PERSONAL HEALTH  
comments_image -

Can Everyday Things Cause Cancer?

There's a stigma that accompanies those who question the safety of familiar things. But as cancer rates rise, maybe we ought to be asking more questions.
 
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Personal Health headlines via email.

 
 
 
 

There is something about the familiar that makes us assume it is safe. Rachel Carson observed this nearly 50 years ago in Silent Spring, when she exposed the dangers of toxins in the pesticides, insecticides, and fertilizers being used to grow the food we eat. There is also something about pointing to the potential danger in familiar things that can make one come across as a kook -- paranoid, fringe, alarmist. Indeed, most of us are inclined to dismiss challenges to the familiar, especially if they are things on which we believe ourselves to be dependent, such as cell phones, cosmetics and plastic food containers. Being caught up in the moment has tremendous power to trick us in this way. That is why people throughout history have done astoundingly misguided things that, from a distance, we look back on and wonder: What were they thinking?

Yet the truth is that many of the everyday things now in our homes and workplaces are filled with chemicals that were not around as recently as the 1950s. When exposed to heat or simple wear and tear, some of these chemicals have ways of getting out of the things they are in and into us. And there are now growing suspicions about a connection between our exposure to chemicals and the rise in numerous diseases and other health-related issues. As Nicholas Kristoff recently put it in The New York Times: “Concern about toxins in the environment used to be a fringe view. But alarm has moved into the mainstream.”

The latest development is from the President’s Cancer Panel, which on May 6 released a 200-page report, entitled "Environmental Cancer Risks: What We Can Do Now" (for a summary by Reuters, go here). The report said: “With nearly 80,000 chemicals on the market in the United States, many of which are used by millions of Americans in their daily lives and are un- or understudied and largely unregulated, exposure to potential environmental carcinogens is widespread.”

The result is “grievous harm,” indeed. In recent decades, an American woman’s risk of breast cancer and an American man’s risk of prostate cancer have risen significantly. Breast cancer rates among Gen X women, for example, are twice what they were for their mothers, as epidemiologist Devra Davis reports in The Secret History of the War on Cancer. Pancreatic cancer and bone marrow cancer, which used to affect only people in their 60s or older, is now occurring to people in their 30s and 40s. And the rates of several childhood cancers, including leukemia, kidney cancer, and brain cancer, have all grown.  In short, half a century ago, when Carson warned of the risks of toxins in the food we eat, one in four Americans was at risk of cancer. Today, that’s closer to one in two.  

At the same time, there has been an upswing in several developmental conditions, such as attention deficit hyperactivity disorder and autism spectrum disorder. For example, once a rare occurrence, autism now affects about one in 100 children.  And while improved detection is a part of the reason, it is not the only reason, according to Dr. Catherine Rice of the CDC, who told reporters in 2009: “We know there are multiple complex genetic and environmental factors which result in multiple forms of autism, and we have much to learn about the causes.”

Medical professionals are increasingly in agreement that children are uniquely susceptible to the dangers associated with chemicals—because their bodies and brains are still developing, and they eat, drink and breathe more for their size than adults do, which means they could carry an even heavier form of what medical experts are already describing as a “quite a toxic burden.”  As the new President’s Cancer Panel report states, “[Children] are at special risk due to their smaller body mass and rapid physical development, both of which magnify their vulnerability to known or suspected carcinogens, including radiation. Numerous environmental contaminants can [even] cross the placental barrier; to a disturbing extent, babies are born 'pre-polluted.'”

submit to reddit

-
Email
Print
Share
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Personal Health headlines via email
Advertisement
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading most read content ..
Advertisement
Fox, Breitbart, and Ricketts Try to Bring Back D'Souza's Pseudo-Birtherism

By Steve M | No More Mister Nice Blog

 
 
Activists Speak Out Against Lack of Access to Bradley Manning

By Agence France Presse

 
 
NYPD Catches Sexual Assailant, Then Lets Him Go Free Because He Didn't Feel Like Being Questioned

By Jill F | Feministe

 
 
Gov. Scott Orders Purging of Florida’s Voter Rolls - Just in Time For Prez Election

By Adele Stan | AlterNet

 
 
Abortion Clinics Across Country Put On Alert In Wake of Georgia Clinic Arson Cases

By Robin Marty | RH Reality Check

 
 
Former GOP Congresswoman Blasts New GOP Women’s Caucus: ‘They’re Not Voting In Best Interest Of All Women’

By Josh Israel | ThinkProgress

 
 
Debbie Wasserman Schulz is Wrong on Wisconsin

By LaFeminista | DailyKos

 
 
Pro-Coal Group Pays People to Wear Its Shirts at EPA Hearing

By Heather Moyer | Sierra Club

 
 
Kids Inundate NY Governor With Concerns About Fracking

By Seth Gladstone | Food and Water Watch

 
 
Shareholders, Top Doctors Demand McDonald's Assess its Health Impacts

By Sara Deon | Civil Eats

 
 
 
 
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS
 
[ page served from web 2 ]