Tag Archives: cancer

Soil metals linked with cancer mortality

Posted by on July 10, 2018 Comments Off on Soil metals linked with cancer mortality

A couple of interesting articles below regarding the link between soil metals and cancer.

____________________________

A study links soil metals with cancer mortality – Medical Xpress –
April 23, 2018, Spanish Foundation for Science and Technology (FECYT)

“Spanish epidemiologists and geologists have found associations between esophageal cancer and soils where lead is abundant. Lung cancer has been associated with high copper content in soil; brain tumors are linked with areas rich in arsenic, and bladder cancer is associated with high cadmium levels. These statistical links do not indicate that there is a cause-effect relationship between soil type and cancer, but they suggest that the influence of metals on the geographical distribution of tumors should be analyzed.

The risk of dying from cancer is not the same in all geographic regions. There are many factors that influence the development of cancer, including the type of soil, since it can harbor heavy metals and semimetals that are carcinogenic for humans. Chronic exposure to these toxic elements, which enter the body via the food chain, could increase the frequency of certain tumors in some territories.

In this context, researchers from the National Epidemiology Center of the Carlos III Health Institute (ISCIII) and the Geological and Mining Institute of Spain (IGME) have jointly assessed the possible statistical association between the concentrations of heavy metals in the soil and mortality by different cancer types. The results have been published in the open access journals Environmental Geochemistry and Health and Environmental Science and Pollution Research International.

The data was extracted from Spain’s Geochemical Atlas, published by the IGME in 2012, as well as from a database with 861,440 deaths from 27 cancer types that occurred in almost 8,000 Spanish municipalities between 1999 and 2008. The data can be extrapolated to the present because the geochemical composition of the soil is stable and the mortality patterns for disease usually do not vary.

The authors have crossed the information of the type of soil and the geographic distribution of the tumors, applying statistical analyses and taking into account the presence of local polluting foci or socio-demographic variables that could interfere in the results. They have found increased mortality in both genders from esophageal cancer in areas with higher concentrations of lead, and lung cancer in areas with high copper levels, among other correlations.

“We have also detected that the highest levels of cadmium, lead, zinc, manganese and copper concentrations in the soil are statistically associated with a higher mortality due to cancers of the digestive system in men,” explains Pablo Fernández, ISCIII researcher and co-author of the paper, “and in the case of women, a higher mortality from brain cancer in those areas with more cadmium content.”

The results also show a relationship between soils with more cadmium and higher mortality from bladder cancer; as well as areas with high concentrations of arsenic and more cases of death from brain tumors. “This research suggests that the geochemical composition of the soil, especially its metals, could be influencing the spatial distribution and mortality patterns of cancer in Spain, regardless of the socio-demographic context,” says Fernández. “The great contribution of this work to environmental epidemiology and public health in general. However, although it is plausible that the contents of toxic elements in the soil, even if they are very small, may be a component in the cancer etiology, the results must be interpreted with great caution, since the relationships found do not allow us to conclude that there is a cause-effect relationship. Our study does not have individual exposure data or information about other very important factors in the origin of cancer, such as tobacco, alcohol consumption or obesity.”

Co-author Gonzalo López-Abente says, “The conclusions move in the field of hypotheses and statistical associations, which will have to be confirmed with future analyses to check whether the composition of the soil itself has its counterpart in the biological markers of humans. In any case, the results are plausible and we could be facing one more component of the cancer etiology.”

___________________________________________________

Only the introduction of the article has been posted, please follow the link for the full article

Investigating local relationships between trace elements in soils and cancer data – Science Direct
Authors – Jennifer M.McKinley, Ulrich Ofterdinger, Michael Young, Amy Barsby, Anna Gavind

“1. Introduction
1.1. How environmental factors affect health
Natural trace elements, mineral water and gases (such as radon) are present in the environment and these interact with the human body in both positive and negative ways. As recognised by Paracelsus (1493–1541 AC) “all substances are poisons; there is none which is not a poison; the right dose differentiates a poison and a remedy”. Medical geology or spatial epidemiology is concerned with the study of spatial patterns of disease incidence and mortality and the identification of potential causes of disease including environmental exposure or socio-demographic factors (Goovaerts, 2010). To date, the culmination of a broad body of research has recognised a number of potentially toxic elements (PTEs), such as arsenic (As), cobalt (Co), chromium (Cr), copper (Cu), nickel (Ni), lead (Pb), selenium (Se), vanadium (V), uranium (U) and zinc (Zn), known to influence human disease by their respective deficiency or toxicity. As the impact of infectious diseases has decreased and the population as a whole ages, so cancer has become the most common cause of death in developed countries. The risk of developing cancer is recognised as a combination of the person’s genetic makeup and environmental factors usually over long periods of time. Steingraber (2010) describes a study of cancer among adoptees that found correlations with their adoptive families but not within their biological ones. The concept that our genes work in communion with substances from the larger ecological world suggests that what runs in families does not necessarily run in the blood (Steingraber, 2010). Carcinogens fall into three groups—chemical, physical and biological. Chemical carcinogens, the largest group, include tobacco products, asbestos, benzene and the products of tobacco. Biological agents include infections such as Human Papilloma Virus, (HPV) causally linked with cervical cancer, and Human Immunodeficiency virus (HIV) linked with lymphomas. The best known example of physical carcinogens is high-energy radiation, including nuclear radiation and X-rays. Radiation is known as a ‘complete’ carcinogen because it can initiate, promote and progress a cancer. Chemical carcinogens occur in nature, in mineral ores, such arsenic and others in foods (e.g. fungal contaminants). The history of cancer is long but our recognition of the agents that contribute to its occurrence has been slow to mature. A reflection that external or environmental agents could produce malignant change was noted by Pott, a London physician, in 1775, after observational studies prompted him to link scrotal cancer, common among chimney sweeps, to the soot that accumulated on their bodies (cited in Majno and Joris, 2004). Skin cancer was noted to be prevalent among workers exposed to arsenic fumes in copper smelters and tin foundries in Cornwall and Wales. Workers in cobalt mines in Saxony and the uranium mines in Bohemia were subject to a disease of the lungs later identified as cancer. Many of the causes of cancer including the effects of lifestyle and environmental factors are still not well understood. Investigating the geographical differences in cancer incidence may shed light on variations in cancer risk factors between populations (Carsin et al., 2009).”

_________________________________________

Enjoy your day further!  Chris

Dust Monitoring Equipment – providing equipment, services and training in dust fallout management to the mining industry.

Particulate air pollutants associated with numerous cancers

Posted by on June 12, 2018 Comments Off on Particulate air pollutants associated with numerous cancers

Here is another post related to our one from last week on how air pollution is damaging our health.  This article discusses how exposure to particulate air pollutants are being associated with numerous cancers.

_______________________________________________________

Particulate air pollutants associated with numerous cancers – University of Birmingham 

“Researchers have found that long-term exposure to environmental pollutants was associated with increased risk of mortality for many types of cancer in an elderly Hong Kong population.

The study between the University of Birmingham and University of Hong Kong, published in Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention, a journal of the American Association for Cancer Research, adds to growing concern around the health risks of prolonged exposure to ambient fine particulate matter.

Particulate matter is the term for particles found in the air, including hydrocarbons and heavy metals produced by transportation and power generation, among other sources. This study focused on ambient fine particulate matter, or matter with an aerodynamic diameter of less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5).

For every 10 microgram per cubic meter (µg/m³) of increased exposure to PM2.5, the risk of dying from any cancer rose by 22 percent.

Dr Neil Thomas, from the Institute of Applied Health at The University of Birmingham, said, “The implications for other similar cities around the world are that PM2.5 must be reduced to reduce the health burden. Air pollution remains a clear, modifiable public health concern.”

Dr Thuan Quoc Thach, from the University of Hong Kong, said, “Long-term exposure to particulate matter has been associated with mortality mainly from cardiopulmonary causes and lung cancer, but there have been few studies showing an association with mortality from other cancers. We suspected that these particulates could have an equivalent effect on cancers elsewhere in the body.”

The researchers recruited 66,280 people aged 65 or older between 1998 and 2001, and followed the subjects until 2011, ascertaining causes of death from Hong Kong registrations. Annual concentrations of PM2.5 at their homes were estimated using data from satellite data and fixed-site monitors.

After adjusting for smoking status, and excluding deaths that had occurred within three years of the baseline to control for competing diseases, the study showed that for every 10 µg/m³ of increased exposure to PM2.5, the risk of dying from any cancer rose by 22 percent. Increases of 10 µg/m³ of PM2.5 were associated with a 42 percent increased risk of mortality from cancer in the upper digestive tract and a 35 percent increased risk of mortality from accessory digestive organs, which include the liver, bile ducts, gall bladder, and pancreas.

For women, every 10 µg/m³ increase in exposure to PM2.5 was associated with an 80 percent increased risk of mortality from breast cancer, and men experienced a 36 percent increased risk of dying of lung cancer for every 10 µg/m³ increased exposure to PM2.5.

The team believe that possible explanations for the association between PM2.5 and cancer could include defects in DNA repair function, alterations in the body’s immune response, or inflammation that triggers angiogenesis, the growth of new blood vessels that allows tumours to spread. In the case of the digestive organs, heavy metal pollution could affect gut microbiota and influence the development of cancer.

The large scale of the study, as well as its documentation of cancer-specific mortality, enables a detailed investigation of the contribution of particulate matter to these cancers and counters the common problems associated with research into mortality via specific types of cancer in a population.

Dr Thomas added, “The next step is to determine whether other countries experience similar associations between PM2.5 and cancer deaths. This study, combined with existing research, suggests that other urban populations may carry the same risks but we’d be keen to look into this further.”

Dr Thach concluded, “The limitation to this study is the sole focus on PM2.5. Emerging research is beginning to study the effects of exposure to multiple pollutants on human health. We must be cautious though, as pollution is just one risk factor for cancer, and others, such as diet and exercise, may be more significant and more modifiable risk factors.””

__________________________________________

How air pollution can cause cancer – Cancer Research UK

“Air pollution increases the risk of lung cancer. For each individual person, the increase in risk of cancer is small. But because everyone is exposed to some air pollution, when we think about big numbers of people, like the population of a country, air pollution has a much bigger effect.

And air pollution isn’t only linked to lung cancer, there is also good evidence that it can increase the risk of other diseases, mainly respiratory diseases and heart disease.

However, it’s important to keep the risk in perspective. Smoking has a much bigger effect on the risk of developing lung cancer than air pollution.

What is air pollution?

Air pollution is the harmful things that are found in the air we breathe.

It is a mixture of many different substances and the exact contents vary depending on its source, your location, the time of year and even the weather. Air pollution can be man-made, such as fumes from cars and smoke from burning fuels like wood or coal. But it also includes natural substances, like desert dust that travels to the UK all the way from the Sahara desert.

Air pollution is often separated into outdoor and indoor air pollution. Both indoor and outdoor air pollutants have been shown to increase the risk of cancer. Air pollution is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer. Although the increased risk of cancer is small for individuals, because everyone is exposed to some air pollution, it has an important effect across the population as a whole.

Outdoor Air Pollution

In 2013, outdoor air pollution was identified as a cause of cancer by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). It’s responsible for far fewer cases of cancer than other risk factors, such as smoking and obesity, but air pollution affects everyone.

The research shows that tiny dust-like particles – called ‘particulate matter’, or PM – are an important part of air pollution. The smallest particles – less than 2.5 millionths of a metre across, known as PM2.5 – appear to be behind lung cancers caused by pollution.

The risk of developing lung cancer increases as the level of PM2.5 in the air increases.”

To read further please follow the above link to the article.