Everyone catches up on our Blogs at www.lesscancer.org

If you have found us here - this is our old house.
We do all are updates and blogging at www.lesscancer.org.
Check us out!

Bill Couzens, Founder Less Cancer- Next Generation Choices Foundation

The Fairest Of Them All 
When Choosing A Sun Block is Like Taking the SATs
By Bill Couzens 

Over the past few days, I have spent time in Virginia grocery stores, including Giant, Safeway, Harris Teeter and Whole Foods. 

At these stores, I navigated labels on merchandise, specifically the ones on sun block. I also observed shoppers, watching to see if they, too, read labels, and I talked to them about those labels. 
My rule of thumb – mostly because of my inability to focus when choosing anything with a label – is to go for the label with fewer lines, less words. A shorter list of ingredients is not scientific, but it is my personal solution when shopping for anything.

Like food, if it comes with a long list of ingredients and or directions, I often do not buy it. I would like to say that’s because I understood each and every ingredient, and its impact on human health and the environment. But I don’t. Honestly, it’s just too darn complicated.

Not unlike many shoppers, when I hit the grocery store, I’m on the phone or texting – not focused on shopping. Who can navigate all the complicated messages and labels?  Not me, even under the best circumstances.

Well, after a few days of really watching people in the stores, I discovered that I may be one of the few that actually tries to read labels  – unless if you go to Whole Foods, where many consumers are seemingly are really expert in everything they are buying. And yet, what is ironic is that many products sold at Whole Foods are reduced risk, green, or organic products.  Of all places, Whole Foods is where I might be the least inclined to read labels.

So, how to other people make choices?  Are people better organized and smarter than I am? Do they actually read the whole label? How do they navigate their shopping, and how in the world do they choose a sun block?

Recently, I was at Whole Foods in Reston, Virginia, and was immediately approached by sales associate Elke Derrickson. She came across as an authority that knows her way around the whole aisle, and was savvy on everything from sun block to vitamins.  I was glad to meet her.

I told Elke that when I choose sun block, it is often simply zinc ointment, and I asked her to show me the least complicated sun blocks. She recommended Badger Sun Block, which is made with zinc oxide, an effective natural sunscreen ingredient. 

According to the Environmental Working Group's Safe Cosmetics Database, Badger Sun Blocks are rated as one of the safest and most effective sunscreens in the world, as well as being uncomplicated and simple. 

I asked Elke if people do in fact read the labeling, and if so, did how did they know about each little ingredient?  She pointed behind me to a well-worn book, the Consumers Dictionary of Cosmetic Ingredients by Ruth Winter – a quick read of 564 pages. While it covers anything you would want to know, I am not sure who has time to really delve into it when shopping. But Elke reports that many people use it when navigating her aisle. 

Secretly, I am wondering who reads it? Who has the time?  Apparently lots of people do.
Is this a big bait-and-switch campaign to keep consumers confused, freaking them out with a list of scary-sounding chemicals that make sun block sound worse than tanning beds or the harmful rays from the sun? The tanning bed industry is on the defensive and many sun screens being scrutinized, at a time when we should be more worried about exposure to harmful rays, and the well-documented link to cancer.  Thats not to say I am not careful about what I put on my skin -I am but I keep really simple.

Recently, there was a study about zinc oxide. and while the details are interesting ,when I asked Ronald B. Herberman, M.D., who is a Less Cancer board member and Founding Director of the University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute about it he said, "the much more important issue is UV radiation from the sun or tanning beds."

And this is why.

According to the American Academy of Dermatology, on an average day in the United States, there are more than one million people tan in tanning salons. Studies have found a 75 percent increase in the risk of melanoma in those who have been exposed to UV radiation from indoor tanning. 

The Skin Cancer Foundation tells us that a tan, whether you get it on the beach, in a bed, or through incidental exposure, is bad news any way you acquire it. Tans are caused by harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation from the sun or tanning lamps, and if you’ve had a tan, you’ve sustained skin cell damage. No matter what you may hear at tanning salons, the cumulative damage caused by UV radiation can lead to premature skin aging (wrinkles, lax skin, brown spots, and more), as well as skin cancer.
Tanning machines emit dangerous UV radiation, and frequent tanners using new high-pressure sunlamps may receive as much as 12 times the annual ultraviolet radiation they would receive from regular sun exposure.

UV radiation is a proven human carcinogen and is linked with a higher risk of all forms of skin cancer, including potentially deadly melanoma, which is the most common form of cancer among young adults ages 25-29. On average, indoor tanners are 74 percent more likely to develop melanomas than non-tanners. They are also 2.5 times more likely to develop squamous cell carcinoma, and 1.5 times more likely to develop basal cell carcinoma, the two most common skin cancers.

Dr. Herberman is particularly concerned that the incidence of melanoma is rising rapidly, and that burns from UV lights are central contributors to increased risk of melanoma. He goes on to say, “Although low level exposure to UV light either from sun or tanning beds will help maintain levels of Vitamin D, one can readily eat foods containing Vitamin D or nutritional supplements, without running the risk of over-exposure to UV. The particular danger is to avoid exposure that will lead to an actual burn, because that has been shown to put people at risk many years later for malignant melanomas."

I also appreciate what green guru Alexandra Zissue told me the other day, when we were discussing this issue via email.  "Mineral block sits ON skin, and chemical block goes INTO skin. Even though there have been some links around skin cancer and zinc, non-nano mineral sunscreen with organic ingredients is still my choice when I have to put on sunscreen,” she said. “The first line of defense is always shade, before sunscreen – trees, hats, and ugly shirts with SPF in them, from brands that are actually approved by skin cancer organizations.” Too many people are claiming that their fabric contains SPF, but have no certification to back it up. “I try not to go out in direct sunlight in the heat of the day,” she added. But I also love summer, and appreciate a little Vitamin D." 
For Bill Couzens and his big, bald German skull, it’s zinc, a baseball cap and sun glasses.   I love the sun, which I consider a great “recharger.” But more and more, I wear protective clothing when I am in the sun. Now I’m a fan of Badger Sun block, but if I don’t have any on hand, I lather-up with plain old zinc ointment.
Here is the “Cliff’s Notes” version on product labels:  keep it whole and keep it simple. More ingredients can translate to potentially increased risk for health and the environment ie the more ingredients the more potential for risk, and for me, not only an increased health risk but an increased risk for eating up important time. I will often reach for organic labels, since almost always they are simple and list whole ingredients.  

There are over 80,000 chemicals in the marketplace that I don’t have the time or the knowledge to navigate. And since I am concerned about what these chemicals are doing to human health and the environment, I do not support those products or companies, if I can help it. I try to keep all purchases simple and whole for foods and products. And yes I often reach for USDA Organic Seal founded by the National Organic program.

What is Natural ?

This is What Bill Couzens Say's
From Abe's Market

We’ve been chatting about this very question a lot at Abe’s and have written up what we think it means here. But we’re equally curious about what it means to you. So we’re asking everyone we know and will be posting their responses here, every Monday. Know someone we should ask? Please suggest in comments.

This week, to kick off the new column, we put the question to Bill Couzens, founder of Less Cancer, an environmental health leader who tirelessly races around the country from his Virginia base, spreading the word about prevention as a solution. Less Cancer’s base is Rye, New Hampshire.

See Link for more:

http://www.abesmarket.com/blog/health-wellness/what-is-natural-bill-couzens-answers/

Soups On!

Walking the Walk...Talking the Talk

By Bill Couzens

Let me just preface this by saying I understand that not everyone shares identical goals. I also understand that when they share goals it may look different to one person than it does to another - or me. That's why Less Cancer works with everyone, why we avoid the politics as we work to stop cancer before it even takes root. It's why as founders of National Cancer Prevention Day, on Feb. 4, we have communities across American looking to include prevention in the cancer conversation.

Not long ago, I wrote something about taking a look at cancer prevention and what it really looked like. I wrote that getting a handle on reducing the risk of cancer will require everyone to live differently. Shifting to prevention requires us to reorder how our culture prioritizes money, human health and the environment. As a culture, we have looked the other way as profit rose above human health and the environment.

When we started our organization in 2004, we knew because of simple Internet searches that the phrase "less cancer" was rarely, if ever, used. The two words - "less" and "cancer" - almost never appeared in the same paragraph, much less side-by-side. The idea of prevention was pretty new, and the focus had always been on fighting cancer, on beating it. Never on Less Cancer.

Recently, I stumbled across a news item about a bald Barbie doll, made by Mattel and inspired by a grassroots movement and online petition. I am grateful to Mattel for the "bald" Barbie, which certainly will comfort children losing their hair.

Not to take away from the good work and intentions of the people putting this doll out, but the doll strikes me as an unbearably sad monument to children with cancer. We now actually need a bald Barbie. Cancer-aware toys? For me, the bald Barbie symbolizes the work that still needs doing. Let's make it so we don't need a post-chemotherapy doll. Too much cancer. Too many children. It's not supposed to be this way. We set the goal to reduce cancer in 2004, and the doll shows how far we have yet to travel.

Childhood leukemia and brain cancer have increased sharply in incidence. Between 1975 and 2004, among children 14 years and younger, primary brain cancer increased by nearly 40 percent and leukemia by over 60 percent. Cancer is now the second leading cause of death for children in the US, exceeded only by injury.(Mt. Sinai Children's Environmental Health Center)

While researching bald Barbie, the stream of information diverted me to another story. I came across the American Cancer Society blog "Choose You." When you sign up there, you receive a flower pin as a reminder to women of the organization's new commitment to health. I thought, "Great, they are getting on board to raise cancer prevention awareness. They are putting out information that can actually reduce health risks."

Soon, though, I noticed this on on the site: the Society began recruiting, in 1959, 1 million men and women to help uncover the harmful effects of smoking on health. Participation also led to a better understanding of the harms of being overweight and obesity.

That confused me. If in 1959 we understood obesity was a health risk, why has childhood obesity in the United States more than tripled between the 1970′s and 2004? What happened?

It's confusing because we know the Department of Health and Human Services reports that food and beverage advertisers collectively spend $10 to $12 billion annually to reach children and youth. More than $1 billion is spent on media advertising to children, and another $4.5 billion is spent on youth-targeted public relations. Wait, there's more: $3 billion is spent on packaging designed for children.

Enter SPRITE, the sponsor branded on the American Cancer Society's "You Choose" landing page.

SPRITE is a Coca-Cola product, according to the Livestrong website (a site that also reports on nutritional merits of McDonald's... seemingly an oxymoron). A 12-oz. can of Coca-Cola Classic contains 41 g of sugars, according to the Harvard School of Public Health, or HSPH. Put another way, a can of Coke contains about 10 tsp. of sugar.

Anyway, one part of me wants to high-five the American Cancer Society for working to reduce calorie intake at a time when so many people are struggling with obesity.

Then there's this: upon seeing the Sprite Zero logo, I also noticed a FACTS page about aspartame. Maybe it's the cynic in me, but I felt the disappointment well up inside. I wondered what this confusing and controversial issue of aspartame was doing on the American Cancer Society site. This site is for women. Does anyone really know all the effects of aspartame on the fetus, much less a fully-baked adult? Maybe so. Maybe they have all the answers they need.
Clearly, this is no accident that the soda maker, an ACS prevention blog sponsor, also has a fact page on aspartame. Is this a campaign for SPRITE or really about cancer prevention? Is this any different than Kentucky Fried Chicken or Pepperidge Farm sponsoring Susan G Komen Race for the Cure? Do any of these sponsorships really pass the red face test?

In any case, SPRITE ZERO does not seem to be a Less Cancer drink choice. It does not strike me as a beverage to reduce risk.

But maybe this is the way we should be doing business? I stare at the branding - no doubt, pricey - and wonder what Phillip Morris would pay to teach our non-smoking programs. What if I got McDonald's to teach our nutrition classes? Who would that help? What would that prevent?

I wonder if we are all walking the walk and talking the talk. I do not think so.

Post By Bill Couzens, Founder Less Cancer

Thank You Mattel !

Bald Barbie

This is a doll I think will make all the difference to children in the cancer fight.

This is a doll that will help comfort and support a child while losing their hair.

I remember my friend shaving his head in a show of solidarity for his son that sadly lost the battle to cancer. It meant everything to that boy.

I am grateful to Mattel for providing this support to families with children battling cancer I know first hand what it can mean to a child a fighting cancer.

Though at the same time I am also saddened that now we need a bald Barbie.

So now here we are in the year 2012 and looking back when Richard Nixon first launched the War on Cancer in 1971 we have suffered untold incidences of cancer and spent billions of dollars on research. For me it seems we live in a time when cancer has become so commonplace that the news of new cases seems almost expected.

Brain cancer has increased by nearly 40%, and leukemia by over 60% in children under 14 Between 1975 and 2004. (Source
Mt. Sinai Children's Environmental Health Center.)

Our work for Less Cancer is all about the Next Generation - Less incidences of cancer. While we are so grateful for Mattel doing all they can to comfort children and families in the cancer battle -I am also interested in seeing prevention be part of the cancer conversation.



http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/health/2012/03/29/mattel-to-produce-bald-friend-of-barbie/


Mattel, the maker of Barbie, will produce a bald fashion doll for children who have lost their hair because of illness or cancer, the company announced today.

“These dolls, which will be a friend of Barbie, will be distributed exclusively to children’s hospitals and other hospitals treating children with cancer throughout the U.S. and Canada, directly reaching girls who are most affected by hair loss,” said Mattel Company spokesman Alan Hilowitz in a statement.

The announcement comes after a Facebook movement urging Mattel to produce a bald version of its famously blonde Barbie doll earlier this year. To date, the page has had more than 150,000 “likes.”

The bald doll would include “hats, scarves and other fashion accessories to provide girls with a traditional fashion play experience. For those girls who choose, the wigs and head coverings can be interchanged or completely removed.”

Bill Couzens Speaks at the Foxcroft Less Cancer Walkathon


While Bill Couzens, Founder Less Cancer was sending off participants for the Foxcroft School Less Cancer Walkathon- actress Fran Drescher Founder of Cancer Schmancer was Facebooking and Tweeting the Junior Class of the Foxcroft School well wishes.

See More at this link.
http://news.yahoo.com/less-cancers-founder-bill-couzens-commends-foxcroft-schools-072746424.html

Bill Couzens Founder Less Cancer

Foxcroft School -Less Cancer Walkathon

http://goodnewsplanet.com/march-walkathon-for-less-cancer/

Foxcroft School Walk-A-Thon Benefiting Less Cancer was Friday, March 30. Walkers, runners and cyclists participated in the five-mile trek, which started at Brick House on the campus of the Middleburg, Virginia school. Participants were asked to wear green the Less Cancer color for prevention.