WE had to talk about the health of European citizens, about cancer – the scourge of our times that threatens to become a real health emergency in the coming years due to the delays in screening, diagnosis and treatments due to the pandemic. And instead we ended up talking about wine.
What is the Cancer Plan and what was voted in Strasbourg
On February 16, the European Parliament voted the “Report on strengthening Europe in the fight against cancer – towards a comprehensive and coordinated strategy”, A document on the guidelines drawn up by the Special Committee on Beating Cancer (Beca) to provide the European Union with a shared strategic plan for the fight against cancer. The text, which touches on issues ranging from prevention to equal access to care, from support for families to relations with pharmaceutical companies, was approved by a very large majority (652 votes in favor, 15 against and 27 abstentions), and, although it does not yet have a legislative value, its approval is a fundamental step, an important sign of shared intentions for the member states. Yet what is causing the most talk, at least here in Italy, is how the original text has been modified by the approval of some amendments concerning the concept of alcohol consumption and the type of warnings to put on the label. Changes resulting from political mediation that risks getting the wrong message across.
Alcohol and cancer risk, US oncologists take sides
by TINA SIMONIELLO
Alcohol: the debate on “zero risk” and on the concept of “harmful use”
There is little to go around it: there is no safe alcohol consumption for health when it comes to cancer prevention. This is a fact that emerges from the scientific evidence, reaffirmed by the IARC which classifies the ethanol contained in alcoholic beverages as a carcinogen and by the WHO. This information is included in the document discussed in the European Parliament and in the text it is also recalled that in Europe about 10% of all cases of cancer in men and 3% of all cases of cancer in women are attributable to alcohol consumption. Sure, the chances of developing cancer increase in proportion to the amount of alcohol consumed, but there is no zero risk. On the other hand, however, in some passages of the document this concept has been replaced with that of “harmful consumption”, a specific unnecessary according to many, and which could create confusion, suggesting that there is a harmless consumption (or that it can even be good for ). Was it really necessary to delete this information – moreover in a part of the document concerning prevention which aims to inform citizens so that they can choose in an informed way, and not that of regulating?
Increased alcohol consumption, Testino: “It is essential to safeguard children”
“In the scientific interpretation, the concept of ‘harmful consumption’ in the context of cancer prevention is wrong”, reiterates the Hon. Alessandra Moretti, which in the last two years has been actively working on the Beating Cancer Plan program involving both scientific societies and patient associations. “The change, which the parliamentary group of socialists to which I belong opposed and which passed by a handful of votes breaking the Parliament, was not necessary, also because the difference between moderate consumption and abuse was already explicit in the part of the document relating to policies for the pursuit of prevention objectives, which provide for the reduction of at least 10% of the harmful consumption of alcohol by 2025, while the Mediterranean diet is proposed as a pillar of a healthy and balanced life “.
Tough fight against tobacco and alcohol, and more artificial intelligence: this is how the EU declares war on cancer
by our correspondent Alberto D’Argenio
Another controversial point is that of the need to offer consumers appropriate information, improving the labeling of alcoholic beverages with the inclusion no longer of “health warnings” (as the original document wanted) but of “information on moderate consumption and alcohol responsible “.
All talking about wine (which is never mentioned in the Cancer Plan)
“Unfortunately, the exploitation was very heavy. And we ended up talking about wine, without the document ever mentioning it, just as there has never been talk of a ‘black sticker’ ”, adds Moretti, who claims instead of having avoided the inclusion of the Nutri Score. “We fought so that the European plan for the fight against cancer was based on the indications of science, expressing itself in policies that inform citizens without punitive or ideological intentions, but that allow everyone to make informed choices”.
The position of scientific societies
In 2020 there were about 2.7 million new cases of cancer among European citizens and 1.3 million deaths from cancer. Estimates say that over 100 million new diagnoses and just as many missed screening tests are expected in the next 25 years. “The vote of the European Parliament reflects the result of a mediation,” he comments Saverio Cinieri, president of the Italian Association of Medical Oncology (Aiom). “What must not get across is the message that citizens are entitled to excessive consumption of alcoholic beverages. The information must be given, accompanied by an information campaign on mediation, in fact “.
“At a time when we are very concerned about the implications of the pandemic on cancer-related diagnoses and mortality, we see the Cancer Plan as a far-reaching measure that concerns the fight that all of Europe wants to wage against cancer, by acting on multiple levels, from primary prevention, ie the promotion of correct lifestyle habits, to secondary prevention, to therapies ”, he adds Francesco Cognettipresident of the Foundation together against cancer, reiterating the importance of the document and the overall satisfaction for its approval: “The path is drawn – he concludes – to achieve equalization of the right to treatment and survival in all member states, that at the moment travel at different rates and do not get the same results “.