Paxil Trial Update – Experts Battle
March 2, 2010
Natural News
By Evelyn Pringle
In the first Paxil birth defect trial that resulted in a $2.5 million verdict against GlaxoSmithKline in October 2009, the infant, Lyam Kilker, was born with three heart defects; an atrial septal defect, a ventricular septal defect, and an interrupted aortic arch, after his mother took Paxil while pregnant.
Pregnant women cannot participate in clinical trials on drugs due to the risk of harm to the fetus. But after a drug has been on the market for a while, epidemiology studies can review the medical records of women who have taken a new drug while pregnant and the records of women who were not exposed to the drug while pregnant and compare the outcomes of the infants.
The plaintiff’s experts, Doctors Ra-id Abdulla, David Healy, Shira Kramer and Suzanne Parisian, all testified that they believed Paxil (paroxetine) caused Lyam’s defects, based in part, on the scientific literature on studies available on Paxil to date.
Battle of the Experts
During her September 15, 2009 opening statement, Glaxo’s lead attorney, Chilton Varner, told the jury, the “experts in the case diverge sharply on how they interpret that body of scientific literature.”
The “plaintiffs’ experts say that these scientific studies prove causation, they prove that Paxil causes cardiac defects and IAA,” she noted.
“They get there by … lumping all cardiac defects together and looking at the numbers for cardiac defects as a group,” she said, “They also get there by rejecting any application of the tool of statistical significance.”
“The plaintiffs’ experts will tell you they believe that as long as there is a difference between the two groups, and the Paxil group is higher than the control group, that’s enough,” Varner told the jury.
“GSK’s experts, on the other hand, are anti-lumping,” she said. “They say that you can’t lump all heart defects together because they form for different reasons at different times by different processes and that you can’t use evidence as to one kind of defect to imply that it also applies to another kind of cardiac defect.”
“And GSK’s experts will tell you that statistical significance matters,” she stated, “that without applying the tool of statistical significance, you have no idea whether the difference between the two groups is real and meaningful or whether it is simply the operation of chance or coincidence.”
Studies Designed to Fail
During his September 15, 2009 opening statement, the family’s lead attorney, Sean Tracey, told the jury: “You are going to hear from experts in this case that there are ways to design studies to fail.”
“If you truly don’t want to know the truth,” he said, “very smart people can design studies that won’t show you the truth.”
Dr Shira Kramer, an epidemiologist, testified as an expert for the plaintiffs. Kramer was asked to explain what is meant by “inclusive by design.” It’s “a very, very serious problem that has been written about quite a bit,” she told the jury.
The reason for “the tremendous amount of concern and literature on this topic,” she said, “is many of these studies look like they have been designed to fail.”
It’s the “deliberate design of epidemiological studies in such a way as to make it, if not impossible, extraordinarily difficult to detect relationship between an exposure and an outcome or a disease,” Kramer explained.
In the Paxil studies, many of the “designed characteristics have been such that they would minimize or make it more difficult to detect an increased risk,” she said. “And despite that, these studies have shown consistency in showing an increased risk of cardiac malformations associated with first trimester Paroxetine exposure.”
“The pressure is always against the ability to detect increased risk in the way these studies are designed,” Kramer said. “And, yet, despite that, we are seeing consistently elevated risks associated with Paxil, which is very, very important, very compelling, and very alarming actually.”
Kramer described the difference between association and causation as meaning that a single study with a finding of an elevated risk of birth defects would only show an association. “When you have a body of literature which shows through multiple studies consistently elevated findings, then you move from association in one study to causation, that this factor causes the disease,” she told the jury.
During closing arguments on October 8, 2009, Tracey told the jury that, “Defense lawyers can’t stand the word ‘causal.’”
“Causal” is the “kiss of death” for a defense lawyer, he said, because they know that is one of the questions the jury will be asked.
“The second question you are going to be asked,” he told the jury, is “Do you find that Michelle David’s ingestion of defendant’s drug Paxil was a factual cause in bringing about the heart defects?”
To continue reading this report, click here.
Herbicide in Drinking Water May be Dangerous
March 1, 2010
Natural News
By David Gutierrez
Contamination of drinking water by a common herbicide poses a greater health threat than previously believed, according to a report issued by the nonprofit environmental organization Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC).
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) monitors average yearly levels of the popular herbicide atrazine in drinking water supplies, based on four tests per year. But the NRDC notes that levels of the toxin in drinking water regularly spike after heavy rains or during the spring when it is being widely applied, and that the four yearly testings may miss these events. The organization’s researchers found several such spikes in its own testing of water supplies in towns in agricultural regions of the South and Midwest.
“Our biggest concern is early-life-stage development,” said Jennifer Sass of the NRDC. “If there’s a disruption during that time, it becomes hard-wired into the system. These endocrine disrupters act in the body at extremely low levels. These spikes matter.”
Because atrazine is compatible with no-till farming, it is popular among farmers seeking to acquire a “green” label by reducing their carbon footprint. It is known to disrupt the hormonal system, and may cause cancers and menstrual problems in adults. It is considered especially dangerous to the developing reproductive systems of fetuses and children. The chemical has been shown to kill aquatic microorganisms and suppress the immune systems of larger animals, and it can cause limb or reproductive deformities in amphibians at levels as low as 0.1 parts per billion.
The EPA has set a threshold of 3 billion parts per billion for permissible atrazine levels, which the NRDC says would be too high even without periodic spikes. The NRDC analysis of 139 different municipal water systems found that 54 of them had a one-time spike higher than 3 parts per billion at some point in 2003 or 2004.
Home or municipal carbon filters can remove atrazine from water, but many municipal treatment plants do not use such procedures.
Click here for the full report
Doctor Gets Court Order to Hold Pregnant Woman
February 24, 2010
Change.org
By Roxann MT Joy
With issues like the Stupak Amendment and Nevada’s Personhood Initiative in the national spotlight, I am aware that a woman’s right to choose whether or not to carry a fetus to full-term is under attack.
What I didn’t realize, perhaps naively, is that her right to choose how to carry a fetus is also under fire. Last March, Florida resident Samantha Burton was in week 25 of her pregnancy when she paid a visit to her doctor. Burton was showing signs of potential miscarriage, so her physician ordered bed rest. Burton explained that, as a working mother of two toddlers, bed rest simply wasn’t a viable option and then proceeded to ask for a second medical opinion. Seems reasonable, right?
Her doctor, however, was having none of that. Rather than refer Burton for the desired second opinion, he instead felt it necessary to contact state authorities, who then proceeded to force Burton to be admitted to Tallahassee Memorial Hospital against her will and undergo any procedure the doctor felt like prescribing. When Burton had the audacity to request a change in the hospital in which she was being treated, the court denied her request. Three days into her forced hospitalization, Burton miscarried.
Never mind that there is actually no scientific research to support the claim that bed rest helps prevent preterm birth and that even the American College of of Obstetricians and Gynecologists does not believe it should be routinely recommended. Never mind Burton’s very real concern for the care of her two small children. Never mind the psychological, physical, and financial toll this takes on her family. The only thing that mattered to the doctor and the government was that they got their (ultimately ineffectual) way.
Oh, and did I mention this case gets worse? Burton (with help from her pro bono lawyer and the ACLU) sued the State of Florida claiming it — duh — violated her constitutional rights. The court ruled against her, claiming that that State was merely maintaining “status quo” in the situation. Hmmm. I never knew forcing a woman to bed rest in a hospital was status quo. Perhaps I’ve been ill-informed.
It is scary to think that the government feels it can negate the bodily autonomy of pregnant women for any reason, let alone for something like this. Where does this stop? If a doctor lacking scientific support can force a woman into a hospital of his choosing for the tests of his choosing, what’s next? Certainly it seems as if the bar has been set pretty low in terms of the criteria needed to override a woman’s freedom to make informed decisions for herself.
Burton’ lawyers filed for appeal and the case is now being heard in Florida’s First District Court of Appeals. Hopefully, this time the court will acknowledge the bodily autonomy of pregnant women and reverse the lower court’s frightening and potentially dangerous ruling. I shudder to think of the consequences of the earlier decision being upheld.
Click here for the full report.
Agriculture Chemical Linked to Serious Birth Defects
February 22, 2010
Natural News
By S.L. Baker
Gastroschisis is a birth defect in which the intestines, and sometimes other organs, develop outside the fetal abdomen and poke out through an opening in the abdominal wall. Long considered a rare occurrence, gastroschisis has mysteriously been on the rise over the last three decades. In fact, the incidence of the defect has soared, increasing two to four times in the last 30 years. But why?
Researchers think they’ve found the answer. The culprit behind the suffering of babies born with this condition appears to be the agricultural chemical atrazine. That’s the conclusion of a study just presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal Medicine (SMFM) held in Chicago.
Researchers at the University of Washington in Seattle were alerted to a higher than normal number of cases in of the birth defect in babies born in eastern Washington. So they began investigating to see if the increased incidence was due to some kind of environmental exposure in that area.
“Our state has about two times the national average number of cases of gastroschisis,” Dr. Sarah Waller, one of the study’s authors, said in a statement to the media. “The life expectancy for fetuses with this diagnosis is better than 90 percent; however it requires delivery at a tertiary care center with immediate neonatal intervention which often separates families and can cause serious financial and emotional stress.”
The condition can lead to poor function of the bowel after delivery and potential long term feeding problems. Bottom line: babies with this birth defect must undergo the trauma of surgery right after birth. And while most survive, some babies with gastroschisis have significant damage to the bowel due to direct contact between the intestine and amniotic fluid or because the intestine was twisted. These infants may develop a condition known as “short gut” which can lead to stunted growth and a host of feeding and other problems.
For the new study, Dr. Waller and her research team went to work investigating all cases of live born infants with gastroschisis during the period between 1987 and 2006. They matched birth certificates with databases from the U.S. Geological Survey that revealed where agricultural spraying took place and what chemicals were used. It turns out the chemicals atrazine, nitrates, and 2, 4 dichlorophenoxyacetic acid were heavily sprayed in the area.
Of the 805 cases and 3,616 controls in the study, gastroschisis developed far more frequently among babies whose mothers lived less than 25 km from the site of high surface water that was specifically contaminated with one of the chemicals — atrazine. What’s more, the risk of gastroschisis was found to especially rise in babies of women who conceived in the spring, from March through May. Those are the months when use of the chemical is the most prevalent.
The problem with atrazine
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), atrazine is applied to crops (especially corn, sorghum, and sugarcane) before and after planting to control broadleaf and grassy weeds. It is used most heavily in the Midwest on agricultural crops but it is also applied to residential lawns, particularly in Florida and the Southeast.
Problems linked to atrazine have been in the news previously. Earlier research showed it causes sexual abnormalities in frogs and the chemical has also been linked to prostate cancer in workers at an atrazine manufacturing plant.
So why is it still widely used? Unfortunately, the EPA has done little to address the mounting evidence that atrazine is harmful to humans as well as animals. Last fall the agency announced it was going to start a new assessment of the chemical in 2010 that could take months to years to complete. In the meantime, tons of atrazine will continue to be sprayed on crops and lawns — and mothers and their unborn babies will continue to be exposed to this chemical now linked to a serious and potentially deadly birth defects.
Click here for the full report
Genes May Influence Preterm Births
February 5, 2010
Reuters
By Xavier Briand
They said gene variants in the mother and fetus can make them susceptible to an inflammatory response to infections inside the uterus, raising the risk that a baby will be born early — before 37 weeks of gestation.
A preterm baby has a 120 times greater risk of death than a baby born full term, and survivors are at risk of breathing difficulties, bleeding into the brain, and having a significant neurological handicap such as cerebral palsy.
“Preterm birth costs the United States $26 billion per year. It is one of the most serious and significant challenges to medicine and society and one whose importance is not fully recognized,” said Dr. Roberto Romero of the National Institutes of Health, who presented his findings at a meeting of the Society for Material-Fetal Medicine in Chicago.
Romero said the findings support the notion that preterm delivery is an evolutionary mechanism intended to protect baby and mother from infection.
“We have established that one of every three premature babies is born to a mother who has an intra-amniotic infection,” an infection in the normally sterile amniotic fluid that surrounds the developing fetus, Romero said.
Because the response to infections is controlled by genes, Romero and colleagues set out to identify which are most likely to play a role in response to infections in the amniotic fluid.
HOPING FOR A DNA TEST
For the study, the team analyzed 190 genes and more than 700 DNA variants from 229 women and 179 premature infants in Chile. They compared these to genes from 600 women who delivered their babies full term.
“What we found was there were some DNA variants in the fetus that were associated with the occurrence of premature labor and delivery, and there were some genes in the mother that also increase the risk of premature labor and delivery,” Romero said in a telephone interview.
In the fetus, the strongest gene influence was the interleukin 6 receptor, which is involved in the body’s response to inflammation.
In the mother, the team focused on one gene called tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase 2, or TIMP2, which affects structures in the cervix and uterus that get broken down at the start of labor.
Romero said when there is an infection, the combination of these two genetic profiles raises the risk of preterm labor as the body attempts to preserve the mother’s and baby’s lives.
The hope is that the findings may lead to genetic tests that assess whether a woman is predisposed to premature labor, he said. “We are not there, but this is the beginning.”
About 500,000 U.S. babies and 13 million babies worldwide are born prematurely each year.
Click here for the full report
BPAs in Food Packaging
January 18, 2010
The New York Times
By Denise Grady
In a shift of position, the Food and Drug Administration is expressing concerns about possible health risks from bisphenol-A, or BPA, a widely used component of plastic bottles and food packaging that it declared safe in 2008.
The agency said Friday that it had “some concern about the potential effects of BPA on the brain, behavior and prostate gland of fetuses, infants and children,” and would join other federal health agencies in studying the chemical in both animals and humans.
The action is another example of the drug agency under the Obama administration becoming far more aggressive in taking hard looks at what it sees as threats to public health. In recent months, the agency has stepped up its oversight of food safety and has promised to tighten approval standards for medical devices.
Concerns about BPA are based on studies that have found harmful effects in animals, and on the recognition that the chemical seeps into food and baby formula, and that nearly everyone is exposed to it, starting in the womb.
But health officials said there was no proof that BPA was dangerous to humans.
“If we thought it was unsafe, we would be taking strong regulatory action,” said Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, the principal deputy commissioner of the drug agency, at a news briefing.
Nonetheless, health officials suggested a number of things people could do to limit their exposure to BPA, like throwing away scratched or worn bottles or cups made with BPA (it can leak from the scratches), not putting very hot liquids into cups or bottles with BPA and checking the labels on containers to make sure they are microwave safe. The drug agency also recommended that mothers breastfeed their infants for at least 12 months; liquid formula contains traces of BPA.
BPA has been used since the 1960s to make hard plastic bottles, sippy cups for toddlers and the linings of food and beverage cans, including the cans used to hold infant formula and soda. Until recently, it was used in baby bottles, but major manufacturers are now making bottles without it. Plastic items containing BPA are generally marked with a 7 on the bottom for recycling purposes.
The chemical can leach into food, and a study of more than 2,000 people found that more than 90 percent of them had BPA in their urine. Traces have also been found in breast milk, the blood of pregnant women and umbilical cord blood.
Reports of potential health effects have made BPA notorious, especially among parents, and led to widespread shunning of products thought to contain the chemical. Canada, Chicago and Suffolk County, N.Y., have banned BPA from children’s products.
The government will spend $30 million on BPA research in humans and animals, to take place over 18 to 24 months, health officials said at a news briefing on Friday.
Dr. Linda Birnbaum, director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, said the research would involve potential effects on behavior, obesity, diabetes, reproductive disorders, cancer, asthma, heart disease and effects that could be carried from one generation to the next.
Activists on both sides of the passionately debated issue said they were disappointed in the government’s action. The American Chemical Council, which represents companies that make and use BPA, issued a statement saying BPA was safe, praising the health agencies as confirming that there was no proof of harm to people by it, but also saying, “We are disappointed that some of the recommendations are likely to worry consumers and are not well founded.”
Diana Zuckerman, president of the National Research Center for Women and Families, said the F.D.A. had not gone far enough, because its recommendations put the responsibility on families and not on companies making products containing BPA. In addition, Ms. Zuckerman said, the focus on safety should not be limited to children, because studies have linked the chemicals to heart and liver disease and other problems in adults.
Government evaluations of BPA have had a contentious history. The drug agency wrote a draft report calling it safe in 2008. But shortly after that, the National Toxicology Program, part of the National Institutes of Health, said BPA was cause for “some concern,” citing the same issues that the drug agency is now agreeing to: potential effects on the brain, behavior and prostate in fetuses, infants and children.
Then the drug agency asked an independent panel of scientific advisers to review its draft report, and the panel gave it a scathing review. It accused the F.D.A. of ignoring important evidence and giving consumers a false sense of security about the chemical. The drug agency promised to reconsider BPA, and the announcement on Friday fulfilled that pledge.
Click here for the full report
Harmful Chemicals Found in Many Pregnant Women
December 7, 2009
Organic Consumers Association
The “Earliest Exposures” study, a research project conducted by Washington Toxics Coalition in collaboration with the Commonweal Biomonitoring Resource Center and the Toxic-Free Legacy Coalition found pregnant women’s bodies were polluted with chemicals found in consumer products. This first-of-its kind study investigated the living environment of nine fetuses through testing the blood and urine of the nine mothers taking part in the biomonitoring study. Tests measured the levels of five chemical groups, including phthalates, mercury, perfluorinated compounds or “Teflon chemicals,” bisphenol A (BPA), and the flame retardant tetrabromobisphenol A.
The women, all in their second trimester, were all found to have BPA, phthalates, mercury, and “Teflon chemicals” in their bodies. Cause for concern is that these toxic chemicals, known to disrupt development and hormonal systems cross the placenta and are absorbed by the fetus. They not only hinder fetal development, but the growing fetus has limited ability to detoxify these foreign substances.
Of the more than 80,000 chemicals found in consumer products today, only approximately 200 have been tested for safety since the inception of The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) of 1976. Until more strict regulations govern the use of ingredients in consumer products, consumers can take an active role in lowering their toxic exposure. Start by purchasing Phthalate and BPA free products, switching from flame retardant clothing and bedding to organic, and substituting conventional body care for third-party certified organic body care.
Karen Ciesar, Founder and Formulator of Trillium Organics states, “I am sadly not surprised at these findings. The pervasiveness of petrochemicals in the modern world makes avoiding exposures a task which requires research and vigilance. Luckily, there are many non-profit organizations dedicated to informing consumers, some of my favorites are; SafeCosmetics.org (searchable database of cosmetic safety), Healthystuff.org (searchable database of family product safety), HealthychildHealthyworld.org, a comprehensive and informative site about environmental exposures, OrganicConsumers.org (an activist website about all issues surrounding Organic, food, personal care and fibers). It takes some time and effort to find safe products for your family, but every green purchasing choice you make increases your child’s chance at a healthy future in a greener world.”
Trillium Organics has recently been endorsed by the Organic Consumers’ Association as a “brand to trust” in their recent BUYcott campaign. Trillium Organics has been a leader in the movement for clean, safe personal care since 1994.
Click here for the full report
BPA Effects Getting Closer Looks
November 13, 2009
Natural News
By David Gutierrez
The Endocrine Society has issued an official statement expressing concern over the health effects of the common industrial chemical bisphenol A (BPA).
BPA is widely used to make plastics products hard and transparent, such as in water or baby bottles, and is also used to line cans of food or infant formula. Research has shown that the chemical can leach from these materials into food, however, and a number of tests have found high levels of BPA in the bodies of both adults and children.
This is an issue of particular concern because BPA is a known endocrine disruptor, disrupting the operation of vertebrate hormonal systems.
Although the FDA insists that BPA is safe, the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences issued a report last year expressing concern over the chemical’s effects on the development of the brain and prostate gland.
In new research presented to the Endocrine Society’s annual meeting, scientists found that BPA can induce an uneven heart beat in female mice
“These effects are specific on the female heart. The male heart does not respond in this way and we understand why,” researcher Scott Belcher said.
BPA mimics the effects of the female sex hormone estrogen in the body.
Another study found that BPA can induce changes at the genetic level by binding to DNA and changing its function.
“We exposed some mice to bisphenol A and then we looked at their offspring,” researcher Hugh Taylor said. “We found that even when a they had a brief exposure during pregnancy … mice exposed to these chemicals as a fetus carried these changes throughout their lives.”
A third study raised concerns that BPA exposure may be even more widespread than previously believed. Researcher Frederick Vom Saal and colleagues from the University of Missouri found that monkeys are able to quickly clear BPA from their bodies, suggesting that humans with high blood levels are being repeatedly exposed to the chemical.
“We are really concerned that there is a very large amount of bisphenol A that must be coming from [unknown] sources,” Vom Saal said.
Click here for the full report
Remove Heavy Metals in the Body With Cilantro
November 09, 2009
Natural News
By Mike Adams
Heavy metals are extremely toxic to human neurology. Mercury, lead and cadmium all contribute aggressively to the deterioration of neurological function. Fortunately, there’s a simple, natural way to detox your body and remove these toxic substances from your tissues.
The solution is cilantro. It’s that magical-tasting herb often used in Mexican food recipes. As it turns out, cilantro not only taste great, it also binds to heavy metals and helps remove them from your body.
Below, we’re collected some important research on this remarkable ability of the cilantro herb. Read them all to learn more, then whip up your own delicious recipes using raw cilantro in your own kitchen!
Food, after all, is really potent medicine. You can also purchase cilantro liquid extracts from places like Baseline Nutritionals (their product is called “Metal Magic”) or other vendors of quality superfood supplements.
Cilantro removes heavy metals
Supplements helpful in the detoxification process include: cilantro, Vitamin C, selenium, garlic and others. Eating a clean diet, free of pesticides and hormones, is a must for a detoxification program. I encourage my patients to eat whole foods, with adequate amounts of protein. Eliminating the “whites”– refined sugar, refined flour, and refined salt will help any health condition and help any detoxification program. The glycemic index of carbohydrates can be a helpful guide on which carbohydrates to eat and which to avoid.
- The Miracle of Natural Hormones by David Brownstein
Add cilantro to meals; it can help remove heavy metals. Add dark green leafy vegetables, which contain chlorophyll, a helpful detoxifier. Get curcuminoids from spices such as turmeric. Try herbal detoxification teas containing mixtures of burdock root, dandelion root, ginger root, licorice root, sarsaparilla root, cardamom seed, cinnamon bark, and other herbs.
- Ultraprevention : The 6-Week Plan That Will Make You Healthy for Life by Mark Hyman, M.D.
There are several natural chelation products that use only the cilantro and chlorella to extremely positive effect supporting the basic premises being put forth here. The addition of ALA brings in the leading work of Dr. Andrew Hall Cutler, who is one of the world’s leading experts on mercury detoxification. His extensive and successful use of ALA has won him a large devoted audience.
- Transdermal Magnesium Therapy by Mark Sircus
Metal Magic is made from two simple herbs: cilantro and chlorella. Alone, each of these has the ability to bind with heavy metals, and together they make a very powerful metal detoxification substance that can literally pull mercury, lead, cadmium, and other heavy metals right out of your body, thereby sparing your body the damage that would normally be caused by those heavy metals. This is potentially a life-saving product, and it can certainly save the health of a fetus, if you happen to be pregnant or you plan to have a pregnancy in the near future.
Click here for the full report
Scientists Claim Cancer Can Pass from Mother to Infant
October 19, 2009
ExamHealth.com
By Deborah Mitchell
Researchers say they have determined without a doubt that in rare cases, cancer can be transmitted from a mother to her infant in the womb. The report comes after a team of scientists at the Institute of Cancer Research conducted a thorough investigation of a case in which a 28-year-old mother passed along cancer to her infant daughter.
Dr. Anthony Ford, of the Institute of Cancer Research and one of the authors of the study, noted in a recent interview on The World on Public Radio International that there have been only 20 to 30 reported cases of cancer passing from mother to infant in the last 200 years. This latest case is unlike the others, however, because scientists were able to determine how and why the cancer cells were able to pass to the fetus and develop into cancer.
According to Dr. Ford, the cells that normally would be prevented from passing to the fetus through the placental barrier changed their compatibility so that they resembled the infant’s own cells. Because the infant’s immune system did not recognize that the cells were foreign, it did not attempt to destroy them as it normally would do.
In this most recent case, the mother had undiagnosed leukemia during her pregnancy, died several months after giving birth, and then her infant daughter developed a tumor in her jaw that was detected at age 11 months. When the doctors conducted tests of the tumor, they found that it contained leukemia lymphoma cells, and that the cancer had spread to the child’s lungs.
The scientists also determined that the cancer cells of both mother and baby carried the identical mutated cancer gene, but that the girl had not inherited the gene. Using advanced genetic fingerprinting, the scientists were able to prove that the cancer cells were passed from the mother to her infant.
Professor Mel Greaves, who headed the study at the Institute of Cancer Research, noted in the release on the Institute’s website that “We are pleased to have resolved this longstanding puzzle. But we stress that such mother to offspring transfer of cancer is exceedingly rare and the chances of any pregnant woman with cancer passing it on to her child are remote.”
Click here for the full report.
