You can race for the cure but you can't run from the cause

[Guest guest]

[This one's for you Elliot]

>Whenever I see someone wearing one of those " Race For The Cure " T-

>shirts I want to ask him, " What in the world is the matter with you?

>Open your eyes! " or at least to mention to him/her that we have lost

>the war on cancer, and that mainstream cancer treatment does not

>work. But those people are so brain-washed into thinking they did a

>wonderful, humanitarian service by participating in " the race " that

>my words are just wasted on them.

 

You Can Race For The Cure,

But You Can't Run From The Cause

http://www.stopcancer.org/voices/lyman.html

 

by Francesca Lyman

 

Environmental and travel journalist and editor of the American Museum of

Natural History book, " Inside the Dzanga-Sangha Rain Forest " (Workman, 1998).

 

A woman's chance of developing breast cancer has doubled during the past 50

years, and in the last 10 years alone, the rate of disease has increased 33

percent. Hundreds of breast cancer organizations have formed to tackle this

medical crisis, but while most fund raise for cures, others say it's also

time to raise awareness about " preventable causes. "

 

" IT'S JUST phenomenal how it keeps growing, " says Linda Frame, a senior

clinical advisor at the Susan G. Komen Foundation, describing the explosion

of participation in the Komen " Race for the Cure " Series. The race is one

of the best known events held during October - Breast Cancer Awareness

Month - when thousands of women and men in dozens of cities come out to

rally for better research and treatment of the disease.

 

Since 1983, the Race has grown " from one local race with 800 participants

to a national series of 107 races with more than one million participants "

this year, according to Komen. In Dallas alone, adds Frame, the Race grew

from about 27,000 participants last year to 33,000 this year.

 

In San Francisco's Golden Gate Park, too, the Race staged well-produced

events with speakers, jazzed up with music and an array of booths open to a

diverse range of organizations.

 

Focus Turns To Prevention

 

" It's a real feel-good event, and terrific for raising public awareness, "

says Barbara Brenner, director of Breast Cancer Action, an activist group

based in San Francisco. But her group takes an edgier tack.

 

Some breast cancer advocates are upset with President Clinton for

downplaying the passage of an important bill for what they say are

political reasons. NBC's Lisa Myers reports.

 

" Now that we're there on awareness, it's time to do something to stop the

cancer from happening. "

 

This year, Brenner's group was joined by " Women Walking Tall, " a group of

guerilla theater performers dressed in black, marching on 10-foot stilts,

their heads shrouded in veils, who clashed philosophically, at least, with

walkers wearing the pink ribbons that symbolize the cause. Their height is

a subtle reference to the fact that tall women were once associated - if

only in legend - with higher risks of breast cancer.

 

Some carried banners citing corporations known for environmental pollution.

" We carried banners that said, 'You can race for the cure, but you can't

run from the cause,' " says Judy Brady, a 20-year breast cancer survivor and

activist, " and we asked, 'Who's causing the cancer?' "

 

Breast cancer is the most common form of cancer in U.S. women, with some

182,000 invasive cases newly diagnosed each year, as well as another 1,400

in men. Surprisingly, though, little is known about the causes of this

complex, multi-factorial disease, a fact that is frustrating to advocates.

 

Traditionally, the largest organizations have focused on raising money for

research, education, screening and treatment. Since Komen began in 1982,

for example, its foundation and affiliates have raised more than $240

million. The National Association of Breast Cancer Organizations,

representing 60,000 members and 500 local organizations, sees hope,

attributing better use of mammography to detect cancer, " combined with the

benefit of more, and more effective, treatments " for the first significant

decrease in U.S. breast cancer death rates in many decades.

 

Environmental Causes

 

While acknowledging the importance of screening and treatment, another wing

of the movement is advocating a wider focus of research, addressing

" preventable environmental causes, " says Andrea Martin of the Breast Cancer

Fund. In what some advocates call a " pink revolution, " such groups as the

Breast Cancer Fund, Breast Cancer Action, and others want more efforts put

into prevention.

 

Most breast cancer organizations pay little attention to environmental

factors linked to the disease, says Martin. " All the new research into

genetics is exciting, " notes Martin, " but no more than 10 percent of breast

cancer cases can be laid at the feet of hereditary factors. That's why we

need to turn the microscope around. "

 

" Women who for years thought the answer was better diagnosis and treatment

are now saying that the only way we're going to deal with this killer is to

reduce our everyday exposure to carcinogens and toxins, " says Devra Lee

Davis, a research scientist and visiting professor at the Heinz School,

Carnegie Mellon University, who is a leading exponent of the idea that

cancers " are made, not born. "

 

Historically, one's risks of getting the disease have been linked to such

factors as family history, age at menarche and menopause, whether one has

borne and breastfed children, and lifestyle factors such as diet, alcohol

consumption and exercise. Nevertheless, most - some 75 percent - of all

breast cancers occur in women with no known risk factors. The National

Cancer Institute has concluded, " No one knows why some women develop breast

cancer and others do not. "

 

Research On Causes Limited

 

Pollution, some say, may very well be a key factor. According to a 1989

study published in Archives of Environmental Health, breast cancer rates

were higher in the 339 counties with hazardous waste sites and groundwater

contamination than in counties that had no such sites. Other high clusters

of breast cancer have been linked to specific geographic areas suffering

from pollution.

 

So far the research on environmental causes of breast cancer is limited,

however. Ionizing radiation, or X-rays, has been linked to the disease.

Researchers also suggest that exposure to manmade chemicals known as

" endocrine disruptors " that obstruct the normal hormonal activity in the

body could cancer. Others link the disease to organochlorine pesticides,

which cause cancer and disrupt hormones.

 

Some groups are taking their members in a more militant direction, calling

for preventive " public policies that reduce the risks we already know

about, " says Brenner.

 

Joined by a coalition, these groups asked cities to " follow the lead of San

Francisco, Berkeley, and Oakland, Calif., who have declared October " Stop

Cancer Where It Starts " Month, acknowledging the impact of toxins released

into the environment and working to reduce them. "

 

Berkeley plans to include the precautionary principle in its future laws,

and is encouraging " industries located in the Bay Area to contribute to the

health of its workers and all residents by implementing ways to attain the

desired level of zero toxic emissions. "

 

The city will eliminate polyvinyl chloride in its new construction and

renovation, set up criteria for 'Healthy Buildings,' replace toxic

pesticides where possible, and switch diesel fleets to cleaner fuels.

 

" There's no harm in doing this, but we need to further test this out so

that we can better understand causes, " says Frame.

 

This year, Komen itself did grant some research money for environmental

studies. Such studies, she says, " may not just help solve breast cancer but

help our understanding of other diseases as well. "

 

Martin applauds Komen's initiative. However, as a survivor twice diagnosed,

she adds, " We need research, but we also need to act on that research. We

can give scientists work from now until doomsday, but at the same time,

let's not wait for the proof in our own bodies. "