Cancer and the Environment

On the CBC TV program Marketplace last Sunday, host Wendy Mesley talked about her own experience with cancer and her search for causes of this condition.  She's young, fit, sensible, and she could not see how her lifestyle could contribute to her illness.  Her research revealed many things, the most important of which is that many cancers are caused by what is in our environment.

Several things bothered me about the program.

First, I was heartbroken to learn that Danny Steinke of Windsor, Ontario, and former member of Canada's Youth Round Table on the Environment is suffering from cancer again.  I knew this young man when he was in remission, a passionate advocate who tried to make politicians listen to him on the relationship between cancer and the environment (many politicians liked having a photo op with him but no one did anything).  Wendy Mesley met with him and with his parents:  it's obvious to me that this family is under a lot of stress as they deal with this latest crisis in their lives.

Second, that lifestyle bit.  Eating well, drinking only modestly, refraining from tobacco, exercising, etc. -- all these are no guarantee that we will live our lives without cancer.  Yet, the whole 'establishment' continues to promote healthy lifestyle as the main way to prevent cancer.  Therefore, we are at fault when we don't follow those little rules.  Then, in addition to the pain and humiliation of the slash, burn, poison trio of cancer healing, we carry the burden of guilt.

Third, the Canadian Cancer Society is doing very little to make that link between environment and cancer when it should be playing an advocacy role.  You should have seen the spokesperson from this organization squirm when Mesley asked her hard questions.  Spokesperson looked absolutely ridiculous.

What made me feel good about the program?  The amazing work done by Mae Burrows of the Labour Environmental Alliance Society (Vancouver, BC).  Her organization has created a publication worth its weight in gold.  For a mere $10 cdn you can get this publication on becoming a Cancer Smart Consumer.  Also the work of Dr. Sam Epstein whose book Cancer Gate is very revealing. Epstein is bull-shit proof and should be listened to.

Comments

[BobW]

YES, Ann I heard the interview with her and it was quite wonderful. The environmental toxins seem to be simply ignored by the mainline cancer agencies as a contributing cause to the rise in cancer rates. Thanks for the information on the consumer smart guide.

[Linda Buzzell-Saltzman]

Hi Ann and Bob,
I agree that the mainstream cancer organizations try to make patients feel it's their own fault if they get sick (didn't exercise enough, too much cake etc.) Is it coincidence that they get a lot of money from big corporations and big pharma? And of course we don't want to look at where these multiple environmental contaminants that swim around in our bloodstreams and breast milk in a mutually reactive brew and that really DO cause cancer really come from...

[Ann Jarnet]

Bob, Linda, I spent part of the day flipping through Sandra Steingraber's book, Living Downstream. I was stunned to see that she wrote the book 10 years ago! Ten years ago, and no significant change. The concerns she expresses re env and cancer remain. She looks at earth, air, water, fire and the connections with each as regards cancer. On fire, she had this to say: 'Dioxins and furans are not the natural-born children of fire. They are the unplanned, unwanted offspring of modern chlorine chemistry.'

Speaking of fire....

Two weeks ago, Shelley Page, a reporter from the Ottawa Citizen (daily from where I used to live) did a three-part series on firefighters and cancer. Did you know that sick firefighters aren't only battling their disease but they spend a lot of energy fighting with Workers' Compensation? Employers in total denial! In spite of the similarities among some of the cancers -- very specific cancers....
Dr. Hartley Stern of the Ottawa Regional Cancer Center, according to Page, 'believes firefighters should be more aggressively screened than the general population. He thinks there should be protocol that would have firefighters first screened for colon polyps after five to 10 years on the job, instead of waiting until they are 50 years old.' Another person quoted in the series said he felt that firefighers are the canaries in the coal mines.

[Kari Esbensen]

Ann,

Thanks for the blog. It comes at a particularly relevant time as I am working to craft a thesis statement correlating epidemic levels of childhood asthma, obesity, autism and learning disabilities with ecological trauma.

Married to a physician and now mixing with the psychological community through my graduate studies, part of my goal is to inspire health care (including mental health) practitioners on the frontline to become scientists and advocates for true preventive health care in their own communities and on the geo-political front. The obstacles are many.

Like many already stretched thin by the demands of their jobs and day-to-day lives, those I have talked with feel instantaneously overwhelmed by the enormity of the task. In our small industrial community, they have been silent even as the local foundry and major employer was granted an exemption by the Department of Natural Resources, allowing it to emit more benzene (a known carcinogen)than allowable by state law--for fear of being perceived as whistleblowers. While many thanked me on the side for writing a "balanced" letter of concern to the local paper, no one followed up to publicly air their private fears. Then there is the matter of causality. Drawing conclusive uni-lear links between a given carcinogen or neurotoxin is tough when the bobardment is from many simultaneous sources. Studies show that mercury contamination from coal fired power plants could be playing a role in the rise of autism and/or other learning disabilities, but so too might other factors. Its all so mind boggling that its any wonder all but the dogged toss up their hands in fatalism or denial.

In short, I am not surprised the Canadian Cancer society is not doing much. So what do we do in response? Start slowly, by raising awareness while giving constructive options for change. Also by working to connect some of the dots and raising the awareness that our children, like the firemen and the frogs, maybe bio-indicators of systemic decline and sub-clinical bio-accumulation.

Recently, I had the chance to present similar concerns to a group of faculty members and students. The immediate response by the lead instructor was: "Now I feel depressed." Thanks to you all, I responded by first reminding him (them) that there is hope. In my own small way, I tried to move beyond the no-win trap of "doomsterism" by presenting the example of the Bald Eagle, recently removed from the Federal Endangered Species list in response to its recovery from a long-fought battle with DDT. Then I gave the example of an area physician (allergist) I recently met, who is now running for Congress on a health care/environment platform, tired of continually treating the symptoms of illness and not the sources. I also mentioned a recent alliance among the American Academy of Pediatrics, American Nurses Association, American Public Health Association and Physicians for Social Responsibility who filed suit this summer against the EPA for being too lax in protecting children from methyl mercury emitted by coal-fired power plants. (Where's the APA, ACA?)

I'm not sure what I said was anything life changing, but at least a seed had been planted with a group who had traditionally been conditioned to think of early intervention as happening once problems are already manifest. I was also asked to present a more formal talk at an upcoming colloquia--so maybe it contributed to a small "aha".

Not everyone is cut out to be an activist or a spokesperson, but I do think that health care/mental health professionals and organizations carry the potential for enormous influence (for good or bad as in the Bill Frist/Terry Schiavo case) and that we might be wise to rally them on our behalf. If nothing else, we can encourage them to vote in future elections from a whole-brain (and body) perspective.

Sorry about the long and windy reply. Obviously I was moved.

[Ann Jarnet]

Kari: long, thoughtful and interesting responses are always welcome! :-)

Ann

[Kari Esbensen]

Ann and others,

Thanks for the forum and permission to brainstorm/rant a bit. For those who dutifully write, know that at least one cyber soul is grateful.