The National Cancer Institute Should be on the Forefront of Identifying the Causes of Cancer

Samuel Epstein has been a respected, champion of environmental causes of cancer for many years but I must challenge his recent blog post here on HuffPost regarding the Love/Avon Army of Women.

It is certainly true that the chemicals mentioned in his piece have theoretical potential as causes of cancer, however almost all of the data comes from studies on cells and rats. This type of research is very useful in generating hypothesis but cannot prove cause and effect in women. For that we need studies in women. As has been well pointed out in the Breast Cancer Fund's State of the Evidence: The Connection Between Breast Cancer and the Environment, "We need to begin to think of breast cancer causation as a complex web of often interconnected factors, each exerting direct and interactive effects on cellular processes in mammary tissue." Studying one chemical at a time in cells or rats will not be able to predict what the effects in women might be. As one basic scientist said to me the problem with studying women is that "they are so messy and we can't control all the factors." But it is this messiness, or complex web of factors that leads to breast cancer. And it is only by studying women in all their complexity that we will be able to figure out all the causes of breast cancer. It was to this end that the Love Army of Women was launched with a generous grant from the Avon Foundation for Women. Over 330,000 women have signed up to be part of finding the answers by being willing to consider participating in research into the cause and prevention of breast cancer.

Could there be carcinogens in cosmetics that increase breast cancer risk? Of course! Should companies try to use the safest ingredients possible? Of course! In fact Avon is eliminating phthalates in response to the concerns of breast cancer advocates. Could they do more, undoubtedly but they also should be congratulated on funding research into all the possible causes of breast cancer even when the results may not be in its own corporate self-interest. And the National Cancer Institute should be congratulated for being willing to collaborate on new projects to find the answers once and for all.

 

Follow Susan M. Love on Twitter: www.twitter.com/DrSusanLove

Comments

[shelhol]

09:06 AM on 09/07/2009

We can study 'lifestyle' and individual differences all we want, but let's understand that companies like Avon are responsible for exposing us all to vast amounts of hormone-mimicking and cell-interrupting and possibly tumor-supportive chemicals. Can they stop it? As Dr. Love admits, yes they can. Should we avoid association with them until they do? Of course we should! To do otherwise is to act like their corporate lobbyists, like representatives of the chemical producers in this country who encourage that we accept the use of any safety-unproven chemical unless t here is clear "proof" that it is dangerous. A better, safer standard, that would indicate *real* concern for women''s health, is to immediately end the use of any chemical which *might* cause damage--as indicated via those mere 'in vivo' or rat-model Dr. Love shockingly seems to try to discredit here as bad science (sure they aren't thorough epidemiological studies, but must we wait for those to just insist on safer alternatives?!)--and *stop* ignoring their use, as giving the 'thumbs-up' to Avon via letting them come off as protectors of women. Should we use their products with questionable ingredients? No! We should support the small companies using alternative ingredients that work just as well for women, of course!

[RMankovitz]

12:32 AM on 09/07/2009

The following are my personal opinions.

From the NCI and CDC websites: The National Cancer Institute has been in existence for 72 years. The US total annual cost of cancer care has increased from about $1 billion in 1960 to $72 billion today. Cancer has remained the second leading cause of death for the last 70 years.

I fully understand those wanting to wait for evidence-based studies before taking any proactive measures to reduce the risk of breast cancer. Perhaps the next 70 years will be more productive.

For those interesting in taking their health into their own hands, I have the following thoughts, based on common sense:

A robust and properly functioning immune system appears to be the first line of defense against all illnesses, including cancer. In order to support the immune system:

Reduce your toxin load by eating a diet very low in natural and artificial toxins.

Engage in a detoxification plan to eliminate a lifetime of toxins already stored in the body.

Choose natural supplements that support the immune system (iodine and Vitamin D come to mind relating to breast health).

Make lifestyle choices that support the immune system. With respect to breast health, lymph system support may be enhanced by either eliminating brassieres or minimizing their use (they tend to restrict lymph flow), and by using a rebounder for exercise.

There are many programs to accomplish the above, including the one in "The Wellness Project."

Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com

[sixyfivepercentwater]

08:44 PM on 09/06/2009

"And it is only by studying women in all their complexity that we will be able to figure out all the causes of breast cancer." Scientific conclusions can only be reached by establishing direct causal links. These links cannot be verified outside the laboratory. They cannot be established in the presence of variables.

If you insist on having direct links to cancer - if you simply *must* be able to state that THIS causes cancer and THIS causes cancer, and so on - then the research must happen in laboratories and we must continue to torture rats and other animals who have no rights and can't defend themselves.

I feel it would be much better to realize that the causes of cancer are obviously complex and the increase in the rate of breast cancer (among others) simply must be do to an increase of ingestion of toxins from our air and water which in turn permeate our food.

[loracc]

11:22 AM on 09/06/2009

We absolutely do need more research on the role certain chemicals in our environment play on causing breast cancer and other cancers. We also need to learn more about the role lifestyle plays in helping make us as resistant as possible to the development of breast cancer. Scientific studies have demonstrated that we can lower our risk for breast cancer with certain healthy habits such as breastfeeding, getting regular exercise, limiting weight gain, limiting alcohol consumption, and eating a diet rich in fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and low in saturated fats, and avoiding hormone replacement therapy.. For more information, see:
www.ReduceBreastCancerRisk.com

[sixyfivepercentwater]

08:46 PM on 09/06/2009

That link does not work, and I have never seen any studies which support your allegations.

[SEQUOIABISON]

09:40 AM on 09/06/2009

I think we already know that many types of cancer are caused by poor lifestyle choices and bad eating habits, but the medical profession refuses to embrace diet and exercise as a way of Preventing debilitating illnesses.

I believe every woman should read the iconoclastic eye opening book: "You Can Prevent Breast Cancer" By Harvey Diamond, one of the co-authors of "Fit For Life".
http://www.amazon.com/You-CAN-Prevent-Breast-Cancer/dp/0963632817

[enjoyful]

06:15 PM on 09/06/2009

Breast cancer strikes all women regardless of eating habits, exercise, social strata, and color. People who believe that a breast cancer patient caused their own disease are doing a great disservice to that person and to all breast cancer patients. Perhaps it makes you feel safer to say that it is preventable, but until we know the precise mechanisms that trigger cancers, we can never truly say it is preventable.

[sixyfivepercentwater]

08:49 PM on 09/06/2009

You're so right. The unfounded allegations about breast cancer causes are obviously bogus, because no one knows the causes. Putting the blame on the choices made by the cancer patients is not only irresponsible but downright obtuse and disrespectful. The American Diet is actually much more nutritious than it ever has been in terms of vitamins, minerals, etc. The only way in which diet has changed is the addition of artificial colors, flavors, and other chemicals, as well as the presence of pesticides and herbicides in the air and water. These things are certainly not the cancer patient's fault.

[femdem262]

07:26 PM on 09/06/2009

Then why do thin and athletic women get breast cancer? Being fit can't save you from getting sick, even though it does improve overall health.

There is plenty of blame to go around for men and their "poor lifestyle choices" as well.

[RedPlush Femme]

09:18 PM on 09/05/2009

In regards to women's health and phthalates, I have been doing some research on phthalates use in adult toys recently. It seems that many brands use phthalates in their toys and these chemicals can actually separate from the toy and leech through your skin. Although the studies are not 100% clear, as the post above mentions, there is mounting evidence that elevated levels of phthalates can be harmful to us and could lead to breast cancer.

If you're looking for some safe adult toys to play with, there are a few brands that are guaranteed 100% phthalate-free: LELO, Tantus, and Fun Factory

Also, I just did a blog post about this very topic, so if you're looking for more information check it out:
http://femme.redplush.com/?p=3

[sixyfivepercentwater]

08:45 PM on 09/06/2009

Phthalates are banned in Europe. Their use in sex toys is the least of our problems.