A paper looking at the impact of chemical control laws in Europe, including the REACH regulations, has concluded “that the prevention of environmental exposure that is or may be related to cancer should become an integral part of cancer policies and cancer control programmes.” The paper published in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health notes: “With the precautionary principle and that of physical–chemical hygiene in mind, the European regulations discussed in this article prove to be important steps towards a healthier living environment.”
A US study looking at the impact of a Toxics Use Reduction Act (TURA) in Massachusetts found that reported use of known or suspected carcinogens by industries in the state declined 32 per cent from 1990 to 2010 while releases to the environment declined 93 per cent from 1991 to 2010. Michael Ellenbecker, director of the Toxics Use Reduction Institute (TURI) created alongside the act to work with businesses to reduce chemical risks, said: “These significant reductions show that when companies are required to examine their use of a toxic chemical, many find ways to use it more efficiently, while many others find options for replacing it with a safer substitute chemical or process.” Use of chemicals associated with lung cancer, the biggest occupational cancer killer, decreased 29 per cent while releases to the environment decreased 77 per cent.
ChemHAT, the Chemical Hazard and Alternatives Toolbox, is an internet database developed by the US union IUE-CWA and the Blue Green Alliance. The organisations say: “Instead of what engineering controls and personal protective equipment do I need to lower the levels of exposure to a ‘safe’ level, ChemHAT is being designed to answer the question, ‘Is there a way to get this job done without using dangerous chemicals?’”
The authors, exploring “new” hazards in Taiwan’s developing economy, looked at 4,962 shipbreaking workers over a 24 year period and found standardised mortality ratios (SMRs) for lung cancer almost twice the expected rate (1 .91). The report notes: “Those employed in shipbreaking industries experienced an increase in mortality from all causes. The increased SMR for lung cancer was probably related to asbestos, metals, and welding fume exposure.”
A TUC ‘Time to Change’ health and safety campaign bulletin deals with preventing exposure to carcinogens at work. The new bulletin provides an overview of the situation, including information on what the law says about exposure to substances that can cause cancer.
Outraged civil society groups attending the Rotterdam Convention conference in Geneva in May 2013 have said the convention was hijacked by industry interests. For the fourth time, a handful of countries allied to the asbestos industry refused to allow chrysotile asbestos to be added to the Convention’s list of hazardous substances that require exporters to obtain ‘prior informed consent’ from the importer. Listing of the pesticide paraquat was also blocked.
Despite the UK Health and Safety Executive (HSE) accepting that shiftwork is a cause of 550 breast cancer deaths in women each year and many more cases, the Industrial Injuries Advisory Council has other ideas. Its May 2013 position paper notes: “Although a causal association is not firmly established, collectively, the evidence suggests the possibility of a moderately elevated risk of breast cancer associated with prolonged (more than 20 years) night work. After considering the evidence, the council concluded that there remains insufficient evidence to recommend any changes to the list of prescribed diseases for which people can claim Industrial Injuries Disablement Benefit.” A 2012 HSE report concluded that in Great Britain there are around 550 deaths each year from breast cancer in women who undertake shift work, and nearly 2,000 new cases registered. Health Survey for England data published in December 2014 and compiled by the Health and Social Care Information Centre, showed 33 per cent of men and 22 per cent of women of working age were doing shift work. They defined shifts as employment outside 0700-1900.
The authors suggest there is a real public health problem with pesticides linked to prostate cancer, non-Hodgkin lymphomas, leukaemia, multiple myeloma, and breast cancer. The report notes: “Although the review is not exhaustive in its scope or depth, the literature does strongly suggest that the public health problem is real. If we are to avoid the introduction of harmful chemicals into the environment in the future, the integrated efforts of molecular biology, pesticide toxicology, and epidemiology are needed to help identify the human carcinogens and thereby improve our understanding of human carcinogenicity and reduce cancer risk.”
Four former employees of a printing company in western Japan died after developing bile duct cancer, raising concerns about the use of chemicals at the plant. Shinji Kumagai, an associate professor at the University of Occupational and Environmental Health who was part of the team that uncovered the deaths, said chemicals used at the factory are the probable cause of the cancers. On 2 April 2013, Labour ministry investigators searched the Osaka head office of printing firm Sanyo-CYP Co amid long-running concerns about workplace cancers. A total of 17 employees had developed bile duct cancer, eight of whom died. A nationwide investigation subsequently identified 48 more cases.
Campaigners waved bras outside a Health and Safety Executive (HSE) conference in March 2013, to highlight the watchdog’s “denial, delay and dithering” on occupational cancer risks, particularly those affecting women. Hilda Palmer said “this ‘three monkeys’ approach is especially deadly for work-related cancer in women which has been completely ignored, under-researched and so much less likely to be targeted for preventive action.”
A continually-updated, annotated bibliography of occupational cancer research produced by Hazards magazine, the Alliance for Cancer Prevention and the International Trade Union Confederation (ITUC).
