense of security in the sun. But the FDA has not changed sunscreen labels to alert consumers of this fact.

-snip-

Sir Richard Doll, of Oxford University, perhaps the most esteemed cancer epidemiologist in the world for decades, and one who discounted most environmental causes to cancer, was, in fact, secretly in the employ of chemical companies like Monsanto for years.

-snip-

Shampoos containing a clear colorless liquid know as "1, 4-dioxane" causes cancer in animals and is banned from cosmetics by the European Union. The FDA is silent.

-snip-

Davis' book signals the need for a revolution in medical education, public health and the social world at large. It is a rallying call. The book is capable of sending shock waves through the culture. With our help it can.
--------------------------


have to get rid of the neo cons first

[Mike03]

1. It's frightening

Yesterday I discovered that the coal tar extract used in a psoriasis medication I periodically use is a known carcinogen.

I thought bottled water was healthy until reading some books and articles about chemicals used in the plasticizers in the bottles themselves, which leach hormone-disrupting chemicals into the water. These chemicals are also used in can sealants. A health guru on the radio last Sunday actually told his listeners not to eat or drink anything that comes out of a can, plastic bottle, is wrapped or stored in plastic or aluminum, or is frozen! Also, absollutely no dairy (due to the rBGH), non-organic meats, refined carbohydrates, anything containing MSG or artificial sweeteners. And don't cook any of your vegetables. That kind of narrows it down to raw foods.

[amitten]

2. Well, realistically, I think it all boils down to the levels you intake.

For instance, someone that drinks bottled water once daily may have such small levels of the chemical in question that it's not a problem. Our bodies do have the ability to eliminate toxins, as long as the amounts are fairly small.

But if someone is getting every drink and meal out of a plastic container, the toxins probably add up enough to be a health threat.

I think that's true of any carcinogen.

[TheWraith]

13. Almost anything can kill you, if used improperly.

The important part being what the proper use is versus what a fatal usage is.

For instance, I have no doubt that cell phones CAN cause cancer, but that doesn't mean that the twitchy total paranoia about them is justified. How much is the key question. Hell, oxygen becomes toxic to us at a certain pressure. I'm sure a little artificial sweetener is fine too, as is a little natural sweetener, but too much is too much.

[OzarkDem]

3. Funding for prevention research is scarce

Breast cancer activists have been fighting for at least 6 years to get Congress to approve $30 million in funding for environmental research programs.

Once again, the bill is stalled in committee and the Dems have shown no enthusiasm for trying to get it passed, even though it has enough co-sponsors in the House and Senate to overcome a veto.

http://www.lesspinkmoreresearch.org/

The latest legislative action alert asks everyone to call their senators and ask them to call Sen. Harry Reid to get the bill moving.
Reid is not living up to his promise to get it passed this session.

[The Straight Story]

4. K&R (nt)

[Bobbieo]

6. You omitted radiation poisoning which accounts for many cancer deaths

from the bomb tests held on western deserts in Nevada and New Mexico from the 50s to the 70s. Those radioactive clouds drifted across the country and poisoned thousands of people. Still doing it on the Navajo Reservation.

Wake up people - the uraniun craze is with us again!!!

[Cha]

5. Not surprised...cancer is

a money-maker for a lot of people. We need to be responsible for our own health. I know that's asking a big turn around.

[davsand]

9. Not only is cancer profitable, but lack of regulation helps corporations.

This crowd does not appreciate any regulation of corporate activities, nor do their corporate sponsors. Monsanto (for instance) is not exactly gonna be thrilled if a respected researcher publishes research that suggests Monsanto's products are killing people off. It hasn't been that long ago that big tobacco was fighting the lawsuits about smoking causing cancer. You have got to know this is no different.

Public safety is nothing these guys care about. PROFIT is king.



Laura

[MuseRider]

7. K&R

bookmarking for later reading. I am NOT surprised in the least and anyone who has been paying the slightest bit of attention and actually lets themselves think about it will not be surprised either.

[truedelphi]

8. BENZENE and formaldehyde in all the glade air sprays

And Lysol air fresheners.

The companies cannot legally say that they are so safe that they can be used in the baby's nursery - or Elliot SPitzer in NY will fine them 50,000 dollars.

So instead they create little cartoon butterflies and birds and show these creatures existing healthily in a room being sprayed. (It can be portrayed but not said.) Then we wonder why we have SIDS, and learning disabilities and cancer??

[Cha]

10. That's why it's more than

beneficial(our quality of life depends on it) to stay far away from mainstream products and really go with natural sources. There are so many good companies out there.

[TheWraith]

14. Natural doesn't mean healthy.

Digitalis is natural. Tannins are natural. Hell, so is benzene, cyanide, and safrole. Even pepper, nutmeg, and garlic can all be dangerous in significant doses. To automatically equate "natural" and "healthy" is a logical fallacy.

[truedelphi]

17. I think zidzi was meaning that there are healthy alternatives to the

Corporate model of personal care products.

"Natural" does not necessarily mean healthy - but in today's short hand we tend to use it that way.

[Cha]

28. Thanks, true! I've been out

doing my laundry with Ecos laundry detergent(Earth Friendly Products).. :P

[Cha]

26. True has it..that's what I meant..

Sorry if I wasn't clear enough, Wraith. I've been around this good stuff for so long I don't even think in terms of "natural" versus "healthy". To me, the natural products we sell in our co-op are a significant amount healthier than mainstream products that really can kill you.

And of course you don't overdose on nutmeg, unless you were a joe lieman supporter in Conn and that's about the only excuse you have.

[TheWraith]

29. I just get tweaked by the people who act like everything manufactured is bad...

And everything that comes with a "natural" or "organic" label must be good. Most of the time, they really don't know what they're talking about. I take your meaning, though.

[Cha]

30. I understand..we do have

to investigate and not take anything for granted. :)

[KT2000]

11. Children's health stats

are a national disgrace.
That is the true sign of a failed society.
One in 150 with autism?? There should be a national emergency called to fix this because in 30 years we will have 1 in 150 - 30 year olds with autism!

[truedelphi]

15. The only upside being is that apparently you can have autism or some other

Undefined mental problem and still be President.

We have missed our chance to deal with this emergency. The pictorial messaging is too pervasive - I watched a video last night wherein Native Americans were Febreezing their tribal costumes so they would smell pleasant while they did their ceremonial dances.

the pictorial messsging is doing the work that industry wants it to do.

Doctors are still clueless that their patients might be sick because of pesticides - which have been with us since the 1940's. They do not have any idea about the assault of chemicals, as the education they are given in Medical school is so deficient - and how could it not be - it is now controlled by the corporate interests.

I called and talked to the woman at the National Health Institute one time about four years ago to ask if perhaps the reason that babies were less likely to die of SIDS if they were kept on their backs rather than their tummies could be explained by a simple fact: today's infants are lying on bedding that is so heavily contaminated with toxins from commercial detergents, fabric softeners and bleach. She said she had never really considered that. She also went on and on about the statistics as though I were disagreeing about the stats. But I wasn't arguing that the Babies Sleeping on Their Backs program was unsuccessful - I was saying "Why?"

Part of the official explanation is that there is a "glitch" in the biological programming of the infant.

Well that is nonsense. Babies like sleeping on their tummies because that is a Yogic posture that helps their undevellopped lungs develop properly. A baby is specifically designed to sleep that way, for the reason given.

But when Fabric softeners have chloroform as an ingredient - when commercial laundry detergents contain battery acids, etc we can't help but have to re-configure the infants' sleeping posture or else they will die!

[Duppers]

19. fabric softeners have put me into anaphylactic shock.

Once I had to be hospitalized. And it's hell to try to find a motel or hotel I can stay in.
I feel like the canary in the coal mine. At least my body gives me warning signals.

K & R.

[Bruce McAuley]

34. Scents can be a killer to some...

My wife is highly sensitive/allergic to chemical scents, not to mention dyes in foods. People with heavy scents on them can cause her to reach immediately for her inhaler and leave the area.
Dyes in foods are also a MAJOR allergen for her, and the effects are manifested by bi-polarism and depression in her. She stays away from yellow, blue and red dyes she's fine. We have to make almost all our own foods, or be very careful about what we buy.
She always thinks of herself as a canary in a coal mine.

Bruce

[donsu]

36. I wouldn't touch fabric softener with a ten foot pole

for a number of yrs. I had to Laundromat and hated it because the softener residue would be in the dryers.

I'm not allergic but knew not to trust them.

[KT2000]

32. Absolutely!

Babies are also exposed to formaldehyde in their bedding and personal care products. It is just nuts.

Here is an encouraging message though. Someone wrote an article for an international occ/med publication, about the industry ties to the largest occ/med organization in the US. The corporate toads are so mad they are threatening to sue. Someone really must have shed some light on the subject.

http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/53874/

[Feron]

25. There are lies, damned lies, and statistics..

The definition of autism was recently expanded to include asperger's.

Therefore adults, such as myself, got a diagnosis for first time only recently. I'm 30 now and got a diagnosis at 27. No doubt these "new" cases aren't being differentiated from the newly diagnosed children. Naturally then, the overall autism diagnosis rate will be above average for a few years as awareness spreads and older people are diagnosed for the first time.

And there are also those who are misdiagnosed and sometimes intentionally in order to receive services.

Whenever you hear statistics like that your BS detector should ping. For example it is primarily bandied about as a fundraising tool for autism cure groups. These statistics are designed to make you alarmed and part with your cash.

[KT2000]

31. Not agreeing with your

assumption.
Yes - autism now includes a spectrum - more than before, but that does not explain the increasing incidence that has been noted in most industrialized countries.

I think we should be alarmed that rates for certain cancers in children are rising, that neurodevelopmental and behavioral disorders are rising, asthma rates in children are rising, allergy rates for children are rising and certain congenital defects are rising. This is called the new pediatric morbidity. (Environmental Health Perspectives, Landrigan et.al., Vol 110, No. 7)

You may want to read up on how exposure to thyroid disrupting chemicals can affect fetal development - especially the brain. Lead exposure is robbing IQ in some kids. Infants and young children are exposed to chemicals that they do not even have matured systems in place to deal with them. Take a look at some of the research and you will be astounded.

Sorry - this cannot be sloughed off as BS. It is a very serious problem.

[soothsayer]

12. there are plenty that are curable with genetic drugs, but the populations are too small

to warrant development.

[earth mom]

16. You can bet your sweet bippy Big Pharma doesn't want to see a cure for Cancer. nt

[LeftishBrit]

22. Oh? Then why are so many more people with cancer cured now than 40 years ago?

If you said that Big Pharma doesn't care enough about curing POOR people, that might be accurate.

Instead of attacking modern medicine, we should be fighting for EVERYONE to have the right to it, whether they can pay or not.

[Evoman]

27. Are you kidding? Cures for cancer would make "big pharma" even richer.

But cancer is complicated....there will never be one cure-all for all types of cancer in my opinion. However, billions could be made curing cancer.

[Kurovski]

18. K&R

K&R

K&R

[Hydra]

20. Is there a dirty pie that the Neocons DON'T have their fingers in?

:puke:

[begin_within]

24. This

but I'm sure they'll dig their fingers in if it means profit.

[flashl]

21. And, there is the ever vigilant FDA raidings

Tyranny in the USA: The true history of FDA raids on healers, vitamin shops and supplement companies

K&R

[begin_within]

23. So Donald Rumsfeld is the cause of my headaches.

I used to drink diet sodas but I was getting headaches all the time. I finally read an article about aspartame, and I stopped drinking diet sodas completely, and my headaches went away. Now if I drink a soda I'll only drink one made with real cane sugar, or Splenda. Now I find out that it was Donald Rumsfeld who pushed through Aspartame.

[bluesmail]

33. I remember when cancer was a rarity

I'm retirement age, and when I was a kid I knew one person with cancer. In Mendocino County we have our very own Love Canal.

[femrap]

35. K and R...I can't wait to read

this book. I have been saying for years that Monsanto is going to kill us all. (I just picked Monsanto as an example).

Think of all the chemicals that have been put into humans since after WWII...Food production changed entirely.

And today all cancer research $ is spent on TREATMENT....not CAUSE. Fucking corporations.

Thank you for posting about this book, donsu!

[flashl]

37. Everything is for sale

Lobbying for Cancer

Industry special interests are burying information on cancer-causing chemicals and, according to watchdog groups, the government is helping them do it—in the name of “data quality.”

In a study of the National Institutes of Health’s National Toxicology Program, OMB Watch, a DC-based policy-research group, reports that industry is frustrating the work of government researchers with petitions that are light on science but heavy with accusations of anti-business “bias.”

Public interest advocates warn that corporations are co-opting the federal Data Quality Act to paralyze scientists with frivolous allegations of inaccuracy, driving a stealth assault on public-health research.

In 2000, Congress passed the Data Quality Act under the guidance of lobbyist Jim Tozzi, a former administrator with the Office of Management and Budget under Reagan who now heads the industry-backed Center for Regulatory Effectiveness (CRE). The two-paragraph statute broadly mandates that agencies uphold “the quality, objectivity, utility and integrity of information” they disseminate.

That’s a laudable principle, critics say, but the corporate-friendly Bush administration is promoting exploitation of the law.

The un-natural close ties between FDA, NIH, AMA, chemical lobbyist, and other government watchdog agencies and industries have been found unethical on many occassions and reported for years.