“Reducing Environmental Cancer Risk: What we can do now” is a report, April 2010, which appraises the National Cancer Program. The following letter was submitted to the President of the United States by the President’s Cancer Panel;
Dear Mr. President
Though overall cancer incidence and mortality have continued to decline in recent years, the disease continues to devastate the lives of far too many Americans. In 2009 alone, approximately 1.5 million American men, women, and children were diagnosed with cancer, and 562,000 died from the disease. With the growing body of evidence linking environmental exposures to cancer, the public is becoming increasingly aware of the unacceptable burden of cancer resulting from environmental and occupational exposures that could have been prevented through appropriate national action…..
…..The Panel was particularly concerned to find that the true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated. 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 understudied and largely unregulated, exposure to potential environmental carcinogens is widespread……
…..Most also are unaware that children are far more vulnerable to environmental toxins and radiation than adults. Efforts to inform the public of such harmful exposures and how to prevent them must be increased. All levels of government, from federal to local, must work to protect every American from needless disease through rigorous regulation of environmental pollutants……
….. The Panel urges you most strongly to use the power of your office to remove the carcinogens and other toxins from our food, water, and air that needlessly increase health care costs, cripple our Nation’s productivity, and devastate American lives.
Sincerely,
LaSalle D. Leffall, Jr., M.D., F.A.C.S. Chair
Margaret L. Kripke, Ph.D.
In the accompanying report it was pointed out that although mortality from childhood cancers has dropped dramatically since 1975 – due to vastly improved treatments over the same period (1975–2006) – cancer incidence in US children under 20 years of age has increased .
The causes of this increase are not known but the report emphasized these increases cannot be explained by the advent of better diagnostic techniques.(1)
Ironically, in the past two decades, improved imaging technologies, nuclear medicine examinations, and new pharmaceutical interventions have made significant strides in diagnosing and treating human disease, including cancer.
Americans now are estimated to receive nearly half of their total radiation exposure from medical imaging and other medical sources, compared with only 15 percent in the early 1980s. The increase in medical radiation has nearly doubled the total average effective radiation dose per individual in the US. Computed tomography (CT) and nuclear medicine tests alone now contribute 36 percent of the total radiation exposure and 75 percent of the medical radiation exposure of the US population.
Why is this ironic?
Through radiation, human cancers can develop, grow, and spread, by damaging DNA. This damaged DNA can result in gene mutations that permit or promote cancer development and can, in some cases, be passed on to subsequent generations.
People who receive multiple scans or other tests that require radiation may accumulate doses equal to, or exceeding, that of Hiroshima atomic bomb survivors.(2)
The report states efforts are needed to eliminate unnecessary testing and improve both equipment capability and operator skill to ensure that radiation doses are as low as reasonably achievable without sacrificing image or test data quality.
No mechanism currently exists to enable individuals to estimate their personal cumulative radiation exposure “which would help patients and physicians weigh the benefits and potential harm of contemplated imaging and nuclear medicine tests.”
The report seems a reasonable assessment of environmental dangers facing folk in the US and bringing awareness of these dangers to the President.
Not so......read full article at Heroin and Cornflakes
No comments:
Post a Comment