Les enfants du Distilbène

Conséquences de l’exposition in utero au diéthylstilbestrol, 1991

Sommaire

Sous la direction de : B. BLANC, 1991.
  • Préface
  • Historique, par B. BLANC
  • Physiopathologie du DES-syndrome, par J.C. PONS
  • L’adénose cervico-vaginale post-DES, par B. LEMAIRE
  • Dépistage du cancer du vagin et du col chez les femmes esposées in utero au distilbène, par A. CABAU
  • Papilloma virus humain (HIV) et néoplasie vaginale intraépithé- liale (Va.I.N.) chez les femmes exposées au DES in utero, par A. KHOUZAMI, J.R. DELPERO, F. BLADOU et G. HOUVENAEGHEL
  • L’adénocarcinome à cellules claires du vagin, par B. BLANC et J.R. DELPERO
  • Tumeurs du vagin à cellules claires – Adénocarcinomes à cellules claires. Etude comparative avec les épithéliomas pavimenteux malpighiens, par J.R. DELPERO, A. KHOUZAMI, L. BOUBLI, F. BLADOU et G. HOUVENAEGHEL
  • Les lésions utérines et annexielles, par B. BLANC
  • Conséquences de l’exposition au DES in utero. Le risque chez le garçon, par G. SERMENT, E. LECHEVALLIER, D. BRETHEAU et D. Rossi
  • Les conséquences sur la fonction de reproduction, par L. BOUBLI et C. D’ERCOLE
  • Prise en charge des grossesses des patientes exposées in utero au diéthylstilbestrol, par J.C. PONS, H. RHALI et E. PAPIERNIK
  • Entre mère et fille, le distilbène. Aspects psychologiques, par F. CAHEN et J.C. PONS
Images de médicaments DES
Le Distilbène DES, en savoir plus

Endocrine Society Experts Urged EU to Protect Public from Chemical Exposure

Science-based regulation needed to address danger of endocrine-disrupting chemicals

Washington, DC – To protect human health, Endocrine Society members called on the European Commission to adopt science-based policies for regulating endocrine-disrupting chemicals in an opinion piece published in The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology.

Endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) mimic, block or interfere with the body’s hormones – the chemical signals that regulate brain development, reproduction, metabolism, growth and other important biological functions. EDCs can be found in common products including food containers, plastics, cosmetics and pesticides.

Endocrine Society Experts Urge EU to Protect Public from Chemical Exposure, The Endocrine Society, June 13, 2016.

Pool image Richard P J Lambert.

More than 1,300 studies have linked EDC exposure to health problems such as infertility, diabetes, obesity, hormone-related cancers and neurological disorders, according to the Endocrine Society’s 2015 Scientific Statement. Recent studies have found that adverse health effects from EDC exposure cost the European Union more than €157 billion each year in healthcare expenses and lost productivity.

“A growing body of research has found endocrine-disrupting chemicals pose a threat not only to those who are directly exposed, but to their children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren,”
“We need to protect the public and future generations with regulations that address the latest scientific findings and incorporate new information from emerging research.”

said the Society’s European Union Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Task Force Co-Chair Jean-Pierre Bourguignon, MD, PhD, first author of the opinion piece, of the University of Liège in Liège, Belgium.

The European Commission has proposed four options for regulatory criteria identifying endocrine-disrupting chemicals. The Endocrine Society supports option 3, which would create multiple categories based on the amount of scientific evidence that a particular chemical acts as an endocrine disruptor. This option also allows for incorporating new data as more studies are published.

In The Lancet Diabetes & Endocrinology, the authors note that other options being considered either don’t define endocrine-disrupting chemicals as clearly or include problematic criteria. Option 4 uses potency – the amount of chemical exposure needed to produce an effect – as one criterion. Since EDCs can have different and more dangerous effects when an individual is exposed to low levels, measuring potency could cause regulators to overlook endocrine disruptors that pose a true threat.

“Because of the way hormones work, even low-level exposure can disrupt the way the body grows and develops,”
“Pregnant women, babies and children are particularly vulnerable, and science-based regulations are needed to protect them.”

Bourguignon said.

Science-based regulation of endocrine disrupting chemicals in Europe: which approach?, the lancet, dx.doi.org/10.1016/S2213-8587(16)30121-8
, 13 June 2016.

Other authors of the opinion piece include: Rémy Slama of Inserm, CNRS and University Grenoble Alpes in Grenoble, France; Åke Bergman of the Swedish Toxicology Sciences Research Center in Södertälje, Sweden; Barbara Demeneix of Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle in Paris, France; Richard Ivell of the University of Nottingham in Nottingham, U.K.; Andreas Kortenkamp of Brunel University London in Uxbridge, U.K.; GianCarlo Panzica of the University of Torino and Neuroscience Institute Cavalieri Ottolenghi in Orbassano, Italy; Leonardo Trasande of New York University School of Medicine in New York, NY; and R. Thomas Zoeller of the University of Massachusetts in Amherst, MA.

Liens industrie pharmaceutique et médecins : une approche différente outre-atlantique

Peut-on travailler avec Big Pharma tout en restant complètement objectif?

” En Amérique du Nord, les universités ont décidé que les étudiants ne recevraient plus les visiteurs pharmaceutiques. Car à partir du moment où étudiants et enseignants sont soumis à l’influence de l’industrie, ils ne peuvent plus penser en termes scientifiques.

L’industrie ne fonctionne qu’en termes de ventes, pas en termes de bien de l’humanité. Aux États-Unis, ou au Canada, les médecins ne pensent pas qu’ils sont immunisés contre l’influence des industriels. Ils pensent que l’influence des industriels est contraire à l’intérêt des patients. Ils se défendent, utilisent des arguments scientifiques.

En France, vous entendrez couramment des médecins dire “certes, je travaille avec l’industrie mais je reste complètement objectif”. Les médecins ont une responsabilité importante, car ils sont des prescripteurs, mais aussi des guides à des tas de points de vue. S’ils se laissent guider par l’industrie, ils servent de courroie de transmission auprès des étudiants, des patients, des autres professionnels. Moralement, c’est inacceptable… “.

A man can’t afford to pass up Stilbosol

Stilbosol patenting turned the cattle feed industry upside down in the mid fifties with its phenomenal use by the farmers and feeders

Image Sources
Related Posts
Related Books
More DES DiEthylStilbestrol Resources

Is the age at which British women are having babies changing?

Over 40s now having more babies than under 20s…

Age-specific fertility rates, 1981 to 2015, England and Wales

In 2015, fertility rates decreased for women in all age groups under 25, and increased for all age groups 30 and over compared with 2014. The fertility rate for women aged 25 to 29 remained unchanged.

The largest percentage decrease in fertility rates was for women aged under 20 (7.1%); fertility has generally declined for the under 20s since 1999.

The largest percentage increase in fertility rates was for women aged 40 and over (3.4%); this rate has more than trebled since 1981. In 2015, the fertility rate for women aged 40 and over rose above the rate for women aged under 20.

Women aged 30 to 34 have had the highest fertility of any age group since 2004, prior to this women aged 25 to 29 had the highest fertility.

Births in England and Wales: 2015, Live births, stillbirths, and the intensity of childbearing measured by the total fertility rate, ons.gov.uk, 13 July 2016.

Changes in age-specific fertility rates impact on the total fertility rate (TFR). The TFR decreased in 2015, compared with 2014, despite a small rise in the number of live births. The rise in births was due to an increase in births to women aged 25 and over; births to younger women decreased. As a result, fertility rates for women aged under 25 declined and rates for women aged 30 and over rose. These changes in fertility rates have generally been driven by larger changes in the number of births, rather than changes in the size of the population. The fall in fertility rates at younger ages outweighed the increase in rates at older ages, hence the overall TFR decreased.

In most developed countries, women have been increasingly delaying childbearing to later in life, which has resulted in rising fertility rates among older women. This may be due to a number of factors such as increased female participation in higher education and the labour force, the increasing importance of a career, the rising costs of childbearing, labour market uncertainty and housing factors.

Rising fertility rates at older ages have affected the average age of mother, which has been increasing since 1975, reaching 30.3 years in 2015.

Click to download the complete report.

2016 Changes to Cervical Cancer Screening in the UK

Screening samples will now be tested for human papilloma virus (HPV) first

In the United Kingdom, women aged 25 to 49 are invited for cervical screening every 3 years and from 50 to 64 every 5 years.

The process of cervical screening is to be changed to allow women to benefit from more accurate tests. After a successful pilot programme and a recommendation by the UK National Screening Committee, screening samples will be tested for human papilloma virus (HPV) first. This will be rolled out across England as the primary screening test for cervical disease.

Current testing process

At the moment, cervical screening samples are first tested using the cytology test. The sample is examined for abnormal cells that could go on to develop into cancer. However, the cytology test leaves room for abnormal cells to be missed, as they sometimes look similar to normal cells. Normal cells can also be misdiagnosed as abnormal.

Testing for (HPV is used as a secondary measure for samples needing further investigation. Women with mild or borderline cytology results are tested for HPV and if negative are returned to the routine screening programme. Women who are HPV positive are referred for a colposcopy, a medical examination of the cervix.

New testing process

In the new process, the sample will be tested for HPV first.

The majority (99.7%) of cervical cancers are caused by persistent HPVinfection, which causes changes to the cervical cells. If HPV is found it is a useful guide as to whether abnormal cells are present. Women can then be monitored more closely and any developing abnormal cells found sooner. If no HPV is present the test also minimises over-treatment and anxiety for women.

” These changes are a breakthrough in the way we test women for cervical disease. The new test is more accurate, more personal and will reduce anxiety among women.
Cervical screening currently saves 4,500 lives a year, and this new test will ensure the early signs are spotted and treated earlier. “

said Jane Ellison, Public Health Minister.

The new testing process could prevent around 600 cancers a year, according to Cancer Research UK.

” It’s a huge step forward that the government is now introducing the HPVtest to improve cervical screening. Testing first for the human papilloma virus will help prevent more cervical cancers, as it can pick up the cancer-causing infection before any abnormalities can develop in the cells.

The need for improvements to the cervical screening programme was set out in the cancer strategy for England last year, so it’s good to see progress being made. “

said Sir Harpal Kumar, Cancer Research UK’s chief executive.

Original news story by Gov.UK Department of Health, 6 July 2016.

Big Pharma’s Manipulation and Influence

Truth in Media, 4 Part Series, on Big Pharma Manipulation of Healthcare

Ben Swann Truth in Media – Original Air Date: June-July, 2016.

All 4 parts of Ben Swann’s Truth in Media series about Big Pharma.

More Information

  • When it comes to providing transparency and following proper procedure in protecting the health of the American people:
    • where does the FDA stand?
    • has the FDA maintained its integrity in maintaining oversight of drug companies?
    • is the FDA doing its job to the best of its ability in assuring that our medicines have been rigorously tested?
    • is the FDA making sure that drugs found to be dangerous are assigned proper warnings or removed from the market?
  • New Truth In Media Episodes: Confronting Big Pharma’s Manipulation, Influenc, Truth In Media, Jun 7,, 2016.
More Videos

Le Mediator, c’est un Titanic qui a coulé

La guerre des chiffres: le nombre de morts varie selon l’observateur…

Combien le médicament a-t-il causé de morts? 3? 500? 2000?

“C’est comme si, lorsqu’un navire a fait naufrage, on ne comptabilisait que les corps retrouvés échoués sur le rivage et que l’on oubliait toutes les personnes qui ont disparu en mer et qui ne seront jamais retrouvées”

affirme Irène Frachon.

Titanic par christabelle12300.

Effectivement… quand au distilbène, je vous laisse calculer le nombre de paquebots…

Mediator : à lire
Le Distilbène DES, en savoir plus

Expecting a Baby?

Advice about chemicals and pregnancy

Pregnant or planning a pregnancy? Pay extra attention to chemicals.

The Danish Environment Protection Agency (EPA) emphasises that if you are pregnant or planning a pregnancy, you should pay extra attention to chemicals, as the child you are carrying is very sensitive to external influences.

This 2014 guide explains that we are exposed to many chemicals from many different products, every day, and therefore it is a good idea to minimise this exposure as much as possible.

Sources and More Information

Proposed system for classifying pesticide-related poisoning

New system would provide a valuable evidence base on pesticide exposure

Pesticides include a diverse range of chemicals, which are used to eliminate or control pests such as weeds and insects. They are widely used in agriculture, the home, hospitals and food-processing facilities. Misuse of pesticides however, such as food contamination or using excessive doses, can potentially harm people and the environment. Within the EU, a comprehensive set of legislation regulates the marketing and use of pesticides to prevent these negative effects.

Directive 2009/128/EC for example establishes a framework for the sustainable use of pesticides. It currently covers plant protection products (types of pesticide that protect plants and crops). Pesticides have the potential to harm people, animals and the environment and are also covered by separate regulations.

EU pesticide-poisoning data could be harmonised between Member States, Science for Environment Policy News Alert, 08 July.

Member States are required to collect statistics on the placing on the market and use of plant protection products4 . Regulations also require Member States to collect information and report on suspected cases of poisoning from pesticides. However, there are no common collection and reporting standards, as plant protection products and biocidal products are presently separately categorised within EU legislation.

Harmonising pesticide-poisoning data collection, categorisation and reporting could allow comparable data from different Member States to be pooled in one database. The information in such a database would better support, at both national and European levels, the monitoring and safety evaluation of pesticides and the detection of emerging problems from pesticides. It could also provide evidence for measures to prevent poisoning.

Development of a new categorization system for pesticides exposure to support harmonized reporting between EU Member States, ScienceDirect, Volume 91, Pages 332–340, May 2016.

Pesticide application by ugacommunications.

This study, which was co-funded by the EU5 , reports on a proposed system for classifying pesticide-related poisoning. The researchers categorised the pesticides using the classification of plant-protection products in Regulation (EC) No 1185/2009 and biocidal products listed in Regulation (EC) 1451/20076.

The new system unifies the categorisation of all pesticides, according to: 

  • their main category of use (plant protection or biocide);
  • secondary category of use (for example, insecticides — that target insects — and acaricides — that target ticks and mites);
  • chemical class (for example, pyrethrins/pyrethroids — pyrethrins are derived from chrysanthemum flowers, pyrethroids are synthetic versions of pyrethrins);
  • active substances (for example, bifenthrin — a pyrethoid).

The researchers tested the system on data collected on human exposure to pesticides by six Member States. Three national centres (Germany, Italy, the UK) were able to translate the data from their national coding system to the proposed system, adding any exposures to active substances not included in the list by classifying them according to the proposed categorisation system.

Difficulties experienced by the other three centres (Czech Republic, France, Lithuania), such as being unable to distinguish between the main categories of pesticide products, highlighted the need to support data collection and recording, including the development of guidance documents. Providing common tools to help Member States systematically report hazardous exposures to pesticides would improve data comparability and could inform surveillance and early warning systems in Europe.

The researchers say that, if adopted in the EU, the system would not require changes to current regulations. However, policy support would be necessary to implement standardised data recording and categorisation.

Overall, the system – which would provide a valuable evidence base on pesticide exposure – could help policymakers to better understand the burden of chemical related disease (as required by the REACH regulation) and help ensure that future policies are robust.