Does eating organic help prevent cancer ? You bet

Eating organic pesticide-free food significantly reduces cancer risk, study says

In a population-based cohort study of 68 946 French adults, a significant reduction in the risk of cancer was observed among high consumers of organic food.

Although the Association of Frequency of Organic Food Consumption With Cancer Risk / NutriNet-Santé Prospective Cohort Study Findings need to be confirmed, promoting organic food consumption in the general population could be a promising preventive strategy against cancer.

Eating organic pesticide-free food significantly reduces cancer risk

Association of Frequency of Organic Food Consumption With Cancer Risk – Findings From the NutriNet-Santé Prospective Cohort Study

Key Points

Question
What is the association between an organic food–based diet (ie, a diet less likely to contain pesticide residues) and cancer risk?

Findings
In a population-based cohort study of 68 946 French adults, a significant reduction in the risk of cancer was observed among high consumers of organic food.

Meaning
A higher frequency of organic food consumption was associated with a reduced risk of cancer; if the findings are confirmed, promoting organic food consumption in the general population could be a promising preventive strategy against cancer.

Abstract

Importance
Although organic foods are less likely to contain pesticide residues than conventional foods, few studies have examined the association of organic food consumption with cancer risk.

Objective
To prospectively investigate the association between organic food consumption and the risk of cancer in a large cohort of French adults.

Design, Setting, and Participants
In this population-based prospective cohort study among French adult volunteers, data were included from participants with available information on organic food consumption frequency and dietary intake. For 16 products, participants reported their consumption frequency of labeled organic foods (never, occasionally, or most of the time). An organic food score was then computed (range, 0-32 points). The follow-up dates were May 10, 2009, to November 30, 2016.

Main Outcomes and Measures
This study estimated the risk of cancer in association with the organic food score (modeled as quartiles) using Cox proportional hazards regression models adjusted for potential cancer risk factors.

Results
Among 68 946 participants (78.0% female; mean [SD] age at baseline, 44.2 [14.5] years), 1340 first incident cancer cases were identified during follow-up, with the most prevalent being 459 breast cancers, 180 prostate cancers, 135 skin cancers, 99 colorectal cancers, 47 non-Hodgkin lymphomas, and 15 other lymphomas. High organic food scores were inversely associated with the overall risk of cancer (hazard ratio for quartile 4 vs quartile 1, 0.75; 95% CI, 0.63-0.88; P for trend = .001; absolute risk reduction, 0.6%; hazard ratio for a 5-point increase, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.88-0.96).

Conclusions and Relevance
A higher frequency of organic food consumption was associated with a reduced risk of cancer. Although the study findings need to be confirmed, promoting organic food consumption in the general population could be a promising preventive strategy against cancer.

Up to half of childhood cancer survivors will develop hormone disorders

Endocrine Society’s Clinical Practice Guideline offers treatment recommendations

Washington, DC – The Endocrine Society issued a Clinical Practice Guideline titled “Hypothalamic-Pituitary and Growth Disorders in Survivors of Childhood Cancer: An Endocrine Society Clinical Practice Guideline,”advising healthcare providers on how to diagnose and treat the endocrine disorders that affect a significant portion of childhood cancer survivors in the United States today.

Recent data shows that almost 50 percent of these survivors will develop an endocrine disorder over their lifetime. The guideline provides recommendations on how to diagnose and manage certain endocrine and growth disorders commonly found in childhood cancer survivors.

Childhood cancer is relatively rare, and due to improvements in treatment and patient care, the current five-year survival rates exceed 80 percent. It’s estimated that by 2020, there will be half a million childhood cancer survivors in the United States. These survivors face a greater risk of developing serious medical complications, even decades after cancer treatment ends. Endocrine disorders are especially prevalent among this population, often as a result of their previous treatments, particularly exposure to radiation therapy.

“Childhood cancer survivors have a high risk of developing endocrine disorders,”

said Charles A. Sklar, M.D., of the Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York, N.Y. Sklar chaired the writing committee that developed the guideline.

“Our new guideline addresses the growing risk of endocrine disorders among childhood cancer survivors and suggests best practices for managing pituitary and growth disorders commonly found in this population. The guideline stresses the importance of life-long screening of these survivors for earlier detection and optimal patient care.”

Recommendations from the guideline include long-term screening of childhood cancer survivors who underwent radiation therapy to the brain. This population should be screened for growth disorders, pituitary hormone deficiencies, and early puberty. If a condition is diagnosed, in most instances, clinicians should treat these survivors with the same approaches as other patients who develop endocrine conditions.

Fertility preservation in patients undergoing gonadotoxic therapy or gonadectomy

The Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine Opinion, 2018

“Patients preparing to undergo gonadotoxic medical therapy or radiation therapy or gonadectomy should be provided with prompt counseling regarding available options for fertility preservation. Fertility preservation can best be provided by comprehensive programs designed and equipped to confront the unique challenges facing these patients.

Over 100,000 individuals less than 45 years of age are diagnosed with cancer annually in the United States. Over the past 4 decades, advancements in cancer therapies, particularly chemotherapeutics, have led to dramatic improvements in survival. Given the reproductive risks of cancer therapies and improved long-term survival, there has been growing interest in expanding the reproductive options for cancer patients. Indeed, both cancer survivors and the medical community have acknowledged the importance of patient counseling” …

continue reading on the American Society for Reproductive Medicine practice guidelines.

Is cancer fundraising fuelling quackery ?

Are crowdfunding sites promoting quack treatments for cancer ?

Figures published by The BMJ show how crowdfunding for alternative therapies for patients with terminal cancer has soared in recent years. But there are fears that huge sums are being raised for treatments that are not backed by evidence and which, in some cases, may even do then harm, MedicalXpress reports.

JustGiving’s own figures show more than 2300 UK cancer related appeals were set up on its site in 2016, a sevenfold rise on the number for 2015.

The phenomenon has allowed less well-off patients to access expensive, experimental treatments that are not funded by the NHS but have some evidence of benefit. But many fear it has also opened up a new and lucrative revenue stream for cranks, charlatans, and conmen who prey on the vulnerable.

“We are concerned that so many UK patients are raising huge sums for treatments which are not evidence based and which in some cases may even do them harm.”

The society’s project director, Michael Marshall, said.

Melanie Newman, freelance journalist, London, UK, examines calls to help ensure patients and their donors are not being exploited.

Featured image credit @bmj_company.

Drop the C-word to reduce anxiety and overtreatment, say experts

Renaming low risk conditions labelled as cancer

Removing the cancer label in low risk conditions that are unlikely to cause harm if left untreated may help reduce overdiagnosis and overtreatment, argue The BMJ

Abstract

Evidence is mounting that disease labels affect people’s psychological responses and their decisions about management options. The use of more medicalised labels can increase both concern about illness and desire for more invasive treatment. For low risk lesions where there is evidence of overdiagnosis and previous calls to replace the term cancer, we consider the potential implications of removing the cancer label and how this may be achieved.

Our changing understanding of the prognosis of cancers

Some cancers are non-growing or so slow growing that they will never cause harm if left undetected. A prime example is low risk papillary thyroid cancer. Autopsy studies show a large reservoir of undetected papillary thyroid cancer that never causes harm, and the incidence of thyroid cancer has risen substantially in many developed countries. This rise has been predominantly driven by an increase in small papillary thyroid cancers, with mortality remaining largely unchanged. These small papillary thyroid cancers are increasingly being detected because of new technologies, increased access to health services, and thyroid cancer screening. Studies show that rates of metastases, progression to clinical disease, and tumour growth in patients with small papillary thyroid cancer who receive immediate surgery are comparable with those in patients who follow active surveillance.

Likewise, for both low risk ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) and localised prostate cancer, detection strategies have become controversial as long term outcomes for both conditions have been shown to be excellent and there is evidence and concern about overdiagnosis and overtreament. Given the potential harms of overtreatment of DCIS, active surveillance is now being trialled internationally as an alternative approach. …

continue reading Renaming low risk conditions labelled as cancer on The BMJ, 12 August 2018. Image  credit @bmj_company.

Gardasil alert, imminent risk of unnecessary and sometimes dangerous HPV vaccination for girls and boys

Gardasil : the anticancer vaccination that increases the risk of cervical cancer in young women

Reference. Written by Gérard Delépine, MD, Orthopaedic Surgeon/Oncologist/statistician, July 23, 2018.

Open letter to parliamentarians, and to all citizens.

BE CAREFUL. While many doctors, foreign and French, citizens, patients sometimes victims, have been trying to inform for many years about the uselessness and the risks of the HPV vaccine, a new offensive of the pharmaceutical lobbies led again some MPs to try to introduce laws to make it a compulsory vaccination, already probably the most widespread in the world.

We have analysed the benefit-risk of this vaccine originally intended for women, but boys are likely to be targeted as well and denounced several times its uselessness coupled with its risks. both in women and in men. The time spent since FDA’s marketing authorization in June 2006 only adds new arguments against this vaccination, the strongest of which is the increase in the number of cervical cancers in the vaccinated population. which should encourage these countries to follow the example of Japan and Austria and to delete the recommendation.

Attention, some MPs want to impose a vaccination that can increase the risk of cervical cancer, as proven by international publications of national cancer registries.

ANALYSIS OF THE PROPOSED LAW WHICH MAY MAKE GARDASIL COMPULSORY

The preamble to the bill is based on the usual arguments of pharmaceutical companies widely disseminated by the media and their comfortably paid experts.

This preamble certainly recalls some indisputable true facts: there are more than one hundred HPV strains, the vaccines possibly protect against infection by the 4 to 9 strains included in the vaccine (only 2 to 5% of the 200 known strains ), against genital warts and some dysplasia’s without specifying that there is no evidence that it protects against cancer.

It is extremely disturbing to read in the presentation of opinion justifying the proposed law a number of known untruths:

« There are more than one hundred and twenty kinds of human papillomavirus (HPV), and fifteen are considered to be at high risk because they can cause cancers including HPV 16 and 18 causing 70% of infections. » But this only demonstrates a statistical correlation between presence of HPV and cancer, without anyone being so far able to demonstrate a direct CAUSALITY link.

« There are effective HPV vaccines. Current vaccines offer effective vaccination against 70% of carcinogenic HPV, and a new vaccine will soon increase this rate to 90%. » But, what do MPs mean by efficiency? the vaccine is effective on the infections of strains targeted by the vaccine (only 4 to 9 of the nearly 200 listed strains) but there is no evidence that it can prevent invasive cancer let alone avoid death by this cancer.

Citing Australia as a vaccine success story: « In Australia, where 80% of women and 75% of men are vaccinated, cases of HPV lesions have almost disappeared ». But, this statement is outrageous, as the following presentation will show you, because in this highly vaccinated country the number of cervical cancers (and other cancers attributed to HPV) continue to increase.

They also deny the risk of serious side effects that have led to protests in many countries (Denmark, Ireland, Japan, Colombia) and legal complaints from doctors against the EMA.

WHAT SHOULD IT EXPLAIN TO PARLIAMENTARIANS?

The regular smear (every three years) better guarantees early detection of cervical cancer.

In France, HPV infection is not a real public health problem in 2018, neither for women nor for men. In women, since smear screening has been used, the annual number of deaths from cervical cancer is consistently less than 1000 in France, and the women who die are almost exclusively those who have not been screened.

Diagnosis of HPV papillomavirus infection detected by systematic sampling should be avoided! Positive results often lead to unnecessary examination and very early conisation (biopsy) which is often useless.

The <1000 deaths per year from cervical cancer could all have been prevented by screening, Compare this with lung cancer (23,000 deaths), breast cancer (11,883 deaths), or prostate cancer (8,207 deaths) [15] .

Whilst efficacy of smear screening is proven, HPV vaccination not been proven to prevent a single invasive cervical cancer. The cancer registry records even suggest that this vaccine is sometimes likely to increase the risk.

INSTEAD OF REDUCING THE NUMBER OF CERVICAL CANCERS, IT INCREASES SOMETIMES

Curiously, the MPs who signed the bill do not talk about the proven results of the vaccine on the risk of invasive cancer of the cervix, its only official justification.

Instead of reducing the risk of invasive cancer of the cervix, HPV vaccines keep it at a high level or increase it!

After 12 years of use and more than 200 million girls vaccinated worldwide for a total bill of nearly $100 billion paid directly or indirectly by citizens , we can indeed draw a balance of effectiveness of vaccination in two ways:

  1. By examining the evolution of the incidence (annual frequency of new cases per 100,000 women) of the invasive cancer of the cervix in each country, before and after vaccination, a method already validated in 2003.
  2. World Standardised Rates: gross Incidence reported as « Standard World Population » to correct possible biases related to the demographic characteristics of each country.

The evolution of the incidence of cervical cancer before and after vaccination with Gardasil can be traced in a perfectly reliable way in the national cancer registries controlled and published by the ministries of health of the concerned countries.

 

Australia, according to the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, the incidence of cervical cancer declined by almost 50%, from 12(/100,000) in 1995 to 7 in 2004 (before the vaccination campaign). Mortality also improved, thanks to smear screening and treatment. However, since the vaccination campaign started in 2007, there has been no further decrease in either incidence or mortality. In 2017, the incidence of cervical cancer is estimated at 7.1 and cervical cancer mortality has increased by almost 15% from 1.7 in 2014 to 2 in 2017. And our MPs quote Australian efficiency!

The Australian Ministry of Health estimates the number of new cases of cervical cancer is 912 in 2017 and 930 in 2018. Claiming, like our MPs, that « cases of HPV lesions have almost disappeared » in Australia is therefore not correct. One cannot imagine that these MPs lie voluntarily, so we can conclude that they are poorly informed and that they should have checked themselves the information provided by the experts related to laboratories before distributing this « fake news ».

Great Britain, according to Cancer Research UK, the Office of National Statistics (ONS), the incidence of cervical cancer had decreased (thanks to smear screening) from 12.4 in 1995 to 9.27 in 2004. But since vaccination, there is no longer any evidence of improvement, nor on the incidence stagnating from 9.3 in 2006 to 9.6 in 2015 nor on the mortality remaining at 3.

Canada. According to the Canadian Cancer Society, the incidence of cervical cancer has decreased (through screening) from 18 in 1972 to 8.1 in 2008. But since vaccination, there has been no further progress on incidence stagnating at 8.3 in 2017.

United States, according to the National Cancer Institute’s SEER cancer statistics review, the incidence of cervical cancer reduced from 14.8 in 1975 to 6.66 in 2007. But since vaccination, there has been no decrease in the incidence of cervical cancer reached 6.68 in 2015 .

Norway, according to the Cancer Registry of Norway, Oslo: before vaccination, the standardized incidence had fallen sharply thanks to smear screening from 24 in 1965 to 7 in 2004. But since the vaccination, it goes up to 13.9 in 2014 and 14.9 in 2015.

Sweden, according to the National Kvalitetsregister for Cervix Cancer prevention (NKCx ): before the vaccination campaign, the incidence of cervical cancer had decreased (thanks to screening) from 18 in 1967 to 7 in 2006. The worldwide standardized incidence of cervical cancer has increased significantly since vaccination rising to 10.3 in 2012 and 11.5 in 2015. This increase is almost exclusively due to the increase in the incidence of invasive cancer among women aged 23 to 49, which has reached more than 50% since 2006 (11 in 2006 versus 17 in 2015), whereas it is those who have the highest vaccination coverage rate (85%).

Thus, in countries whose populations have access to smear screening, it has led to a considerable reduction in the incidence of cervical cancer (from 40 to 60%). In contrast, the introduction of vaccination has not reduced the incidence or mortality of cervical cancer. Contrary to what is promised by laboratory-related physicians and by many global health authorities, vaccination campaigns have even been followed by an increase in the incidence of cancer.

France, with low levels of HPV vaccination, can serve as a control country. According to Public Health France, the incidence of cervical cancer in mainland France has steadily decreased from 15 in 1995 to 7.5 in 2007, 6.7 in 2012 and 6 in 2017. This decrease in incidence was accompanied by a decrease in mortality from 5 in 1980 to 1.8 in 2012 and 1.7 in 2017. France, with low use of Gardasil, has a much more satisfactory evolution for both incidence and mortality than that of the countries cited as example by the MPs who want to impose vaccination.

Comparison of recent standardized incidences with vaccination coverage rates.

Immunization advocates claim that a high vaccination coverage rate reduces the risk of invasive cancer of the cervix. Yet the comparison of incidence and mortality rates with vaccine coverage rates shows the opposite:

Australia, HPV vaccination coverage exceeds 85% , but in 2017 the incidence of cervical cancer is 7 and the mortality is 2

Great Britain, despite vaccination coverage exceeding 80%, the incidence in 2015 was 9.6 and mortality 3

Sweden the vaccination coverage rate is close to 75% but the incidence 2015 reaches 11.5.

USA, in 2017 the vaccination coverage rate is 60% for a cervical cancer incidence of 6.8 and a specific mortality at 2.3.

France , in 2017, HPV vaccination coverage is very low (around 15% ) for a cervical cancer incidence of 6 and a specific mortality of 1.7

In countries with high immunization coverage, the incidence of invasive cancers and mortality are therefore higher than in France, and compulsory immunisation proposed by some MPs would eliminate this French paradox that protects our children!

 

The harmful side-effects are difficult to deny

In their preamble, the MPs deny that Gardasil can lead (as any treatment) to complications while Japan, Austria and Denmark have stopped promoting this vaccination after serious complications, sometimes even fatal and that families suffering from these vaccines organized public demonstrations in several countries of the world (Japan, Colombia, Ireland), and that Danish doctors lodged a complaint against the European Medicines Agency (EMA), which refused to answer the questions they asked. after the notification of severe neurological events not listed in the EMA registers.

In France, several lawsuits are in progress.

« Among the most frequently mentioned by the victims defended by M pathologies e Coubris include multiple sclerosis, lupus, disseminated acute encephalomyelitis (inflammation of the central nervous system) and myofasciitis macrophages (a disease that results in pain muscle and chronic fatigue) ». A parliamentary commission of inquiry which could hear experts, citizens and independent associations of laboratories, having, from near or far, no link of interest with laboratories, would be a first step to enlighten Parliament.

IN CONCLUSION, the benefit-risk balance is not in favour of vaccination, let alone compulsory.

A compulsory health measure should not be based on faith in vaccination or hidden conflicts of interest, but on proven facts, verifiable by every citizen. However, the facts established by the official records of cancer registries show that HPV vaccination does not protect against invasive cancer of the cervix but seems rather to maintain its frequency at a high level, and sometimes even increase it.

Let us fight against this bill that threatens our children, by informing everyone, our MP, our senator, our elected officials, that no one may be unaware.

Only this work of proximity of each citizen this summer, will be able to avoid this new catastrophe of return which could be the anti-HPV vaccination, as it has been and still is the obligation of vaccination against hepatitis B.

Let’s apply the precautionary principle! Let us respect the right of every human being to informed choice/consent for medical interventions!

A Gynecologists’ Guide to DES Daughter Care

Dr Guide For DES Daughters 2015

What DES Daughters and their doctors need to know about the lifelong risks of DES exposure to have a discussion about DES health and needs and concerns.



DES DiEthylStilbestrol Resources

Follow-up of Patients with Clear-Cell Adenocarcinoma of the Vagina and Cervix

New England Journal of Medicine, May 3, 2018 – Supported by the National Cancer Institute, National Institutes of Health, through a cooperative agreement

A new report on the risks of exposure during pregnancy to a supplement, diethylstilbestrol (DES), that is linked to a rare cancer. The study found that DES-exposed patients with clear-cell adenocarcinoma had ‘increased mortality across their life span.’ For women aged 10 to 34 with DES-related clear-cell adenocarcinoma, the risk of death was 27 times higher than for other US women in that age group.

Women who had prenatal exposure to diethylstilbestrol (DES) are at increased risk for clear-cell adenocarcinoma of the vagina and cervix early in life. Previous studies have investigated the clinical features of this disease and survival among these patients, but data on their long-term survival are lacking. Women with DES-related clear-cell adenocarcinoma are aging into their 50s and 60s, but the effect of this condition during their overall life span has not been well established.

A total of 695 patients with clear-cell adenocarcinoma in the Registry for Research on Hormonal Transplacental Carcinogenesis were followed through 2014 (see the Methods section of the Supplementary Appendix, available with the full text of this letter at NEJM.org). The mean year of birth was 1955. The mean age at diagnosis of clear-cell adenocarcinoma was 22 years, and 80% of the patients received the diagnosis between the ages of 15 and 30 years. In 415 patients, evidence of prenatal DES exposure was documented.

During a median follow-up of 22.7 years, 219 patients died, yielding a probability of 20-year survival of 69%. The 5-year probability of survival differed between the patients with prenatal DES exposure (86.1%) and patients without documentation of DES exposure (81.2%), but the 20-year probability of survival was similar between the two groups. After adjustment for tumor stage, histologic type, and age, the difference in probability of survival between patients with DES exposure and those without DES exposure was significant only in the first 5 years (P=0.025).

Since the epidemiologic curve was similar between the two groups, some of the patients with clear-cell adenocarcinoma for whom there was no documentation of DES exposure may have actually been exposed to DES in utero, and thus the true survival difference between women with DES exposure and those with idiopathic clear-cell adenocarcinoma would be larger without potential misclassification. This differential effect of DES according to time suggests that clear-cell adenocarcinoma associated with DES exposure and idiopathic clear-cell adenocarcinoma may have different tumor biologic features. Idiopathic clear-cell adenocarcinoma may be more likely to progress quickly or recur earlier, whereas clear-cell adenocarcinoma associated with DES exposure may be more likely to recur later. This interesting phenomenon has also been observed in other estrogen-associated cancers, including breast and endometrial cancers. During the first 5 to 7 years after diagnosis, patients with estrogen receptor (ER)–negative breast cancer have a worse survival than patients with ER-positive breast cancer, but the survival rates between the two groups become similar thereafter. Data from molecular studies of germline genetic mutations, tumor genomic changes, and epigenetic alterations to elucidate the underlying mechanisms for this improved behavior of estrogen-associated cancers are lacking.

We found that patients with clear-cell adenocarcinoma had increased mortality across their life span. The risk of death among women with DES-related clear-cell adenocarcinoma was 27 times higher than that in the general U.S. population of women between 10 and 34 years of age, 5 times higher between 35 and 49 years of age, and 2 times higher between 50 and 65 years of age. The excess mortality risk between the ages of 35 and 49 years is mainly due to late recurrences, whereas the excess mortality risk after 50 years of age may be due to other life-threatening health conditions in the population of women who were exposed to DES. It is therefore important to continue the surveillance of this unique cohort of patients with DES-related clear-cell adenocarcinoma to examine their health conditions late in life.

Press Releases

  • ‘DES daughters’ with rare cancer continue to face higher death rates, reuters, MAY 2, 2018.
  • The DES saga: Death risk high for young women exposed in utero, sciencedaily, May 2, 2018.
  • The pill that gave a generation deadly rare cancers: Mothers-to-be took DES to avoid the pain of a miscarriage – now their daughters are paying the price, DailyMail, 3 May 2018.
  • Mortality Risk Persists for Cancer Tied to Prenatal DES Exposure, empr, May 04, 2018.
DES DiEthylStilbestrol Resources

Toxic substances linked to a range of adverse health impacts present in carpets sold in the EU

Swept under the rug: new report reveals toxics in European carpets threatening health, environment and circular economy

A new study identifies over 59 hazardous substances found in carpets sold in the EU, including endocrine disruptors and carcinogens, linked to serious health conditions such as cancers, learning disabilities and fertility problems. Exposure to these toxics via inhalation, ingestion and dermal contact proves extremely harmful to pregnant women, babies and small children who are particularly vulnerable to the effects of exposure to chemicals, as well as workers in the carpet industry who are exposed to those chemicals because of inadequate safety measures. Many of these toxic chemicals are also persistent polluters that stay in the environment and can cause adverse impacts on ecosystems. In some cases, health and environmental impacts only show decades later.

Hazardous toxics in carpets also pose additional obstacles to the recycling process, impacting the quality of the recycled end material and the cost-effectiveness of recycling. Less stringent regulations for recycled materials can lead to now-restricted chemicals persisting in recycled products and consequently harm health. In addition, at least 37 toxic substances have not been restricted and/or banned for use in carpets. Many of these have not even been fully evaluated for their health and environmental impacts. 10 substances are currently identified by the EU as Substances of Very High Concern (SVHC), of which only 4 are banned from the market.

The report contains a series of clear recommendations to the EU, Member States and manufacturers aimed at adopting a health-first approach towards the circular economy. It recommends protecting the environment and the health of European citizens by eliminating toxic substances, strengthening regulations for new products, consistent and faster chemicals regulation as well as producer responsibility and eco-design measures to ensure toxic-free carpets.

Reference.