Presidential Panel says environmental cancer risk "grossly underestimated" (but they were appointed by Bush!)

Maybe this is why 1 in 3 adults in the developed get cancer in their lifetime?

Environmental Cancer Risk 'Grossly Underestimated'?

Presidential Panel Urges More Steps to Remove Carcinogens From the Environment
By Daniel J. DeNoon
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD

"Grievous harm" from carcinogens in the environment has been "grossly underestimated" by the U.S. National Cancer Program, a presidential panel charges.

...

The two-member President's Cancer Panel, appointed to three-year terms by President Bush, focused its efforts on environmental cancer risk. The panel held four hearings in which it consulted experts from environmental groups, industry, academic researchers, and cancer advocacy groups.

The panel's report includes an open letter to President Obama signed by panel chair LaSalle D. Leffall Jr., MD, of Howard University; and panelist Margaret L. Kripke, PhD, of the University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center.

"The grievous harm from this group of carcinogens has not been addressed adequately by the National Cancer Program," Leffall and Kripke write. "The Panel urges you most strongly to use the power of your office to remove the carcinogens and other toxins from our food, water, and air that needlessly increase health care costs, cripple our nation's productivity, and devastate American lives."

Ha, as if. You know how many bribes--er--campaign contributions politicians would lose if they actually took this advice?

But wait don't worry, the American Cancer Society pees on this panel's anti-Carcinogen parade:

But the American Cancer Society says the panel's report goes too far in trashing established efforts to prevent cancer and that its conclusions go well beyond established facts.

...

One of the panel's central claims is pollutants cause far more cancer than previously appreciated. In an October 2009 review, the Cancer and the Environment committee of the American Cancer Society's suggested that pollutants cause no more than 5% of all cancers.

Those idiots at the American Cancer Society need to SHUT UP. There's no such thing as "wasteful" when it comes to cleaning up our environment. Thankfully, the presidential panel thinks differently:

The presidential panel says this greatly underestimates the problem because it does not fully account for synergistic interactions between environmental contaminants, an increasing number and amount of pollutants, and the fact that all avoidable causes of cancer are not known.

via webmd.com

Hit up that webmd.com link for their take on this dilemma. What do you think? Assume the worst and legislate away these possible environmental threats? Or take our chances and save money?

I know which direction I would choose to go in. I don't want to get cancer.

Posted via web from thepete's posterous