U.S. Losing War on Cancer, Ignoring Prevention

[Guest guest]

http://ens-news.com/ens/feb2003/2003-02-20-11.asp

 

U.S. Losing War on Cancer, Ignoring Prevention

 

 

WASHINGTON, DC, February 20, 2003 (ENS) - Leading players in the war on cancer

should do more to educate the American public about how to minimize its risk of

contracting the disease, according to a new report from the Cancer Prevention

Coalition (CPC).

Americans face increasing cancer risks from occupational and environmental

exposure to industrial carcinogens, the report finds, but established government

and nonprofit cancer organizations are fixated on treatment rather than

prevention.

" This report makes it clear that we are losing the war against cancer, " said Dr.

Samuel Epstein, CPC chairman and author of " The Stop Cancer Before It Starts

Campaign: How to Win the Losing War Against Cancer. " " But, " he said, " there are

opportunities for reversing this trend. "

The United States is losing the war against cancer, said Dr. Samuel Epstein.

(Photo courtesy Coalition to Prevent Cancer)Based on available data, the overall

incidence of cancers in the American population is on the rise. Men have a

little less than a one in two lifetime risk of developing cancer, for women the

risk is a bit more than one in three.

Adjusted to reflect the aging population, the U.S. cancer incidence is up some

24 percent from 1973 to 1999. Mortality rates are up some 30 percent over the

same time period.

But some argue these numbers are misleading, as the medical community's ability

to identify cancer has improved over that time period. Still, cancer kills some

550,000 Americans each year and is the second leading cause of death. Some 1.3

million Americans contract cancer each year.

And the American war on cancer, Epstein said, has been undermined by the myopic

focus on treatment by the National Cancer Institute (NCI), a government agency,

and the American Cancer Society (ACS), a nationwide, community based voluntary

health organization.

These organizations, he said, have been silent on a wide range of avoidable

causes of cancer, other than personal lifestyle choices such as smoking. Epstein

said there is enough evidence to warn people of the presence of industrial

pollutants, the concentrations of pesticides in nonorganic fruits and vegetables

and the possible risks of irradiated foods.

 

The National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society should do more to

warn the public about how they can avoid risks of cancer, according to the

Cancer Prevention Coalition. (Photo courtesy University of Maryland)

Mainstream cosmetics contain a wide range of carcinogenic materials, he said,

and there are increased cancer risks from some prescription medications.

Epstein said neither NCI nor ACS has taken a strong stand on the dangers from

carcinogenic exposures from pesticides or hazardous industrial waste.

" This has tacitly encouraged powerful corporate polluters and industries to

continue manufacturing carcinogenic products, " Epstein warned.

These organizations tend to " blame the victim " for contracting cancer, he said,

rather than explore the environmental causation that could be responsible for

their illness.

ACS spokesman Greg Donaldson said Epstein's comments about his organization and

its commitment to prevention efforts are " simply false. "

A cancer patient takes treatment. (Photo courtesy Prometic)Identifying the

specific cause of cancer is still often extremely difficult, Donaldson said. ACS

is funding some $40 million in prevention programs, he said, including studies

into environmental causation.

" We are committed to funding research on this, " Donaldson said, " but we only

speak when there is science based evidence one way or another. "

The National Cancer Institute did not return calls for comment.

Epstein released the new report at a press briefing today in Washington, DC and

announced that the Cancer Prevention Coalition and others will use it as a

springboard for a new grassroots effort.

This effort aims to reform the National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer

Society and to pressure federal and state governmental organizations to improve

the public's understanding of how to limit their risks of contracting cancer.

The public should have access to a registry compiled by NCI of " avoidable

carcinogens, " Epstein said, and Congress may need to step in to ensure this

happens.

What is frustrating, according to Dr. Nicholas Ashford, a Massachusetts

Institute of Technology public policy expert, is that NCI should already be

doing this.

" The legal mandate of NCI is to inform the public about avoidable causes of

cancer, " he said.

The National Cancer Institute is not fulfilling its mandate to inform the

public about cancer risks, according to Dr. Nicholas Ashford. (Photo courtesy

MIT)

This mandate comes from the 1971 National Cancer Act, signed by President

Richard Nixon, and was strengthened by amendments in 1988 that called for " an

expanded and intensified research program for the prevention of cancer caused by

occupational or environmental exposure to carcinogens. "

Prompting significant changes to NCI under the current political climate in

Washington will be very difficult, Epstein said, but there are opportunities at

state and local levels.

The Cancer Prevention Coalition report calls on states to enact the equivalent

of a toxics use reduction act passed in 1989 by Massachusetts. The law requires

statewide industries to disclose the chemicals they use, and since its passage

the state's environmental emissions decreased by 73 percent.

" This could set the stage for phasing out harmful carcinogens, " Epstein said.

That should be the ultimate goal, said Ashford. " When we know there are safe

alternatives, we should use them, " he said. " We are not talking about

bankrupting industry. "

The effort to reform NCI will closely monitor how it spends its annual budget of

some $4.6 billion. Tracking NCI's budget increases against the cancer incidence

numbers, Epstein said that " the more money we spend on cancer, the more cancer

we get. "

But he does not argue that less money should be spent. Instead, Epstein said it

should be spent better, with much more of it earmarked for prevention efforts.

NCI should be doing more research on avoidable exposures to industrial

carcinogens, Epstein said, and should inform the public of known risks from

occupational and environmental exposure to carcinogens.

The report suggests that both organizations should adopt the precautionary

principle and research cancer clusters in the vicinity of major sources of urban

pollution, power plants, petrochemical factories and Superfund hazardous waste

sites.

It is time to focus on cancer prevention, said Dr. Richard Clapp. (Photo

courtesy Tellus)This research, Epstein said, could complement the available data

on air and water pollutants documented through the U.S. Environmental Protection

Agency's National Toxic Release Inventory as well as data from states.

" We have not begun to win the war on cancer, " said Dr. Richard Clapp, an

epidemiological professor at the Boston University School of Public Health. " We

have not even turned the corner. "

" We have to move beyond the body count and begin to prevent exposures before

they occur. "

To view the report, log on to: http://www.preventcancer.com

 

 

 

advertisment

 

-->

 

 

 

Copyright Environment News Service (ENS) 2003.

 

Gettingwell- / Vitamins, Herbs, Aminos, etc.

 

To , e-mail to: Gettingwell-

Or, go to our group site: Gettingwell

 

 

 

 

Tax Center - forms, calculators, tips, and more