Ames, et.al.:Cancer Prevention, Rodent High-Dose Cancer Tests,And Risk Assessment

[Stewart Farber <farbersa@optonline.net>]

Radsafe colleagues:



In the course of doing a search to find what data might be readily available on 

the benz-alpha-pyrene [BAP} and other organic carcinogens [Polycyclic Aromatic 

Hydrocarbons - PAH] in cooking/barbecuing smoke related to recent postings about 

the health risks of various burger emporiums, I found the following review by 

Bruce Ames, et. al. which has some information on this general issue and a lot of 

information worth reading on cancer and risk assessment. It is well referenced 

and may be a resource article that radiation risk interested parties may want to 

file away.



To see the entire article, there is a link below to:



Risk Analysis Guest editorial, 16: 613-617 (1996)

http://potency.berkeley.edu/text/riskanaleditorial.html

==============

Cancer Prevention, Rodent High-Dose Cancer Tests, And Risk Assessment



Bruce N. Ames, Lois Swirsky Gold and Mark K. Shigenaga



Key Words: cancer causation, risk assessment, cell division, animal cancer test, 

cancer mechanism



INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH FROM THIS REVIEW EDITORIAL:



"We have recently reviewed the causes and prevention of cancer with an emphasis 

on mechanism (1). The major causes of cancer are smoking, dietary imbalances, 

chronic infections leading to chronic inflammation, and hormones (1). Past 

occupational exposures might cause a few percent of current human cancer, a major 

part being asbestos exposure in smokers. The age-adjusted cancer death rate in 

the U.S. for all cancers combined has declined 14% since 1950 (excluding lung 

cancer, 90% of which is attributable to smoking), while life expectancy has 

increased (1), which may in part be due to better diet (2). The idea that there 

is an epidemic of human cancer caused by synthetic industrial chemicals is not 

supported by either toxicology or epidemiology. Though some epidemiologic studies 

find an association between cancer and low levels of industrial pollutants, the 

studies do not correct for diet, which is a potentially large confounding factor; 

moreover, the levels of pollutants are low and rarely seem plausible as a causal 

factor when compared to the background of natural chemicals that are rodent 

carcinogens (3).



=================

Best wishes to all,



Stewart Farber, MS Public Health

Consulting Scientist

[203] 367-0791





************************************************************************

You are currently subscribed to the Radsafe mailing list. To unsubscribe,

send an e-mail to Majordomo@list.vanderbilt.edu  Put the text "unsubscribe

radsafe" (no quote marks) in the body of the e-mail, with no subject line.

You can view the Radsafe archives at http://www.vanderbilt.edu/radsafe/