Open Letter: The precautionary principle and chemicals

The constant refutation by those in the cancer industry who stand to lose out if harmful chemicals are banned is to say the least tiresome.

How much evidence is needed before the precautionary principle is applied to all known carcinogenic substances?

The evidence that endocrine disrupting chemicals (EDCs) are contributing to the increasing incidence of breast cancer is growing on a daily basis. The most comprehensive compilation of this evidence to date is /The State of the Evidence/ (Fifth Edition, 2008), published by the Breast Cancer Fund in the US.

Bisphenol A, just one of many known EDCs, has already been listed as a toxic substance in Canada, which has been the first country in the world to ban the sale and import of all baby bottles/products containing BPA. Many states in the USA have also banned the use of this chemical in baby products. How long must we wait for the UK to follow suit?

It is, to say the least, insulting to hear the continual onslaught on female diet and lifestyle when we know that less than half of breast cancer cases can be attributed to these causes. The impact of chemical toxins in the environment, including personal care products, begs investigation so that woman can be honestly informed to enable them to make choices which suit them.

The persistent emphasis on alcohol consumption and weight in relation to breast cancer by the media and cancer charities has become insulting to the many women who work hard, eat well and try to enjoy life while staying within the recommended limits. Most breast cancer survivors are /not guilty as charged/ of high levels of alcohol consumption and/or poor diet. The image of an obese, drunken ladette is not what is witnessed in most breast clinics.