May 6th, 2010 09:36 ET
Many years ago was told about formaldehyde in household furnishings, wash new clothing before wearing, etc., and to keep
pathoes plants in all rooms – plant absorbs air impuritie and
gives off oxygen. Switched to pyrex verses plastic containers and buying a radon detector today!
Hope foregoing is helpful.
Friday, May 7, 2010
Presidential panel: Cancer risks underestimated
Presidential panel: Cancer risks underestimated
Posted: 12:01 AM ET
By David S. Martin
CNN Medical Senior Producer
Exposure to potential cancer risks in daily life is widespread but underestimated, especially for children, a presidential panel said today.
The President’s Cancer Panel said the public remains by and large unaware of such common cancer risks as formaldehyde, benzene and radon. It’s the first time the group has focused on environmental cancer risks in its annual report to the president.
“The mere fact that the President’s Cancer Panel has this report is going to make people more aware,” said panel chair Dr. Lasalle Leffall Jr., an oncologist and professor of surgery at Howard University College of Medicine.
The panel also recommends reducing environmental cancer risks a cornerstone of cancer prevention efforts and said doctors need to do a better job considering potentially harmful chemical exposures when diagnosing patients.
The report also faults U.S. policy for allowing most of the 80,000 chemicals in use to go largely unstudied and unregulated. For example, the report says, bisphenol A (BPA) remains unregulated in consumer products such as plastic bottles, can liners and food wrap “despite the growing link between BPA and several diseases, including various cancers.”
Risks of environmental exposure are especially acute for children, who weigh less but – pound for pound - take in more food, water and air than adults. Toxic chemicals also remain active longer in children’s bodies and their developing brains are more prone to chemical exposure.
Leffall said the panel decided to publish the report on environmental cancer risks this year even in absence of proof that particular exposures cause cancer. Case in point: Cell phones. Leffall said even though science has not shown electromagnetic energy from cell phone use causes cancer, the report takes a cautious approach and recommends callers wear headsets, or text, to reduce exposure.
To lessen cancer risks, the 240-page report also recommends:
* Removing shoes before entering the home to avoid tracking in toxic chemicals such as pesticides.
* Filtering tap water.
* Using stainless steel, glass or BPA-free plastic water bottles.
* Microwaving in ceramic or glass instead of plastic containers.
* Minimizing consumption of food grown with pesticides and meat raised with antibiotics and growth hormone.
* Minimizing consumption of processed, charred or well-done meats, which contain carcinogenic heterocyclic amines and polyaromatic hydrocarbons.
* Reducing radiation from X-rays and other medical sources.
The report singled out three chemicals as dangerous: formaldehyde, benzene and radon.
Almost all homes contain formaldehyde, considered a probable human carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency. Formaldehyde is used in plywood, particle board, foam insulation, carpet and draperies, furniture, permanent press fabrics and toiletries. Exposure is highest when these are newly installed, the report said. Also, an estimated 2 million Americans are exposed to formaldehyde at work, raising their risk of dying from Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers, according to the report.
Exposure to benzene is also widespread. Exhaust from cars and other vehicles contain benzene, listed as a known human carcinogen by the EPA.
Radon, which forms naturally and can collect in homes, is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States, behind smoking, resulting in an estimated 21,000 deaths annually, according to the report. The report recommends periodically checking the radon levels at home.
The President’s Cancer Panel was created in 1971. Serving with Lefall is Margaret L. Kripke of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The panel’s third member has not been appointed.
Editor's Note: Medical news is a popular but sensitive subject rooted in science. We receive many comments on this blog each day; not all are posted. Our hope is that much will be learned from the sharing of useful information and personal experiences based on the medical and health topics of the blog. We encourage you to focus your comments on those medical and health topics and we appreciate your input. Thank you for your participation.
Filed under: Cancer
Share this on:
Mixx
Digg
Facebook
del.icio.us
reddit
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Share post | 132 Comments | Add a comment | Permalink
Starbuck May 6th, 2010 09:01 ET
Gee, let's outlaw life and therefore we won't have to worry about this. These physicians are nutcakes, those who think every potential compound in the world will cause cancer. How about the medical problems caused by the resulting laws and regulations these demogods put on people in the attempt to save people from getting cancer. The above panelists should realize that stress kills and has much more effect on cancer than anything proposed above.
Are these doctors so dumb that they don't realize that formaldehyde is a natural emission of people when they breathe. Yes it is a natural compound as is radon so next let's outlaw oxygen. What idiots and you the taxpayer pays for these quacks.
Aleksandr Belov May 6th, 2010 09:25 ET
Could be cancer is a product of immune system battle?
The modern world use a lot of chemicals which can be hidden allergy for body. This hidden allergy keep immune system under stress even people don't know about. After a years of this immune system battle the body starts produce a cancer.
The simple thing to prevent cancer is identify if immune system under stress or not and use anti-allergy medication.
Jeannie Caicedo May 6th, 2010 09:27 ET
My mother has lung cancer. Three years ago she had nothing in her lungs. She's worked as a hairstylist all of her life, and recently (past 2 years) there has been a huge increase in the use of a product to straighted hair called "The Brazilian method". After my mom started reporting a feeling of nauseousness and just total body discomfort everytime someone in the salon used this product I decided to look into the ingredients. It contains formaldehyde....and anyone who is familiar with a salon setting will tell you that there isn't good ventilation. I believe this is why my mother is sick. I really hope someone starts regulating this before many women (hairstylists) begin to get sick. To me this industry already treats their workers unfairly (no health insurance, etc.),and know it's become a health hazard!
Terry May 6th, 2010 09:33 ET
Well, thanks to Corporate America, we are all doomed. Can we remove all of the Interstate Highway System and return the land to Organic Farming?
Neena May 6th, 2010 09:36 ET
Many years ago was told about formaldehyde in household furnishings, wash new clothing before wearing, etc., and to keep
pathoes plants in all rooms – plant absorbs air impuritie and
gives off oxygen. Switched to pyrex verses plastic containers and buying a radon detector today!
Hope foregoing is helpful.
Steve May 6th, 2010 09:38 ET
Finally, we're becoming more aware of the things that affect our health in this society. Recognizing the effects of environmental hazards is but one step to truly addressing runaway health care costs. If we can also focus equally on leading healthier lives through better eating, exercise, stress reduction, and personal habits, we can really tackle our health care crisis. This report is a great start to helping us get there.
Bradley Arbogast May 6th, 2010 09:39 ET
As I was reading this article I could not help but think that the President's cancer panel may be missing the point. If exposure to carcinogens were the problem then everyone would have the same cancer rate throughout their lifespan. But they don't. Cancers become more prevalent as people age. I have been investigating the biological changes which occur with aging and are responsible for not just the increase in cancers but the increase in cardiovascular disease as well. It appears that a single hormone is responsible for the increase in disease as we age. By increasing this hormone, which is safe and natural (but not any of the ones tried thus far) we may be able to reduce the risk of cancer and possibly all of the diseases of aging.
Ron Kossow May 6th, 2010 09:47 ET
Despite all of the environmental hazards smoking is by far and away the biggest hazard to one's health. It is simply not possible to eliminate all potential carcinogens from our lives. We all live in dwellings that contain plywood, carpet, toiletries, etc. Trace amounts of radon are found in everyone's basement. Likewise, everyone has some exposure to exhaust from automobiles. One can greatly reduce their cancer risk by not smoking, eating a well balanced diet, and maintaining a healthy weight.
Neena May 6th, 2010 09:50 ET
As an ingredients reader, when a brand name hand dish detergent came on the market many years ago it listed formaldehye as an
ingredients, and I called their customer service live telling them
would not use the product b/c of the formaldehyde "what was
purpose". A year later formaldehyde was not listed on label.
Sure hope it was truth in advertising...
willy May 6th, 2010 09:50 ET
i'm not a doctor, but don't our bodies constantly have foreign matter that it's battling, including cancer cells? i thought cancer starts by the cells mutating rapidly. this can be hindered thru better diet and lifestyle but in my opinon, even the healthiest people can get cancer. the good thing is we have come so far, over the past 30+ years in treating it, and allowing people to go on with their lives. years ago when people got cancer, they died. try to stay positive eat well and take care...
john May 6th, 2010 09:51 ET
Oh please govt, u know best, please protect me from LIFE!!!! I want you to be my daddy and provide for me from cradle to grave, I am worthless, I cant do it by myself, oh please please keep me safe...lol....liberals..PATHETIC!!
Juan Ayala May 6th, 2010 09:57 ET
The FDA has failed at regulating and verifying the safety of everything that is used in consumer products today. I truly believe that the FDA the food industry and pharmacudical companies are only concerned with making profits by using cheap and unsafe chemicals in everything we use and consume everyday. The only proof the FDA has that these chemicals are safe are the lab tests that are paid for by the companies that want these chemicals approved. It isnt until people get sick that the FDA realizes that certain ingredients and chemicals are harmful.
eric May 6th, 2010 09:57 ET
The problem with this discussion is they warn of that these potentially toxic chemicals (xenobiotics) can be mutagenic (e.g. cause mutations in DNA that can contribute to the formation of cancerous cells) but they don't explain that the risk of mutagenicity is highly dependent on the amount of xenobiotics you are exposed to (dose), as well as your body's capacity to absorb, distribute and get rid of the xenobiotic. The body has a very complex and efficient system that can recognize, neutralize and excrete xenobiotics, and generally, only when the dose has exceeded the bodies capacity to neutralize these them can they become potentially dangerous. There is also data that suggests that low level exposure to xenobiotics can heighten this system's capacity to deal with xenobiotics and therefore better protect us from acute higher level doses. It is also important to note that the likelihood of gaining a mutation from an exposure is dependent on the length of exposure as well as the dose. So a short exposure is much less likely to cause a mutation than a chronic exposure. The take home point is you do need to think about what you are potentially being exposed to but you need to consider it in the context of the dose and rate of exposure.
Ricefarmer May 6th, 2010 09:59 ET
A hundred years ago, a lot fewer folks lived to be my age. Very few reached a hundred (today we have 111,000 centurians alive in the USA). My longer live can be attributed to the plastic in my motocycle helmet, the solvents and chemicals used to develop and produce modern medicine, the nuclear weapon that kept my father from having to die on a Japanese beach during an invasion..... Funny how the things that save you can also kill you.
kentuckienne May 6th, 2010 10:08 ET
Starbuck: we exhale carbon dioxide, too, but that doesn't mean we should go around inhaling enormous clouds of it. Just because something is "natural" doesn't mean it isn't harmful - lead, cyanide and arsenic are all natural compounds, too.
bts8q May 6th, 2010 10:15 ET
Starbuck wrote:
"The above panelists should realize that stress kills and has much more effect on cancer than anything proposed above...Are these doctors so dumb that they don't realize that formaldehyde is a natural emission of people when they breathe. Yes it is a natural compound as is radon so next let's outlaw oxygen."
Just wow. I have never seen such a display for awhile. First, studies are done based on empirical evidence...both in animals and observational, longitudinal studies in humans. Go to pubmed.com and search "radon; cancer."
Though low levels of a given compound may be harmless, high and chronic exposure is toxic; for an example that you can understand, take alcohol, drugs...or water. Drink too much water and you will die...it does happen...look it up.
Please do some research before posting–after all, you are in front of a computer!
Valerie May 6th, 2010 10:15 ET
I am fighting cancer for the fourth time in three years. I am in a clinical trial because existing chemo doesn't work. I believe that my immune system has been compromised by continuous exposure to all those listed as well as chlorine and flouride (other countries do not allow this in their water because of the risk but we place a higher value on teeth than life). Listen to this article. Protect your children. I am trying to. Even if you just implement a few changes it could make a big difference. It could be the difference between life and death.
Dee May 6th, 2010 10:16 ET
Starbuck, you are an idiot. Carbon dioxide is ALSO a natural emission of people when they breathe. And, as we all know, it is having a detrimental effect on our environment. Just because something occurs naturally on our planet doesn't mean it's harmless. Just look at the oil slick – which we drilled out of the Earth – that is approaching our shores. We need to find better, healthier ways to produce our products, and we need to realize that our health is more important than the allmighty dollar.
Tom May 6th, 2010 10:17 ET
Farm chemicals are regulated far more than most of the chemicals that people come into contact with everyday as if the farm chemicals posed a greater risk to everybody's health than all these unregulated chemicals for which I think the average person comes into more contact with on a daily basis. I'm not against farm chemical regulation but people have a distorted sense of the danger of such chemicals in relationship to more of their daily exposure to hazardous materials that they don't even know they are being exposed to that don't have anywhere near the same oversight.
Elle May 6th, 2010 10:18 ET
Starbuck, you make me wish I was a Republican. Then I could ignore everything that makes me unhappy, too. Taxpayer stress, my a**.
Lorenzo May 6th, 2010 10:20 ET
The most dangerous cancer risk? Ignorance. All Americans should be happy that efforts are being made toward a healthier and more responsible society.
FK from Los Angles, CA May 6th, 2010 10:20 ET
Thank you, CNN, for reporting on this issue. It's amazing how many Americans are sick or dying from these "accepted" household products. It will be interesting to see how many follow ups you will do on this story. Will you give it as much prominence as Tiger Woods gets or will this be a one-off like most major stories that effect public health.
Meghan May 6th, 2010 10:23 ET
I've been saying this for years. As far as "natural" occuring compound, when it is put into a chemical it is no longer "natural" and thus becomes a greater compound than it was in its "natural" setting. So, yes, all of these "quacks" are trying to regulate "natural" occuring compounds once they combine with other chemicals that ultimately can be harmful to us. I've known too many people this year who have succumbed to this epidemic and it's about time someone recognizes other possible causes, i.e., environmental, food, water.
Mendrys May 6th, 2010 10:23 ET
Funny how common sense advice to limit exposure to formaldehyde, benz
Posted: 12:01 AM ET
By David S. Martin
CNN Medical Senior Producer
Exposure to potential cancer risks in daily life is widespread but underestimated, especially for children, a presidential panel said today.
The President’s Cancer Panel said the public remains by and large unaware of such common cancer risks as formaldehyde, benzene and radon. It’s the first time the group has focused on environmental cancer risks in its annual report to the president.
“The mere fact that the President’s Cancer Panel has this report is going to make people more aware,” said panel chair Dr. Lasalle Leffall Jr., an oncologist and professor of surgery at Howard University College of Medicine.
The panel also recommends reducing environmental cancer risks a cornerstone of cancer prevention efforts and said doctors need to do a better job considering potentially harmful chemical exposures when diagnosing patients.
The report also faults U.S. policy for allowing most of the 80,000 chemicals in use to go largely unstudied and unregulated. For example, the report says, bisphenol A (BPA) remains unregulated in consumer products such as plastic bottles, can liners and food wrap “despite the growing link between BPA and several diseases, including various cancers.”
Risks of environmental exposure are especially acute for children, who weigh less but – pound for pound - take in more food, water and air than adults. Toxic chemicals also remain active longer in children’s bodies and their developing brains are more prone to chemical exposure.
Leffall said the panel decided to publish the report on environmental cancer risks this year even in absence of proof that particular exposures cause cancer. Case in point: Cell phones. Leffall said even though science has not shown electromagnetic energy from cell phone use causes cancer, the report takes a cautious approach and recommends callers wear headsets, or text, to reduce exposure.
To lessen cancer risks, the 240-page report also recommends:
* Removing shoes before entering the home to avoid tracking in toxic chemicals such as pesticides.
* Filtering tap water.
* Using stainless steel, glass or BPA-free plastic water bottles.
* Microwaving in ceramic or glass instead of plastic containers.
* Minimizing consumption of food grown with pesticides and meat raised with antibiotics and growth hormone.
* Minimizing consumption of processed, charred or well-done meats, which contain carcinogenic heterocyclic amines and polyaromatic hydrocarbons.
* Reducing radiation from X-rays and other medical sources.
The report singled out three chemicals as dangerous: formaldehyde, benzene and radon.
Almost all homes contain formaldehyde, considered a probable human carcinogen by the Environmental Protection Agency. Formaldehyde is used in plywood, particle board, foam insulation, carpet and draperies, furniture, permanent press fabrics and toiletries. Exposure is highest when these are newly installed, the report said. Also, an estimated 2 million Americans are exposed to formaldehyde at work, raising their risk of dying from Hodgkin’s lymphoma and other cancers, according to the report.
Exposure to benzene is also widespread. Exhaust from cars and other vehicles contain benzene, listed as a known human carcinogen by the EPA.
Radon, which forms naturally and can collect in homes, is the second leading cause of lung cancer in the United States, behind smoking, resulting in an estimated 21,000 deaths annually, according to the report. The report recommends periodically checking the radon levels at home.
The President’s Cancer Panel was created in 1971. Serving with Lefall is Margaret L. Kripke of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center. The panel’s third member has not been appointed.
Editor's Note: Medical news is a popular but sensitive subject rooted in science. We receive many comments on this blog each day; not all are posted. Our hope is that much will be learned from the sharing of useful information and personal experiences based on the medical and health topics of the blog. We encourage you to focus your comments on those medical and health topics and we appreciate your input. Thank you for your participation.
Filed under: Cancer
Share this on:
Mixx
Digg
del.icio.us
StumbleUpon
MySpace
Share post | 132 Comments | Add a comment | Permalink
Starbuck May 6th, 2010 09:01 ET
Gee, let's outlaw life and therefore we won't have to worry about this. These physicians are nutcakes, those who think every potential compound in the world will cause cancer. How about the medical problems caused by the resulting laws and regulations these demogods put on people in the attempt to save people from getting cancer. The above panelists should realize that stress kills and has much more effect on cancer than anything proposed above.
Are these doctors so dumb that they don't realize that formaldehyde is a natural emission of people when they breathe. Yes it is a natural compound as is radon so next let's outlaw oxygen. What idiots and you the taxpayer pays for these quacks.
Aleksandr Belov May 6th, 2010 09:25 ET
Could be cancer is a product of immune system battle?
The modern world use a lot of chemicals which can be hidden allergy for body. This hidden allergy keep immune system under stress even people don't know about. After a years of this immune system battle the body starts produce a cancer.
The simple thing to prevent cancer is identify if immune system under stress or not and use anti-allergy medication.
Jeannie Caicedo May 6th, 2010 09:27 ET
My mother has lung cancer. Three years ago she had nothing in her lungs. She's worked as a hairstylist all of her life, and recently (past 2 years) there has been a huge increase in the use of a product to straighted hair called "The Brazilian method". After my mom started reporting a feeling of nauseousness and just total body discomfort everytime someone in the salon used this product I decided to look into the ingredients. It contains formaldehyde....and anyone who is familiar with a salon setting will tell you that there isn't good ventilation. I believe this is why my mother is sick. I really hope someone starts regulating this before many women (hairstylists) begin to get sick. To me this industry already treats their workers unfairly (no health insurance, etc.),and know it's become a health hazard!
Terry May 6th, 2010 09:33 ET
Well, thanks to Corporate America, we are all doomed. Can we remove all of the Interstate Highway System and return the land to Organic Farming?
Neena May 6th, 2010 09:36 ET
Many years ago was told about formaldehyde in household furnishings, wash new clothing before wearing, etc., and to keep
pathoes plants in all rooms – plant absorbs air impuritie and
gives off oxygen. Switched to pyrex verses plastic containers and buying a radon detector today!
Hope foregoing is helpful.
Steve May 6th, 2010 09:38 ET
Finally, we're becoming more aware of the things that affect our health in this society. Recognizing the effects of environmental hazards is but one step to truly addressing runaway health care costs. If we can also focus equally on leading healthier lives through better eating, exercise, stress reduction, and personal habits, we can really tackle our health care crisis. This report is a great start to helping us get there.
Bradley Arbogast May 6th, 2010 09:39 ET
As I was reading this article I could not help but think that the President's cancer panel may be missing the point. If exposure to carcinogens were the problem then everyone would have the same cancer rate throughout their lifespan. But they don't. Cancers become more prevalent as people age. I have been investigating the biological changes which occur with aging and are responsible for not just the increase in cancers but the increase in cardiovascular disease as well. It appears that a single hormone is responsible for the increase in disease as we age. By increasing this hormone, which is safe and natural (but not any of the ones tried thus far) we may be able to reduce the risk of cancer and possibly all of the diseases of aging.
Ron Kossow May 6th, 2010 09:47 ET
Despite all of the environmental hazards smoking is by far and away the biggest hazard to one's health. It is simply not possible to eliminate all potential carcinogens from our lives. We all live in dwellings that contain plywood, carpet, toiletries, etc. Trace amounts of radon are found in everyone's basement. Likewise, everyone has some exposure to exhaust from automobiles. One can greatly reduce their cancer risk by not smoking, eating a well balanced diet, and maintaining a healthy weight.
Neena May 6th, 2010 09:50 ET
As an ingredients reader, when a brand name hand dish detergent came on the market many years ago it listed formaldehye as an
ingredients, and I called their customer service live telling them
would not use the product b/c of the formaldehyde "what was
purpose". A year later formaldehyde was not listed on label.
Sure hope it was truth in advertising...
willy May 6th, 2010 09:50 ET
i'm not a doctor, but don't our bodies constantly have foreign matter that it's battling, including cancer cells? i thought cancer starts by the cells mutating rapidly. this can be hindered thru better diet and lifestyle but in my opinon, even the healthiest people can get cancer. the good thing is we have come so far, over the past 30+ years in treating it, and allowing people to go on with their lives. years ago when people got cancer, they died. try to stay positive eat well and take care...
john May 6th, 2010 09:51 ET
Oh please govt, u know best, please protect me from LIFE!!!! I want you to be my daddy and provide for me from cradle to grave, I am worthless, I cant do it by myself, oh please please keep me safe...lol....liberals..PATHETIC!!
Juan Ayala May 6th, 2010 09:57 ET
The FDA has failed at regulating and verifying the safety of everything that is used in consumer products today. I truly believe that the FDA the food industry and pharmacudical companies are only concerned with making profits by using cheap and unsafe chemicals in everything we use and consume everyday. The only proof the FDA has that these chemicals are safe are the lab tests that are paid for by the companies that want these chemicals approved. It isnt until people get sick that the FDA realizes that certain ingredients and chemicals are harmful.
eric May 6th, 2010 09:57 ET
The problem with this discussion is they warn of that these potentially toxic chemicals (xenobiotics) can be mutagenic (e.g. cause mutations in DNA that can contribute to the formation of cancerous cells) but they don't explain that the risk of mutagenicity is highly dependent on the amount of xenobiotics you are exposed to (dose), as well as your body's capacity to absorb, distribute and get rid of the xenobiotic. The body has a very complex and efficient system that can recognize, neutralize and excrete xenobiotics, and generally, only when the dose has exceeded the bodies capacity to neutralize these them can they become potentially dangerous. There is also data that suggests that low level exposure to xenobiotics can heighten this system's capacity to deal with xenobiotics and therefore better protect us from acute higher level doses. It is also important to note that the likelihood of gaining a mutation from an exposure is dependent on the length of exposure as well as the dose. So a short exposure is much less likely to cause a mutation than a chronic exposure. The take home point is you do need to think about what you are potentially being exposed to but you need to consider it in the context of the dose and rate of exposure.
Ricefarmer May 6th, 2010 09:59 ET
A hundred years ago, a lot fewer folks lived to be my age. Very few reached a hundred (today we have 111,000 centurians alive in the USA). My longer live can be attributed to the plastic in my motocycle helmet, the solvents and chemicals used to develop and produce modern medicine, the nuclear weapon that kept my father from having to die on a Japanese beach during an invasion..... Funny how the things that save you can also kill you.
kentuckienne May 6th, 2010 10:08 ET
Starbuck: we exhale carbon dioxide, too, but that doesn't mean we should go around inhaling enormous clouds of it. Just because something is "natural" doesn't mean it isn't harmful - lead, cyanide and arsenic are all natural compounds, too.
bts8q May 6th, 2010 10:15 ET
Starbuck wrote:
"The above panelists should realize that stress kills and has much more effect on cancer than anything proposed above...Are these doctors so dumb that they don't realize that formaldehyde is a natural emission of people when they breathe. Yes it is a natural compound as is radon so next let's outlaw oxygen."
Just wow. I have never seen such a display for awhile. First, studies are done based on empirical evidence...both in animals and observational, longitudinal studies in humans. Go to pubmed.com and search "radon; cancer."
Though low levels of a given compound may be harmless, high and chronic exposure is toxic; for an example that you can understand, take alcohol, drugs...or water. Drink too much water and you will die...it does happen...look it up.
Please do some research before posting–after all, you are in front of a computer!
Valerie May 6th, 2010 10:15 ET
I am fighting cancer for the fourth time in three years. I am in a clinical trial because existing chemo doesn't work. I believe that my immune system has been compromised by continuous exposure to all those listed as well as chlorine and flouride (other countries do not allow this in their water because of the risk but we place a higher value on teeth than life). Listen to this article. Protect your children. I am trying to. Even if you just implement a few changes it could make a big difference. It could be the difference between life and death.
Dee May 6th, 2010 10:16 ET
Starbuck, you are an idiot. Carbon dioxide is ALSO a natural emission of people when they breathe. And, as we all know, it is having a detrimental effect on our environment. Just because something occurs naturally on our planet doesn't mean it's harmless. Just look at the oil slick – which we drilled out of the Earth – that is approaching our shores. We need to find better, healthier ways to produce our products, and we need to realize that our health is more important than the allmighty dollar.
Tom May 6th, 2010 10:17 ET
Farm chemicals are regulated far more than most of the chemicals that people come into contact with everyday as if the farm chemicals posed a greater risk to everybody's health than all these unregulated chemicals for which I think the average person comes into more contact with on a daily basis. I'm not against farm chemical regulation but people have a distorted sense of the danger of such chemicals in relationship to more of their daily exposure to hazardous materials that they don't even know they are being exposed to that don't have anywhere near the same oversight.
Elle May 6th, 2010 10:18 ET
Starbuck, you make me wish I was a Republican. Then I could ignore everything that makes me unhappy, too. Taxpayer stress, my a**.
Lorenzo May 6th, 2010 10:20 ET
The most dangerous cancer risk? Ignorance. All Americans should be happy that efforts are being made toward a healthier and more responsible society.
FK from Los Angles, CA May 6th, 2010 10:20 ET
Thank you, CNN, for reporting on this issue. It's amazing how many Americans are sick or dying from these "accepted" household products. It will be interesting to see how many follow ups you will do on this story. Will you give it as much prominence as Tiger Woods gets or will this be a one-off like most major stories that effect public health.
Meghan May 6th, 2010 10:23 ET
I've been saying this for years. As far as "natural" occuring compound, when it is put into a chemical it is no longer "natural" and thus becomes a greater compound than it was in its "natural" setting. So, yes, all of these "quacks" are trying to regulate "natural" occuring compounds once they combine with other chemicals that ultimately can be harmful to us. I've known too many people this year who have succumbed to this epidemic and it's about time someone recognizes other possible causes, i.e., environmental, food, water.
Mendrys May 6th, 2010 10:23 ET
Funny how common sense advice to limit exposure to formaldehyde, benz
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)