[Contents]   [Post]



Breast cancer kills 46,000 women in the U.S. each year. On average, each of
these women has her life cut short by 20 years, for a total loss of about a
million person-years of productive life each year. Of course this huge cost
to society is heaped on even greater burdens, the personal anguish and suffering,
the motherless children, the shattered families.

The medical establishment dominated by male doctors pretends that the breast
cancer epidemic will one day be reversed by some miracle cure, which we have
now been promised for 50 years. Until that miracle arrives, we are told, there
is nothing to be done except slice off women's breasts, pump their bodies full
of toxic chemicals to kill cancer cells, burn them with radiation, and bury
our dead. Meanwhile, the normal public health approach primary prevention languishes
without mention and without funding. We know what causes the vast majority of
cancers: exposure to carcinogens. What would a normal public health approach
entail? Reduce the burden of cancer by reducing our exposure to carcinogens.
One key idea has defined public health for more than 100 years: PREVENTION.
But with cancer, everything is different. In the case of cancer, prevention
has been banished from polite discussion.

Now a new, fully-documented book[1], by physician Janette D. Sherman, poses
a fundamental challenge to all the doctors and researchers and health bureaucrats
who have turned their backs on cancer prevention: "If cancers are not caused
by chemicals, endocrine-disrupting chemicals, and ionizing radiation, what are
the causes? How else can one explain the doubling, since 1940, of a woman's
likelihood of developing breast cancer, increasing in tandem with prostate and
childhood cancers?," Dr. Sherman asks.(pg. x) And if exposures are the
problem, then ending exposures is the solution: "Actual prevention means
eliminating factors that cause cancer in the first place."(pg. 31)

Dr. Sherman is a practicing physician who has treated 8000 patients over 30
years. Unlike most physicians, she possesses an extensive knowledge of chemistry.
Furthermore, she has become a historian by examining a large body of medical
and public health literature dating back to the 19th century. It is this unique
combination -- of historical view, knowledge of chemistry, deep personal experience
as a physician, and an ethical clarity that PRIMARY PREVENTION is the proper
policy -- that makes this book important and compelling.

The book begins with two chapters emphasizing the similarities among all living
things that are made up of cells including humans, animals and plants. Cells
in every creature can go awry and start to grow uncontrollably, a definition
of cancer. Because all cell-based creatures are so similar, what we learn from
one can often tell us something useful about another. For example, when we learn
from the Smithsonian Institution that sharks get cancer from swimming in waters
contaminated with industrial chemicals, we learn (or SHOULD learn) something
useful about our own vulnerability to exotic chemicals.(pg. 9)

Turning to breast cancer, Dr. Sherman lists the known "risk factors"
the common characteristics shared by many women who get breast cancer: early
menarche (age at which menstruation begins); late menopause (age at which menstruation
ends); late childbirth and the birth of few or no children; no experience breast-feeding;
obesity; high fat diet; being tall; having cancer of the ovaries or uterus;
use of oral contraceptives; excessive use of alcohol.

"What is the message running through all of these 'risks?'" Dr. Sherman
asks. "Hormones, hormones, and hormones. Hormones of the wrong kind, hormones
too soon in a girl's life, hormones for too many years in a woman's life, too
many chemicals with hormonal action, and too great a total hormonal load."(pg.

Dr. Sherman then turns her focus to the one fully-established cause of breast
(and other) cancers: ionizing radiation, from x-rays, and from nuclear power
plant emissions and the radioactive fallout from A-bomb tests.

These, then, are the environmental factors that give rise to breast cancer:
exposures to cancer-causing chemicals, to hormonally-active chemicals, and to
ionizing radiation in air, food and water. How do we know the environment air,
food, water and ionizing radiation plays an important role in causing breast
cancer? Because when Asian women move from their homelands to the U.S., their
breast cancer rate soars. There is something in the environment of the U.S.
(and other western industrial countries) causing an epidemic of this hormone-related
disease. The medical research establishment likes to call it "lifestyle
factors" but it's really environment. Air, food, water, ionizing radiation.

With this basic information in hand, Dr. Sherman then describes historically
and today the exposure of women in the U.S. to a flood of carcinogenic and hormonally
active chemicals, plus ionizing radiation.

Take common pharmaceutical products, for example. Canadian researchers have
demonstrated enhanced cancer growth in mice given daily HUMAN-EQUIVALENT doses
of three commonly-used antihistamines, which are sold under the trade names
Claritin, Histamil and Atarax.(pg. 21) Two years earlier the same researchers
had reported breast cancer promotion in rodents fed clinically-relevant doses
of antidepressant drugs, which are marketed as Elavil and Prozac.(pg. 21) Millions
of women in the U.S. are taking these drugs today.

At least 5 million women in the U.S. are currently taking Premarin the most
often-prescribed form of estrogen (female sex hormone), to ease the transition
through menopause.(pg. 156) This is called "hormone replacement therapy"
and it is routine, recommended medical practice in the U.S. A review of 51 studies
of women taking hormone replacement therapy showed that those who never took
hormones had a breast cancer rate ranging from 18 to 63 per 1000 women. Those
who took hormones for five years experienced an additional 2 breast cancers
per 1000 women; after 10 years of hormone therapy the additional breast cancers
rose to 6 per 1000. The danger largely disappears 5 years after discontinuing

Hormones are big business. Despite evidence that synthetic hormones caused
cancer in rodents and rabbits, American drug companies began selling synthetic
hormones in 1934 in cosmetics, drugs, food additives, and animal feed. The best-known
is DES (diethylstilbestrol) but there were and still are many others. The National
Cancer Institute (NCI) in 1938 published a study showing that DES caused breast
cancer in rodents. Three years later, in 1941, NCI published a second study
confirming that DES caused breast cancer in rodents. That year the U.S. Food
and Drug Administration (FDA) approved DES for commercial use in women.(pg.

DES is 400 times as potent as natural estrogen and can be made for pennies
per pill. It was therefore phenomenally profitable and researchers aggressively
sought new uses. DES soon was being used to prevent miscarriages, as a "morning
after" pill to prevent pregnancies, and as a breast-enlargement cream.
It wasn't long before researchers discovered that they could make chickens,
cows and pigs grow faster if they fed them hormones, and a huge new market for
hormones opened up. As early as 1947, a hormonal effect was reported among U.S.
women who ate chicken treated with growth hormones. (Chapter 7, note 55.) Between
1954 and 1973 three quarters of all beef cattle slaughtered in the U.S. grew
fat on DES.

In 1971, human cancer from DES exposure was confirmed and in 1973 DES was banned
from meat, so other growth hormones were substituted. Most recently, of course,
the U.S. FDA has allowed the U.S. milk supply to be modified to increase the
levels of a growth hormone (called IGF-1) known to stimulate growth of breast
cells in women. (pg. 101)

Still today most U.S. beef, chickens and pigs are intentionally contaminated
with growth hormones which is why Europeans refuse to allow the import of U.S.
beef. European scientists are asking the same question that Dr. Sherman raises:
"[H]ormones are administered to meat animals to promote growth and weight
gain. Why should humans expect to not respond similarly to such chemical stimuli?"(pgs.

Then of course there are dozens probably, in fact, hundreds of household chemicals
and industrial byproducts that are hormonally active: pesticides, cleansers,
solvents, plasticizers, surfactants, dyes, cosmetics, PCBs, dioxins, and so
forth, that interfere with, or mimic, naturally-occurring hormones. We are awash
in these, at low levels, from conception until death. See www.ourstolenfuture.org.

How many growth-stimulating and cancer-promoting hormones can we ingest or
absorb through our lungs and skin before we feel the effects? No one in authority
is asking that crucial question, but Janette Sherman is asking it, pointedly,
and armed to the teeth with scientific evidence.

Then there is radioactivity. In 1984, a study of Mormon families in Utah downwind
from the nuclear tests in Nevada reported elevated numbers of breast cancers.(pg.
65) Girls who survived the bombing of Hiroshima are now dying in excessive numbers
from breast cancer. Dr. John Gofman has reviewed 22 separate studies confirming
unequivocally that exposure to ionizing radiation causes breast cancer. (See
REHN #693.) Janette Sherman does a good job of summarizing ecological studies
showing that women living near nuclear power plants suffer from elevated numbers
of breast cancers. These studies, by their nature, are suggestive and not conclusive.
but there is ample reason to believe that all nuclear power plants leak radioactivity
routinely into local air and water and that any exposure to ionizing radiation
increases a woman's danger of breast cancer. The only way to PREVENT this problem
is to end nuclear power permanently.

Why has the U.S. turned its back on the preventive approach to cancer? Dr.
Sherman returns to this question throughout her book. For example, in a devastating
chapter on Tamoxifen (a known cancer-causing chemical now approved by U.S. FDA
for use in women), she asks, "Why is our primary well-funded National Cancer
Institute not devoting its efforts to primary prevention? Has breast cancer,
like so many aspects of our culture, become just another business opportunity?"(pg.

In the end, Dr. Sherman reaches a conclusion about that question: "There
is a massing, in a few hands, of the control of production, distribution and
use of pharmaceutical drugs and appliances; control of the sale and use of medical
and laboratory tests; the consolidation and control of hospitals, nursing homes,
and home care providers. We are no longer people who become sick. We have become
markets. Is it any wonder that prevention receives so little attention? Cancer
is a big and successful business!" (pg. 207)

And, finally: "Reflecting on the purpose of the corporation to sell products
and services and maximize profits, it becomes apparent that prevention cannot
be in the interest of the bottom line. What a sad and bitter realization,"
she concludes.(pg. 228)

Despite this sad and bitter conclusion, this is a powerful upbeat book about
what citizens can and must do to end the epidemic of cancer that is sweeping
the western world. If the truth shall set us free, this book is an important
part of our collective liberation, freeing us from the lies and deceptions,
the false promises of cancer cures always "just around the corner."
Cancer is caused by exposure to carcinogens. The way to solve the cancer problem
is to prevent exposures. This means we must end nuclear power, and demand clean
food, water and air. Janette Sherman's contribution has been to give us a wealth
of powerful evidence on which to act. Now it is up to us. --Pet er Montague


OF BREAST CANCER (New York and London: Taylor and Francis, 2000). ISBN 1-56032-870-3.

################################################################ NOTICE In
accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107 this material is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research
and educational purposes. Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic
version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS free of charge even though
it costs the organization considerable time and money to produce it. We would
like to continue to provide this service free. You could help by making a tax-deductible
contribution (anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send
your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research Foundation, P.O.
Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do not send credit card information
via E-mail. For further information about making tax-deductible contributions
to E.R.F. by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL, or at (410)
263-1584, or fax us at (410) 263-8944. --Peter Montague, Editor

  [Posted by Peter Montague, Editor Environmental Research Fou on 12/2/2004] Reply to this message