CANADIAN STUDY GIVES MORE EVIDENCE CANCER IS A LIFESTYLE DISEASE LARGELY CAUSED BY FOOD

by Alex PietrowskiStaff Writer Waking Times

Shockingly, worldwide cancer rates are predicted to rise even further, and that by the year 2020, 1-in-2 women and 1-in-3 men will be diagnosed with some form of cancer. It is so common already, in fact, that it getting cancer is more common than getting married or having a first baby.

The cancer industrial complex is negligent in warning people who chemotherapy is now known to actually make some cancers spread and make some tumors more aggressive. Government and its myriad regulatory agencies work diligently to prevent access to natural or alternative cancer treatments, and doctors and the mainstream media give the impression that the causes of cancer are a mystery.

In reality, one can significantly reduce the likelihood of getting cancer by making lifestyle changes, and according to a recently published study out of Canada found that the total proportion of cancer rates which can be attributed to lifestyle and environmental factors is quite high, nearing 41%.

Regarding the methods used in the study:

We estimated summary population attributable risk estimates for 24 risk factors (smoking [both passive and active], overweight and obesity, inadequate physical activity, diet [inadequate fruit and vegetable consumption, inadequate fibre intake, excess red and processed meat consumption, salt consumption, inadequate calcium and vitamin D intake], alcohol, hormones [oral contraceptives and hormone therapy], infections [Epstein-Barr virus, hepatitis B and C viruses, human papillomavirus, Helicobacter pylori], air pollution, natural and artificial ultraviolet radiation, radon and water disinfection by-products) by combining population attributable risk estimates for each of the 24 factors that had been previously estimated. [Source]

The list above essentially outlines the wide range of personal choices we know can increase the risk of cancer, mainly pointing out that food causes cancer. Along with exercise, and common avoidable environmental factors, cancer is somewhat preventable.

Overall, we estimated that 40.8% of incident cancer cases were attributable to exposure to the 24 factors included in the analysis (Table 2). Tobacco smoking was responsible for the greatest cancer burden, accounting for an estimated 15.7% of all incident cancer cases (2485 cases), followed by physical inactivity and excess body weight, which were responsible for an estimated 7.2% and 4.3% of incident cancer cases, respectively. All other exposures of interest were estimated to be responsible for less than 4.0% of incident cancer cases each. [Source]

Within this information is the revelation that so much of our food system works against good health. Perhaps the greatest secret here in all of this is the growing awareness of the negative affects that consumption of sugar has on human health. Now, some 80% of all packaged products contain some form of fructose, and sugar has been identified as a top cause of the global cancer epidemic.

Final Thoughts

In the face of such frightening statistical evidence on rising cancer rates, it is imperative to remember that the individual has more control over their health than the mainstream would have us believe.

 

About the Author

Alex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and Offgrid Outpost, a provider of storable food and emergency kits. Alex is an avid student of Yoga and life.

This article (Canadian Study Gives More Evidence Cancer is a Lifestyle Disease Largely Caused by Food) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alex Pietrowski and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/07/22/canadian-study-gives-evidence-cancer-lifestyle-disease-largely-caused-food/

WIKK WEB GURU

CERBERUS CAPITAL – THE DIABOLICAL PURVEYORS OF CHEAP FOOD AND EXPENSIVE PHARMACEUTICALS

by Cameron S. Bigger, Contributor Waking Times

What if I told you the people creating, pricing and selling us our groceries are the same people in-charge of researching, developing, dispensing, and promoting our most popular prescription medications?

Is it just bad luck or coincidence that in 2017 an American has a heart attack every single 34 seconds, while another has a stroke every 40 seconds? Is it just dumb-luck that over 37.7% of the U.S. population is currently obese, while 34% of the U.S. population has high blood pressure, with over 23.4 million Americans now suffering from diabetes?

Well, these are most likely not coincidences, as the heart disease sector of the U.S. healthcare market is already extremely lucrative—raking in over $318 billion in 2016—while currently rapidly expanding into the global marketplace. In fact, worldwide in 2010, the estimated cost of cardiovascular disease was $863 billion, and it’s estimated to rise to $1044 billion by 2030.

With numbers of this magnitude, it shouldn’t take long to understand why a group of greedy investors might want a piece of this tremendous growth. So badly, that it might even outweigh their moral burdens pertaining to how many people would have to die for them to do so.

Let me explain how this ingenious deception works.

A single, mysteriously hidden, yet, massively rich investment firm called Cerberus Capital Management owns the 2nd largest grocery store chain in North America: Albertson’s Companies, Inc.

Now, Albertson’s is the parent company of multiple other grocery stores, with their largest acquisition being Safeway, meaning that Cerberus currently owns & operates over 2,205 total grocery outlets. Inside the vast majority of these grocery stores, there are pharmacies being operated, often times under different names (such as Sav-On Pharmacies inside of Albertson’s Grocery Stores), but no matter what their name tag may read, all the pharmacies within these over 2,000 stores, are all owned by Cerberus. Along with owning the grocery stores and the pharmacies inside, Cerberus also owns the pharmaceutical research/production company: Covis Pharma.

Again, why not just call it Cerberus Pharma?

The very origin of the word Cerberus, itself, is disturbing: “Cerberus is the monstrous, multi-headed, greek mythological hound dog who guards the gates of the Underworld to prevent the dead from leaving.”

Digital Capture

Well, let’s take a look at what the top sellers are for Cerberus—via Covis Pharma:

Covis Pharma’s top products:

  • Altoprev: Statin (lipid-lowering medication)
  • Sular: Calcium Channel Blocker (lowers blood pressure)
  • Betapace: Heart Rhythm Problems (regulates irregular heartbeat)
  • Lanoxin Injections: Congestive Heart Failure (delays heart attacks)
  • Rilutek: Glutamate Blocker (covers up pains associated with MSG consumption)

As we can see, four-out-of-five of Covis’ top products are used to suppress the symptoms (not treat the causes) of heart problems, while the fifth suppresses the symptoms of MSG consumption (a commonly used preservative in processed meats and canned foods that can lead to a host of medical problems, including heart arrhythmia).

So, why just suppress symptoms of heart disease through chemical medications instead of getting rid of them by better promoting and selling heart-healthier foods?

According to the American Heart Association, by 2030, 40.5% of the US population is projected to have some form of cardiovascular disease, and between 2010 and 2030, the real total direct medical costs of cardiovascular disease are projected to triple, from $273 billion to $818 billion.

As one may hopefully now conceptualize, heart disease is a remarkably lucrative business, and therefore, Cerberus is executing an extremely lethal conflict-of-interest, as they are the people who are quietly stocking our grocery shelves while intentionally profiting so massively off our most debilitating modern-day diseases.

How is it not illegal that the same people who are able to own and sell us our groceries, are also allowed to be dramatically increasing their overall profits by creating and leading a constant supply of sick people directly down a path into their long-term, monthly recurring, heart disease medication payments?

Upon really analyzing the situation, it wouldn’t be an exaggeration to say this corruption runs so deeply that every time a consumer actually makes a heart-healthy selection in any of these 2,205+ stores, it literally compromises the future long-term potential profits of these grocery store/big pharma owners.

In contrast, from a business aspect, it makes sense to the bottom line, and it really is a genius plan. What better way to create a huge, passive, income stream than by secretly poisoning the public in low-dosages through remarkably priced, highly palatable, well-marketed, front-end food products, eventually making them feel ill enough to seek out medical attention, which conveniently generates recurring pharmaceutical sales?

Profit is what Cerberus is ultimately seeking—all the while operating under many different names, banners, and logos to leave the public so confused they wouldn’t even know where to begin tracing the origins of their health problems.

In short, a small group of chemists, business executives and even a former U.S. Vice President are diabolically working together disguised as Cerberus Capital Management Firm and have created a revolving door from food to pharmacy.

Do we really trust this group of individuals to own so much stake in the future of our global food production and health care?

About the Author
Cameron is an internationally-published vegan fitness model & writer who’s passionate about bringing to light the vast medicinal benefits of a whole-foods, plant-based diet, along with consistent exercise.
This article (Cerberus Capital – The Diabolical Purveyors of Cheap Food and Expensive Pharmaceuticals) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is printed here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Cameron S. Bigger and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution and author bio. 

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/07/14/cerberus-capital-diabolical-purveyors-cheap-food-expensive-pharmaceuticals/

WIKK WEB GURU

WARNING – HAIR DYES, STRAIGHTENERS, RELAXERS NOW SHOWN TO INCREASE RISK OF BREAST CANCER

by Phillip SchneiderStaff Writer Waking Times

For years, women have been told that cancer is simply a spontaneous occurrence based on predisposed genetic traits which increase or decrease your likelihood of acquiring cancer. The biggest secret of the cancer industry is the fact that in truth, environmental exposure to carcinogenic toxins such as pesticides, heavy metals, radiation, and even certain chemical beauty products are some of the largest contributing factors in acquiring cancer.

Ask any scientist and they will tell you that throughout the many thousands of years that humanity has been on the planet, evolution has produced a species which is aptly able to survive in and adapt to their environment. The secret here is that tens of thousands years of evolution did not create humans who are “naturally” pre-programmed to acquire breast cancer. There is almost always another factor, or varying factors, which contribute to the acquisition of breast cancer and come from outside the realm of of human genetics.

For example; smokingaluminum-based deodorantshaving an abortion, and many more environmental factors can contribute to an increased risk of varying forms of cancer. According to the National Cancer Institute, about 12% of women develop breast cancer at one point throughout their lifetime, affecting around 220,000 new patients each year and killing about 40,000 (about 400 of which are men).

Beauty Product Preservatives Contribute To Cancer

Something that is often overlooked is the effect that chemical-based beauty products have on women. As it turns out, many make-ups, hair dyes and personal care products contain preservatives which new research is finding to be more carcinogenic than previously thought. Scientists are discovering that these types of preservatives, known as parabens, can be highly carcinogenic, even in low doses.

Although parabens are known to mimic the growth effects of estrogens on breast cancer cells, some consider their effect too weak to cause harm…But this might not be true when parabens are combined with other agents that regulate cell growth. – Dale Leitman, Gynecologist and Molecular Biologist, UC Berkeley

Hair Dyes And Breast Cancer

In a report from the journal Carcinogenesis, scientists have found a link between increased breast cancer risk and the use of hair dyes, straighteners, relaxers and conditioning creams which contain cholesterol or placenta. While studying data coming from 4,285 women ages 20-75 (over half of which had breast cancer), they found that there was a significant increase in risk of breast cancer for women who used these hair dyes, straighteners, or relaxers.

Something you might find interesting is that the risk factor for African Americans was actually different from Caucasian American women in the study. Black women who used dark shades of hair dyes had a 51% higher risk of cancer and a 72% higher risk of estrogen positive breast cancer.

White women on the other hand had a 54% higher risk of estrogen positive breast cancer with the use of dark hair dyes and over 2.5x higher risk of estrogen negative breast cancer at 256% with the use of relaxers.

Some of the more toxic hair dye ingredients to look out for include PPD (para-Phenylenediamide), resorcinol, ammonia, persulfates, lead acetate, and 4-ABP. Brands which have lower or no levels of these toxins include Madison ReedHenna Color LabNatulique Zero, and O&M Original and Mineral.

“Exposures to carcinogens in hair products have been explored as breast cancer risk factors, yielding equivocal findings…These novel findings provide support a relationship between the use of some hair products and breast cancer.”

Conclusion

It is important to note that research has not yet concluded that these chemicals cause breast cancer, but it has proven a link. If you want to reduce your risk of breast cancer or work on healing yourself from it, reducing exposure to these chemical-based hair dyes and preservatives is a must, as well as researching factors.

 

About the Author
Phillip Schneider is a student and a staff writer for Waking Times.
This article (Warning – Hair Dyes, Straighteners, Relaxers Now Shown to Increase Risk of Breast Cancer) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Phillip Schneider and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/07/14/warning-hair-dyes-straighteners-relaxers-now-shown-increase-risk-breast-cancer/

WIKK WEB GURU

CHEMOTHERAPY MAY SPREAD CANCER AND TRIGGER MORE AGGRESSIVE TUMORS, SAYS NEW RESEARCH

by Alex PietrowskiStaff Writer Waking Times

The world spent over $100 billion a year on cancer drugs in 2015, a year in which the world’s highest paid CEO made his killing from cancer patients. Much of this is spent on chemotherapy, which is well-known to weaken patients, sacrifice their immune systems and make them susceptible to co-infections, diseases and other complications.

In addition to these side-effects, it has now been discovered that while chemotherapy does kill cancer cells, it can also trigger cancer cells to disperse throughout the body triggering more aggressive tumors to develop in the lungs and other vital bodily systems.

A new research study conducted by Dr. George Karagiannis of the Albert Einstein College of Medicine of Yeshiva University in New York explains how this works. Entitled, Neoadjuvant chemotherapy induces breast cancer metastasis through a TMEM-mediated mechanism, Dr. Karagiannis’ study focused on breast cancer patients, looking at the unintended consequences of chemo.

Many are given chemotherapy before surgery, but the new research suggests that, although it shrinks tumours in the short term, it could trigger the spread of cancer cells around the body.

It is thought the toxic medication switches on a repair mechanism in the body which ultimately allows tumours to grow back stronger. It also increases the number of ‘doorways’ on blood vessels which allow cancer to spread throughout the body. [Source]

In short, chemotherapy is now shown to in some cases increase the likelihood that cancer will spread throughout the patient’s body. The cancer cells are reacting to chemotherapy by dispersing throughout the body to look for new hosts.

By studying the process of intravasation or entry of cells into the vasculature, Karagiannis et al. discovered that, in addition to killing tumor cells, chemotherapy treatment can also increase intravasation. Groups of cells collectively known as tumor microenvironment of metastasis (TMEM) can serve as gateways for tumor cells entering the vasculature, and the authors discovered that several types of chemotherapy can increase the amounts of TMEM complexes and circulating tumor cells in the bloodstream. [Source]

Karagiannis discovered that mice exposed to chemotherapy saw an increase the number of cancer cells circulating throughout the body and lungs. This research finally offers a scientific explanation of why so many patients see their cancer spread into other parts of their bodies once chemo/radiation treatment begins.

Having isolated this effect in breast cancer cases only, the research opens the door to examine the possibility of this happening in patients with other types of cancer who choose chemotherapy.

In this study we only investigated chemotherapy-induced cancer cell dissemination in breast cancer. We are currently working on other types of cancer to see if similar effects are elicited. ~Dr. George Karagiannis

Final Thoughts

There are many approaches to treating cancer, and shockingly many of the natural approaches which require few if any drugs are actually illegal in our society. Furthermore, regarding breast cancer, mammograms are known to be dangerous, the number of false positive cancer test results is shockingly high, and in many cases women are being treated for cancer when they don’t even have it.

The preferred mainstream cancer treatment has become a means of capitalizing on human suffering, and while it has long been suspected that chemo can do more harm than good, we now have research indicating that this is indeed the case. Dr. Karagiannis’ study adds a very significant piece of the puzzle of why the contemporary model of cancer care should be abandoned in favor of natural treatments.

About the Author

Alex Pietrowski is an artist and writer concerned with preserving good health and the basic freedom to enjoy a healthy lifestyle. He is a staff writer for WakingTimes.com and Offgrid Outpost, a provider of storable food and emergency kits. Alex is an avid student of Yoga and life.

This article (Chemotherapy May Spread Cancer and Trigger More Aggressive Tumors, Says New Research) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Alex Pietrowski and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/07/06/chemotherapy-may-spread-cancer-trigger-aggressive-tumors-says-new-research/

WIKK WEB GURU

BIOTECH FIRM CLAIMS NEW MEDICAL RESEARCH WILL GIVE LIFE TO THE DEAD

by Paul A. PhilipsGuest  Waking Times

No, this is not something out of the X-Files and nor are the implications. Researchers at the American biotech firm Bioquark are working on a pioneering stem cell methodology that they think will give life to brain-dead patients.

In light of this research, there are the inevitable ethical implications when considering raising people from the dead. Besides this, bear in mind the ruling elite want immortality but they also want world depopulation. So it would be unlikely that they would allow any genuinely successful technology that gives life to the dead to be made publicly available. The ethical implications and the ruling elite’s viewpoint on immortality will be discussed later.

Majority countries define brain-dead as the irreversible and permanent loss of brain function, which is used to confirm death. However, Ira Pastor Bioquark’s CEO and researchers claim that dead patients’ brains can be resurrected through extracting, harvesting and then re-introducing their own stems cells into the body. Various peptides will then be injected into the spinal cord, used in conjunctions with laser treatment and the stimulation of nerve cells. MRI scans will be used throughout the treatment to monitor the progress, attempting to reboot the patients’ central nervous systems, thus give life to the dead.

While patients are deemed technically dead due to the brain stem no longer working, a number of bodily functions such as the circulatory, respiratory and digestive systems still exist. So far, the research has been able to revive comatose patients.

Dead or comatose, the methodology works on the principle that unlike central nervous system cells the stem cells have substantial regenerative capabilities, especially when planted at the lower brain stem and upper spinal cord regions. Similar to the salamander (capable of growing entire limbs after severe damage) the stem cells can regenerate and remodel the central nervous system: Bioquark also claims that patients’ memories can be erased…

Ethical Issues/Concerns

The project raises a number of ethical issues/concerns. What about consent? Indeed, a patient cannot give consent to anything if they’re dead. If the patient had been informed and signed a legal document prior to death giving the okay for the treatment then that would be acceptable. However, how many patients would be in this circumstance considering the treatment is new, only in the developmental stage and not well-known?

How many know what they’d be letting themselves in for? What sort of quality of life would these people have after some sort of functionality is restored to their brains? For instance, would they come round only to have vague memories, not knowing who they are and not recognising relatives or friends..?

-Perhaps it would be better to decline the offer of becoming a ‘living subject’ for this medical science experiment because:

…you already are immortal

Modern-day medicine, with its narrow, mechanistic, material-based approach would not embrace the idea that who you really are is an immortal multi-dimensional conscious entity: Those who have had near-death experiences have claimed that when the body ceases to function we move out of our bodies and journey on…

-Isn’t this one of a number of reasons to simply accept death and not engage in a medical research project that doesn’t allow nature to run its course..?

The Ruling Elite

Having an obsession with immortality, it’s more than apparent that the ruling elite don’t have the realization that all of us already are immortal: Whether it’s to do with transhumanism or through other technologies such as the hidden and suppressed cures to so-called incurable diseases, in achieving immortality the ruling elite will be entrapping themselves in a 5-sense 3-dimensional body prison: It could be said that because of fixations with money and control they will not be able to transcend their consciousness; venture out into the great multidimensional experience where there’s a whole new reality…

Finally

Here’s an excellent video that very aptly sums up the ruling elite and where they are at with their ideas of immortality.

About the Author

Paul A. Philips is the author of NewParadigm.ws.

This article (Biotech Firm Claims New Medical Research Will Give Life to the Dead) was originally created and published by NewParadigm.ws and is re-posted here with permission. 

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/06/30/biotech-firm-claims-new-medical-research-will-give-life-dead/

WIKK WEB GURU

THE NUMBER ONE KILLER OF WOMEN IS IN PART A FORM OF SPIRIT SICKNESS

by Christina SarichStaff Writer Waking Times

With all the Susan G. Komen “runs for the cure” and incessant talk of pink ribbons, you’d think women were dropping like flies from breast cancer, but this isn’t the number one killer of women in modern society.

The most common killer of women is also one of the most preventable diseases. According to research from Harvard, coronary heart disease, and the stress which is behind it, is the leading cause of death among the female gender, but why?

As per the study, women are six times more likely to worry about getting breast cancer, but heart-disease is a much more real and present danger. Part of the problem is that breast cancer usually hits a woman in her 50s, while the first heart attack happens to women when they are much older, so it is easier to discount heart disease, and the underlying factors which contribute to it.

Another possible reason women worry about breast cancer more than the health of their hearts, is two-fold: we are naturally outwardly focused as nurturers, and Big Pharma has a racket going with breast cancer, so we’re primed to think of this disease first. $9,850 dollar breast cancer drug anyone?

Heart disease is also sneaky. It doesn’t always start with a serious stroke or heart attack. The physical symptoms can include fatigue, shortness of breath, mid-chest pressure (not pain), nausea, and radiating pain from the jaw or the left shoulder.

Non-physical symptoms of an ailing heart can include:

–       An inability to express openly, the suffering and pain we’ve endured emotionally. (Even the Harvard study says that a woman’s stress is often discounted and her symptoms chalked up as hypochondria, so women are taught to ‘suck it up.’)

–       An inability to forgive and express compassion.

–       Leading with our heads instead of our hearts.

–       Co-dependent tendencies or a lack of expressing our full power.

–       Lack of acceptance.

In Sanskrit, the heart chakra is called Anahata, which means unstruck note, or unwounded love. A woman is born with an innate ability to love unconditionally, but through cultural and familial pressure we’ve been taught, just like men, to stuff it down, and cut ourselves off from the emotions that can with a broken heart or a heart that needs to express forgiveness for pain caused by others.

When the heart chakra is balanced, it radiates serenity balance, and calm. It easily gives and receives love. It doesn’t ruminate on past hurts because they’ve been expressed in a healthy way.

Why are so many women dying of a heart attacks and strokes associated with heart disease? Our hearts must return to the “unhurt” or “unstruck, unbeaten” state, the “unmade sound” which is infinitely, AUM. (Or, really the fourth sound following A-U-M, which is silence).

When the Zen koan asks, “What is the sound of one hand clapping/” It refers to this “unstruck note.” It is referring to the primal energy of sound itself, the sound of creation, of love in its creative force.

We must trust the intelligence of the heart to be our inner compass again. As we nurture others, we must also nurture ourselves. If we feel as if we don’t belong or fit in, it’s time to reach out and connect with others who can accept us as we are.

It is also interesting to note, that women don’t respond to traditional medicine the way that men have. As the Harvard study details,

Most of our ideas about heart disease in women used to come from studying it in men. But there are many reasons to think that it’s different in women. A woman’s symptoms are often different from a man’s, and she’s much more likely than a man to die within a year of having a heart attack. Women also don’t seem to fare as well as men do after taking clot-busting drugs or undergoing certain heart-related medical procedures. Research is only now beginning to uncover the biological, medical, and social bases of these and other differences. The hope is that new knowledge will lead to advances in tailoring prevention and treatment to women.” 

The heart is a fascinating muscle, and its energy is used for much more than just pumping blood through our veins. According to Rollin McCraty, Director of Research at the Institute of HeartMath, the heart’s electromagnetic field is about 5000 times stronger than that of the cranial brain, interacting with and permeating every cell of our bodies. When we heal the heart’s energy, women will return to their natural state of compassionate, uncompromising, unconditional lovers. This is what needs healing.

About the Author

Christina Sarich is a staff writer for Waking Times. She is a writer, musician, yogi, and humanitarian with an expansive repertoire. Her thousands of articles can be found all over the Internet, and her insights also appear in magazines as diverse as Weston A. PriceNexusAtlantis Rising, and the Cuyamungue Institute, among others. 

This article (The Number One Killer of Women is in Part a Form of Spirit Sickness) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is published here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Christina Sarich and WakingTimes.com. It may be re-posted freely with proper attribution, author bio, and this copyright statement. Please contact WakingTimes@gmail.com for more info.

Disclaimer: This article is not intended to provide medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Views expressed here do not necessarily reflect those of Waking Times or its staff.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2017/06/26/number-one-killer-women-part-form-spirit-sickness/

WIKK WEB GURU

Toxic Exposure: Chemicals are in Our Water, Food, Air and Furniture

by University of California, San Francisco

When her kids were young, Tracey Woodruff, Ph.D., MPH, knew more than most people about environmental toxics. After all, she was a senior scientist at the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). But even she never dreamed, as she rocked her children to sleep at night, that the plastic baby bottles she used to feed them contained toxic chemicals that could leach into the warm milk. 

Back then, in the late 1990s, it wasn’t widely known that the chemicals used in plastic sippy cups and baby bottles can potentially disrupt child development by interfering with the hormone system. That, in turn, could alter the functionality of their reproductive systems or increase their risk of disease later in their lives.

“When I had babies, I did many of the things we now tell people not to do,” says Woodruff, who for the past decade has been the director of UC San Francisco’s Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment (PRHE). Also a professor in the University’s Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, she earned her doctorate in 1991 from a joint UCSF-Berkeley program in bioengineering and then completed a postgraduate fellowship at UCSF.

Woodruff’s children have since grown into physically healthy teenagers, but many children are not as lucky. Unregulated chemicals are increasing in use and are prevalent in products Americans use every day. Woodruff is concerned by the concurrent rise in many health conditions, like certain cancers or childhood diseases, and the fact that the environment is likely to play a role in those conditions. What motivates her is the belief that we need to know more about these toxics so we can reduce our exposure to the worst of them and protect ourselves and our children from their harmful effects. (Woodruff points out that the word “toxics” as a noun means any poisonous substances, from either chemical or biological sources, whereas “toxins” are poisons only from biological sources, either plant or animal.)

The PRHE is dedicated to identifying, measuring and preventing exposure to environmental contaminants that affect human reproduction and development. Its work weaves together science, medicine, policy and advocacy.

For example, research over the past 10 years by UCSF scientists and others has showed that bisphenol A (BPA) – an industrial chemical used since the 1950s to harden plastics in baby bottles, toys and other products – is found in the blood of those exposed to items made with BPA and that it can harm the endocrine systems of fetuses and infants. As a result, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) outlawed BPA in baby products in 2012, and some manufacturers developed BPA-free products. But now scientists believe the chemicals that replaced BPA may be just as harmful. 

Furthermore, BPA is only one in a long, long list of chemicals we encounter every day in our homes, schools, workplaces and communities. And scientists have barely scratched the surface of understanding them. Of the thousands and thousands of chemicals registered with the EPA for use by industry, the agency has regulated only a few. 

“In the last 50 years, we have seen a dramatic increase in chemical production in the United States,” Woodruff explains. Concurrently, there’s been an increase in the incidence of conditions like attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD), autism, childhood cancers, diabetes and obesity. “It’s not just genetic drift,” Woodruff maintains.

And we’re all at risk from increasing chemical exposure. The water we run from our taps, the lotion we smear on our skin, the shampoo we rub in our hair, even the dust in our houses is full of synthetic chemicals.

Preventing exposure in babies

PRHE experts do more than just measure such trends. They also collaborate with clinical scientists and obstetricians at Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital (ZSFG), so their findings directly benefit pregnant patients. “We partner with the clinical scientists,” explains Woodruff, “because they look at treatments for disease, and environment might be a missing factor in the cause and prevention of disease.”

Though environmental toxics affect us all, there’s a reason PRHE focuses on pregnant women and children, Woodruff adds. Exposure to even tiny amounts of toxic substances during critical developmental stages can have outsize effects. So exposure to toxics is especially detrimental to fetuses, infants and young children, as well as preteens and teenagers.

“If you prevent the problem at the beginning, you get a lifetime of benefits,” says Woodruff.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began measuring human exposure to chemicals in 1976. These so-called “biomonitoring” studies found a range of toxics in subjects’ blood and urine – substances like DDT, BPA, air pollutants, pesticides, dioxins and phthalates. Phthalates, for example, are a class of chemicals known to be endocrine disruptors but widely used as softeners in plastics and as lubricants in personal-care products. Biomonitoring has determined that women of reproductive age evidence higher levels of phthalates than the population at large. One reason, says Woodruff, is that young women use more products like perfume, deodorant, shampoo and conditioner.

Woodruff herself recently led a study in which UCSF researchers collected blood samples from pregnant women at ZSFG. After the women delivered their babies, the researchers collected umbilical cord blood samples – and discovered that almost 80 percent of the chemicals detected in the maternal blood samples had passed through the placenta to the cord blood. It was the most extensive look yet at how the chemicals that pregnant women are exposed to also appear in their babies’ cord blood (and followed an earlier study by Woodruff that marked the first time anyone had counted the number of chemicals in the blood of pregnant women). Published in the Nov. 1, 2016, print edition of Environmental Science and Technology, the study also found that many chemicals were absorbed at greater levels by the fetuses than by the pregnant women…

more…

https://www.biosciencetechnology.com/news/2017/06/toxic-exposure-chemicals-are-our-water-food-air-and-furniture

WIKK WEB GURU