Inside Prevention

FDA likely to delay ruling on BPA (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, 11/30/09)

The FDA will delay its new safety analysis of BPA, according to an article in today's Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

Despite months of additional study and a self-imposed timetable, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration likely will not release its ruling Monday on the safety of bisphenol A, a chemical used in thousands of household products that has been linked to developmental and behavioral problems.

...Even if a new ruling does not come Monday, environmental groups - including the Breast Cancer Fund, Environmental Working Group and the National Resource Defense Council - say they will ask the FDA to immediately impose a public health warning, mandatory labeling of food cans, and an outright interim ban on polycarbonate plastic in food containers. (Read complete article.)

While the FDA is working on its safety reassessment, the Breast Cancer Fund is working with Congress to ban BPA from all food and beverage containers. You can help: Ask your senators to sign on to the Ban Poisonous Additives Act.

Lead, chemicals found in toys despite stricter law (Washington Post, 11/25/09)

It's been nine months since a federal toy safety law took effect, but toxic toys are still available at major U.S. retailers, according to product tests released today by the U.S. Public Interest Research Group and reported in the Washington Post:

Despite a new law that bans six chemicals from children's products and lowers the lead limit for them, a public interest group has found a number of toys at major retailers that contain the chemicals and illegal amounts of lead.... [W]hile many manufacturers and retailers are complying with the new law, a handful are not, and it is hard for consumers to tell the difference. (Read complete article)

The Breast Cancer Fund supported an amendment to the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act that banned six phthalates from toys and other plastic products for kids. Phthalates are chemicals that make plastic soft and pliable, but they're also linked to early puberty - a breast cancer risk factor. The law also bans lead in toys.

The law is good, but it requires the Consumer Product Safety Commission to enforce it. We'll continue to push for the safety protections Congress intended.

In the meantime, here are a few tips for safe, phthalate-free holiday toy shopping:

• Soft plastic toys that young children might put in their mouths may contain phthalates unless they are marked "phthalate-free," "PVC-free" or "EU compliant," or they carry the CE mark (which indicates that the product is compliant with European Union regulations and therefore should be phthalate-free).
• Both teethers and pacifiers sold in the United States are supposed to be phthalate-free already, though parents should purchase these items from reputable retailers.
• Recycling codes (if toys have them) may help you determine if the items are made with PVC, which often contains phthalates. PVC plastics are marked #3. Better choices are codes #1, #2 or #5. The Breast Cancer Fund recommends that people also avoid plastics marked #6 (styrene) and #7 ("other," but often BPA-based).
• To be safe, we recommend that parents discard soft plastic toys and childcare articles that do not fall into one of the exceptions listed above. When purchasing new items, look for phthalate-free toys and make sure retailers know phthalate-free merchandise is important to you.

Ask Janet!

On the next few Fridays (and perhaps beyond), Breast Cancer Fund Science Advisor Janet Gray, Ph.D., of Vassar College, will lend her scientific expertise in environmental health to answering burning questions around the link between breast cancer and environmental exposures.

Question from Norma, Texas:
All I read about not using personal care products or cleaning products with toxic chemicals seems overwhelming. It makes me want to throw my hands up in the air! Where would you suggest I start?

Dear Norma,
This information can seem overwhelming because chemicals are so pervasive in our surroundings, but by making changes where you can – and being aware of what you’re putting in and on your body – you can reduce your risk and the risk for future generations.  

To introduce and raise awareness around the environmental causes of breast cancer, the Breast Cancer Fund and LUNA launched the Pure Prevention campaign, which provides easy, everyday tips to help individuals reduce their exposure to chemicals linked to the disease. The tips for prevention focus on reducing exposure to common risks found in our homes (plastics, household cleaners and insecticides), on our foods (pesticides and hormones), and in our personal care products. It also provides recommendations for how to choose – or create – safer alternatives, as well as how to learn more and take action through the Breast Cancer Fund to eliminate these environmental causes through smart public policies and regulations.

In collaboration with faculty, students and technical professionals at Vassar College, we’ve also created the Environmental Risks and Breast Cancer project, a multimedia Web site to encourage people to learn more about common exposures found both inside and outside the home and make informed choices to reduce your risk.

The Breast Cancer Fund works to aggregate the in-depth science linking environmental exposures and breast cancer and to mobilize the public in support of policy initiatives, corporate accountability campaigns and other innovative programs that promote breast cancer prevention. To learn more about the science, look to the Breast Cancer Fund’s State of the Evidence: The Connection Between Breast Cancer and the Environment, a comprehensive report of the scientific evidence on chemicals and radiation linked to breast cancer. The scientific evidence provides the basis to move toward research and public policy changes necessary to stop breast cancer before it starts.

And, don’t forget to check out my 20 Tips for Breast Cancer Prevention on The Daily Green! 

Have questions about breast cancer and environmental exposures? Ask Janet! askjanet@breastcancerfund.org.

Mammography Screening: Are we asking the wrong question?

This week, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force announced new mammography guidelines, moving the recommended age for women to receive their annual screenings from 40 to 50. Because mammography is one of the few tools available for breast cancer detection, the response from women across the country has been one of overwhelming frustration and anxiety.

With a mission to identify and eliminate the environmental causes of breast cancer, the Breast Cancer Fund has long been concerned about women’s exposures to ionizing radiation, the longest and best-established link to the disease.

The Breast Cancer Fund calls for a change in the national conversation about breast cancer detection, moving away from blanket guidelines and toward an investment in safer and more effective alternatives and in better understanding the causes of the disease.

This is a moment of opportunity to recognize the weaknesses in our current tools and fully invest in breast cancer prevention.

Read the Breast Cancer Fund’s complete position on the new mammography guidelines.

Ask Janet!

On the next few Fridays (and perhaps beyond), Breast Cancer Fund Science Advisor Janet Gray, Ph.D., of Vassar College, will lend her scientific expertise in environmental health to answering burning questions around the link between breast cancer and environmental exposures. Dr. Gray’s Tips for Breast Cancer Prevention were featured on The Daily Green during National Breast Cancer Awareness Month in October. She is also the editor of the Breast Cancer Fund’s State of the Evidence: The Connection Between Breast Cancer and the Environment.

Question from Emilie, California:
I know that dry cleaning has harmful chemicals and is known for being an insidious pollutant of the environment as it’s difficult to contain the solvents. My dry cleaner recently changed ownership and is promoting that they are “earth friendly” cleaners. However, I’ve heard that some of the new methods of dry cleaning are better at being contained (and thus less polluting) but are still using the same or similar solvents.  What guidance can you give those of us with wardrobes full of professional clothing that require dry cleaning to ensure we are not unknowingly being exposed to toxic dry cleaning solvents.

Dear Emilie,
Thank you for your question. Dry cleaning is both hazardous for the environment and human health because of the use of perchloroethylene (also called PCE or PERC) to prevent water from penetrating the fabric’s threads. PERC has been found to be a water contaminant linked to increased breast cancer rates. Breast cancer clusters in Cape Cod, Mass., and recently Camp Lejeune, N.C., have shown a strong connection between incidences of the disease and high levels of the chemical found in their water supplies.

There has been some concern that cleaners will claim that they’re “organic” but continue to use PERC because it’s an organic solvent or volatile organic compound (VOC). In my October tips, I suggest that the best way to avoid exposure is to examine the fabric to determine if it’s necessary to dry clean. Manufacturers often put “dry clean only” on the label to prevent liability, but gentle wet washing and air drying may be sufficient.  

Along the same lines, a developing alternative in professional dry cleaning is wet cleaning and liquid carbon dioxide cleaning that uses water as a solvent rather than PERC.

The most environmentally-friendly method remains the do-it-yourself option where you can control the amount of water and type of detergent that you use. You also avoid unnecessary plastic bags!

Have questions about breast cancer and environmental exposures? Ask Janet! askjanet@breastcancerfund.org.

BPA raised workers' risk of sexual dysfunction, study says (Milwaukee Journal Sentinel)

Yet another reason to avoid bisphenol A in your own life and advocate for those who don't have the luxury of choosing safer alternatives. Breast cancer is just one of the many tragic risks of this estrogenic chemical.

Chinese factory workers exposed to huge amounts of bisphenol A substantially increased their risk of sexual dysfunction, according to a study released late Tuesday that is expected to add more urgency to the question of the chemical's safety.

Read the article from the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel (Nov. 11, 2009).

Consumer Reports defends BPA study against industry attacks

Earlier this week we blogged about Consumer Reports' study that found bisphenol A (BPA) in name-brand canned foods. Not surprisingly, the BPA industry came out swinging, with all kinds of attacks on Consumer Reports' credibility. Really?

Today, the magazine defended its report on its blog, responding to industry attacks point by point.

Enough is enough. It's time to drown out the voices that profit from making and selling this toxic chemical with the voice of reason: there is sufficient evidence of harm to human health to get BPA out of food and beverage containers, period. Write to your Congressional rep if you agree.

New study reveals BPA leaching into name-brand canned foods

On Tuesday, Consumer Reports revealed the results of a new study  testing for the presence of bisphenol A (BPA) in name-brand canned foods. While the Breast Cancer Fund has long been concerned that BPA leaches from can linings into foods, the study confirms that almost all of the popular products tested contained the chemical.

Nearly every American has detectable levels of BPA in their bodies, and there is growing evidence that exposure to this synthetic estrogen, even at low levels, can have adverse effects on human health, including increased risk of breast and prostate cancer. BPA is also found in hard, clear plastics, including food storage containers and baby bottles.

The results give new urgency to the call by the Breast Cancer Fund and environmental health groups to ban BPA nationwide from food and beverage containers.

Consumer Reports tested 19 name-brand products, including soups, tuna and green beans, and found that almost all contain levels of BPA. Even products labeled as BPA-free registered a presence of the chemical. 

Ask your members of Congress to co-sponsor the Ban Poisonous Additive Act.

View the Breast Cancer Fund's press release on the study.