Nexus - 0803 - New Times Magazine-pages

Page Content (OCR)

imbalance are further compounded by serious questions of con- flicts of interest, particularly with the multibillion-dollar cancer drug industry."* Many experts predicted as far back as 40 years ago that cancer _— imbalance are further compounded by serious questions of con- rates would increase, citing an explosion in the use of synthetic flicts of interest, particularly with the multibillion-dollar cancer chemicals. From 1940 through the early 1980s, production of drug industry."* synthetic chemicals increased by a factor of 350-fold. Billions of tons of substances which had never existed before were released TOXIC TAMOXIFEN into the environment. Yet only 3% of the 75,000 chemicals in use Perhaps we can forgive Zeneca's involvement with carcinogenic have been tested for safety. These toxic time bombs are every- chemicals, since it researched and patented the most popular where—in our water, air and food. They are also found in the breast cancer treatment, tamoxifen, manufactured under the name workplace, in schools and in household cleaners, cosmetics and of Nolvadex. Or perhaps not. This highly profitable drug grosses personal care products. Women who live near toxic waste dumps US$500 million annually. have 6.5 times the incidence of breast cancer.’ On May 16, 2000, the New York Times reported that the A survey conducted by Dr Mary Wolff of Mt Sinai Hospital, National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences had added New York, found that women with breast cancer had four times 14 substances to its list of known carcinogens.’ Tamoxifen was the levels of DDE (a breakdown product of the pesticide DDT) included in that list! However, the government's announcement than that found in non-carcinogenic tumours.* confirmed what had already been known. Another study investigated why women of higher socio-eco- In May 1995, California's expert committee, established from nomic status in the community of Newton, Massachusetts, had a —_ Proposition 65, decided to let the public know that tamoxifen use higher incidence of breast cancer than women in the lower socio- is likely to cause endometrial cancer.'’ Zeneca Pharmaceuticals economic group.° The researchers attributed the increase to did not challenge these findings. greater use of professional lawn care and dry cleaning services It is known that tamoxifen causes uterine cancer, liver cancer, which use known carcinogenic chemicals. stomach cancer and colorectal cancer. After just 2 to 3 years of The pesticides/breast cancer link was stunningly highlighted in use, tamoxifen increases the incidence of uterine cancer by two to research from Israel which linked three organochlorine pesticides three times. The treatment for uterine cancer is hysterectomy. In detected in dairy products to an increase in 12 types of cancer in _ addition, tamoxifen increases the risk of stroke, blood clot, eye 10 different strains of mice. After damage, menopausal symptoms and public outcry in 1978 forced the depression. The biggest shock of all Israeli government to ban the pesti- is the fact that tamoxifen increases cides—benzene hexachloride, DDT the risk of breast cancer! The journal and lindane—breast cancer mortality Dr John Gofman believes that Science published a study from Duke rates, which had increased every year University Medical Center in 1999, for 25 years, dropped nearly 8% for medical X-rays are the major which showed that after 2 to 5 years all age groups and more than one- cause of cancer, including of use tamoxifen actually initiated third for women aged 25 to 34 in the growth of breast cancer! 1986.° breast cancer, as well as So Zeneca, the originator of Breast The American Cancer Society heart disease in the USA. Cancer Awareness Month, is the (ACS) was founded with the support manufacturer of carcinogenic petro- of the Rockefeller family in 1913. chemicals, carcinogenic pollutants Members of the chemical and phar- and a breast cancer drug that causes maceutical industry have long had a at least four different types of cancer place on its board. in women, including breast cancer. According to Dr Samuel Epstein, MD, Professor of Is something wrong with this picture? Occupational and Environmental Medicine at the University of Illinois School of Public Health: "The ACS also has close con- MAMMOGRAPHY DANGERS nections to the mammography industry. Five radiologists have Since the Breast Cancer Awareness Month spin doctors claim served as ACS presidents, and in its every move the ACS reflects that breast cancer is "simply not a preventable disease", the focus the interests of major manufacturers of mammography machines has shifted to the theme of early detection. Women are now and film, including Siemens, DuPont, General Electric, Eastman encouraged to start having mammograms earlier than ever before. Kodak, and Piker."’ At one time, only women 50 years or older were told to have this Could this have something to do with the fact that the American screening. Now the campaign is targeting 40-year-olds and even Cancer Society's latest report on cancer prevention makes no women as young as twenty-five. However, detection of breast mention of environmental factors or safer screening protocols? cancer with mammography is not the same as protection from Dr Epstein scathingly attacks the cancer establishment. "Over breast cancer. recent decades, the incidence of cancer has escalated to epidemic Questions are being raised about the validity of mammograms. proportions while our ability to treat and cure most cancers A mammogram is an X-ray. The only acknowledged cause of remains virtually unchanged. Apart from the important role of | cancer, according to the American Cancer Society, is from tobacco, there is substantial and long-standing evidence relating radiation. When it comes to radiation, there is no safe level of this epidemic to involuntary and avoidable exposure to industrial exposure. carcinogens in air, water, the workplace and consumer products. For 20 years or more, Dr John Gofman, a scientist with degrees Nevertheless, the priorities of the cancer establishment, the — in both chemistry and medicine, has been publishing studies of National Cancer Institute and the American Cancer Society remain the hazards of low-level radiation. His hypothesis is that narrowly fixated on damage control—diagnosis and treatment— "Medical radiation is a highly important cause (probably the prin- and on basic molecular research, with relative indifference to, if cipal cause) of cancer mortality in the United States during the not always benign neglect of, prevention. Concerns over this twentieth century". Dr Gofman believes that medical X-rays are medical X-rays are the major cause of cancer, including [a as ee | oe breast cancer, as well as _ heart disease in the USA. MAMMOGRAPHY DANGERS Since the Breast Cancer Awareness Month spin doctors claim that breast cancer is "simply not a preventable disease", the focus has shifted to the theme of early detection. Women are now encouraged to start having mammograms earlier than ever before. At one time, only women 50 years or older were told to have this screening. Now the campaign is targeting 40-year-olds and even women as young as twenty-five. However, detection of breast cancer with mammography is not the same as protection from breast cancer. Questions are being raised about the validity of mammograms. A mammogram is an X-ray. The only acknowledged cause of cancer, according to the American Cancer Society, is from radiation. When it comes to radiation, there is no safe level of exposure. For 20 years or more, Dr John Gofman, a scientist with degrees in both chemistry and medicine, has been publishing studies of the hazards of low-level radiation. His hypothesis is that "Medical radiation is a highly important cause (probably the prin- cipal cause) of cancer mortality in the United States during the twentieth century". Dr Gofman believes that medical X-rays are 42 = NEXUS APRIL — MAY 2001 Dr John Gofman believes that www.nexusmagazine.com