Tag: cancer

Doctor warns of ‘cancer tsunami’ as WHO projects sharp rise in cases by 2050

A new report from the World Health Organization warns that the number of people diagnosed with cancer each year is expected to surge over the next quarter-century.

The report projects annual cancer diagnoses will climb from about 20 million today to nearly 35 million by 2050.

While some cancers are declining thanks to prevention efforts, experts warn aging populations, rising obesity rates and other risk factors will place unprecedented pressure on health-care systems around the world.

“We need to focus attention on what some people are calling the cancer tsunami,” said Dr. Peter Stotland, chief of surgery and a surgical oncologist at North York General Hospital.

Stotland told Global News the findings mirror what doctors are already seeing in Canada.

“We’re seeing just higher numbers of people coming in with cancer,” he said, pointing to an aging population that is expected to drive increases in lung, prostate and colorectal cancers.

“I think it’s shocking because this is something that we’re seeing on a regional, provincial level and a national level,” he said.

At the same time, doctors are also seeing more young people diagnosed with colorectal cancer.

“We can be seeing two spikes… one in older people and another in younger people with cancer,” he said. “That’s going to put a lot of stress on the health-care system.”

Keep reading

Study Finds Sunscreen Use Linked to Higher Risk of Multiple Skin Cancers

A UK Biobank study involving over 470,000 people found that individuals who reported using sunscreen more frequently had substantially higher risk of multiple skin cancers — even after researchers accounted for major confounding factors like age, sex, skin type, tanning ability, sunburn history, sunlamp use, and time spent outdoors.

The findings are worrisome:

• MELANOMA: +292% higher risk (RR = 3.92)

• BASAL CELL CARCINOMA: +140% higher risk (RR = 2.40)

• SQUAMOUS CELL CARCINOMA: +126% higher risk (RR = 2.26)

The researchers categorized sun protection habits from “never/rarely” to “always” and found the strongest associations among the most frequent sunscreen users.

In other words: the more sunscreen use reported, the higher the observed skin cancer risk.

This was an observational study, meaning it cannot prove sunscreen directly caused cancer. However, the study was also not a simplistic comparison of random sunscreen users versus non-users. Researchers statistically accounted for many of the biggest known skin cancer risk factors — including skin color, hair color, tanning ability, childhood sunburns, tanning bed exposure, outdoor time, age, and sex.

Even after all of that, the association remained.

Many chemical sunscreens contain hormone disruptors that are rapidly absorbed into the bloodstream, including compounds like oxybenzone, octocrylene, and homosalate.

Some formulations have also been found contaminated with benzene, a known human carcinogen.

And then there is the vitamin D issue. Sunlight is how the human body produces vitamin D, a hormone precursor involved in immune regulation, cellular repair, inflammation control, and cancer defense. People who never receive sunlight exposure without sunscreen are likely to become vitamin D deficient.

That does not mean people should recklessly burn in the sun. Sunburns are clearly harmful. Aim for sensible sunlight exposure — spending enough time in the sun reap the benefits without reaching the point of burning. If you’ll be out in the sun for hours on end during mid summer, consider opting for zinc-based (mineral) sunscreens rather than heavily absorbed chemical formulations.

The takeaway is not to fear sunlight, but to respect it.

Keep reading

Supreme Court ruling blocks thousands of lawsuits against maker of Roundup weedkiller

The Supreme Court sided with the maker of the Roundup weedkiller Thursday in a ruling expected to block thousands of lawsuits alleging it failed to warn people the product could cause cancer.

The case came before the justices after a tidal wave of litigation that included some multibillion-dollar verdicts against the global agrochemical manufacturer Bayer, which acquired Roundup when it bought its original manufacturer Monsanto in 2018.

The decision is a victory for the Trump administration, but one that could be tricky politically since allies in the Make America Healthy Again movement want to rein in pesticide use.

The high court, in a 7-2 ruling, found that the company can’t be sued in state courts because federal regulations have found a cancer link unlikely and do not require a warning label.

The decision “is good for science, farmers, and industries that depend on regulatory clarity for innovation,” Bayer said in a statement. “It should help significantly contain the Roundup litigation after nearly a decade of legal battles.”

Though Bayer said the ruling should result in the dismissal of pending lawsuits containing failure-to-warn allegations, the company said it plans to proceed with a proposed $7.25 billion class-action settlement intended to resolve many of the remaining claims.

Lawyers for some residents pursuing Roundup litigation criticized the court’s decision.

“This Supreme Court ruling wrongly slams the courthouse door on Americans sickened by pesticides,” said attorney Christopher Seeger, who is proposed as a claimants’ representative in the settlement. But he said a settlement still would allow some people to receive compensation.

The case before the Supreme Court was filed by Missouri resident John Durnell. He developed a cancer called non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma after more than 20 years of serving as the neighborhood association’s “spray guy,” using Roundup on parks in his historic St. Louis community.

A jury agreed that the company failed to warn him about possible cancer dangers and awarded him $1.25 million. It’s one of thousands of similar cases, including some multibillion-dollar damage awards.

Keep reading

Five things to know about pesticides, cancer and a pending Supreme Court ruling

After years of lawsuits against agrichemical companies and battles over environmental regulations, the nation’s highest court is expected to rule this summer on a case that could significantly alter the pesticide industry.

The U.S. Supreme Court is expected to rule next month on whether lawsuits can be brought against pesticide and herbicide makers over claims their products have caused cancer. 

The court heard arguments in the case in April, and the justices appeared split.

With a ruling weeks away, here are five things to know about the topic of pesticide use and cancer.

1. Geographic correlation between heavy pesticide use and high cancer rates

Numerous studies and an analysis of federal data have shown a potential correlation between pesticide use and cancer. Out of the 500 U.S. counties with the highest pesticide use per square mile (largely concentrated in corn, soybean and fruit-producing states like Iowa, Illinois, Missouri, California and Florida), 60% have cancer rates higher than the national average of 460 cases per 100,000 people. A 2024 study in Frontiers in Cancer Control and Society suggests the impact of pesticide use on cancer incidence may rival that of smoking.

2. Thousands of lawsuits have been won against agrichemical companies

State courts have also found that correlation credible, as Bayer, the maker of the herbicide Roundup, has lost thousands of cases and agreed to pay more than $12 billion in settlements, including individual jury verdicts such as an initial $2 billion award in California and a recent $1.25 million verdict in Missouri. According to the company, more than 65,000 lawsuits have been filed by farmers, gardeners and other users alleging the chemical caused their cancer.

3. Companies push for ‘liability shields‘

In response to these lawsuits, agrichemical companies have aggressively lobbied for state-level bans on this type of litigation. Often referred to as “liability shield” laws, they would essentially say that because the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has not warned of a link to cancer, state-level claims would be void. Georgia and North Dakota are the only two states that have passed these liability shield laws. 

4. The Trump administration has largely sided with pesticide makers

The push for stricter pesticide regulation has created unusual alliances between left-leaning environmentalists and conservative health advocates under the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) banner. 

After an initial Health and Human Services report linked pesticide overuse to childhood health issues, the agency’s final report last year walked back all regulatory calls and instead pivoted to promote public confidence in current EPA standards. President Trump also signed an executive order this year declaring glyphosate critical to national security, and his administration actively sided with Bayer during oral arguments before the Supreme Court.

In April, MAHA activists celebrated a win after the House voted to remove a pesticide industry-backed provision from its farm bill. The debate is expected to continue as the Senate drafts its own version of the farm bill. 

5. Supreme Court hears arguments on national ‘liability shield’ ban

In April, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments in Monsanto v. Durnell, in which Monsanto (owned by Bayer) argued that because the EPA has ruled glyphosate is unlikely to be carcinogenic, federal law preempts states from requiring cancer warning labels or awarding damages through state juries. A decision is expected in July.

Keep reading

COVID mRNA Vaccines Should Be Pulled Off the Market, Oncologist Says

Medical commentator John Campbell, Ph.D., used a recent U.S. Senate hearing on COVID-19 vaccines, cancer and scientific censorship to spotlight concerns he says have been ignored for years — and to argue that the issue demands a public reckoning.

In a series of videos following the June 3 hearing, Campbell described the proceedings as a “massively under-discussed and under-publicized” examination of “possible links between COVID vaccines and cancer and also the active suppression of medical and scientific information.”

“It really couldn’t be more serious for science,” Campbell said in a June 4 video. “Lies are told, lies have been told and things have been ignored. This has resulted in a greatly reduced trust in mainstream media and institutions.”

Campbell devoted a June 7 video to testimony from oncologist Dr. Angus Dalgleish, whose observations of unusual cancer relapses after COVID-19 booster shots led him to question whether vaccine safety was receiving adequate scientific scrutiny.

Last week’s Senate hearing brought those concerns before lawmakers and examined claims that researchers who raise such questions have faced professional and institutional pushback.

The June 3 hearing, “Plausible Mechanisms of COVID-19 Injections Causing Cancer and Attacks on Scientific Publications,” was held by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, chaired by Sen. Ron Johnson (R-Wis.).

Keep reading

Legal Notice Filed to Force EPA to Set Water Standards for Atrazine, a Pesticide Linked to Cancer

Conservation and public health groups filed a formal notice on Thursday, May 28, with Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin to force the agency to develop water-quality standards for atrazine, a pesticide linked to cancer, according to the groups.

According to the notice, atrazine has been found at dangerous levels in thousands of U.S. waterways and in drinking-water supplies. The filing is a required step before the groups can sue the EPA under the Clean Water Act. [1][2]

Atrazine is the second most widely used pesticide in the United States, with tens of millions of pounds applied annually on corn and other crops. The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2025 classified atrazine as “probably carcinogenic to humans,” according to a report from NaturalNews.com. [2] Since 1999, cancer has been the leading cause of premature death in the United States for those under age 85, according to the book “Taking Action, Saving Lives” by Kristin Shrader-Frechette. [3]

The herbicide is banned in more than 60 countries due to links to birth defects, cancers and fertility problems, reported Children’s Health Defense. [4] Atrazine has been shown to disrupt endocrine systems and cause reproductive abnormalities in wildlife, including turning male frogs into hermaphrodites, according to a 2007 report from NaturalNews.com. [5]

The 1972 Clean Water Act regulates discharges into U.S. waterways, but toxic runoff from agriculture continues to pollute, according to a Frontline report cited by Mercola.com. [6] The act requires the EPA to develop water-quality criteria for pollutants; the agency initiated that step in 1999 but never completed it, according to the groups.

Keep reading

Largest Human Cancer Study of Ivermectin + Mebendazole Is Now PEER-REVIEWED and PUBLISHED in a Major Cancer Journal

The largest real-world human study to date evaluating ivermectin and mebendazole in cancer patients is now peer-reviewed and published in Anticancer Research—a major international oncology journal of the International Institute of Anticancer Research (IIAR), established in 1995.

Our study, “Real-world Clinical Outcomes of Ivermectin and Mebendazole in Cancer Patients: Results from a Prospective Observational Cohort,” represents one of the most compelling clinical signals ever documented for repurposed anti-parasitic therapies in oncology.

In this prospective real-world clinical program evaluation, a diverse population of cancer patients (n=197) was prescribed compounded ivermectin–mebendazole, with each capsule containing 25 mg ivermectin and 250 mg mebendazole. Participants were followed for approximately six months using standardized digital surveys assessing cancer outcomes, medication adherence, and tolerability.

At approximately six months post-treatment initiation, we observed an 84.4% Clinical Benefit Ratio (CBR)—meaning more than four out of five patients reported either no evidence of disease (remission), tumor regression, or cancer stabilization.

Nearly half of all patients (48.4%) reported the strongest positive outcomes, including no evidence of disease (32.8%) or tumor regression (15.6%). An additional 36.1% reported disease stabilization, while only 15.6% reported progression.

Importantly, adherence was remarkably high, with 86.9% completing the initial prescription and 66.4% remaining on therapy at six months.

Side effects were predominantly mild and manageable, reported in 25.4% of patients (primarily gastrointestinal), with 93.6% of those experiencing side effects continuing treatment after minor dosing adjustments.

What makes these findings especially notable is that this was a heterogeneous, real-world cancer population—including patients with prostate, breast, lung, colon, liver, and many other malignancies, many of whom were also undergoing conventional therapies such as chemotherapy, radiation, and surgery.

This groundbreaking peer-reviewed publication was made possible through a unique collaboration between The Wellness Company, the McCullough Foundation, and the Chairman of the President’s Cancer Panel—uniting real-world clinical data, frontline medical experience, and epidemiologic expertise to evaluate inexpensive, repurposed therapies with major translational potential.

Keep reading

‘How do you put a hospice in a burrito stand?’ Watch Congress get stunned by new revelations about astronomical California fraud

The U.S. Congress is being stunned by unnerving revelations about the extent of hospice fraud in California, with alarming testimony indicating phony hospice centers purportedly located in a burrito stand as well as a tire shop.

Sheila Clark, president and CEO of the California Hospice and Palliative Care Association, told lawmakers Tuesday: “How do you put a hospice in a burrito stand in California? How do you put a hospice in a tire store in California? That all had to be vetted through licensure and certification and accreditation.”

“You’d be amazed at how many hospices – the door you can walk up to in California and there is nobody there. There is five months worth of mail that you can see stacked up from CMS and nobody’s there. And that passed a survey. How did that happen?”

The House Ways and Means Committee was so struck by Clark’s disclosure, it shared her testimony on social media, noting: “You heard that right. In Gavin Newsom’s California, a burrito stand masquerading as a hospice care facility was getting accredited and receiving taxpayer dollars.”

While Clark did not name any specific burrito stand, Politics on X explained: “This example illustrates broader federal and state probes into California hospice fraud involving overbilling Medicare, shell companies, identity theft, and improper enrollments, with one recent scheme alone allegedly defrauding Medi-Cal of $267 million.”

Keep reading

Dr. Oz on Insane Fraud: After Stopping Payments to 450 Hospices in CA, NOT ONE Has Asked for Reinstatement of Funds

In March, investigative journalist Nick Shirley released video on uncovering $170 million in fraud in California.

“We uncovered over $170,000,000 in fraud as these fraudsters live in luxury with no consequences,” Nick Shirley said.

“California’s version of Medicaid called ‘Medi-Cal’ has more than doubled since 2022 from $108 billion to a proposed $222 billion in 2026. Their population, however, has not grown exponentially. However, their spending has,” Nick Shirley said.

“There has been a 1,000 percent increase in hospice care in Los Angeles County,” Nick Shirley said. It’s estimated that the fraud in California could be in the hundreds of billions of dollars.”

Nick Shirley visited ‘hospices’ in Los Angeles and ‘daycares’ in San Diego.

In early April, California Attorney General Rob Bonta (D) announced his office had charged 21 suspects in a $267 million hospice fraud ring in Southern California.

A Trump administration Fraud Task Force also conducts raids against healthcare fraudsters across the southern part of the state. Eight people were arrested and charged with over $50 MILLION in fraud.

Keep reading

23 Popular Hair Dyes Test Positive for Carcinogenic Chemicals: Report

An analysis of 23 popular hair color products sold in the United States found that all of them contained at least one carcinogenic chemical.

The tests were conducted on 21 boxed dyes and two temporary hair chalk products from brands including L’Oreal Paris, Dark & Lovely, Madison Reed, Manic Panic, Revlon, and Clairol, consumer advocacy group Consumer Reports (CR) said in a recently published report.

Product samples were sent to an accredited lab, where the items were tested for heavy metals, volatile organic compounds (VOC), and phthalates.

“All 23 samples tested positive for dichloromethane (methylene chloride), a volatile chemical widely used in the U.S. for a variety of products, including paint, adhesives, and pharmaceuticals,” CR said.

The chemical “is classified as a probable carcinogen for humans. Its use is restricted in cosmetics and is generally prohibited except for limited applications, such as in certain hair dye formulations.”

Six product samples contained toluene, a chemical toxic to the central nervous system and a lung irritant.

Keep reading