The AFA Blog

Insurance coverage for young adult cancer patients to preserve fertility

by Corey Whelan

Around 1.5 million American men and women are diagnosied with cancer annually.  Ten percent of those are under the age of 45 and one percent will be younger than 20.  That translates into around 70,000 young adults, all under the age of 20 years old, who will have to grapple with this disease.  Statistics aside, if you or a loved one are diagnosed with cancer, life may never be the same.  Mind reeling, you may or may not think about options for parenthood later on.  Of course, many cancer treatments including surgery, chemotherapy and radiation may have the effect of rendering the person on the receiving end infertile.  Of course, survival is the number one goal but many cancer patients report that their ensuing infertility was just as devastating to them as their original diagnosis.

Fertility can often be preserved prior to cancer therapy beginning, for both men, women, boys and girls.  These options can be as simple as collecting and freezing sperm, or can become more complicated and expensive, including testicular needle aspiration for young boys or egg freezing for young women.

According to change.org, the vast majority of insurance comapnies and HMO's in the United States do not cover fertility preservation treatments such as those referenced above.

Currently, legislation addressing this issue is being decided upon in California.  Bill AB 428 is being sponsored by Assemblyman Anthony Portantino but your help is needed.  No matter where you live, your name on a petition requesting support of this bill will be meaningful and will not go unnoticed.  

Click here to read the petition letter and to sign it. Please.

For more information on fertility preservation and your options, click here

To watch a short video on fertility preservation, click here

Be the change.

Update on the Safe Chemicals Act - some good news from Capital Hill

by Kimberly Inez McGuire

A bit of good news for reproductive health today coming from Congress! Signaling their clear intention to protect families from toxic chemicals in everyday products, Senators Frank Lautenberg, Barbara Boxer, Amy Klobuchar, Charles Schumer and others today introduced the “Safe Chemicals Act” to upgrade America’s outdated system for managing chemical safety.  (Click here to watch video of Sen. Lautenberg talking about the bill.) This bill comes on the heels of a USA Today article highlighting the alarming rise in early puberty among girls and would go a long way toward protecting the reproductive health and fertility of millions of Americans. 

Reproductive Health Advocates to Congress: Protect Women’s Health, Pass Chemical Policy Reform

Statement by Kirsten Moore, President & CEO of the Reproductive Health Technologies Project, on the introduction of the Safe Chemicals Acts of 2011 by Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ):

“Amid an increasingly partisan backdrop, this bill gives Americans from across the political spectrum something they have been clamoring for—better laws to protect our families from toxic and untested chemicals in everyday products. Reforming our chemical laws is a prime example of how government can work for the people by protecting our reproductive health and our children from the threat of chemicals like lead, formaldehyde, and asbestos. The introduction of the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 is a critical first step to creating a healthier tomorrow for women and their families. This bill also presents a profound opportunity to protect the most vulnerable among us, from pregnant women and children to low-income communities and communities of color, which are disproportionately affected by toxic chemicals.”

Statement by Tracey Woodruff, PhD, Director, Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment at the University of California San Francisco, former EPA scientist, and Board member of the Reproductive Health Technologies Project:

 “Mounting scientific evidence demonstrates that commonly-used chemicals can harm reproductive health and contribute to infertility, miscarriage, early puberty, and decreased sperm counts. Thousands of other chemicals have never been studied. It’s time to use current science to study chemicals used in everyday products, place common-sense limits on those that can adversely impact our health, and provide consumers with the information they need to protect their families.”

 Background: The Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 will provide long overdue reform of the 35-year-old federal law that regulates toxic chemicals, the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). This new legislation would give the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) stronger authority to test and regulate the 84,000 chemicals on the market today. Studies have linked exposure to many commonly used chemicals, such as bisphenol A (BPA), to a host of reproductive health problems including infertility, miscarriage, birth defects, early puberty in girls, low sperm counts, and breast cancer.

 For more information about this legislation and how toxic chemicals impact reproductive health and fertility, please visit: http://www.rhtp.org/fertility/SafeChemicalsAct2011.asp

Kimberly Inez McGuire is the Senior Associate, Programs & Policy Reproductive Health Technologies Project
www.rhtp.org / www.judgment-to-empathy.org

For more information about this bill, or how you can support efforts to reduce toxic chemical exposure, please contact [email protected] or 202-530-4401.

Protecting reproductive health from dangerous chemicals

by Corey Whelan

I was privileged to attend a Congressional briefing in Washington, D.C. yesterday, specific to toxic chemical exposure and reproductive health.  The briefing was coordinated through the Reproductive Health Technologies Project and the Guttmacher Institute, as well as Congressional Reps. Louise Slaughter (D,NY), Diana DeGette (D,CO), Lois Capps (D,CA) and Rosa DeLauro (D,CT).

The panel of speakers was comprised of moderator Kirsten Moore, President & CEO of the Reproductive Health Technologies Project; Katie Huffling RN, MS, CNM, Environmental Health Program Coordinator of the Alliance of Nurses for Healthy Environments, Celinda Lake, President of Lake Research Partners, Andy Igrejas, Director of Safer Chemicals, Healthy Families, and Elizabeth Nash, Public Policy Associate of the Guttmacher Institute.

One of the stated goals of yesterday's briefing was to move forward, through verifiable scientific data as well as statistical analysis of public opionion, regulatory changes that could positively impact upon the levels of toxic chemicals that Americans are routinely exposed to, thereby reducing risks to reproductive health and overall health.  

The most significant fact brought forth to me personally, was the verification that over 200 scientific studies have definitively and negatively implicated BPA (bisphenol A) in cases of cancer, metabollic disorders, premature puberty, male factor infertility and reproductive health issues.  

A number of important findings and action plans were brought forth by both the speakers and the audience.  These included:

NIEHS (National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences) - All complex diseases have been shown to have both a genetic and environmental component.  A growing body of research is beginning to suggest that many adult diseases and disorders, including asthma, diabetes and obesity, may be traced back to exposures that occur during development.  Research supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and others are finding that in utero or neonatal exposures to environmental changes may make people more susceptible to diseases later in life.  In addition, a growing body of evidence suggests that numerous man-made chemicals may interfere with the endocrine system.  Scientists refer to these chemicals as endocrine disruptors.  Endocrine disruption is an important public health concern.

Guttmacher Institute Policy Review - In a long-awaited announcement, the federal Food and Drug Administration (FDA) officially acknowledged concern about the effects of bisphenol A on the health of fetuses, infants and young children.  The statement marked a notable refersal of the agency's earlier position that BPA did not pose a health risk to humans.  Equally notable, however, was the fact that the FDA took no steps to restrict BPA's use.  Instead, it provided recommendations for parents to reduce exposure and said the government would continue to study the chemical's toxicity.

Safer Chemicals Healthy Families - A reformed Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) would serve as the backbone of a sound and comprehensive chemicals policy that protects public health and the environment, while restoring the luster of safety to U.S. goods in the world market.

There was much more.  It is understandable that the American public is, and should be, concerned about our daily toxin exposure, and the number one action item on anyone's list should be to keep in touch with your Congressional and Senatorial representatives about this issue.  Everyone needs an action plan.  Several potential and key, proactive behavioral changes were suggested by the Reproductive Health Technologies Project:

• Refuse Receipts, as the powdery coating on them contains BPA.
• Keep Plastic Cool, as heat causes chemicals to leach out of them and into food
• Leave Shoes at the Door, to keep pesticides and other chemicals out of your home
• Don't Be Fooled by Fragrance, and avoid cosmetics and cleaning products that list fragrance as an ingredient.  It is code for phthalates, another known endocrine disruptor
• Look Up Your Lipstick - check it out at http://cosmeticdatabase.com
• Filter Your Drinking Water, to remove common contaminants like arsenic and lead
• Buy BPA Free, if your product does not contain BPA it will say so on the label
• Toss the Teflon, as this chemical has been linked to cancer and early menopause
• Limit Canned Food, another known source of BPA
• Dust, Vacuum and Mop Frequently, to cut down on chemcials that accumulate in household dust

The American Fertility Association is proud to be aligned with powerful, proactive advocates who are working for the public good.  For more information on endocrine disruptors and fertility, visit The AFA's library.

 

 

Food Packaging Significant Source of BPA Exposure, New Study Finds

The American Fertility Association congratulates allied non profit organization, The Breast Cancer Fund and the Silent Spring Institute on their groundbreaking new study on BPA exposure and women's health.  The AFA has been sounding the alarm on BPA and other toxins that affect reproductive health for many years; our most recent press release quoted Executive Director Ken Mosesian as stating, "The AFA is proud to be a thought leader in this arena, and looks forward to definitive answers being realized.  We recognize that more research is urgently needed."

  A peer-reviewed study published today in Environmental Health Perspectives suggests that food packaging is a substantial source of exposure to the endocrine-disrupting chemical bisphenol A (BPA), which laboratory studies have linked to breast cancer, infertility, early puberty, and other serious health problems. In this unprecedented human study, scientists at the Breast Cancer Fund and Silent Spring Institute discovered an average drop of 60 percent in BPA levels when study participants ate a diet that avoided contact with BPA-containing food packaging, such as canned food and polycarbonate plastic.

“This study suggests that removing BPA from food packaging will remove the number one source of BPA exposure,” said Janet Gray, Ph.D., Science Advisor to the Breast Cancer Fund and professor at Vassar College. “The study should serve as a call to action for industry and government to get BPA out of food packaging and to fix the broken chemical management system that allows it to be there in the first place.”

The study, “Food Packaging and Bisphenol A and Bis(2-Ethyhexyl) Phthalate Exposure: Findings from a Dietary Intervention,” tested the levels of BPA in the urine of five San Francisco Bay Area families who had a high likelihood of regular exposure to food packaging containing BPA (they consumed canned foods and beverages, ate meals outside of the home, used polycarbonate water bottles, and/or microwaved in plastic). The families were provided with three days’ worth of freshly prepared organic meals with no canned food, and using only glass storage containers. The families’ urine was evaluated while they ate their typical diets, again during the period when they were provided with freshly-prepared meals, and then again after returning to their normal eating habits. While the families were eating the fresh-food diet, their BPA levels dropped on average by 60 percent. Reductions were even more pronounced—75 percent—for those with the highest exposures. When families returned to their regular diets, their BPA levels increased back to pre-intervention levels.

In addition to BPA, participants were tested for phthalates, plastic-softening chemicals that can interfere with reproductive development. Levels of DEHP (a phthalate used in food packaging) dropped by an average of 50 percent during the intervention; and the highest exposures dropped by over 90 percent.

"Our study provides clear and compelling evidence that food packaging is the major source of exposure to BPA and DEHP,” said Ruthann Rudel, lead author of the study and Director of Research at Silent Spring Institute. “The study shows that a fresh-food diet reduces levels of these chemicals in children and adults by half, after just three days."

BPA and the phthalate DEHP are both used widely in food packaging. BPA is used to make polycarbonate plastics and is used in the lining of food cans, and DEHP is an additive used in some food containers and plastic wraps to increase flexibility. BPA and phthalates are both known as endocrine-disrupting chemicals because of their effects on hormone systems. BPA has been shown to mimic the hormone estrogen, and exposure has been associated with effects on the developing brain, reproductive system, and mammary and prostate glands in laboratory studies. Phthalates have been demonstrated to interfere with androgen signaling and male reproductive development in laboratory and human studies.

“The findings of this food packaging study suggest that if the food and food-storage industries reformulated packaging to remove BPA and phthalates, or if there were a federal ban of these chemicals in food packaging, a large portion of the population would experience a rapid reduction in the levels of these chemicals in their bodies,” said Dr. Gray. “Industry and government need to ensure the safety of any substitute chemicals before they are put into use.”

Suggestions from the Breast Cancer Fund and Silent Spring Institute for reducing exposure to BPA and DEHP include cooking at home with fresh foods and making some changes in the kitchen, such as avoiding canned foods, choosing glass and stainless steel food and beverage containers, and not microwaving in plastic. After aggregating the results of tests of 300 canned food products, the Breast Cancer Fund found that BPA especially leaches into canned foods that are acidic, salty or fatty, such as coconut milk, soup, meals (e.g., ravioli in sauce) and vegetables. For additional tips or to download a shopper’s guide, visit www.breastcancerfund.org.

  

A Chemical Blowout: Frizz, Formaldehyde and Infertility

By Kimberly Inez McGuire

The first whispers of summer are in the air, foretelling sunny days, sultry nights, and trips to the beach. For better or worse, it also means that many women crowd into salons and spas in a frenzy of pre-summer health and beauty rituals. And it’s no small task to prepare for all the bared skin and exposure to the elements—that’s right, ladies and gents, I’m talking about the Brazilian.

No, not that Brazilian. I’m talking about the Brazilian Blowout (also known as Keratin Treatment), a salon procedure that claims to “improve the health and condition of the hair,” “eliminate frizz,” and “smooth the cuticle.” These are tantalizing promises to a curly-haired woman like me. Between my Irish ringlets and Puerto Rican kink (thanks, Mom and Dad!) my hair can be a handful—and the swampy, sticky DC summers don’t help. Neither do the countless women’s magazines, ugly duckling movies, and makeover TV shows that portray hair like mine as a problem, a “before” picture in desperate need of a stick-straight “after.” So, when I see photos of Jennifer Aniston, Halle Berry, and Nicole Richie rocking smooth, shiny locks, I hear the siren call of hassle-free hair and think, “Why not?”

In a word? Formaldehyde. Yes, that same stinky soup that held the dissecting frogs in 10^th grade biology is now available in your local high-end hair salon. Initially, this rather disturbing information came to light late last year when salon workers reported headaches, eye irritation, difficulty breathing, and nose bleeds, all symptoms of short-term formaldehyde exposure. When Oregon Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) tested samples of Brazilian Blowout products, they found dangerous levels of the chemical, including in products explicitly labeled “Formaldehyde Free.”

Investigators have concluded that the process of applying the solution to hair, and then using a blow dryer and flatiron, aerosolized the formaldehyde, making it easy for salon workers and clients to inhale. This is a great discovery if you’re looking for an effective biological weapon, but definitely bad news for women’s health. Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen, and scientific studies have linked it to miscarriage, stillbirth, menstrual disorders, and female infertility. Just last week, the beauty industry’s own scientists finally acknowledged that they cannot guarantee the safety of formaldehyde-containing hair straighteners. And by the way, this is just the tip of the iceberg in terms of toxic cosmetics targeted to women of color.

Now, you’re probably thinking, Brazilian Blowout products have been recalled, right? Because putting a nasty chemical like formaldehyde into a product that women all over the country use must be illegal, RIGHT? Sadly, this is not the case. While Canada has stopped the distribution of these toxic products, Ireland has issued a recall, and the California Attorney General’s office has filed a lawsuit, there has been no nation-wide recall or federal government action to stop the use of these harmful products. And it’s certainly not for lack of effort by women’s health groups like Women’s Voices for the Earth, the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics and the National Healthy Salon Alliance.

Unfortunately, the laws that are supposed to protect us from toxic cosmetics are 70 years old and badly broken—and the Brazilian Blowout brouhaha is a symptom of a failed system. There are no safeguards in place to prevent dangerous products from coming on the market, and no real labeling requirements—which is exactly how a product touted as “Formaldehyde Free” was found to contain dangerous levels of formaldehyde. There are over 12,000 ingredients used in cosmetics, yet 89 percent of them have not been reviewed for safety. In fact, voluntary recalls and anemic self-regulation are all that stands between American families and toxic chemicals in everyday products—from Brazilian Blowout to body wash, baby bottles to blue jeans.

I checked the Brazilian Blowout website today, and the company is heavily featuring a new product called “ZERO” which, they claim, “releases 0% Formaldehyde.” Given that there’s no real oversight of claims like this, I’m skeptical. The company is also standing behind their original formulation—you know, the one that gave salon workers nosebleeds and could be making clients infertile.

Women and workers deserve better. Fortunately, there is something we can do (besides just pulling our hair out from frustration). In the coming months, Congress is expected to introduce legislation that would update our national chemical policy, ensure that products are safe before allowing them in our homes and workplaces, and provide consumers and federal agencies with the information they need to protect human health. To make sure Congress lives up to this important responsibility, you can sign a petition asking President Obama to create a cancer prevention plan that stops the use of cancer-causing chemicals (like formaldehyde) in products we use every day.

Until we have common-sense regulation of chemicals in cosmetics and everyday products, the status quo—labels that lie and products that poison—will continue. So, until I can trust that a Brazilian Blowout isn’t going to give me cancer or make it hard for me to have kids someday, I’m keeping my curls, thank you very much. And I’ll use some of the time I’m not sitting at the salon to sign that petition to President Obama and send it to 10 women I care about. Because beauty is pain sometimes, but this is ridiculous.

Quick tip: How safe are your cosmetics? Find out here.

Kimberly Inez Mcguire is the Senior Associate, Programs & Policy for the Reproductive Health Technologies Project.

Experts at UN Meeting Urge Action to Combat Environmental Causes of Cancer.

Important and significant actions designed to reduce or eliminate environmental toxins in the workplace were urged today by experts attending a United Nations convened scientific meeting.  Interestingly, many of the same toxins known to contribute to escalating cancer rates world wide have also been linked in multiple studies to infertility and birth defects of various types.  The press release appears in its entirety here:

EXPERTS AT UN MEETING URGE ACTION TO COMBAT ENVIRONMENTAL CAUSES OF CANCER.

UN press release

(New York; 18 March,  2011)

Medical experts attending a United Nations-convened scientific meeting today called for action to address preventable environmental and occupational causes of cancer, noting that nearly one in five of all cases of cancers are attributable to the environment, including work settings.

“Many environmental and occupational factors, including certain chemicals, radiation and airborne particles, can cause cancer,” said Maria Neira, the Director for Public Health and Environment at the UN World Health Organizations (WHO), which convened the meeting in the Spanish Principality of Asturias.

“These cancers could be prevented and reduced by changes in national and international policy to limit people’s involuntary exposure to these substances,” she added.

The cancers related to the environment, which comprise roughly 19 per cent of all cancers and cause 1.3 million deaths each year, are often the result of situations where people have limited control over the quality of air they breathe, the water they drink, and the level of chemical contamination in indoor and outdoor environments and at places of work.

In their “Asturias Pledge,” the experts urged governments to include environmental and occupational preventive measures in their national cancer control programmes, and ensure enforcement of national and international standards for environmental and occupational carcinogens.

They recommended that WHO lead a global effort in highlighting the importance of primary prevention of cancer, assess the impact of environmental and occupational interventions on primary prevention of cancer, and develop guidance for implementation of evidence-based interventions.

Civil society should raise awareness about practices and processes that increase carcinogenic risks, raise awareness, educate and advocate for funding to implement effective primary prevention of those types of cancers, the experts suggested.

Industry, for its part, should support and implement measures aimed at preventing the cancers. It should also contribute to policy development relating to the mitigation of occupational risks and workers’ exposures; eliminate or reduce exposure to known and probable carcinogens, and better inform workers on the risks they face in the workplace and protect them from carcinogens.

Reducing and eventually eliminating the exposure to environmental and occupational carcinogens is the most effective way to prevent a number of cancers, according to WHO. Stopping the use of asbestos can prevent lung cancer, mesothelioma and cancers of the larynx and ovaries, for example. Replacement of benzene with safer solvents will prevent leukaemia, the agency said.

 

Asturias Pledge

Environmental and Occupational Determinants of Cancer: Interventions for Primary Prevention

Asturias (Aviles and Gijon), Spain

17 – 18 March 2011

http://www.who.int/phe/news/events/international_conference/Call_for_action_en.pdf

 

Cancer is the second leading cause of death worldwide. Environmental and occupational risk factors are estimated to be a substantial contributor to the cancer burden, many of them are modifiable and often result from involuntary exposure of populations, but have yet to be seriously addressed by cancer prevention programmes. The burden of cancer is currently shifting towards heavily populated low- and middle-income countries and is predicted to increase due to a rise in life expectancy as a result of economic development. Therefore, environmental and occupational interventions are key for reducing the incidence and mortality of cancer, can be cost-effective and contribute to the overall well-being of communities.

 

In line with World Health Assembly Resolution WHA58.22 on Cancer Prevention and Control, where countries were urged to pay special attention to cancers for which risk factors are avoidable, including environmental and occupational factors, we, the participants in the first WHO International Conference on "Environmental and occupational determinants of cancer: Interventions for Primary Prevention", call for a broad, public health driven response bringing together public heath, environmental, occupational and cancer control communities in a multi-sectoral and collaborative approach, to tackle known and preventable causes of cancer, using scientific evidence to raise awareness and promote environmental and occupational interventions in support of primary preventive measures:

 

 

TO GOVERNMENTS

1. Further develop surveillance of the burden of cancer, support research and build capacities for systematic identification and measurement of environmental and occupational risk factors as part of national cancer control programmes.

 

2. Include and implement evidence-based environmental and occupational preventive measures as part of policies, legislation and regulations, creating synergies among public health programmes, with NGOs and private and public institutions.

 

3. Adopt and enforce national and international legislation for protection against environmental and occupational carcinogens.

 

4. Support campaigns for behavioural change, including in the work place, to protect individuals from environmental and occupational cancer risks, through innovative approaches and collaboration with the media, and using easily accessible public information about the risks and protection measures.

 

 

 

 

TO WHO

1. Lead a global effort to highlight the importance of primary prevention of cancer through healthy environments, raising awareness and bringing together public heath, environmental, occupational and cancer control communities.

 

2. Shape the research cancer agenda so as to take account of environmental- and occupational-related cancers, including a better characterization of causes and assessment of the effectiveness of behavioural change and environmental and occupational interventions for the primary prevention of cancer.

 

3. Encourage governments to include environmental and occupational prevention measures as part of national cancer control programmes.

 

4. Develop guidance for the implementation of evidence-based environmental and occupational interventions based on population needs assessments.

 

5. Support the implementation of environmental and occupational prevention measures in developing countries and countries in transition through technical assistance, training and other means.

 

6. To support implementation of the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control and the World Health Assembly Resolution WHA60.23 on Prevention and control of noncommunicable diseases: implementation of the global strategy.

 

7. Encourage governments to provide funding to further study environmental factors as potential causes of cancer and to support primary prevention of cancer due to known environmental and occupational risk factors.

 

8. Establish a coordinated network of institutions at national and international level to support policy development and implementation of primary prevention measures for environmental- and occupational-related cancers.

 

 

TO CIVIL SOCIETY NETWORKS

1. Increase awareness raising about environmental and occupational determinants of cancer.

 

2. Advocate for the enforcement of national and international standards for exposure to environmental and occupational carcinogens and to enhance protection of workers.

 

3. Further develop innovative campaigns and strategies to raise awareness about individual behavioural change to support primary prevention of environmental- and occupational-related cancers.

 

4. Strengthen involvement in policy development and implementation related to the mitigation of environmental and occupational risks.

 

5. Advocate for research on environmental- and occupational-related cancers and on effectiveness of prevention measures, including those related to behavioural change.

 

6. Advocate for funding to tackle primary prevention of environmental- and occupational-related cancers, including support for awareness raising, education, and wider implementation of measures known to be effective.

 

7. Support the development of a global network of international environmental-, occupational- and health-related NGOs to advocate for the introduction of environmental and occupational aspects to the global cancer agenda, and with other actors to engage with the media in support of primary prevention of environmental- and occupational-related cancers.

 

 

TO INDUSTRY AND THE PRIVATE SECTOR

1. Incorporate measures for primary prevention of environmental- and occupational-related cancers into existing corporate initiatives and business management programmes.

 

2. Where necessary, develop substitutes, products, technologies and processes to eliminate the use of carcinogens, evaluate their effectiveness and support international technology and information transfer.

 

3. Provide information to governments, workers and consumers about hazardous substances and products, ensure clear labelling and responsible marketing.

 

4. Train workers, suppliers and sub-contractors in preventing exposures to carcinogens and establish prevention and mitigation measures.

 

5. Partner with governments and civil society groups in support of primary prevention of cancer.