Tag Archives: Cancer

U.S. Justice Ginsburg released from hospital after cancer surgery

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Supreme Court Associate Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg is seen during a group portrait session for the new full court at the Supreme Court in Washington, U.S., November 30, 2018. REUTERS/Jim Young/File Photo

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, 85, has been released from the hospital after undergoing cancer surgery, a court spokeswoman said on Wednesday.

“Justice Ginsburg was discharged from the hospital yesterday and is recuperating at home,” spokeswoman Kathy Arberg said in a statement.

The liberal justice underwent surgery at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center in New York on Friday to remove two cancerous nodules in her left lung.

There was no evidence of any remaining disease after the removal of the two nodules, both of which were found to be cancerous, Arberg said on Friday, citing the thoracic surgeon, Dr. Valerie Rusch. No further treatment was planned, she said.

Ginsburg, one of the court’s nine justices, broke three ribs in a fall last month. The nodules were found as part of the tests the justice underwent after the fall, Arberg said.

As the oldest justice, Ginsburg is closely watched for any signs of deteriorating health. Ginsburg, appointed by Democratic President Bill Clinton in 1993, also is the senior liberal member of the court, which has a 5-4 conservative majority.

If she were unable to continue serving, Republican President Donald Trump could replace her with a conservative, further shifting the court to the right. Trump already has put two conservatives on the court since becoming president in January 2017 and a potentially dominant 6-3 conservative majority would have major consequences for issues including abortion, the death penalty, voting rights, gay rights and religious liberty.

Ginsburg has recovered from previous medical issues. She was treated in 1999 for colon cancer and again in 2009 for pancreatic cancer but did not miss any argument sessions either time. In 2014, doctors placed a stent in her right coronary artery to improve blood flow after she reported discomfort following routine exercise. She was released from a hospital the next day.

The justices are scheduled to hear their next round of arguments on Jan. 7.

In recent years she has become something of a cult figure for liberals and known by the nickname “Notorious RBG,” after the late rapper Notorious BIG.

A documentary film, “RBG,” was released earlier this year and a feature film about her life, “On the Basis of Sex,” made its debut in theaters this week.

(Reporting by Lawrence Hurley; Writing by Mohammad Zargham; Editing by Tim Ahmann and Bill Trott)

U.S. judge affirms Monsanto weed-killer verdict, slashes damages

Monsanto's Roundup weedkiller atomizers are displayed for sale at a garden shop near Brussels, Belgium November 27, 2017. REUTERS/Yves Herman

By Tina Bellon

(Reuters) – A U.S. judge on Monday affirmed a verdict against Bayer AG unit Monsanto that found its glyphosate-based weed-killers responsible for a man’s terminal cancer, sending the German company’s shares down 8 percent.

In a ruling by San Francisco’s Superior Court of California, Judge Suzanne Bolanos said she would slash the punitive damages award to $39 million from $250 million if lawyers for school groundskeeper Dewayne Johnson agreed.

Bayer said in a statement the decision to reduce the damages was a step in the right direction, but it would still file an appeal with the California Court of Appeal because the verdict was not supported by the evidence presented at the trial.

“According to an earlier hearing, the judge toyed with the idea of dropping the damages altogether,” brokerage alpha said in a note to clients. “Now, however, the judge made a U-turn and confirmed the jury’s previous verdict.”

Monsanto, which denies the allegations, had asked the judge to throw out the entire original $289 million verdict or order a new trial on the punitive damages portion.

A jury on Aug. 10 found the company’s glyphosate-based weed-killers, including RoundUp and Ranger Pro, had caused Johnson’s cancer and that the company failed to warn consumers about the risks.

The verdict wiped 10 percent off the value of the company and marked the first such decision against Monsanto, which faces more than 8,000 similar lawsuits in the United States.

Plaintiff Dewayne Johnson leaves the courtroom following a post-trial hearing at the Superior Court in San Francisco, California, U.S., October 10, 2018. REUTERS/Jim Christie

Plaintiff Dewayne Johnson leaves the courtroom following a post-trial hearing at the Superior Court in San Francisco, California, U.S., October 10, 2018. REUTERS/Jim Christie

The German company, which bought Monsanto this year for $63 billion, says decades of scientific studies and real-world use have shown glyphosate to be safe for human use.

Lawyers for Johnson in a statement on Monday said they were still reviewing whether to accept the reduced award or retry the punitive damages portion.

“The evidence presented to this jury was, quite frankly, overwhelming,” the lawyers said.

The amount of punitive damages is limited by law, and Bolanos said California’s constitution did not permit a higher award. If Johnson accepts the reduced damages, the final verdict would order Monsanto to pay a total of $78 million, split equally between compensatory and punitive damages.

Bolanos’ Monday decision is a turnaround from a previous tentative ruling she issued on Oct. 10.

In that preliminary order, Bolanos said she was considering ordering a new trial on punitive damages, saying Johnson had failed to meet his burden of producing clear and convincing evidence of malice or oppression by Monsanto, a requirement for allowing a jury to award punitive damages.

But following that tentative ruling, at least five of the jurors who delivered the Aug. 10 verdict sent letters to the judge, urging her to uphold their decision. Bolanos did not directly refer to the jurors’ letters in her Monday ruling but said the jury was entitled to its findings.

In September 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency concluded a decades-long assessment of glyphosate risks and found that the chemical was not a likely carcinogen to humans.

However, in 2015, the cancer unit of the World Health Organisation classified glyphosate as “probably carcinogenic to humans.”

Johnson’s case, filed in 2016, was fast-tracked for trial due to the severity of his non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, a cancer of the lymph system, that he alleged was caused by years of glyphosate exposure.

(Additional reporting by Ismail Shakil in Bengaluru and Arno Schuetze in Frankfurt; editing by Robert Birsel)

Three decades after nuclear disaster, Chernobyl goes solar

Visitors walk past solar panels at a solar power plant built on the site of the world's worst nuclear disaster, Chernobyl, Ukraine October 5, 2015. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich

By Pavel Polityuk

CHERNOBYL, Ukraine (Reuters) – Ukraine unveiled a solar plant in Chernobyl on Friday, just across from where a power station, now encased in a giant sarcophagus, caused the world’s worst nuclear disaster three decades ago.

A new Safe Confinement arch covering the damaged fourth reactor of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant is seen near a newly built solar power plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine October 5, 2018. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich

A new Safe Confinement arch covering the damaged fourth reactor of the Chernobyl nuclear power plant is seen near a newly built solar power plant in Chernobyl, Ukraine October 5, 2018. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich

Built in a contaminated area, which remains largely uninhabitable and where visitors are accompanied by guides carrying radiation meters, 3,800 panels produce energy to power 2,000 apartments.

In April 1986, a botched test at reactor number 4 at the Soviet plant sent clouds of nuclear material billowing across Europe and forced tens of thousands of people to evacuate.

Thirty-one plant workers and firemen died in the immediate aftermath of the accident, mostly from acute radiation sickness.

Thousands more later succumbed to radiation-related illnesses such as cancer, although the total death toll and long-term health effects remain a subject of intense debate.

“It’s not just another solar power plant,” Evhen Variagin, the chief executive of Solar Chernobyl LLC, told reporters. “It’s really hard to underestimate the symbolism of this particular project.”

The one-megawatt solar plant is a joint project by Ukrainian company Rodina and Germany’s Enerparc AG, costing around 1 million euros ($1.2 million) and benefiting from feed-in tariffs that guarantee a certain price for power.

An employee walks past solar panels at a solar power plant built on the site of the world's worst nuclear disaster, Chernobyl, Ukraine October 5, 2015. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich

An employee walks past solar panels at a solar power plant built on the site of the world’s worst nuclear disaster, Chernobyl, Ukraine October 5, 2015. REUTERS/Gleb Garanich

It is the first time the site has produced power since 2000, when the nuclear plant was finally shut down. Valery Seyda, head of the Chernobyl nuclear plant, said it had looked like the site would never produce energy again.

“But now we are seeing a new sprout, still small, weak, producing power on this site and this is very joyful,” he said.

Two years ago, a giant arch weighing 36,000 tonnes was pulled over the nuclear power station to create a casement to block radiation and allow the remains of the reactor to be dismantled safely.

It comes at a time of sharply increasing investment in renewables in Ukraine. Between January and September, more than 500 MW of renewable power capacity was added in the country, more than twice as much as in 2017, the government says.

Yulia Kovaliv, who heads the Office of the National Investment Council of Ukraine, said investors want to reap the benefits from a generous subsidy scheme before parliament is due to vote on scrapping it in July next year.

“Investors expect that in the renewable energy sector facilities launched before 2019 will operate on the current (beneficial) system of green tariffs,” she told Reuters on the sidelines of a conference in Odessa in September.

“And that is why investors want to buy ready-to-build projects in order to complete construction before that time.”

(Additional reporting by Natalia Zinets in Odessa; writing by Matthias Williams; Editing by Dale Hudson)

In Missouri, J&J faces biggest trial yet alleging talc caused cancer

FILE PHOTO: A Johnson & Johnson building is shown in Irvine, California, U.S., January 24, 2017. REUTERS/Mike Blake/File Photo

By Tina Bellon

NEW YORK (Reuters) – A lawsuit by 22 ovarian cancer patients against Johnson & Johnson went to trial on Wednesday in Missouri state court, marking the largest case the company has faced over allegations its talc-based products contain cancer-causing asbestos.

The women and their families suing in the Circuit Court of the City of St. Louis say decades-long use of J&J’s Baby Powder and other cosmetic talc products caused their disease. They allege the company knew its talc was contaminated with asbestos since at least the 1970s but failed to warn consumers about the risks.

J&J denies both that its talc products cause cancer and that they ever contained asbestos.

J&J is battling some 9,000 cases brought by users of its Baby Powder and Shower to Shower talc products, the latter of which was sold to Valeant Pharmaceuticals in 2012.

The majority of those lawsuits claim talc caused ovarian cancer in women who used it for feminine hygiene. A smaller number of cases allege talc contaminated by asbestos in the mining process caused mesothelioma, a tissue cancer closely linked to asbestos exposure.

The cases that went to trial on Wednesday effectively combine those claims by alleging the women’s ovarian cancer was caused by asbestos in J&J talc products.

J&J lawyer Peter Bicks told the jury on Wednesday that the causes for ovarian cancer are often unknown, according to an online broadcast of the trial by Courtroom View Network.

He said gene mutations and a family history of cancer played an important role and that asbestos was not known to cause ovarian cancer.

Bicks added that testing done by independent laboratories, universities, government agencies, talc suppliers and J&J itself has shown that there is no asbestos in the company’s talc.

But plaintiff’s lawyer Mark Lanier said asbestos and talc, which are closely linked minerals, are intermingled in the mining process, making it impossible to remove the carcinogenic substance. Lanier said there was “no doubt” that talc caused his clients’ ovarian cancer.

“This case is as simple as asbestos breathed in or put inside of you,” Lanier told the jury.

J&J has lost two talc mesothelioma jury trials in the past weeks. Those cases are currently under appeal.

Juries in California and Missouri have also issued verdicts in ovarian cancer cases totaling more than $720 million in damages. Those decisions have either been tossed out or are still under appeal.

(Reporting by Tina Bellon; Editing by Cynthia Osterman)

J&J Baby Powder litigation takes new focus with asbestos claims

FILE PHOTO: Bottles of Johnson & Johnson baby powder line a drugstore shelf in New York October 15, 2015. REUTERS/Lucas Jackson/File Photo

By Tina Bellon

NEW YORK (Reuters) – A $117 million verdict against Johnson & Johnson and a supplier in favor of a man who said his asbestos-related cancer was caused by long-term use of J&J’s Baby Powder could open a new front for thousands of cases claiming the widely-used product caused cancer, legal experts and plaintiffs lawyers said.

J&J has been battling some 6,000 cases claiming its baby powder and Shower to Shower products cause ovarian cancer. The $117 million verdict by a New Jersey jury last week, however, involved a different form of cancer that is clearly linked to asbestos.

Plaintiffs lawyers claim that internal J&J documents seen in that trial show that baby powder had been contaminated with asbestos. They now plan to use the documents in upcoming ovarian cancer trials to allege that the asbestos contamination also caused that form of cancer.

J&J and Imerys Talc America, a unit of Imerys SA, have vowed to appeal the New Jersey verdict and deny asbestos has ever been present in their products or that their talc can cause any form of cancer.

The case of Stephen Lanzo, a New Jersey resident who claimed he developed mesothelioma after using baby powder since his birth in 1972, was the first time a jury saw the internal J&J documents which plaintiffs claim show that J&J knew since the 1970s that the talc in its baby powder was contaminated by asbestos during the mining process.

J&J says the documents present no such evidence, but merely show the company’s caution.

Peter Bicks, a lawyer leading J&J’s talc asbestos defense, said that in the early 1970s, the company was looking at how it could potentially remove asbestos from talc if the two became intermingled in the mining process. He says no contamination was ever found, citing decades of testing by independent laboratories and scientists.

Bicks called the claims of a link between talc and asbestos “junk science.”

Mesothelioma, a rare and deadly form of cancer closely associated with exposure to asbestos, affects the delicate tissue that lines body cavities.

While the link between asbestos and mesothelioma is sufficiently established, scientists are divided on whether asbestos exposure can cause ovarian cancer. Some studies have shown an association between the two, while other studies have found no such link.

Elizabeth Burch, holder of the Charles H. Kirbo Chair of Law at the University of Georgia, said it remained an open question whether talc contained asbestos and that each case would turn on the facts.

But J&J, which had $76.5 billion in sales in 2017, gives the plaintiffs’ bar an enticing new target, said Nathan Schachtman, a lecturer at Columbia University who used to defend asbestos cases.

Some 3,000 people are diagnosed with mesothelioma each year, according to the American Cancer Society, a number that Howard Erichson, a law professor at Fordham University who specializes in mass tort litigation, called significant from a legal standpoint.

But the roughly 22,000 women who were diagnosed with ovarian cancer last year, according to the National Cancer Institute, provide lawyers with a potentially much larger pool of plaintiffs to tap.

“This is just the tip of the iceberg,” said Mark Lanier, one of the lawyers representing consumers, who said plaintiffs would file thousands of additional mesothelioma and ovarian cancer cases.

New Jersey-based J&J in a statement after the Lanzo verdict said plaintiffs’ attorneys had shifted their strategy to focus on asbestos after a series of losses at trial and in court rulings over previous allegations that the talc itself causes cancer.

Of the six ovarian cancer trials to date, juries found J&J liable five times, but a Missouri appellate court threw out the first verdict and a California judge tossed another. Appeals of the other cases are pending.

J&J in November also won the first trial over allegations that its talc contained asbestos and caused a woman’s mesothelioma. Plaintiffs lawyers say the jury in that case did not see the documents presented during the Lanzo trial.

But Erichson said the widespread use of J&J’s consumer products generally make the company an attractive litigation target.

“Baby powder is as ubiquitous a product you can think of and there are lots of people who can testify they’ve been exposed to it,” he said.

(Reporting by Tina Bellon; editing by Noeleen Walder and Leslie Adler)

Starbucks coffee in California must have cancer warning, judge says

FILE PHOTO - A woman holds a Frappuccino at a Starbucks store inside the Tom Bradley terminal at LAX airport in Los Angeles, California, United States, October 27, 2015. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson

By Nate Raymond

(Reuters) – Starbucks Corp and other coffee sellers must put a cancer warning on coffee sold in California, a Los Angeles judge has ruled, possibly exposing the companies to millions of dollars in fines.

A little-known not-for-profit group sued some 90 coffee retailers, including Starbucks, on grounds they were violating a California law requiring companies to warn consumers of chemicals in their products that could cause cancer.

One of those chemicals is acrylamide, a byproduct of roasting coffee beans that is present in high levels in brewed coffee.

Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Elihu Berle said in a decision dated Wednesday that Starbucks and other companies had failed to show there was no significant risk from a carcinogen produced in the coffee roasting process, court documents showed.

Starbucks and other defendants have until April 10 to file objections to the decision.

Starbucks declined to comment, referring reporters to a statement by the National Coffee Association (NCA) that said the industry was considering an appeal and further legal actions.

“Cancer warning labels on coffee would be misleading. The U.S. government’s own Dietary Guidelines state that coffee can be part of a healthy lifestyle,” the NCA statement said.

In his decision, Berle said: “Defendants failed to satisfy their burden of proving by a preponderance of evidence that consumption of coffee confers a benefit to human health.”

Officials from Dunkin’ Donuts, McDonald’s Corp, Peet’s and other big coffee sellers did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

The lawsuit was filed in 2010 by the Council for Education and Research on Toxics (CERT). It calls for fines as large as $2,500 per person for every exposure to the chemical since 2002 at the defendants’ shops in California. Any civil penalties, which will be decided in a third phase of the trial, could be huge in California, which has a population of nearly 40 million.

CERT’s lawyer Raphael Metzger did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Starbucks lost the first phase of the trial in which it failed to show the level of acrylamide in coffee was below that which would pose a significant risk of cancer. In the second phase of the trial, defendants failed to prove there was an acceptable “alternative” risk level for the carcinogen, court documents showed.

Several defendants in the case settled before Wednesday’s decision, agreeing to post signage about the cancer-linked chemical and pay millions in fines, according to published reports.

(Reporting by Nate Raymond; Additional reporting by Lisa Baertlein; Writing by Andrew Hay; Editing by Richard Chang and Leslie Adler)

Senator McCain diagnosed with aggressive brain cancer

FILE PHOTO: U.S. Senator John McCain attends a news conference at the Benjamin Franklin Library in Mexico City, Mexico December 20, 2016. REUTERS/Henry Romero/File Photo

By Patricia Zengerle

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – U.S. Senator John McCain, the 2008 Republican presidential nominee known for political independence during more than three decades in the Senate, has been diagnosed with an aggressive form of brain cancer, his office said on Wednesday.

The 80-year-old lawmaker and former Navy pilot, who was re-elected to a sixth Senate term in November, has been recovering at home in Arizona since undergoing surgery at the Mayo Clinic in Phoenix last Friday to remove a blood clot from above his left eye.

Tissue analysis since that procedure revealed that a brain tumor known as a glioblastoma was associated with the clot, his office said.

McCain’s doctors said he was recovering from surgery “amazingly well” and that his underlying health was excellent. Treatment options include a combination of chemotherapy and radiation.

However, glioblastoma is considered a grade IV tumor, the most malignant of gliomas. Medical experts said it can be very aggressive and spread into other parts of the brain quickly.

“It takes people’s lives almost uniformly … The tumor cells are very resistant to conventional therapy, such as radiation and chemotherapy. It’s a poor prognosis,” said Dr. Richard Ellenbogen, who chairs the Department of Neurological Surgery at the University of Washington.

McCain’s daughter, Meghan McCain, said the family was shocked by the diagnosis but that her father was the “most confident and calm” of them all as he prepared for a new battle against cancer.

McCain has had non-invasive melanomas removed at least three times. He also overcame injuries suffered as a prisoner of war in Vietnam, where he endured beatings and torture by his North Vietnamese captors.

Questions about McCain’s health arose during a recent Senate hearing when the lawmaker, normally a keen interrogator of witnesses, rambled during questioning of former FBI Director James Comey. His doctors told CNN on Wednesday, however, that he had no sign of neurological impairment before or during his surgery.

His fellow members of Congress rushed to offer tributes to McCain and wishes for his quick recovery. Known for an independent political streak, ready wit and strong opinions, McCain is one of the best-known and most popular U.S. lawmakers among his peers and the media.

Senator Lindsey Graham, a long-time friend, said McCain was “resolved and determined” when they spoke by telephone. “This disease has never had a more worthy opponent.”

While known as a fierce advocate for strong U.S. military action overseas, McCain also has a reputation for working with Democrats on issues from clamping down on campaign finance abuses to immigration reform. This week, McCain called for a bipartisan approach to overhauling the U.S. healthcare system.

‘GIVE IT HELL, JOHN’

“Senator John McCain has always been a fighter,” said President Donald Trump. “Get well soon.”

Former Democratic President Barack Obama, who defeated McCain for the White House in 2008, called McCain “an American hero and one of the bravest fighters I’ve ever known. Cancer doesn’t know what it’s up against. Give it hell, John.”

McCain was one of Congress’ most vocal critics of Obama’s foreign policy, but he has also raised questions about Trump, a fellow Republican.

McCain found himself to be a brief side issue in the race for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination when he criticized Trump, who responded by saying McCain was not a war hero because he had been captured by the Vietnamese.

Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell called McCain, the chairman of the Armed Services Committee, a hero and said he looked forward to having him back in Washington.

McCain, the son and grandson of admirals, was a U.S. Navy pilot. His plane was shot down over Vietnam in 1967 and he spent 5-1/2 years as a prisoner of war.

One of McCain’s proudest moments as a U.S. senator was working to pass legislation banning torture in 2015.

When he was offered release because of his father’s rank, McCain refused to be freed before those who had been held captive longer. He finally returned to the United States in 1973, with other prisoners of war.

McCain’s absence this week has complicated efforts by Trump and his fellow Republicans to repeal Obama’s Affordable Care Act, popularly known as Obamacare. McCain’s absence from Washington makes it difficult for McConnell to gather the 50 votes he needs in a chamber where the party holds only a 52-48-seat margin.

His absence could also complicate progress toward passing the annual National Defense Authorization Act, a $700 billion piece of legislation setting policy for the Department of Defense that must pass every year.

(Reporting by Patricia Zengerle; Additional reporting by Steve Holland, Richard Cowan and Yasmeen Abutaleb in Washington, Eric M. Johnson in Seattle and Dan Whitcomb in Los Angeles; Editing by Kieran Murray and Peter Cooney)

Scientists to test whether Zika can kill brain cancer cells

FILE PHOTO - Genetically modified male Aedes aegypti mosquitoes are pictured at Oxitec factory in Piracicaba, Brazil, October 26, 2016. REUTERS/Paulo Whitaker

By Kate Kelland

LONDON (Reuters) – Scientists in Britain plan to harness the Zika virus to try to kill brain tumor cells in experiments that they say could lead to new ways to fight an aggressive type of cancer.

The research will focus on glioblastoma, the most common form of brain cancer, which has a five-year survival rate of barely 5 percent.

Zika causes severe disability in babies by attacking developing stem cells in the brain – but in adults, whose brains are fully formed, it often causes no more than mild flu-like symptoms.

In glioblastoma, the cancer cells are similar to those in the developing brain, suggesting that the virus could be used to target them while sparing normal adult brain tissue.

Experts say existing treatments have to be given at low doses to avoid damaging healthy tissue.

Researchers led by Harry Bulstrode at Cambridge University will use tumor cells in the lab and in mice to assess Zika’s potential.

The mosquito-borne virus has spread to more than 60 countries and territories in a global outbreak that was first identified in Brazil in 2015.

“Zika virus infection in babies and children is a major global health concern, and the focus has been to discover more about the virus to find new possible treatments,” Bulstrode said in a statement.

“We’re taking a different approach, and want to use these new insights to see if the virus can be unleashed against one of the hardest-to-treat cancers …

“We hope to show that the Zika virus can slow down brain tumor growth in tests in the lab,” Bulstrode added. “If we can learn lessons from Zika’s ability to cross the blood-brain barrier and target brain stem cells selectively, we could be holding the key to future treatments.”

(Editing by Louise Ireland and Kevin Liffey)

Dangerous levels of Chromium-6 in water found in all 50 states

Refreshing Drinking water

By Kami Klein

Millions of Americans in all 50 states are drinking water with a dangerous amount of Chromium 6, a known cancer causing chemical that has a huge list of potential health hazards. This is the damaging chemical that was the focus in California 25 years ago in the profound and popular true life movie, Erin Brockovich.  

A new report last month from the nonprofit research group, Environmental Working Group (EWG), analyzed evidence gathered by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) from samples of more than 60,000 water systems in all 50 states between 2013 and 2015.  These samples show that the tap water of 218 million Americans contain high levels of chromium 6. In fact, this carcinogen turned up in as much as two-thirds of our nation’s water supply! These high levels of chromium 6 were deemed unsafe by public health officials. Oklahoma, Arizona and California had the highest average statewide levels of the chemical found in their drinking supply. 

According to the report by EWG, a two-year study by the National Toxicology Program found that drinking water with chromium-6, or hexavalent chromium, caused cancer in laboratory rats and mice. The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment concluded that ingestion of even tiny amounts of chromium-6 can cause cancer in people, by using this report along with other animal studies. This conclusion was affirmed by state scientists in New Jersey and North Carolina.

In an article released by the Global Healing Center , Chromium 6 was ranked #16 out of the top 275 most toxic substances found by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.

Health Problems from Chromium-6

Studies of chromium-6 have established that breathing the particles can cause lung cancer. The chemical has also been connected to liver damage, reproductive problems, developmental harm, blood anemia, and cancer according to the EWG. Chromium-6 presents greater risks to infants and children, people who take antacids, and people with poorly functioning livers.

How did chromium-6 get into our water supply?  

According to Live Science, Chromium is an odorless and tasteless metallic element that can be found naturally in rocks, plants, soil and volcanic dust and animals. Chromium-6, however, is a toxic form of the mineral. While this form does occur naturally in the environment, chromium-6 is mostly produced by industrial waste processes. The EPA has reported many instances of chromium-6 being released into the environment from industrial pollution — leakage, poor storage, or inadequate industrial waste disposal practices.

How much chromium-6 is it safe to consume?

According to the EWG article, the California scientists set a public health goal of 0.02 parts per billion in tap water, the level that would pose negligible risk over a lifetime of consumption. This means that the amount posed no more than a one-in-a-million risk of cancer for people who drink it daily for 70 years. (A part per billion is about a drop of water in an Olympic-size swimming pool.) But in 2014, after aggressive lobbying by industry and water utilities, California State regulators adopted a legal limit 500 times the public health goal at 10 ppg. Far lower than any other state, but still not the scientists’ public health goal. It is the only enforceable drinking water standard specifically for hexavalent chromium (chromium 6), not total chromium at either a state or federal level.  

The U.S. Environmental Protection agency has set a maximum contaminant level of 100 parts per billion for total chromium in drinking water. Numerous states have established limits of 50 parts per billion of total chromium in drinking water. For water control standards, they are combining the natural levels of chromium and the toxic form  Chromium 6 into one category.

Comparing the public health goal to levels of contamination found in the EPA tests, EWG estimates that if left untreated, chromium-6 in tap water will cause more than 12,000 excess cases of cancer by the end of the century.

In an article written by CNN, Bill Walker, co-author of the report and managing editor of the Environmental Working Group said, “These figures may be confusing, but the real point is that chromium-6 is one of many chemicals in our environment.” The group receives grant money from the Turner Foundation, which is chaired by CNN founder Ted Turner, who is no longer involved with the news organization or any Turner entity.

“Americans are exposed to dozens if not hundreds of other cancer-causing chemicals every day in their drinking water, their consumer products and their foods,” Walker said. “And what the best science of the last decade tells us is that these chemicals acting in combination with each other can be more dangerous than exposure to a single chemical.”

How can you filter Chromium 6 and other chemicals from your Drinking water?  

There are many water filtering options out there but experts say that to look explicitly for those that will advertise effective filtering of chromium and chromium 6 (hexavalent chromium).

Is my state included in these water samples?  

There is a very informative map from the EWG showing where the water samples were taken and the results of their testing and evaluation. Not every county was tested.   Contact your health department in your area if you are concerned over your chromium 6 levels and want to find out more!

The quality of the water that we are putting into our bodies, the pureness of water that we encourage in children’s bodies can either mean good health, chronic health problems or even cost you your life. The fight against industrial waste in our water supply continues from the state level to our federal government.

Invest in a good filtering water bottle or system for your home!   Your body will thank you!