What If Proof Is Elusive? ALL EDITIONS

• Published in: Newsday
• Main Author: Barron H. Lerner. Barron H. Lerner, MD, is author of "The Breast Cancer Wars" and teaches medical history at Columbia
• Format: Newspaper Article
• Language: English
• Published: Long Island, N.Y Newsday LLC 18.08.2002
• Edition: Combined editions

At some point activists and researchers should acknowledge that a link between breast cancer and environmental toxins, if it exists, may be impossible to prove. Does this mean the quest to rid Long Island and other areas of toxic waste and pollutants should be abandoned? Absolutely not. Indeed, thanks to a combination of science and politics, four of the five substances in the Long Island study - DDT, chlordane, dieldrin and PCBs - already are banned. Rather, we can push aggressively for laws that eliminate or regulate other potential carcinogens, notwithstanding the lack of conclusive studies. Breast cancer activists have an admirable track record of promoting good science, but definitive scientific proof should not be a prerequisite to good policy. When breast cancer activists, in a revolutionary achievement, persuaded Congress in 1993 to earmark funding for a study of environmental toxins on Long Island, they were well aware of the potential pitfalls of this type of research. Yet one of the hallmarks of activism for breast cancer, as well as for AIDS and other diseases, has been to push for scientific data that can either prove or disprove long-held claims. For example, it was good scientific studies of breast cancer surgery in the 1970s that finally led to the abandonment of the radical mastectomy, a highly disfiguring operation. Thus it seemed prudent to ascertain, once and for all, if high rates of breast cancer stemmed from exposure to toxic waste and other pollutants.