SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
breast cancer
Ford, Put the Brakes on Breast Cancer
We can see through the pink-tinted smoke screen of Ford’s Warriors in Pink. Truth be told, Ford’s Warriors in Pink program is just another example of “pinkwashing.”
Oct 25, 2018
This October is both Breast Cancer Awareness Month and the 110th anniversary of the Ford Model T. Ford Motor Company tells us they are "dedicated to fueling the spirit of those living with" breast cancer through their Warriors in Pink campaign. But in reality their cars and trucks are fueling the breast cancer epidemic.
A quarter of a million women are diagnosed with invasive breast cancer annually, and more than 40,000 people will die of the disease this year. All of the hope, inspiration, and determination that Ford's Warriors in Pink promises to fuel will not change these grim statistics as long as Ford's cars and trucks continue to produce cancer-causing emissions.
Most conversations about breast cancer prevention focus on genetic testing. But inherited mutations accounts for only an estimated 10 percent of all breast cancers, leaving the majority of people diagnosed with the disease with no known risk factors. And many of the widely-accepted risk factors, such as when a woman starts her period or goes into menopause, are not things that a person can change.
Scientists looking for possible targets to prevent breast cancer have identified environmental toxins as important contributors to breast cancer risk. In 2009 President's Cancer Panel reported that "the true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated."
Some of the first chemicals researchers have identified as increasing the risk of breast cancer are found in the exhaust from combustion engines: carcinogens and hormone disruptors such as benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Benzene is such a potent mammary carcinogen it has been linked to breast cancer in men. Virtually everyone in the U.S. breaths in auto exhaust. Again, the 2009 President's Cancer Panel recommended limiting exposure to auto exhaust noting that cars, trucks, and other passenger vehicles "are responsible for approximately 30 percent of cancer resulting from air pollution."
As one of the Big Three automobile manufacturers in the U.S., Ford is in a position to make a huge difference in reducing cancer rates by making clean vehicles.
If Ford truly wants us to believe they have "been active in the fight against breast cancer since 1993," why would they decide earlier this year to go full-throttle on sales of the highest-emission trucks and SUVs, while virtually eliminating lower emission passenger vehicles from their U.S. fleet? Why have they proudly announced a new diesel version of "America's best-selling" F-150 truck--when diesel is enriched with nitro PAHs, which are particularly potent mammary carcinogens? Why will they stop sales in the U.S. of their only 100 percent electric, zero emission car?
Attempting to brush aside criticism for these recent announcements, Ford is loudly touting plans for future investment in electrification--nearly all of which will be in China, where regulation standards are higher. Yet at a major auto show in the U.S. earlier this year, Ford notably failed to showcase any electric vehicles.
Breast cancer is a public health crisis and a social justice issue. We can't afford to hold our breath and hope Ford's promise of new, cleaner vehicles will come to the U.S. sometime down the road.
Ford Warriors in Pink sells branded clothes and other gear in order to raise money for four breast cancer charities. They provide "tips," "inspirational postcards," "healing music," and spotlight 122 "Models of Courage" in order to fuel "the spirit of those living with the disease." But this is nothing more than an attempt by Ford to distract attention away from their role in driving the breast cancer epidemic.
We can see through the pink-tinted smoke screen of Ford's Warriors in Pink. Truth be told, Ford's Warriors in Pink program is just another example of "pinkwashing." Breast Cancer Action first coined the term in 2002 to reveal the hypocrisy of companies that claim to care about breast cancer, but actually manufacture or sell products that are linked to increasing the risk of the disease.
Rather than cleaning up their cars, Ford tells us we need to "harness that fighting spirit." But the truth is, no matter how hard someone "fights"--how strong or determined or hopeful they are--up to 30 percent of all breast cancers will go on to spread or metastasize.
It's time for Ford to show their commitment to people affected by breast cancer by making the shift to 100 percent zero emission vehicles. Instead of pinkwashing and platitudes, Ford can "go further" by no longer making vehicles that produce exhaust.
One hundred and ten years ago, Ford made its name by bringing the Model-T to the masses. Now it's time Ford to bring an all-electric fleet to the masses. By turning away from cancer-causing combustion engines cars and towards zero-emission cars and trucks, Ford can truly help put the brakes on the breast cancer epidemic. After all, the best way to fight cancer is to prevent it in the first place.
Keep ReadingShow Less
New Study Calls Out 17 Common Chemicals Linked to Breast Cancer
"Studies that address toxic chemical exposure account for just a drop in the bucket of money spent on breast cancer."
May 12, 2014
A new study spotlights the ubiquity of environmental toxins, identifying 17 common chemicals that should be the target of breast cancer prevention efforts, and marking a "huge step forward" in the research called for by a federal committee.
The study by researchers at the Silent Spring Institute and Harvard School of Public Health was published Monday in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives.
"Every woman in America has been exposed to chemicals that may increase her risk of getting breast cancer. Unfortunately, the link between toxic chemicals and breast cancer has largely been ignored," Julia Brody, PhD, study author and Executive Director at Silent Spring Institute, said in a statement.
More than 200,000 women are diagnosed with breast cancer in the U.S. each year, but the SSI states that only "5-10 percent of those are due to high-risk inherited genes," emphasizing the need for research on environmental exposure-related diagnoses.
Yet "studies that address toxic chemical exposure account for just a drop in the bucket of money spent on breast cancer," Brody stated.
The new study also found that the same chemicals that have been found to cause mammary cancer in lab rats were also linked to breast cancer in women.
The researchers identified chemicals women may be commonly exposed to and that are rodent mammary carcinogens, and placed those into 17 groups.
They include chemicals in gasoline, diesel and other exhaust, flame retardants, stain-resistant textiles, paint removers, and disinfection byproducts in drinking water. Among the specific chemicals on the list of 17 are benzene, which can be found in gasoline, vehicle exhaust, tobacco smoke and solvents; styrene, found in building materials and consumer products made from polystyrene, indoor air, cigarette smoke, polystyrene food packaging; and PFOA and related compounds, which can be found in grease-, water- and stain-proof coatings, or contaminated drinking water. The list also includes endocrine disruptors, which have received increased attention in recent years due to their connection to products containing BPA.
"The study provides a road map for breast cancer prevention by identifying high-priority chemicals that women are most commonly exposed to and demonstrates how to measure exposure. This information will guide efforts to reduce exposure to chemicals linked to breast cancer, and help researchers study how women are being affected," added study author Ruthann Rudel, MS, Research Director of the Silent Spring Institute.
Last year, a report from a federal committee, the Interagency Breast Cancer and Environmental Research Coordinating Committee (IBCERCC ), emphasized the need for more research into the environmental causes of breast cancer, including the "cocktail of carcinogens and endocrine disruptors" people are exposed to every day.
"Prevention is the key to reducing the burden of breast cancer," said Jeanne Rizzo, President and CEO of the Breast Cancer Fund, the leading national organization working to prevent breast cancer by eliminating our exposures to toxic chemicals and radiation linked to the disease. "That was the conclusion reached by the 2013 federal IBCERCC committee I co-chaired, which also recommended research on the effects of chemical and physical factors that influence the risk of breast cancer. This review is a huge step forward in that research."
Echoing study author Rudel, Rizzo said "this review will be a vital reference tool for scientists looking to evaluate the causes of breast cancer."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Study: Women in Manufacturing Face Five-fold Breast Cancer Risk
Workers complained of nosebleeds, headaches for decades
Nov 19, 2012
Women who work in automotive plastics and food-can manufacturing industries show nearly a five-fold increase in the incidence of breast cancer, according to results of a "groundbreaking," peer-reviewed study published Monday in the journal Environmental Health.
Over a six-year period, the workers in Ontario, Canada, handled carcinogenic and endocrine-disrupting chemicals including bisphenol A (BPA) -- now banned in baby bottles in Canada and the US -- as well as solvents, heavy metals and flame retardants.
For more than three decades, women in Windsor, Ontario "have complained of pungent fumes and dust that caused nosebleeds, headaches, nausea and dizziness," the Washington-based Center for Public Integrity and the Toronto Star report. "Some spoke of smouldering blobs of plastic dumped directly onto the floor near where they worked."
Plant worker Gina DeSantis said workers got sick, but never made a connection to the chemicals, although they worried about a lack of ventilation in the factories.
Jeanne Rizzo, R.N., president and CEO of the Breast Cancer Fund, called the study "groundbreaking," and said the existing laws must "urgently" be enforced or overhauled.
She continued, in part:
This study demonstrates what the Breast Cancer Fund has been saying for years. We are all exposed to a cocktail of carcinogens and endocrine disruptors every day that puts us at greater risk for breast cancer, and we need to prioritize and invest in preventing exposures to these toxic chemicals.
No one should have to face a cancer diagnosis because of the work they do. These workers are the canaries in the coal mines--we need to heed the warning of this study and take measures to protect them and all of us from toxic chemical exposures.
Researchers from Canada, the US and the United Kingdom studied occupational histories of 1,006 women from Ontario who had breast cancer and 1,146 who didn't, and took into consideration factors such as smoking, weight, alcohol use and other lifestyle and reproductive factors. Study members worked in auto plants, casinos, other factories and plants.
The Center for Public Integrity reported:
Sandy Knight, who worked at two Windsor plastics plants from 1978 to 1998, had a breast cancer scare in 2000, when she was 41. The cancer was at Stage III -- "invasive and fast-growing," said Knight, 53, who now works at a Ford parts distribution center near Toronto. She had a single mastectomy and, following 10 years of hormonal treatment, is in remission.
Asked if she believed her disease was work-related, Knight said, "I'm suspicious of it because of all the exposures we had." She remembers the "nauseating kind of odor," the burning eyes and headaches, all the women with cancer, sterility and miscarriages. She's upset that little seems to have changed at some plants.
"Why am I speaking to people today, in 2012, who are doing the same processes I did in 1980?" Knight asked. "It just seems like we're fighting the same battle. A lot of these chemicals should be removed from the workplace.
Plastics manufacturing in Canada is a $21 billion a year industry employing about 91,000 people -- 60 to 80 percent of whom are women, according to the study.
Brophy noted the "blue-collar workers ... remain invisible and their cancer risk largely ignored."
Workers stay, they told study authors, because they pay is good -- $22 an hour with benefits -- and other jobs are scarce.
Robert Park of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health in the United States, said he was "surprised by how strong the findings were."
But US and Canadian industry officials attributed the increase in cancer to "lifestyle and genetic factors."
Study co-author James Brophy said the chemicals are not present in our air, food, water and other products, and "if we fail to take heed then we are doing so at our own peril."
Andrew Watterson, another of the study's co-authors, said the findings will have implications for plastics workers in Europe, India, China, Africa, the United States, noting, "The chemicals will have the same toxic effects. The same diseases will develop."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular