We understand that we haven’t been sharing as much nutritional and lifestyle information here as we usually do. There has just been a lot of interesting and important cancer related new lately.
Like this report. Pat is especially interested in this, because the “type of blood cancer” the report references is multiple myeloma–his cancer.
It seems clear from other reports we have read that some of the cancers listed–among others–most likely were caused by Ground Zero toxic exposure. And like the report says, it often takes much longer for cancers to develop then less than seven years.
BUT, statistics don’t support the popular view that working at and around Ground Zero was a cancer death sentence. See what you think after you read these excerpts from today’s AP/ABC News report:
9/11 Cancer Study Won’t Settle Debate Over Risks
The most comprehensive study of potential World Trade Center-related cancers raises more questions than it answers and won’t end a debate over whether the attacks were really a cause.
The study suggests possible links with prostate, thyroid and a type of blood cancer among rescue and recovery workers exposed to toxic debris from the terrorist attacks. But there were few total cancers and even the study leaders say the results “should be interpreted with caution.”
The study involved nearly 56,000 people enrolled in a registry set up to monitor health effects from those exposed to the aftermath of the trade center attacks. Most participants volunteered for enrollment, which could skew the results if people who already had symptoms were more likely to enroll than healthier people…
The increased risks were seen only in rescue and recovery workers, who likely had more direct, sustained contact with potential cancer-causing substances in the dust, smoke and debris from the attacks. But cancers weren’t more common in workers who had the most exposure — a finding that would seem to contradict the theory that contact was the cause.
The study comes just a few months after the federal government added dozens of types of cancer to a list of illnesses related to the trade center attacks that will be covered by a program to pay for health coverage…
The article ends this way:
Donald Berry, a biostatistics professor at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center in Houston, said the study has too many limitations to draw any definitive conclusions.
“There’s no evidence that 9/11 caused any of these cancers,” Berry said.
He pointed out that no increased risks were found for lung cancer — a cancer that might seem plausible after breathing lots of toxic dust and smoke.
OK. Way too soon to tell, especially for lung cancer! Are you kidding me? It can take decades–or even a lifetime–for lung cancer to develop. But stats don’t lie–or do they? Fortunately, aid has already been approved for a large number of cancers that may or may not be related to exposure.
Our position has always been; just give them the money! Whether one of these brave, public service workers’ cancer was caused by 9/11 work or not. These workers helped the citizens of New York. The least the state and city can do is help them out.
Feel good and keep smiling! Pattie