When a person attempts conversation about how something causes cancer, they are often met with the dismissive response “but everything causes cancer.” They are right, in a way. Almost everything does cause cancer, yet it is possible to avoid.
This article can be a resource for avoiding carcinogens, endocrine disruptors, and health damaging chemicals. It only scratches the surface, but this should be a perfect introduction for someone who is unaware that many things are too toxic to tolerate.
1. Chemicals in Food
A. GM, pesticide contaminated soy is linked to endocrine disruption and cancer
As you may have heard, the pesticide RoundUp or glyphosate is an enemy to public health in several ways, but did you know many soy products are contaminated with it, and can cause endocrine disruption and cancer?
Genetically modified soybeans are grown in great abundance, and the result is cheap, plentiful soybean oil. The soybean oil is put into just about every processed food product you can think of, and it often contains the pesticide it is genetically modified to be resistant to.
Have you ever heard of doctors prescribing anti-depressants, referencing a “chemical imbalance” as the cause of depression? Well endocrine disruption, hormonal imbalance from chemicals, is one true cause of “chemical depression,” so avoiding them can be a critical decision in securing emotional health.
What’s more, the small amounts of glyphosate found in soy products interact with a phytoestrogen in soybeans, creating a reaction that has a more potent endocrine disrupting effect.
A 2013 paper published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology says:
“Glyphosate-based herbicides are widely used for soybean cultivation, and our results also found that there was an additive estrogenic effect between glyphosate and genistein, a phytoestrogen in soybeans. However, these additive effects of glyphosate contamination in soybeans need further animal study.”
B. Artificial Coffee Creamers
This article could choose any number of processed foods to expose the toxicity of. Let’s just choose one: artificial coffee creamer.
This is an artificial creamer sold under the brand “Ambiance.”
It contains these chemicals.
“Corn syrup solids” are in the same vein of unhealthy as high fructose corn syrup, partially hydrogenated soybean oil is one of those health damaging soy products, dipotassium phosphate is a common additive to coffee creamer that is linked to health problems written about in academic papers, and the list goes on.
2. Body Care Products
A. Aluminum in Deodorant
Breast and skin cancer, Alzheimer’s, endocrine disruption, and other health problems are strongly linked to the use of “body care” products. For example, aluminum compounds in antiperspirant/deodorant are linked to Alzheimer’s. Endocrine disruptors are even ending up in water supplies.
The way body care products can cause health problems is well summarized in a 2009 paper titled, “Underarm antiperspirants/deodorants and breast cancer”:
“An extensive number of cosmetic products are applied topically on and around the human breast on a daily basis, often multiple times a day, including not only underarm anti-perspirant/deodorant products but also body lotions, body sprays, moisturising creams, breast firming/enhancing creams and suncare products. These products are not rinsed off but left on the skin, allowing for continuous dermal exposure, absorption and deposition into underlying tissues, which may be further increased by abrasions in the skin created by shaving [2,3,5–7]. The extent to which chemicals absorbed by this route escape metabolism remains unknown, but they would certainly escape the systemic metabolism to which orally derived chemicals would be subjected [5–7].”
An article by Dr. Edward Group offers an alternative to toxic deodorants:
“Aluminum-free deodorants should consist of essential oils and all natural ingredients. Aluminum free alone may not be enough as some aluminum-free deodorants are still high risk, according to the Environmental Working Group, and can contain chemicals like triclosan and propylene glycol. Triclosan is perhaps a more fierce endocrine disruptor than propylene glycol, so try to avoid it. This article contains a recipe for making your own deodorant using natural ingredients like baking soda and coconut oil.”
B. Chemical sunscreen can cause endocrine disruption and cancer
You may have heard of sunscreen actually causing skin cancer and hormone disruption.
Oxybenzone is a main ingredient in many sunscreens. Luckily there are alternatives.
Two different types of sunscreen are well summarized by Wellness Mama:
“There are two ways that a sunscreen can protect the skin from sun damage: with a mineral barrier or a chemical one.
Mineral sunscreens typically include ingredients like zinc oxide or titanium dioxide, which create a physical barrier to protect the skin from the sun.
Chemical sunscreens use one or more chemicals including oxybenzone, avobenzone, octisalate, octocrylene, homosalate and octinoxate.”
In one case, a woman who blogged about the value of body care products and sunscreen actually ended up with skin cancer. An ABC headline reads: “Woman ‘Shocked’ to Develop Skin Cancer Despite Sunscreen Vigilance.”
From that article:
“Annie Tomlin is an expert beauty editor who is known for telling her millions of readers about the importance of sunscreen, so when a red patch appeared on her hairline and wouldn’t go away, she knew something wasn’t right.
“As it grew and grew I thought, ‘this isn’t normal,’” she said.
A biopsy revealed that Tomlin had basal cell carcinoma. It’s the most common kind of skin cancer. Tomlin said she was “shocked” by the diagnosis in November.”I’m religious about sun protection. I wore it every day as a kid,” she said.”
C. Baby Powder (talcum)
Pharma giant Johnson & Johnson’s baby powder causes cancer. They have knowingly sold it for years, and over a thousand women are suing them.
Well summarized by James Corbett:
“Oh, really, this is getting to be too much! What do you want me to say? That there are now more than 1200 women suing J&J for covering up the talcum/cancer connection? That one of the jurors that awarded the $72 million told the St. Louis Post-Dispatch that “They [J&J] tried to cover up and influence the boards that regulate cosmetics”? That J&J have spent over $5 billion in legal fines and penalties over the last three years, including a $2.2 billion penalty for illegally marketing an anti-psychotic to children and the elderly, a $2.5 billion penalty for selling faulty artificial hips and $120 million in compensation to women who suffered organ damage and constant pain from the company’s horrific, internally eroding vaginal mesh inserts? OK, there. I said it.
What’s not to like about this company and its business prospects? Nothing, that’s what! Just look at this: Last week Johnson & Johnson’s pharmaceutical arm, Janssen Biotech, agreed to license a potential prostate cancer treatment from Tesaro for $50 million. The bold move will insure that J&J remains at the forefront of biopharmaceutical research and development.
I’ll admit it. The internal J&J memo that proves that Johnson & Johnson knew of the baby powder / cancer linkage in 1992 looks bad. It does. And the fact that the same memo also recommends targeting black and Hispanic women (including an “adult Hispanic media program” and an “adult black print effort”) looks bad. It does. But look at the numbers. Look at them!”
3. Cancer Causing, Health Damaging Drugs
A. Diethylstilbestrol (DES)
In the past century, bad drugs have led to deformed children, cancer, birth defects, and more. One was called Diethylstilbestrol, or DES: pregnant mothers were encouraged to take it, and infants exposed to it in utero were born with many kinds of health problems.
Reading from Wikipedia:
“Human exposure to DES occurred through diverse sources, such as dietary ingestion from supplemented cattle feed and medical treatment for certain conditions, including breast and prostate cancers. From about 1940 to 1971, DES was given to pregnant women in the mistaken belief it would reduce the risk of pregnancy complications and losses.
In 1971, DES was shown to cause clear cell carcinoma, a rare vaginal tumor in girls and women who had been exposed to this drug in utero. The United States Food and Drug Administration subsequently withdrew DES from use in pregnant women. Follow-up studies have indicated that DES also has the potential to cause a variety of significant adverse medical complications during the lifetimes of those exposed.”
DES Action.org is a great resource for learning about this.
Another bad drug of the past was Thalidomide, one of the most obscene stories of a bad drug possibly ever seen. Pregnant mothers were also encouraged to take Thalidomide in the post WWII era, and it causes extremely severe deformities and health problems.
This is a video about Thalidomide.
Despite all of that, Thalidomide is still sometimes prescribed to treat leprosy and cancer.
Today, bad drugs have less of an immediate, noticeable effect: they often take time for the damage to become noticeable, which makes it very difficult to pin down chemicals as the definitive cause of an illness.
Take MiraLAX for example. According to an article from the Mind Unleashed titled “Laxative Given to Toddlers Linked to Neuropsychiatric Events: MiraLAX Exposed by Parents”:
“MiraLAX is an over the counter laxative that has been central in pharmaceutical practice for a few decades. It is a petroleum product: polyethylene glycol. A similar chemical is used in anti-freeze, ethylene glycol. Small amounts of highly toxic ethylene glycol are found in MiraLAX as well.
Originally intended for adults, today toddlers and young children are given it freely. Doctors “literally give it like water,” as described by Dr. Scott W. Cohen, a pediatrician in Beverly Hills, California.
Parents are currently raising awareness of it’s danger: this has been a long time coming.
D. Vaccines during pregnancy
Today, mothers are still being poisoned during pregnancy. Mothers are encouraged to get flu shots, which is probably not good for the baby, if you understand what is in the vaccine. People are trying to quantify if vaccines during pregnancy are linked to miscarriage, stillbirth, and other problems.
Summarized by Kelly Brogan, MD:
“I dare say that the modern woman has handed over her inner compass. It’s as if we came from generations of master chefs – natural giants in the kitchen, using our senses and instincts to guide us toward nourishing preparations – but we have been recently convinced through the promise of technology and corporate prowess that processed food is more reliable, nutritious, and beneficial. We’ve been convinced that Hamburger Helper is better for our families than a homemade Bolognese.
The Medicalization of Pregnancy and Birth is no Exception
In this way, women have permitted doctors and pharmaceutical companies privileged access to their fierce and primitive drive toward protecting a pregnancy. They have been made to feel fear, convinced that they need the support of the apparatus of allopathic medicine to get them through this perilous trial.”
“Clearly, as a perinatal practitioner, I have concerns with even one vaccine administration in pregnancy; however, that women in 2009 were subject to a completely and entirely unstudied combo pack of interventions, the package insert of which clearly states,
“It is also not known whether these vaccines can cause fetal harm when administered to pregnant women or can affect reproduction capacity”
Goldman, the researcher and author of the aforementioned study, determined the following:
“Spontaneous abortion (miscarriage) and still birth rates determined to be proximally associated to vaccine delivery were analyzed by Moro et al for the flu seasons of 1990-2009 finding 1.9/million or an average incidence of 1.2 per year.
From this average to the first 5 months of the 2009/10 season in which women were recommended to receive both the typical flu vaccine and the H1N1, there were 57/million fetal losses reported.
Using a capture-recapture statistical tool that allows for researchers to control for the inherent limitations of a reporting system, 174 cases from VAERS and 67 cases from NCOW were pooled to identify an ascertainment-corrected rate of 1/1695 (590/million). This adjustment reflects the fact that VAERS is a gross underestimation of the actual incidence of adverse events – in this case representing only 13% of the vaccine-related fetal losses.”
E. Aluminum in Antacids
People wonder why they are poisoned with aluminum: among all the commonly known sources, antacid drugs are one of the greatest sources. Antacids given to people with stomach problems contain aluminum hydroxide, linked to Alzheimer’s and all the usual symptoms of aluminum poisoning.
One can look at this 2003 paper titled “Aluminium in over-the-counter drugs: risks outweigh benefits?.” Reading from it:
“It is now commonly acknowledged that aluminium toxicity can be induced by infusion of aluminium-contaminated dialysis fluids, by parenteral nutrition solutions, and by oral exposure as a result of aluminium-containing pharmaceutical products such as aluminium-based phosphate binders or antacid intake.
Over-the-counter antacids are the most important source for human aluminium exposure from a quantitative point of view. However, aluminium can act as a powerful neurological toxicant and provoke embryonic and fetal toxic effects in animals and humans after gestational exposure.”
As you can see, so many things do cause cancer: just about everything artificial, allopathic, and born from corporations we should never trust to look out for our wellbeing. Alternatives exist and are thriving, from mineral based sunscreens, to aloe vera for the skin, instead of toxic skin care products.
It must be understood how the FDA and regulatory agencies allow this: here’s an example of how a revolving door operates.
FDA commissioner Margaret Hamburg had to resign over a racketeering scandal. Her husband’s hedge fund Renaissance Technologies owned stake in Johnson & Johnson, and that might explain why the FDA allowed them to continue selling a litany of toxic products.
That’s just one example of how regulatory authority works. We have the research available to us, and can learn for ourselves what is toxic and what isn’t.
Please share this with any person who needs a starting point in researching the toxicity of products before they use them.
About the Author
This article (Does Everything Cause Cancer Nowadays?) was originally created and published by Waking Times and is printed here under a Creative Commons license with attribution to Pedro Aquila and WakingTimes.com.