Americans "bombarded" with cancer causes: (federal government) report

Source: Reuters

(Reuters) - Americans are being "bombarded" with chemicals, gases and radiation that can cause cancer, and the federal government must do far more to protect them, presidential cancer advisers said on Thursday.

..................

"The incidence of some cancers, including some most common among children, is increasing for unexplained reasons," the report reads.

"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," it adds.

"The American people -- even before they are born -- are bombarded continually with myriad combinations of these dangerous exposures," Kripke and Leffall wrote in a letter to President Barack Obama at top of the report.





Read more: http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-GreenBusiness/idUSTRE6450LN20100506

Why not research what's causing it? Because then we can't make money off pink teddy bears and pins and other crap made in China using chemicals that cause cancer.

I hate all that cutesy crap. None of that money goes to look for a cure for anything. Most of the research money is spent on "market research". Cancer is just too big a business for the drug companies and all these corporate charities for them to look for an actual cure. Anything alternative that actually does treat or cure is actively suppressed.

I feel terrible for the people who get involved in those walks, rides, sales, telethons etc "for the cure", they are doing it out of the goodness of their hearts and are usually there helping because they've lost someone, or have been sick themselves. so I just politely decline instead of getting on a soapbox, but the system irks the heck out of me.

On cigarettes alone, they must have researched tens of kinds of cancer they cause, decades after it was clear that smoking could kill you wiith one form of cancer or another, if not emphysema. Ditto causes of skin cancer, brain cancer, colon cancer and on and on.

With cigarettes in particular, it's ridiculous. As if someone would say: "Well, I'm willing to smoke myself into early and uncomfortable death by emphysema, heart failure, and lung cancer, but I draw the line at smoking myself into death by stomach cancer." Or, "I'm good with all that, but I draw the lines at wrinkles around my lips."

At this point, it's fairly clear to me that quite a lot of things can cause cancer of different kinds, from exposure to sun and tanning beds, to smoking, to using cell phones, to (maybe) coffee, etc. etc.

Meanwhile, I'd be surprised if auto emissions did not cause or contribute to human death, but what are the chances cars will disappear soon?

I'd just love it if someone would figure out a way to prevent cancer (in some way other than study after study of what causes it) or halt its progress or even cure it. But those things require more genius than studies.
c

by Devra Davis --

Info on the book here:

http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org/content/secret-history-war-cancer-0

here's a snippet --

Among the Findings

* As early as 1936, the world’s leading cancer scientists understood that tobacco, diagnostic and solar radiation, benzene, and hormones caused cancer. The preparation and conduct of World War II with its focus on immediate survival effectively sidetracked these early findings of cancer hazards.
* Many more young people (those under 40 years of age) are getting cancer. One of the reasons may be the excessive use of x-rays in infants and children, and our failures to reduce exposures to other cancer hazards like those in urban air or agents that can leach from some plastics. Earlier this year, the American College of Radiology advised against unnecessary and excessive use of CT and other forms of diagnostic radiation in children, warning that this will further add to the growing cancer burden in young people today.
* When first reports emerged that coke oven workers had higher rates of lung cancer in the 1970s, some suggested that this was because most of them were black. Not until similar findings showed up in white Mormon workers five years later, was the link between coke oven work and lung cancer established. While one in eight Americans today is black, one in three works in a blue collar job, and one in five lives within two miles of a hazardous waste site. This increased environmental burden has never been considered when trying to understand why rates of prostate, breast, and colo-rectal cancer are so much higher in blacks than whites.
* The life-saving test for cervix cancer, called the Pap smear, was not put into use for more than a decade after it was shown to save lives, because of fears that it would undermine the private practice of medicine. These delays led to the deaths or unnecessary surgery of millions of women, who succumbed to an illness that could have been avoided.


It's a Great book!

infant death, spontaneous abortions, cancers and immune disorders, etc. all result.

www.radiation.org has more info on what we ALL are being exposed to and there is a synergistic affect which makes it all the worse.

I recommend the books by Dr. Sherman which can be found at this site, especially for women and those who expect or hope to have children. There are preventive measures and remediative measures which we all should know about, especially if you want to protect your children in or out of the womb (or your eggs and reproductive organs)

I wonder what their first clue was? :sarcasm:

If we keep producing more cancers then insurance premiums will go up, insurance companies will make more profit, and their stock will go up.

More is Better, Sooner is Best!

Why would anyone who appreciates unregulated capitalism be against increasing cancer rates?
:sarcasm:

Insurance premiums go up, then they drop people who have been paying those higher premiums and develop cancer, insurance companies will make more profit ...

causes a pervasive and insidious human death rate through it's half life*..


Tikki


*nuclear waste half-live=forever...

Exactly.

Guess who slept through their science classes?

:rofl:

http://www.hanford.gov/page.cfm/HanfordsPresentMission

You'll love this article...lots of plans to and strategies to with waste that was generated
between 65 and 40 years ago.
That is our life time.


The Tikkis...."Children of the radiate glow"...

God bless these cancer-fighting chemicals, gases, and radiations.

try googling "increase in cancer rates"

you'd think you would find a bunch of annual reports, updated every year, showing each type of cancer and the rate, whether increasing or decreasing, for US, other countries, and worldwide.

but all you get is a couple outdated articles, no reports with graphs and charts.

if you ask the average joe, most people seem to think cancer has been here as long as the human race has, and the rate isn't increasing.

Why?

I have come to think that if people realize how much the cancer rate is increasing, they will logically come to the conclusion that is has to be due to something in our environment, something we have added to our environement, over the last generation, whether it's electromagnetic radiation, chemicals, both, or more. When people realize this they will demand that we as a society do something about it. And that means a major overhaul to the cellphone/electronics industry. It means a major overhaul to the chemical and food industry. And these guys have such a financial interest in keeping things as they are, that they would rather keep making money knowing that they're probably killing people, than actually do something about it. So they don't want this information to get out and they want people to think that cancer rates are about the same as they were 50-100 years ago.

But if you dig deep, you'll find out they aren't.

Do we know for a fact that rates are increasing? That there are more "chemicals" in the environment? How does better detection play into cancer rates? Longer lives? As an anecdotal note, several of my grandparents' parents died of cancer. None of my grandparents did. Well, I have a grandmother still alive, she's 100 so I think she can successfully be called an outlier. My point is, cancer wasn't exactly unheard of three generations ago. Certainly, pollution was quite rampant in my grandparents' day, they can tell a lot more polution horror stories than I can, and I'm 52.

it is very difficult to find data on cancer rates, although it should be pretty easy in today's day of internets.

my grandparents are still alive, 96 years old. from my view cancer is skyrocketing in today's generation. I could name a bunch of people I've known that have died in the last 5-10 years, at young ages from cancer.

it's very complicated... there are different types of cancer and lots of factors.

but some things we do know... electromagnetic radiation is a carcinogen, and we are exposed to it much more than we were just a generation or two ago. there are studies that clearly show a correlation between cellphone use and brain cancer. That's a done deal. With chemicals on our food, exposure to plastics, etc, it's not as easy. But we know these things cause cancer and we know we are getting more exposure. it doesn't take a brain surgeon to make a conclusion here, but it certainly would help if the data was more available. In todays day where you can look up the stats of any baseball player who played a hundred years ago in seconds, you'd think it would be just as easy to find data on cancer rates. Maybe I'm just striking out but I've looked for it before and found it very difficult to find.

http://www.google.com/#hl=en&safe=off&q=cancer+rates+rise&aq=&aqi=&aql=&oq=cancer+rates+rise&gs_rfai=&fp=1fef2a3fa9a54442

Stomach
Liver
testicular
breast cancers

all this crap that people buy and consume on a daily basis is killing us.

It is accompanied by depression because my state of health is going to be off for hours and plans have to be changed when it is really bad.

Fowl mood. Supersensitive. Angry for the intrusion.

Years ago I learned that the artifical flavor for butterscotch was benzene. Benzene is carcinogenic, Artificial colorings, artificial flavors, artificial scents - artifical cigarettes.

We want everything cheap and nicely packaged.
And since some steal, they are packaged in steel strong plastic.

Many large corporations don't give one damn about poisoning and polluting.

They register outside the US to protect them from rules in place to protect the citizens and earth.

They send their profits outside the US.

They hire labor from outside the US.

And they are trying to change our genes.

More cancer - consider that there might be something to chemtrails.

Profit goes hand in hand with control of us.

There are too many people - makes it hard to control.

It's a big circle. Then look at the shopping carts.

We will buy their poison because they give us a coupon.
AND WE LOVE THEM JUST THE SAME BECAUSE WE KEEP BUYING THAT POISON AND NEVER ASK QUESTIONS.

See because of me, now they have a warning.

Plus shampoo, soap, and probably some of the crap they put into processed foods. We have been moving toward organic food and soaps, shampoos that aren't as loaded with chemicals. ( http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/ ) It is more expensive, however.

I buy from Vitacost.com - they have really good deals on my favorite vege based products -For cleaning I use Dr. Bronner's Sal Suds for everything from dish washing liquid, hand soap, mix in spray bottle w/ water and teaspoon of vinegar to clean bathrooms, kitchen - mirrors - ...

I had not heard of them, and I'm just about to place my first order.

they have food stuff too - Arrowhead products, like Buckwheat pancake mix, cornbread, etc....nuts, cereals, cookies,

Their NSI brand is great, IMHO.

non-stick coatings, tanning beds, wifi, blue tooth, EMFs, benzene, french fries (acrylamide), marijuana, tobacco, alcohol, bacon, dental x-rays, and more.

And you want to know what the worst of it is???

The legislation (http://www.epa.gov/endo/">Endocrine Disruptor Program), requiring that the federal government begin testing to determine the impact of all these 80,000+ chemicals on its citizens -- was passed in 1996 in the Clinton Administration!

(click)
http://www.epa.gov/endo/pubs/edspoverview/index.htm">

And it has been bogged down in large part over arguments about http://discovermagazine.com/2009/feb/22-very-tough-rat-big-risk-human-health">which damned rats they should use for the tests.


- K&R

It's fairly obvious, right? Even now I wonder how many of the "safe" chemicals lacing our foods and beverages are safe on their own but toxic when mixed with other such chemicals?

thanks to Monsanto and other corporate interests that head up our EPA and FDA.

/sarcasm

Nothing like for-profit health "care".

x(