Josh Fox makes two points about breast cancer in The Sky in Pink.  One is about trends of breast cancer incidence within areas of north Texas with intense drilling and fracking operations.  The other is about pink drill rigs. 

The first was seized upon by AP reporter in an attempt to claim that Fox had exaggerated.  Journalist Tom Wilber and Dot Earth then continued that line of inquiry. 

I’ll come back to the Texas cancer registry data in a moment—along my own reference to it in last December’s letter to Governor Cuomo about the cancer risks of fracking. 

I want to talk first about that pink rig because it’s been overlooked so far in this conversation and because its existence—as both symbol and fact—helps explain why environmental explanations for human cancers are often held to a different standard than the “traditional” risk factors: diet, exercise, genetic susceptibility.  (More uncertainty surrounds the role of animal fat in contributing to breast cancer than exposure to air pollution, for example.  Nevertheless, cancer control agencies freely give dietary advice to women. They are seldom accused of exaggerating the evidence or crying “fire” in a crowded theater when they do so.)

Polluting industries not only fund research projects that serve to downplay the health and environmental impacts of their actions, as we have been discussing here, they also contribute money to charities or otherwise associate themselves with charities, including breast cancer groups, (whose iconic color is pink).   In turn, the industries receive good publicity. 

Along the way, they also influence public opinion about the causes of cancer and discourage efforts to prevent cancer by, say, eliminating exposures to carcinogens.  The recent book and documentary film, Pink Ribbons, Inc. explores this phenomenon closely, as does the watchdog organization of the breast cancer movement, Breast Cancer Action, as part of its “Think Before You Pink” campaign.  [Full disclosure: I have served as a science advisor for this group.]

Ergo, fracking for the cure.

Indeed, the Pennsylvania Breast Cancer Coalition counts Chesapeake Energy, a top oil and gas company, as a corporate partner. http://lancasteronline.com/article/local/475191_Partnership-challenged.html. These kinds of alliances—symbolized by the pink drill rig—are the bigger story, it seems to me, and yet they are not making headlines in the Associated Press.  Meanwhile, a filmmaker’s statements about puzzling breast cancer trends in Texas are. 

As you note, I wrote about these same trends in a fully referenced letter to Governor Cuomo last December.  I stand by my words.

I also wrote about many other lines of evidence, and this is important.  In the absence of conducting controlled exposure experiments on human beings—which would be unethical--researchers have to assemble the pieces of evidence available to us. 

Patterns in cancer registry data over time and across space provide one line of evidence.  Combined with other lines of evidence, they can offer powerful clues. Looking at patterns in breast cancer incidence data before and after 2002, for example, allowed us to conclude—in the context of other data—that hormone replacement therapy after menopause contributes to breast cancer. 

Whenever epidemiologists see an unusual pattern of disease incidence in a given area, especially one like breast cancer that has established links to environmental exposure, the next three questions are to ask are these--

1)  Are there other diseases with environmental links whose incidence rates are also different in this area?

2)  Is there biological plausibility for an environmental explanation?

3)  Is there anything demographically different about the women who live there that might explain the unusual patterns?  (ethnicity, reproductive history, breastfeeding rates, access to mammograms)

In the case of breast cancer in the Barnett Shale area of Texas, the answers to the first two questions above, although incomplete, seem to be yes.  Consider:

Childhood asthma is Tarrant County is more than double the national average; researchers from Baylor University are now investigating.

http://www.baylor.edu/mediacommunications/news.php?action=story&story=98474

Meanwhile, in Colorado, a study from the Colorado School of Public Health found that drilling and fracking operations release benzene into air at levels known to elevate cancer risk.  http://www.erierising.com/human-health-risk-assessment-of-air-emissions-from-development-of-unconventional-natural-gas-resources/

This is important because we know that benzene exposure has demonstrable links to breast cancer.  Benzene is specifically highlighted in the 2010 President’s Cancer Panel Report:  http://deainfo.nci.nih.gov/advisory/pcp/annualreports/pcp08-09rpt/PCP_Report_08-09_508.pdf.  Benzene’s role as a possible breast carcinogen was also highlighted in the recent Institute of Medicine report: http://www.iom.edu/Reports/2011/Breast-Cancer-and-the-Environment-A-Life-Course-Approach/Press-Release.aspx.  Benzene’s association with breast cancer are described in the science review by researchers at the Silent Spring Institute: http://sciencereview.silentspring.org/mamm_detail.cfm?cid=71-43-2 and Brody JG, Moysich KB, Humblet O, Attfield KR, Beehler GP, Rudel RA. Environmental pollutants and breast cancer: epidemiologic studies. Cancer. 2007, 109 (12 Suppl):2667-711. Benzene’s links to breast cancer were also reviewed by the California Breast Cancer Research Program’s 2007 report,Identifying Gaps in Breast Cancer Research: Addressing Disparities and the Roles of the Physical and Social Environment, which I helped to edit:  http://www.cbcrp.org/sri/reports/identifyinggaps/GAPS_full.pdf

We also know—from studies conducted in Long Island—that breast cancer risk is associated with industrial and traffic-related air pollution: Lewis-Michl EL, Melius JM, Kallenbach LR, Ju CL, Talbot TO, Orr MF, Lauridsen PE. Breast cancer risk and residence near industry or traffic in Nassau and Suffolk Counties, Long Island, New York. Arch Environ Health. 1996, 51(4):255-65.

We know, from EPA data, that north Texas has at least two census tracts in which the cancer risk from toxic air pollution is significantly high:  http://www.epa.gov/ttn/atw/nata2002/risksum.html.

And we know that 35 different air pollutants act as breast carcinogens in animal studies:  Rudel RA, Attfield KR, Schifano JN, Brody JG. Chemicals causing mammary gland tumors in animals signal new directions for epidemiology, chemicals testing, and risk assessment for breast cancer prevention. Cancer. 2007, 109(S12):2635-66.

In conclusion, there are plenty of biological reasons to suggest that air pollution and other stressors from drilling and fracking operations in the Barnett Shale area of Texas might be playing a role in the story of breast cancer.

With all the above as backdrop, here is what I notice about breast cancer rates in north Texas when I look at the interactive county maps and rates for invasive and in situ breast cancer for the state  (http://www.cancer-rates.info/tx/index.php).  

Overall, there has been a slow, statewide decrease in breast cancer incidence.  However, the area that includes Denton, Texas does not follow this pattern.  In fact, for single years, beginning in 2005, the rate increases.  Moreover, along with the Houston area, the area that includes Denton always leads the state.

Is mammography use in this region lower than Texas statewide?  That’s not at all clear to me.  The diagnosis of very early-stage breast cancer (in situ cancer) appears at least as high in the Denton County area than it is in the state as a whole.  (High rates ofin situ breast cancer are often indicators of high rates of compliance with mammogram screening guidelines.)

In conclusion, I feel that I am on firm ground—and so is Josh Fox—in saying that the breast cancer incidence in particular areas of Texas are different than the rest of the state and that these areas happen to be where fracking goes on intensely.  

Given that drilling and fracking operations involve releases of known and suspected breast carcinogens--and benzene is one--it is reasonable, and morally right, to ask if fracking might be involved with the creation of these patterns.

Until the answers are in, benefit of the doubt goes to breasts, not to the chemicals that cause cancer in breasts.  And the burden of proof belongs on the shoulders of the gas industry to demonstrate safety, not on the backs of women, who would have to suffer and die order to demonstrate without a doubt that fracking causes breast cancer.  

When public health is at stake, the trigger for action is indication of harm, not proof of harm.

Stop fracking.  Do the research.  Investigate these patterns.

For more: Read a Blog on the topic on the New York Times

Comments

Comments are now closed for this item.

1. Comment by yaby, Oct 3rd, 2012 2:01am

   nike heels
   nike high heels ugg boots
   ugg boots clearance
   ugg boots sale uggs outlet discount uggs uggs outlet ugg boots clearance
   
   
   
   ugg boots clearance
   ugg boots outlet
   nike heels
   nike high heels
   
   nike heels
   nike high heels ugg boots clearance
   uggs clearance ugg boots clearance
   discount ugg boots
   ugg boots canada uggs canada
   ugg boots usa
   uggs usa
   
   
   nike heels
   nike high heels nike heels
   nike high heels cheap true religion jeans
   true religion jeans outlet
   ugg boots clearance
   ugg boots sale
   ugg boots clearance
   
   
   ugg clearance ugg boots clearance sale
   nike dunk high heels
   nike dunk heels uggs clearance ugg boots clearance sale
   ugg boots on clearance
   uggs on clearance
   
   ugg boots clearance
   nike heels
   ugg boots clearance
   nike heels
   nike high heels
   
   
   cheap uggs ugg boots clearance
   
   ugg boots clearance
   uggs outlet
   uggs clearance
   
   
   cheap true religion
   true religion jeans cheap
   true religion jeans sale
   true religion jeans outlet online
   cheap true religion for women
   cheap true religion for men




2. Comment by nike sb heels, Sep 27th, 2012 2:49am

   Men's style is very different to women's. Most men want modest designs yet still have enough appeal to attract attention. They Vivienne Westwood Bas Orb Earrings tend to use accessories like ties and belts to break the unvariedness of their style. And as time progressed, some Vivienne Westwood Mini Bas Pearl Bracelets shopvisaleuk.com men learned to accessorize wearing stainless steel jewelry including rings, cufflinks and pendants to enhance their looks, no longer bound by the tired classic vivienne westwood ebury heart bags fashion. Though precious jewelry is popular to both sexes, alternative metal jewelry for men got a particularly positive reaction due to the distinct properties of the metals. Accessories which includes stainless steel jewelry, titanium jewelry and tungsten carbide jewelry, has become a vogue in vivienne westwood bags




3. Comment by Scarpe MBT, Aug 29th, 2012 12:12am

   Se la pelle è naturalmente morbida e chiara, quindi utilizzare una fondazione pura liquido. Per una copertura MBT completa, è MBT Outlet meglio scegliere un fondotinta. Se la pelle ha difetti gravi, come l'acne, i marchi, la vitiligine o rosacea, allora è meglio l'uso di mascherina massima copertura nascosto. E 'facile farlo utilizzando questo trucco Scarpe MBT mimetico. Questo assicura un aspetto naturale, la pelle impeccabile per le donne che hanno la pelle di colore giallo-base.




4. Comment by DE, Aug 13th, 2012 12:31am

   je pense que si j'arrive à avoir un ventre plat et à affiner mes jambes, je robe de mère de marié préférerai la coupe sirène qui met en valeur tout le corps. Je n'oserai pas porter une coupe courte même si c'est tendance et que http://www.robemariageonline.com/robe-de-cortège-enfant-pas-chère-c-5 je trouve cela joli. La coupe princesse est pas mal mais elle est portée par des femmes de plus de 40 ans !
   
   
   
   http://www.robemariageonline.com/robe-de-marié-col-en-cœur-c-11_12 Publié le 18/05/2011 17:05
   
   
   
   Florence