Almost 1000 common food/drug/household chemicals are (estrogenic) carcinogens

[haidut]

Back in 2023, I had an interview with Dr. Mercola in regards to estrogen and its role in many disease, especially cancer. We discussed the official classification of estrogen as a "known human carcinogen" by both the US government and WHO. That interview must have struck a nerve since a famous doctor went through the trouble of writing an extensive blog post trying to debunk the already established fact that estrogen is a carcinogen, by claiming that most of that data stems from the WHI studies, and that those are now considered flawed, ergo estrogen cannot be considered a carcinogen. As a response, I asked people in touch with her to send her the following links on the topic, and that list is certainly not exhaustive. To this day, I have no not received a response from her

Estrogen a more powerful breast cancer culprit than we realized — Harvard Gazette
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/1999/20908lbl.pdf
Endometrial Cancer Prevention (PDQ®)
Link Between Melanoma and Estrogen Could Lead to New Therapeutic Approach
Estrogen May Play Role in Melanoma Recurrence
Estrogen hikes ovarian cancer risk
High levels of estrogen in lung tissue related to lung cancer in postmenopausal women
Estrogen plays a role in expansion of liver metastases in non-sex-specific cancers
Even "non-carcinogenic" estrogens can cause cancer
Estrogen, not HPV, causes cervical cancer; progesterone can stop / reverse it – To Extract Knowledge from Matter
Frontiers | EZH2 Mediates Proliferation, Migration, and Invasion Promoted by Estradiol in Human Glioblastoma Cells
Is Estradiol a Genotoxic Mutagenic Carcinogen?1
Combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives and combined estrogen-progestogen menopausal therapy - PubMed
Endogenous estrogens as carcinogens through metabolic activation - PubMed
Estrogen contributes to the onset, persistence, and malignant progression of cervical cancer in a human papillomavirus-transgenic mouse model - PubMed
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2914219/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006291X23004102
Estrogen and its metabolites are carcinogenic agents in human breast epithelial cells - PubMed
Unbalanced estrogen metabolism in ovarian cancer - PubMed
Estrogen treatment enhances hereditary renal tumor development in Eker rats - PubMed
Inhibition of Estrogen-induced Renal Carcinoma in Syrian Hamsters by Vitamin C
https://ovarianresearch.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13048-020-00621-y
https://ehjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1476-069X-11-S1-S8
https://europepmc.org/article/PMC/5739773
https://erc.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/erc/15/2/475.xml
https://translational-medicine.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12967-019-2056-3
https://europepmc.org/article/med/23011535
https://academic.oup.com/jcem/article/84/6/2080/2864679
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/01.ATV.21.1.6
https://www.por-journal.com/articles/10.3389/pore.2021.622733/full
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.4_suppl.85
https://academic.oup.com/jnci/article/96/6/466/2606744
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD014869/epdf/full

Now, aside from that "short" (and non-exhaustive) list above, the study below should probably suffice to drive the point home that estrogen is a mutagenic carcinogen, and any chemical with estrogenic properties is a danger to health. Shockingly, it looks like we are bathing 24x7 in a toxic sea of almost 1,000 chemicals with such properties (aka xenoestrogens), and given their ubiquity in food, drugs, industry, household, hospitals, and even nature it is little surprise the population of Western countries is sicker than ever. Considering the sheer number of chemicals involved and the near impossibility of avoiding them, keeping the metabolic rate high (helps with excretion of xenoestrogens) and usage of anti-estrogenic chemicals (eg. vitamin E, progesterone, pregnenolone, aspirin, DHT, antihistamines, etc) becomes that much more important.

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp13233
"...We identified 279 mammary carcinogens (MCs) and an additional 642 chemicals that stimulate estrogen or progesterone signaling. MCs were significantly enriched for steroidogenicity, ER agonism, and genotoxicity, supporting the use of these KCs to predict whether a chemical is likely to induce rodent mammary tumors and, by inference, increase BC risk..."

https://www.ehn.org/breast-cancer-chemicals-2666906815.html
"...More than 900 chemicals commonly found in consumer products and the environment have been linked to breast cancer risk in a new study. The study, published today in Environmental Health Perspectives, identified 921 chemicals that could potentially increase the risk of breast cancer and found that 90% are ubiquitous in consumer products, food and drinks, pesticides, medications and workplaces. The list includes chemicals like parabens and phthalates, which are commonly found in makeup, skin and hair care products; and numerous pesticide ingredients, including malathion, atrazine and triclopyr, which are used on food and in household pest control products in the U.S. Breast cancer among young women has increased in recent years. Between 2010 and 2019, diagnoses among people 30 to 39 years old increased 19.4%, and among those ages 20 to 29, rates increased 5.3%. This change is too fast to be explained by genetics, so researchers have begun looking more closely at potential environmental causes for the disease. A 2020 study found that women who used chemical hair straighteners more than six times a year had about a 30% higher risk of breast cancer than those who didn’t use chemical straighteners. Those products typically contain one or more of the chemicals identified in the new study as increasing the chances of getting breast cancer."

 

[Soren]

Back in 2023, I had an interview with Dr. Mercola in regards to estrogen and its role in many disease, especially cancer. We discussed the official classification of estrogen as a "known human carcinogen" by both the US government and WHO. That interview must have struck a nerve since a famous doctor went through the trouble of writing an extensive blog post trying to debunk the already established fact that estrogen is a carcinogen, by claiming that most of that data stems from the WHI studies, and that those are now considered flawed, ergo estrogen cannot be considered a carcinogen. As a response, I asked people in touch with her to send her the following links on the topic, and that list is certainly not exhaustive. To this day, I have no not received a response from her

Estrogen a more powerful breast cancer culprit than we realized — Harvard Gazette
https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/drugsatfda_docs/label/1999/20908lbl.pdf
Endometrial Cancer Prevention (PDQ®)
Link Between Melanoma and Estrogen Could Lead to New Therapeutic Approach
Estrogen May Play Role in Melanoma Recurrence
Estrogen hikes ovarian cancer risk
High levels of estrogen in lung tissue related to lung cancer in postmenopausal women
Estrogen plays a role in expansion of liver metastases in non-sex-specific cancers
Even "non-carcinogenic" estrogens can cause cancer
Estrogen, not HPV, causes cervical cancer; progesterone can stop / reverse it – To Extract Knowledge from Matter
Frontiers | EZH2 Mediates Proliferation, Migration, and Invasion Promoted by Estradiol in Human Glioblastoma Cells
Is Estradiol a Genotoxic Mutagenic Carcinogen?1
Combined estrogen-progestogen contraceptives and combined estrogen-progestogen menopausal therapy - PubMed
Endogenous estrogens as carcinogens through metabolic activation - PubMed
Estrogen contributes to the onset, persistence, and malignant progression of cervical cancer in a human papillomavirus-transgenic mouse model - PubMed
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2914219/
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006291X23004102
Estrogen and its metabolites are carcinogenic agents in human breast epithelial cells - PubMed
Unbalanced estrogen metabolism in ovarian cancer - PubMed
Estrogen treatment enhances hereditary renal tumor development in Eker rats - PubMed
Inhibition of Estrogen-induced Renal Carcinoma in Syrian Hamsters by Vitamin C
Estrogen enhances the proliferation and migration of ovarian cancer cells by activating transient receptor potential channel C3 - Journal of Ovarian Research
Environmental exposure to xenoestrogens and oestrogen related cancers: reproductive system, breast, lung, kidney, pancreas, and brain - Environmental Health
Europe PMC
Estrogen promotes tumor progression in a genetically defined mouse model of lung adenocarcinoma
Estrogen receptors promote NSCLC progression by modulating the membrane receptor signaling network: a systems biology perspective - Journal of Translational Medicine
Europe PMC
Loss of Estrogen Inactivation in Colonic Cancer
https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/full/10.1161/01.ATV.21.1.6
Estrogen Aggravates Tumor Growth in a Diffuse Gastric Cancer Xenograft Model
https://ascopubs.org/doi/abs/10.1200/JCO.2018.36.4_suppl.85
Estrogen Signaling in Livers of Male Mice With Hepatocellular Carcinoma Induced by Exposure to Arsenic In Utero
https://www.cochranelibrary.com/cdsr/doi/10.1002/14651858.CD014869/epdf/full

Now, aside from that "short" (and non-exhaustive) list above, the study below should probably suffice to drive the point home that estrogen is a mutagenic carcinogen, and any chemical with estrogenic properties is a danger to health. Shockingly, it looks like we are bathing 24x7 in a toxic sea of almost 1,000 chemicals with such properties (aka xenoestrogens), and given their ubiquity in food, drugs, industry, household, hospitals, and even nature it is little surprise the population of Western countries is sicker than ever. Considering the sheer number of chemicals involved and the near impossibility of avoiding them, keeping the metabolic rate high (helps with excretion of xenoestrogens) and usage of anti-estrogenic chemicals (eg. vitamin E, progesterone, pregnenolone, aspirin, DHT, antihistamines, etc) becomes that much more important.

https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/10.1289/ehp13233
"...We identified 279 mammary carcinogens (MCs) and an additional 642 chemicals that stimulate estrogen or progesterone signaling. MCs were significantly enriched for steroidogenicity, ER agonism, and genotoxicity, supporting the use of these KCs to predict whether a chemical is likely to induce rodent mammary tumors and, by inference, increase BC risk..."

More than 900 common chemicals linked to breast cancer risk: Study
"...More than 900 chemicals commonly found in consumer products and the environment have been linked to breast cancer risk in a new study. The study, published today in Environmental Health Perspectives, identified 921 chemicals that could potentially increase the risk of breast cancer and found that 90% are ubiquitous in consumer products, food and drinks, pesticides, medications and workplaces. The list includes chemicals like parabens and phthalates, which are commonly found in makeup, skin and hair care products; and numerous pesticide ingredients, including malathion, atrazine and triclopyr, which are used on food and in household pest control products in the U.S. Breast cancer among young women has increased in recent years. Between 2010 and 2019, diagnoses among people 30 to 39 years old increased 19.4%, and among those ages 20 to 29, rates increased 5.3%. This change is too fast to be explained by genetics, so researchers have begun looking more closely at potential environmental causes for the disease. A 2020 study found that women who used chemical hair straighteners more than six times a year had about a 30% higher risk of breast cancer than those who didn’t use chemical straighteners. Those products typically contain one or more of the chemicals identified in the new study as increasing the chances of getting breast cancer."

This is why I'm against the movement that says we should not supplement and just eat naturally.

In the modern world it is so hard to avoid these toxins I think for most people some form of supplementation to compensate is a necessity

 

[haidut]

just eat naturally

Yep, there is no such thing anymore...unless one lives in a remote wilderness untouched by mankind. For the ones stuck in "civilization", avoiding/controlling damage is a much more realistic approach.

 

[InChristAlone]

I agree we are exposed to thousands of chemicals. But the idea we need Big Pharma to prevent damage from them is not wise. I took cyproheptadine for yrs and ended up with sludgy bile and elevated liver enzymes and high tissue cholesterol ( totalxHDL÷LDL good is 300-500 mine steadily increased to 1100 before finally coming down after doing beans and activated charcoal and quitting juice)

A better strategy is to stop intoxing and start detoxing using fiber and binders.

 

[Soren]

I agree we are exposed to thousands of chemicals. But the idea we need Big Pharma to prevent damage from them is not wise. I took cyproheptadine for yrs and ended up with sludgy bile and elevated liver enzymes and high tissue cholesterol ( totalxHDL÷LDL good is 300-500 mine steadily increased to 1100 before finally coming down after doing beans and activated charcoal and quitting juice)

A better strategy is to stop intoxing and start detoxing using fiber and binders.

Who is saying that we need big pharma? I would not consider cypro part of big pharma the patent expired decades ago and it is very cheap. If anything big phara is advocating against the use of drugs like cypro

 

[AinmAnseo]

I agree we are exposed to thousands of chemicals. But the idea we need Big Pharma to prevent damage from them is not wise. I took cyproheptadine for yrs and ended up with sludgy bile and elevated liver enzymes and high tissue cholesterol ( totalxHDL÷LDL good is 300-500 mine steadily increased to 1100 before finally coming down after doing beans and activated charcoal and quitting juice)

A better strategy is to stop intoxing and start detoxing using fiber and binders.

In Christ,
Could you tell me more about your quitting juice?
Did you stop drinking oj and all other fruit juices?
Thanks.

 

[InChristAlone]

Who is saying that we need big pharma? I would not consider cypro part of big pharma the patent expired decades ago and it is very cheap. If anything big phara is advocating against the use of drugs like cypro

My point was why are we doing the same thing doctors do? Taking chemicals to do symptom control. That's allopathy. Get at root causes. The only thing manufactured I am okay with at the moment is nicotinic acid and activated charcoal. Zinc and selenium if that counts as manufactured.

In Christ,
Could you tell me more about your quitting juice?
Did you stop drinking oj and all other fruit juices?
Thanks.

Yes stopped all sweets drinks. Peat was right that fructose increases cholesterol.

 

[AinmAnseo]

My point was why are we doing the same thing doctors do? Taking chemicals to do symptom control. That's allopathy. Get at root causes. The only thing manufactured I am okay with at the moment is nicotinic acid and activated charcoal. Zinc and selenium if that counts as manufactured.


Yes stopped all sweets drinks. Peat was right that fructose increases cholesterol.

Thanks.
But, I thought that Peat advocated for the daily use of OJ?

 

[3apples555]

@haidut
So happy to see you active here again.
Truly.

 

[InChristAlone]

Thanks.
But, I thought that Peat advocated for the daily use of OJ?

Yes that is one of the main diet recommendations. I'm just offering my experience and the experience of others who ended up with worse liver health and cholesterol doing this.

 

[Soren]

My point was why are we doing the same thing doctors do? Taking chemicals to do symptom control. That's allopathy. Get at root causes. The only thing manufactured I am okay with at the moment is nicotinic acid and activated charcoal. Zinc and selenium if that counts as manufactured.


Yes stopped all sweets drinks. Peat was right that fructose increases cholesterol.

I'm not doing the same things doctors would do.

Most doctors would not recommend cypro. Sometimes you have to take things to alleviate symptoms while you make other adjustments. For example I think my mother would literally be dead if i had not given her cyproheptadine. It was the ONLY thing that was able to calm down her unbelievably bad symptoms which were caused by medication that a doctor gave her that i told her not to take. She literally could not sleep or sit down for more than 2 minutes it was absolute hell. Just because a doctor recommends a drug or medicine that has a negative effect does not mean all drug and medicine recommendations are inherently bad. It is never so black and white, it depends on the context.

I have also seen first hand how many other "chemicals" greatly improved the lives of others. One being someone I knew who was suffering greatly from opioid withdrawal they had been through it before and they told me that the previous time had been 1000 times worse compared to the one where they took the supplements i recommended one of them being cyproheptadine.

Why is activated charcoal not also count as allopathy? Why if it is manufactured is it automatically.

Sometimes people get caught up in stress hormone cascade that can only be broken with additional "manufactured" supplements that is not just doing symptom control.

 

[haidut]

@haidut
So happy to see you active here again.
Truly.

Thank you! I was actually active the past few months, just mostly reading as I was busy with other work.

 

[Rinse & rePeat]

Thank you! I was actually active the past few months, just mostly reading as I was busy with other work.

Nice to have you back!

 

[AlaskaJono]

This is why I'm against the movement that says we should not supplement and just eat naturally.

In the modern world it is so hard to avoid these toxins I think for most people some form of supplementation to compensate is a necessity

Yep, there is no such thing anymore...unless one lives in a remote wilderness untouched by mankind. For the ones stuck in "civilization", avoiding/controlling damage is a much more realistic approach.

I have lived in fairly remote places for extended periods of time, ie - years, and came to the conclusion that the environmental factors alone, without the phthalates and parabens and hair straightener/air fresheners in my life, it is truly impossible to avoid the toxic 'strain' on my person. The rainwater that I drink daily is less contaminated than the treated 'town water' that I get when I visit friends. And I am in a relatively clean location now, rural Tasmania. (We have strange 'new clouds' here too, as well as some mining and fish farming, most folks have the Round-Up backpac to spray their lawns with, etc. .)

Add the food additive aspect or the 'purity' of the natural foods themselves, both those listed and not listed (senomyx? Roundup?) and we have a real emergency on our hands. Our bodies have to deal with this situation, whether it is mercury, copper, fluoride, glyphosate, estrogen/hormone disruptors. Whatever works for people to feel that they are supporting the expulsion, or sequestering of these toxic elements in our internal and external environment. And what does work is Pooping every day several times, breathing fully, and feeling good! Whether it be Nina Simone, or praying, meditating, or all of the above.

I still do buy/eat as clean a food source as possible, by gardening, trading, and supporting local producers. But I am not going to live in fear of becoming toxic as that is not helpful in the least. If eating wild salmon or Roo, or grass eating sheep or cows for that matter, tox-es me out and kills me, I am outta here willingly. ;-)

One big issue is that the scientific papers are not always truthful, ie- fraudulent, and there is proof of this. I also have spoken with 'insiders' in the University medical study industry, and they did say that certain results must be 'discovered' in medical studies otherwise the funding is cut to the department, or the phd or candidate is no longer welcome at that institution. This is the level of moral and ethical decline we live in.
See

Those BPA-free plastics you thought were safe? Think again.

Inside the Big Tobacco-style campaign to bury the disturbing evidence about the products you use every day.

www.motherjones.com

(Tritan is made by Eastman)
Long read, but worth it. Basically tests that were used by Certichem and Plastipure were 'deemed ' by jurors on counts of false advertising and unfair competition. They also concluded Tritan was not estrogenic. "Their rationale, according to postverdict interviews, echoed Eastman’s claims that estrogenic activity could not be established solely through cell-based tests."

These tests were the standard for decades I understand.
Anyhoo... "According to Bittner’s research, some BPA-free products actually released synthetic estrogens that were more potent than BPA.
And other researchers in the article did find estrogenic activity, but were not allowed to present evidence in that court.
And ..."Eastman also sued CertiChem and its sister company, PlastiPure, to prevent them from publicizing their findings that Tritan is estrogenic, convincing a jury that its product displayed no estrogenic activity."
So, yeah, Phthalathes are inside you. And me. etc. . Read below in Red from NIH and it would appear it is all good. But... It just isn't so.
"On Sciences’ advice, Eastman then commissioned a study that used computer modeling to predict whether a substance contains synthetic estrogens, based on its chemical structure. The model suggested that one of Tritan’s ingredients—triphenyl phosphate, or TPP—was more estrogenic than BPA."
From Pub med.

Lack of androgenicity and estrogenicity of the three monomers used in Eastman's Tritan™ copolyesters - PubMed

Eastman Tritan™ copolyester, a novel plastic from Eastman is manufactured utilizing three monomers, di-methylterephthalate (DMT), 1,4-cyclohexanedimethanol (CHDM), and 2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol (TMCD) in various ratios. As with most any polymer, the monomers along with the high...

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Lack of androgenicity and estrogenicity of the three monomers used in Eastman's Tritan™ copolyesters​

Abstract​

Eastman Tritan™ copolyester, a novel plastic from Eastman is manufactured utilizing three monomers, di-methylterephthalate (DMT), 1,4-cyclohexanedimethanol (CHDM), and 2,2,4,4-tetramethyl-1,3-cyclobutanediol (TMCD) in various ratios. As with most any polymer, the monomers along with the high molecular weight oligomers, whose toxicity is most commonly represented by the monomers, make up the predominate amount of free chemicals available for leaching into the environment and/or foods. In light of the high level of public concern about the presence of endocrine (primarily estrogenic) activity ascribed to certain plastics and chemicals in the environment, Tritan's™ monomers were evaluated using QSAR for binding to the androgen receptor and estrogen receptors (alpha and beta) as well as a battery of in vitro and in vivo techniques to determine their potential androgenicity or estrogenicity. The findings were universally negative. When these data are coupled with other in vivo data developed to assess systemic toxicity and developmental and reproductive toxicity, the data clearly indicate that these monomers do not pose an androgenic or estrogenic risk to humans. Additional data presented also support such a conclusion for terephthalic acid (TPA). TPA is also a common polyester monomer and is the main mammalian metabolite formed from DMT.