1) No reason for panic by Andrew Gach <UncleWolf@worldnet.att.net> 2) Deer Kill Phone-In Poll by Debbie Leahy <DLEAHY@delphi.com> 3) URGENT - Save The Powerful Owl (AU) by "Karen Bevis" <alibvic@paradigm4.com.au> 4) (US) Endangered species list by "allen schubert, arrs admin" <arrs@envirolink.org> 5) Bed Burning, Alert Cat Gets Woman, 100, Awake by SDURBIN@VM.TULSA.CC.OK.US 6) (US) RFI: New Law by "allen schubert, arrs admin" <arrs@envirolink.org> 7) Doctors see risk in animal organs by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net> 8) (US) Grower Fights Superiority Attitude by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net> 9) Re: (US) Endangered species list by Elisa Bob <Bailey2@ix.netcom.com> 10) Re: Prairie Chicken-links by "D.B.Sullivan" <Buffalob@mhtc.net> 11) (US) Feature-Battle Rages Over Future of Free Willy'' Whale by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net> 12) STGD by "Brassett, Susan" <brassett@bostech.com> 13) (US) Ultralights, whooping cranes stop over in Utah by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net> 14) pigeon shoot bill by Heidi Prescott <hprescott@fund.org> 15) Dogs die in airplane cargo hold by Shirley McGreal <spm@awod.com> 16) Pottsville, PA: Hunger Strike Hits 2 Weeks by Michael Markarian <mmarkarian@fund.org> 17) (US) Poultry Farmers Deny Blame by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net> 18) (CA) RFI: A plea for new information by "allen schubert, arrs admin" <arrs@envirolink.org> 19) Ron Scott Memorial Observance by Peter Muller <Peter.Muller@worldnet.att.net> 20) Pet Protection Bill by Akipplen2@aol.com 21) Re: Prairie Chickens by "D.B.Sullivan" <Buffalob@mhtc.net> 22) Re: Pet Protection Bill by jeanlee <jeanlee@concentric.net> 23) Crossposting--Admin Note by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net> 24) Attachments--Admin Note by allen schubert <alathome@clark.net>
Date: Wed, 15 Oct 1997 21:32:02 -0700
From: Andrew Gach <UncleWolf@worldnet.att.net>
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: No reason for panic
Message-ID: <344598C2.25FC@worldnet.att.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Breast cancer may be linked to blood pressure drugs
The Associated Press
NEW YORK (October 15, 1997 5:10 p.m.)
Women 65 and older who took calcium channel blockers, a widely used drug
for high blood pressure and heart disease, were about twice as likely to
develop breast cancer, a study found.
The result is far from proof that calcium channel blockers raise the
risk of breast cancer, the study's authors and other experts warned.
Women should not stop taking the drugs, at least not without consulting
their doctors first, they said. The risk of uncontrolled high blood
pressure may outweigh any possible added risk of breast cancer, the
National Institutes of Health said.
Two drug companies also said prior work shows the medications don't
raise the risk of cancer.
Calcium channel blockers are sold under a variety of names, such as
Adalat, Cardizem, Procardia, diltiazem, nifedipine and verapamil. Prior
studies have disagreed on whether they affect cancer risk.
The new study found no sign of an effect on cancers overall. The
research was reported in Wednesday's issue of the journal Cancer by
Annette Fitzpatrick of the University of Washington in Seattle, Janet
Daling of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle, and
others.
"This is not reason for panic," Fitzpatrick said.
Researchers followed about 3,200 women 65 and older for an average of
five years. During that time the women developed 75 cases of breast
cancer. Women who took calcium channel blockers during the study had
about twice the risk of breast cancer as women taking no blood pressure
drugs, or women taking other types of blood pressure drugs.
Most of the data came from women taking older, short-acting forms of
calcium channel blockers rather than newer, one-a-day forms. These newer
forms are now the more widely used. Fitzpatrick said the study could not
reliably analyze the two forms separately.
Pfizer Inc. and Bayer Corp., which sell calcium channel blockers,
pointed to prior studies that have found no increased cancer risk.
Pfizer also said that major medical organizations have concluded that
the overall evidence doesn't support any association between calcium
channel blockers and cancer.
By MALCOLM RITTER, AP Science Writer
Date: Thu, 16 Oct 1997 07:09:29 -0400 (EDT)
From: Debbie Leahy <DLEAHY@delphi.com>
To: ar-news@envirolink.org
Subject: Deer Kill Phone-In Poll
Message-ID: <01IOV6PO5O5U92QLY0@delphi.com>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=US-ASCII
Today's Morningline question in the Chicago Sun-Times is "Should deer be
shot at Fermilab physics research center to reduce their population?"