|
Essential Oils |
Bella Mira Essential Oil Supplements
Essential Oil Information and Use
|
Chemical Free |
Chemical Free Body Care Products
Chemical Free Cleaning Products
|
Gluten Free |
Gluten Free Living and Recipes
|
Important Information |
Detoxification and Digestion Products
Save Your Computer Free Protection
|
Great Products |
|
FREE Wellness Tests |
Hormone Balance Test New Improved
|
Contact Us |
(918) 640-2973
Our Shopping Cart Is:
Free Samples w/$100 Order.
DDT and Breast Cancer in Young Women: New Data on the Significance of Age at Exposure
Barbara A. Cohn,1 Mary S. Wolff,2 Piera M. Cirillo,1 and Robert I. Sholtz1
1Child Health and Development Studies, Center for Research on Women's and Children's Health, Public Health Institute, Berkeley, California, USA; 2Mount Sinai School of Medicine, New York, New York, USA
Abstract
Background: Previous studies of DDT and
breast
cancer assessed exposure later in life when the breast may not
have been vulnerable, after most DDT had been eliminated, and after DDT had been
banned.
Objectives: We investigated whether DDT exposure in young women during the period of peak DDT use predicts breast cancer.
Methods: We conducted a prospective, nested case–control study with a median time to diagnosis of 17 years using blood samples obtained from young women during 1959–1967. Subjects were members of the Child Health and Development Studies, Oakland, California, who provided blood samples 1–3 days after giving birth (mean age, 26 years) . Cases ( n = 129) developed breast cancer before the age of 50 years. Controls ( n = 129) were matched to cases on birth year. Serum was assayed for p,p´-DDT, the active ingredient of DDT ; o,p´-DDT, a low concentration contaminant ; and p,p´-DDE, the most abundant p,p´-DDT metabolite.
Results: High levels of serum p,p´-DDT predicted a statistically significant 5-fold increased risk of breast cancer among women who were born after 1931. These women were under 14 years of age in 1945, when DDT came into widespread use, and mostly under 20 years as DDT use peaked. Women who were not exposed to p,p´-DDT before 14 years of age showed no association between p,p´-DDT and breast cancer ( p = 0.02 for difference by age) .
Conclusions: Exposure to p,p´-DDT early in life may increase breast cancer risk. Many U.S. women heavily exposed to DDT in childhood have not yet reached 50 years of age. The public health significance of DDT exposure in early life may be large.
Response:
DDT and Breast Cancer
Environ Health Perspect. doi:10.1289/ehp.11025 available via http://dx.doi.org [Online 27 March 2008]
Referencing: DDT and Breast Cancer in Young Women: New Data on the Significance of Age at Exposure
In a recent article, Cohn et al. (2007) noted an association between increased breast cancer risk and p,p´-DDT [1,1,1-trichloro-2,2-bis( p-chlorophenyl)ethane] exposure early in life. Their article should be interpreted with caution, particularly the estimated 5-fold increase in risk for women born after 1931 the authors reported without qualification in the "Abstract"; this value was repeated in the news article by Manuel (2007). Cohn et al. (2007) evaluated three DDT congeners—that is, p,p´-DDT, o,p´-DDT [1,1,1-trichloro-2( p-chlorophenyl)-2-( o-chlorophenyl)ethane], and p,p´-DDE [1,1-dichloro-2,2-bis( p-chlorophenyl)ethylene]—by various categories of year of birth, yet they found no significantly increased risk estimates for any of the three DDT congeners in multiple comparisons that were not adjusted for the other DDT-related chemicals either in all women or in women born after 1931. The estimated 5-fold increase in risk for the upper tertile of p,p´-DDT serum levels was only observed in subgroup analyses that were both restricted to women born after 1931 and adjusted for serum level of o,p´-DDT. The impact of the adjustment for o,p´-DDT on the risk estimate for p,p´-DDT is remarkable in view of the low o,p´-DDT levels observed (35% were below the limit of detection). A significant inverse association between o,p´-DDT level and breast cancer risk, which was interpreted by Cohn et al. in terms of length of time since DDT exposure, became stronger after adjustment for p,p´-DDT levels; presumably this does not indicate a protective effect of recent DDT exposure.
In view of the absence of evidence for an association between p,p´-DDE levels and breast cancer risk (Lopez-Cervantes et al. 2004), it seems unlikely that DDT exposure increases the risk of breast cancer. Nonetheless, if the effect of DDT exposure early in life on breast cancer risk is large [a possibility suggested by Cohn et al. (2007)], then the decreasing birth cohort trend in breast cancer risk that has been observed for U.S. baby boomers is even more remarkable (Chu et al. 1999; Tarone 2006, 2007; Tarone and Chu 2000). Women born after 1945 would have been exposed to DDT for each of the first 13 years of life, with increasing exposure through the late 1960s (Wolff et al. 2005), but the birth cohort risk of breast cancer showed a marked decrease among U.S. women for over two decades after 1945. DDT exposure would join a list of other breast cancer risk factors predicting increasing breast cancer risk in baby boomers (Tarone 2006); yet the birth cohort risk of breast cancer decreased for women born after 1945. That the hypothesized association between DDT exposure and breast cancer risk has received far more attention than the paradoxical decreasing risk of breast cancer that has actually occurred among young U.S. women says much about the priorities and focus of environmental epidemiology.
The author declares he has no competing financial interest.