Originally posted by ReeVeeR
Pharmacists give themselves cancer from dispensing toxic chemotherapy chemicals!
One of the side effects of chemotherapy is, ironically, cancer. The cancer doctors don't say much about it, but it's printed right on the chemo
drug warning labels (in small print, of course). If you go into a cancer treatment clinic with one type of cancer, and you allow yourself to be
injected with chemotherapy chemicals, you will often develop a second type of cancer as a result. Your oncologist will often claim to have
successfully treated your first cancer even while you develop a second or third cancer directly caused by the chemo used to treat the original
There's nothing like cancer-causing chemotherapy to boost repeat business, huh?
During all this, the pharmacists are peddling these toxic chemotherapy chemicals to their customers as if they were medicine (which they aren't).
While preparing these toxic chemical prescriptions, it turns out that pharmacists are exposing themselves to cancer-causing chemotherapy agents in the
process. And because of that, pharmacists are giving themselves cancer... and they're dying from it.
Why pharmacists are dying of cancer
People who live in glass houses should never throw stones, they say. And you might similarly say that pharmacists who deal in poison shouldn't be
surprised to one day discover they are killing themselves with it.
Chemotherapy drugs are extremely toxic to the human body, and they are readily absorbed through the skin. The very idea that they are even used in
modern medicine is almost laughable if it weren't so downright disturbing and sad that hundreds of thousands of people are killed each year around
the world by chemotherapy drugs.
Now you can add pharmacists to that statistic. For decades, they simply looked the other way, pretending they were playing a valuable role in our
system of "modern" medicine, not admitting they were actually doling out chemicals that killed people. Now, the sobering truth has struck them hard:
They are in the business of death, and it is killing them off, one by one.
The Seattle Times now reports the story of Sue Crump, a veteran pharmacist of two decades who spent much of her time dispensing chemotherapy drugs.
Sue died last September of pancreatic cancer, and one of her dying wishes was that the truth would be told about how her on-the-job exposure to
chemotherapy chemicals contributed to her own cancer.
The Occupational Safety and Health Association (OSHA), it turns out, does not regulate workplace exposure to toxic, cancer-causing chemotherapy
chemicals. At first glance, that seems surprising, since OSHA regulates workplace exposure to far less harmful chemicals. Why not chemo?
The answer is because the toxicity of chemotherapy has long been ignored by virtually everyone in medicine and the federal government. It has always
been assumed harmless or even "safe" just because it's used as a kind of far-fetched "medicine" to treat cancer. This, despite the fact that
chemotherapy is a derivative of the mustard gas used against enemy soldiers in World War I. Truthfully, chemotherapy has more in common with chemicals
weapons than any legitimate medicine.
So today, while workers are protected from secondhand smoke in offices across the country, pharmacists are still being exposed every single day to
toxic, cancer-causing chemicals that OSHA seems to just ignore. The agency has only issued one citation in the last decade to a hospital for
inadequate safety handling of toxic chemotherapy drugs.
As the Seattle Times reports, "A just-completed study from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control (CDC) -- 10 years in the making and the largest to
date -- confirms that chemo continues to contaminate the work spaces where it's used and in some cases is still being found in the urine of those who
Full article here.
Fearmongering. My son was diagnosed with cancer when he was 3, and I am in the medical field. Now on to your comments. Chemotherapy refers to and
chemical used to treat cancer. Any chemical. There are only 9 chemo drugs which are known carcinogens. And they are heavy duty medications. Not
all chemo drugs have the potential to cause cancer. And jsut because something is a carcinogen doesn't mean it will give you cancer, it simply
increases your risk.
As far as saying that if you are treated with chemo you will often develop a 2nd or 3rd type of cancer because of the chemo is an outright lie.
Hundreds of thousands of people are not killed by chemo drugs each year. 500,000 people die a year from cancer in the US. And for the past several
years that number has been dropping. The 5 yr survival rate from 96-2006 is 66% compared to 51% 30 years ago.
As far as OSHA not having guidelines:
HAZARD DEFINITION BASED ON PHARMACOLOGY/TOXICOLOGY.
Professional judgment by personnel trained in pharmacology/toxicology is essential in designating drugs as hazardous, and reference 65 provides
information regarding the development of such a list at one institution. Some drugs, which have a long history of safe use in humans despite in vitro
or animal evidence of toxicity, may be excluded by the institution's experts by considerations such as those used to formulate GRAS (Generally
Regarded As Safe) lists by the FDA under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Act. In contrast, investigational drugs are new chemicals for which there is
often little information on potential toxicity. Structure or activity relationships with similar chemicals and in vitro data can be considered in
determining potential toxic effects. Investigational drugs should be prudently handled as HD's unless adequate information becomes available to
Some major considerations by professionals trained in pharmacology/toxicology65 in designating a drug as hazardous are:
Is the drug designated as Therapeutic Category 10:00 (Antineoplastic Agent) in the American Hospital Formulary Service Drug Information?68
Does the manufacturer suggest the use of special isolation techniques in its handling, administration, or disposal?
Is the drug known to be a human mutagen, carcinogen, teratogen or reproductive toxicant?
Is the drug known to be carcinogenic or teratogenic in animals (drugs known to be mutagenic in multiple bacterial systems or animals should also be
Is the drug known to be acutely toxic to an organ system?
And just for reference the study regarding contamination of pharmacists and medical professionals handling chemo meds was not completed. It was put
on hold. Twice. So there are no statistics to validate your comments.
Most antichemo articles come from the alternative medicine crowd. WHy do they rip chemo? Because it works? Without chemo and radiation(and its
derivatives) do you have any idea what the mortality rate for cancer would be?
Here is a list of all chemo drugs. Remember only 9 are known to be carcinogenic. And the people getting those heavy duty meds probably aren't
expecting to live long enough for a secondary cancer to possibly develop 20 years later.
Educate yourself with something other than herbal remedy quacks.