Print
Email
Share

Cancer patient raises environmental concerns over chemo drugs

by GARY CHITTIM / KING 5 News

Bio | Email | Follow: @gchittimK5

KING5.com

Posted on February 7, 2012 at 10:30 PM

Updated Tuesday, Feb 7 at 11:44 PM

SEATTLE - With each drip from the IV bag,  Dr. Molly Linton knows it is the delivery system for her her best chance to beat the cancer attacking her body.

"As a naturepath, I'm doing chemotherapy because there's nothing in my bag that would work," said Linton as she took her second dose of powerful cancer fighting drugs.

She was forced to suspend her thriving practice to concentrate on her breast cancer. The battle is consuming nearly every moment of her busy life.

But Linton has begun a personal campaign to get answers about the drugs she and a growing number of U.S. residents are using to fight cancer. She is convinced cancer is linked to environmental factors. She worries the waste stream is laden with a man-made chemical stew that passes through our homes, vehicles and our bodies. And now she worries that some of the most powerful of those chemicals, her cancer drugs, pass through her body largely unchanged and into the sewer lines to add to the stew.

"Sampling over the last decade have shown there are identifiable amounts of various pharmaceuticals and personal care products in the general environment," said University of Washington Researcher John Kissel.

He agrees with Linton that even the most modern waste water treatment facilities are not designed to remove the chemicals found in the drugs and personal care products we have been using for decades and cancer drugs would be no exception.

Kissel said there is not enough testing of waste water effluent to know the extent of the problem and its possible affects on human and environmental health.

With so many scientists concerned some of our unexplained and growing maladies such as Parkinson's Disease and Alzheimer's are products of continued long term exposure to chemicals, both Linton and Kissel would like to see more studies.

Linton points out the nurses preparing her treatment have to use protective clothing to prevent being burned or inhaling fumes from the drugs.

And as she leans back to accept the flow she knows has the best chance of saving her life, she can't help worrying about those nurses and everyone else downstream.

Print
Email
Share
 

To add a comment, please register or login.

1000 characters remaining

Submit

We welcome your comments on this story's topic. Off-topic comments, personal attacks, and inappropriate language may be flagged and removed, and comment privileges blocked, per our Terms of Service. Thanks for keeping the comments space respectful.

Privacy Policy

You have indicated this comment should be removed.

Close

The comment has been submitted for review. Thank you .

Comments: Displaying 1 - 11 of 11

ankh5 said on February 10, 2012 at 7:07 AM

By the way, Anonymous, traces of bleomycin, a chemo drug, have been found in tap water in the UK. So your claims of "zero" are bogus. As you see it, we should all sit around and wait until unborn children start dying until we decide it's a problem. When a governmental or corporate source says that traces of these drugs are too small to pose a risk, you can bet they are lying through their teeth, and those concentrations are much higher.

81164618
Flag this comment

ankh5 said on February 10, 2012 at 6:47 AM

@Anonymous As stated by the UW researcher in the article, there is not enough data to conclude one way or the other about the effects of pharmaceuticals in our drinking water, but they are there. At least 30 different drugs have been found in trace amounts and that fact alone should cause concern. As this society becomes more drugged, these concentrations should rise. Consider the fact that water is the most essential element in life. This is something you consume in large quantities every day. You are a fool to be so flippant about something that wasn't even there a few years ago. You are so self righteous about something there is no data to support in either direction. If you can't at least come to grips with the fact that this could be a huge problem, especially with water supplies being the commodity of the future, you are a lost soul. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black.

81163542
Flag this comment

snakepliskin said on February 8, 2012 at 7:49 PM

I work in a hospital and am quite familiar with all the safety issues with chemotherapeutics, how nasty the stuff is and how to properly handle it and dispose of any residues in a way that is totally environmentally responsible. Protocols and practices are mandated by the EPA, the Joint Commission, DOH and a mryiad of other regulatory agencies and professional organizations. It's one of the reasons health care costs are so high.

81088016
Flag this comment

Anonymous said on February 8, 2012 at 6:11 PM

jdjdjdjdj - to address your question, the answer is zero. The fraction of chemotheraputic agents which passes through the human system and survives wastewater treatment, only then to traverse the environment (still unchanged, mind you,) and wind up in drinking water, where it is consumed by humans and reaches concentrations sufficient to exert some phantasm of it's pharmaceutic effects - is zero. Particularly given that they're fairly delicate macromolecular protein products, hence IV infusion. Continuing to go through every moment of your life high and failing to sufficiently evaluate your sources of information will lead you to a life of mediocrity. Comfort yourself with indignant sanctimony if you must, but don't be surprised when the whole world sees right through it and disregards your ranting.

81083751
Flag this comment

jdjdjdj said on February 8, 2012 at 12:15 PM

JCCCBlvu- You ARE aware that this isn't an article about the effects on the environment, but an article about the effects on the human population, right? So, we save a human life by treating them with chemotherapy, but how many in return will end up sick in the future because they were exposed to these chemicals just by drinking their tap water? But, you know something? Cannabis has been shown to shrink tumors (and in some cases, eradicate cancer altogether,) but the Feds refuse to legalize it. Why? Because the companies (and all the head honchos who are making billions on the drugs they use to "cure" our diseases) are making too much money and they know they can't regulate cannabis. Do some research.

81063922
Flag this comment

scott_bellevue said on February 8, 2012 at 8:43 AM

She can find the answers to what's in those chemo bags by reading some medical journals. It's all published. And duh. Of course its poison. That's what kills the cancer.

81050978
Flag this comment

JCCCBlvu said on February 8, 2012 at 8:18 AM

I guess I more in favor of helping save a human life than saving the environment. Call me shallow.

81049431
Flag this comment

jcman said on February 8, 2012 at 7:54 AM

Farm chemicals are also a major concern. So many of them end up in our ground water which supplies a substantial amount of the drinking water in this country. Places where they have been widely used show strange mutations of frogs and other amphibians. If it's affecting them, how can it not be affecting us? With our hormonal system it only takes a few molecules to affect us and many of these chemicals mimic hormones with disastrous results. Girls entering puberty earlier and earlier is a good example.

81047593
Flag this comment

maltbymike said on February 8, 2012 at 7:46 AM

Cancer drugs are poison to the cancer cells. They are extremely hostile to the body, but what are your options.

81047103
Flag this comment

ptempt said on February 8, 2012 at 7:12 AM

She needs to speak with Jim Henson and get his opinion ...

81045447
Flag this comment

commonsensewa said on February 8, 2012 at 12:50 AM

There's always the alternative Molly and choose Not to use the chemo drugs and contributing to a problem that's saving yours and many others lives.

81037891
Flag this comment