Inside Prevention

Teens for Safe Cosmetics take Union Square

On Tuesday, dozens of Bay Area high-schoolers took to Union Square in downtown San Francisco to protest the use of toxic chemicals in cosmetics products. They wore prom dresses and combat boots.

Teens for Safe Cosmetics is yet another example of concerned women across the country who are pressuring cosmetics companies to remove ingredients linked to cancer or birth defects from products.

Learn more about the problem and check out the video from Tuesday's "ProjectPROM" event below.

Drop in breast cancer rate linked to decline in HRT use

Today's New England Journal of Medicine reports an 8.6 percent decline in U.S. breast cancer rates between 2001 and 2004, and connects that drop to fewer women using hormone replacement therapy to counter the symptoms of menopause.

NEJM's analysis of National Cancer Institute registries showed a sharp decline in 2003—after HRT use was linked to breast cancer risk—followed by a leveling off in 2004. The effect was particularly robust for post-menopausal women with estrogen-receptor-positive breast tumors (cancers that grow in response to estrogen).

And while some researchers argue that it's premature to attribute the decline to HRT (stopping HRT may have slowed the growth of some tumors, but they could show up in later years, for example), it's clearly been enough evidence to convince many women to say no thanks.

Hormones play an important role in the development of breast cancer, whether from HRT or hormone-disrupting chemicals (atrazine, bisphenol A, dibutyl phthalate, dioxin, organochlorine pesticides, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and others). Elimination of this one hormone source meant 30,000 fewer women received a diagnosis of breast cancer over the course of the 2-year NEJM study; now imagine how many more women could be spared if we eliminate these other exposure sources.

(Read more coverage of today's HRT story from the Associated Press and the Los Angeles Times.)

Perfume, perfume everywhere

Synthetic musk fragrances are added to countless consumer items. A decade ago, musks were found in human breast milk in Europe, raising a red flag. Now, even higher levels of polycyclic musks have been found in breast milk from U.S. mothers.

To check out the ingredients of your cosmetics products, visit the Environmental Working Group's Skin Deep database. And visit the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics to get involved and take action for safer cosmetics.

Environmental health hits the small screen

Last night's episode of House (a FOX medical drama, for the uninitiated) featured an obscure plot that we at the Breast Cancer Fund happen to know a lot about: the estrogenic effects of chemicals.

In this episode, a young girl presented with bizarre symptoms—including mentruation at age 8—that her doctors finally figured out was caused by hugging her father and picking up hormones from his testosterone cream. And no, they didn't make this up; actual case studies of very young girls developing breast buds are detailed in Sandra Steingraber's upcoming report on early puberty commissioned by BCF and follow the same exposure route.

So what does this little girl have to do with breast cancer? For one, early puberty is a risk factor for the disease. More broadly, chemicals that act like estrogen increase breast cancer risk (recall, for example, the HRT-breast cancer connection).

The "doctors" on the show talked about the hormone-mimicking chemicals in cleaning products, pesticides and shampoos that contain placenta (also true). I'm thrilled to see this kind of messaging finding its way into pop culture, and hopeful that we're reaching a critical mass of people who won't stand for chemical bombardment any longer.

Your next mammogram may not be necessary

For forty-somethings: 120,000 doctors want you to stop and think about your next mammogram.

As reported last week in the Washington Post, the American College of Physicians (ACP), the largest medical specialty group in the country representing 120,000 internists, issued new guidelines urging women in their 40’s to consult with their doctors about whether or not to have mammograms.

The ACP believes the risks of mammograms including exposure to radiation, a known breast carcinogen, unnecessary biopsies, surgery and chemotherapy – may outweigh the benefits.

"All we're saying is that women should be informed about the risks and benefits so they can make a decision based on all the facts," said Douglas K. Owens of Stanford University, who chaired the committee that wrote the guidelines.

This flies in the face of the recommendations from the American Cancer Society and the National Cancer Institute. Both recommend mammograms starting at age 40.

BCF was thrilled to see the ACP encouraging women to take an active role in deciding if, when and how often they should schedule their mammograms.

Read the Breast Cancer Fund’s mammography position statement to get more info on radiation, risks, etc.