« February 2006 | Main | April 2006 »
March 27, 2006
They’re Listening....
For years, we’ve been asking state and local governments to protect the lung health of our citizens, and now according to our recently published report, State Legislated Actions on Tobacco Issues (SLATI), we’re seeing a growing trend amongst states to make almost all public places and workplaces smokefree. In addition, states are raising tobacco taxes, essential in the fight to prevent our youth from starting to smoke, an addiction that for many, is more difficult to break than an addiction to heroin.
Earlier this year we issued the American Lung Association Smokefree Air 2010 Challenge, urging policymakers to adopt strong smokefree air laws. Why is it so important that we rid our work environments and other public places of secondhand smoke?
Here are some facts:
- Secondhand smoke has been classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as a known cause of cancer in humans.
- Secondhand smoke causes approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths and 35,000 – 62,000 heart disease deaths in adult nonsmokers in the United States each year.
- Secondhand smoke is especially harmful to children, and can even be fatal. Secondhand smoke causes 1,900 to 2,700 deaths from sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) in the United States each year.
So as you see, secondhand smoke is not just a nuisance, it’s a potential killer. I invite you to read more of these alarming statistics by clicking here.
Click here for the SLATI report to see the latest on tobacco control laws in your state. In addition you might want to check out your state’s grades on tobacco control laws in the American Lung Association State of Tobacco Control 2005 report, released in January.
Thanks to a combined effort of many concerned Americans, millions of us are now able to enjoy a smokefree existence, without compromising our careers, or our leisure-time activities.
Posted by lungblogposter at 06:49 AM | Comments (1)
March 14, 2006
All Lung Cancer Sufferers are Victims
Last week we lost one of the country’s top patient advocates to lung cancer. Dana Reeve was only 44 years old, and according to the media reports, she wasn’t a smoker.
While we haven’t seen clear data on the subject, there are anecdotal reports of a rise in lung cancer in nonsmoking women. We’re beginning to see evidence of genetic susceptibility to lung cancer in this group. According to a study conducted in France, as reported in Pubmed, “the epidemiology of the disease in women is different, with tobacco smoking explaining only 70% of the incidence. Other risk factors such as higher expression of the gastrin-releasing peptide (GRP) receptor, hormonal factors, radon and passive smoking may also play a role.”
While smoking is still, without a doubt, the number one cause of lung cancer, there clearly are other risk factors for lung cancer, including the following:
Radon - Radon is considered to be the second leading cause of lung cancer in the U.S. today. Radon gas can come up through the soil under a home or building and enter through gaps and cracks in the foundation or insulation, as well as through pipes, drains, walls or other openings. Radon causes between 15,000 and 22,000 lung cancer deaths each year in the United States -- 12 percent of all lung cancer deaths are linked to radon.
Secondhand Smoke - Many of the chemicals in tobacco smoke also affect the nonsmoker inhaling the smoke, making "secondhand smoking" another important cause of lung cancer. It is responsible for approximately 3,000 lung cancer deaths annually.
Industrial Exposures - Another leading cause of lung cancer is on-the-job exposure to cancer-causing substances or carcinogens. Asbestos is a well-known, work-related substance that can cause lung cancer, but there are many others, including uranium, arsenic, and certain petroleum products.
Particulate Pollution - A recent study published in the Journal of American Medical Association suggests that particulate matter pollution can cause lung cancer.
How can you prevent lung cancer?
First, if you smoke, quit. The more time and quantity you smoke, the greater your risk of developing lung cancer. But if you stop smoking, the risk of lung cancer decreases each year as normal cells replace abnormal cells. After ten years, the risk drops to a level that is one-third to one-half of the risk for people who continue to smoke. In addition, quitting smoking greatly reduces the risk of developing other smoking-related diseases, such as heart disease, stroke, emphysema and chronic bronchitis. Visit our Freedom From Smoking Online program or call one of our lung health experts at the Lung HelpLine at 1-800-LUNGUSA to help you quit.
If you are a nonsmoker, know your rights to a smoke-free environment at work and in public places. Make your home smoke-free. Test your home for radon. If you are exposed to dusts and fumes at work, ask questions about how you are being protected.
How is lung cancer detected?
There have been reports in recent years of new approaches to detect and diagnose lung cancer. While they have attracted much attention, few of them have been fully studied for effectiveness and accuracy. The hottest technology in diagnosis has been low-dose CAT scans. Also known as spiral CT, there is no question that this technology detects early lung cancer. It also detects benign material more frequently, so it’s not clear whether, as a screening device, it does more good than harm. Right now the effectiveness of the spiral CT scan is being studied through a federal lung cancer research program, so we should know pretty soon if this is an effective tool.
Other areas of promise include blood tests for lung cancer indicators and tests to detect lung cancer in sputum cells, at the moment neither of these is recommended for clinical use. We’re also looking at new medicines that do seem to prolong life, and we’re seeing some promise in experimentation with immunotherapy.
What next?
We’ve barely scratched the surface when it comes to lung cancer research. Despite the fact that Lung cancer is the leading cancer killer in both men and women, lung cancer-specific research has not received funding equal to its effects on those diagnosed with it and on our society as a whole. Attitudes need to change. Smokers are the victims. The tobacco industry has addicted millions of people through their powerful, deceptive advertising. The federal government needs to allocate more money for the diagnosis and treatment of lung cancer.
The diagnosis -
If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with lung cancer you need to get the facts. Our Lung Cancer Profiler is a tool that can help you learn about treatment options for your specific diagnosis. The Lung Cancer Profiler will not only help you in your quest for information, it should also serve as a tool for discussing an appropriate plan with your doctor.
Posted by lungblogposter at 12:49 PM | Comments (8)
March 07, 2006
The American Lung Association Urges Stronger Air Pollution Health Standards and We Need Your Help
Each week I like to pick a lung-health topic that’s been covered in the news with the hope that I can answer some of your questions. This week, I’m asking for your help.
On December 20, 2005, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced new limits on how much particle pollution can be in outdoor air. Unfortunately, despite a strong scientific consensus that both the annual and daily limits on particle pollution need to be tighter to protect public health, EPA failed to propose adequate standards. EPA’s independent outside scientific review panel and the EPA's own staff scientists have proposed tightening both standards. EPA Administrator Johnson overrode these recommendations and proposed a standard weaker than those recommended. The Clean Air Act requires EPA to set these air pollution standards at levels that protect public health. The health science clearly shows that the current federal limits on particle pollution are set too high, allowing air pollution that leads to the premature deaths of thousands of Americans each year. The EPA proposal will leave millions of Americans unprotected and will lead to thousands of premature deaths. EPA will announce its final decision on those standards by September 27, 2006.
If EPA's proposals are adopted, tens of thousands of people who could have been protected will die prematurely. Polluters are blaming these deaths on anything but their pollution, even denying the evidence of thousands of studies because they don't want to have to clean up.
Tens of thousands of Lung Association volunteers and advocates sent messages to Administrator Johnson telling him to set the standards where they really can protect public health. You, too, can join in our e-advocacy network and help clean up the air we all breathe – click here to sign up! Thank you for your help.
Posted by lungblogposter at 07:56 AM | Comments (1)
