[HN Gopher] Global cancer cases will jump 77% by 2050, WHO repor...
___________________________________________________________________
Global cancer cases will jump 77% by 2050, WHO report estimates
Author : rntn
Score : 36 points
Date : 2024-02-03 19:22 UTC (3 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.cnn.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.cnn.com)
| binsquare wrote:
| "The researchers point to several factors as driving the expected
| increases in cancer rates, such as obesity, tobacco use and
| alcohol use, as well as environmental factors like air
| pollution."
|
| It's interesting to see alcohol use lumped in as cancer causing
| as tobacco use and air pollution. I wonder what kind of cancer
| risks it introduced?
| myko wrote:
| Alcohol consumption is linked to increases in liver cancer
| quickslowdown wrote:
| And throat/mouth, I believe. Alcohol is poison, even in small
| amounts. I still drink it occasionally, not trying to be
| preachy!
| jacobsimon wrote:
| And apparently breast cancer and several others. I also
| drink regularly but I just finished reading _Drink_ [1] and
| it goes pretty in depth on the health effects.
|
| 1. https://www.amazon.com/Drink-New-Science-Alcohol-
| Health/dp/B...
| hackyhacky wrote:
| I don't get this. 77% is a big increase. Alcohol and tobacco
| use can't be increasing enough to drive that change. Obesity
| and pollution are on the rise, but _that_ much?
|
| Edit: autocorrect correction
| vdaea wrote:
| The big secret: the number is completely made up, but it will
| be used as an excuse to take rights away from you.
| hackyhacky wrote:
| The people who have the power to limit your freedom don't
| need to make up numbers in order to do so.
| vdaea wrote:
| They can't do it without popular support, so they make up
| the numbers so the gullible people are happy with their
| rights being taken away.
| hackyhacky wrote:
| The sound you hear now is my eyes rolling so hard at the
| lengths that conspiracy theorists go to sow distrust in
| institutions without any plausible evidence.
| ipnon wrote:
| It's a risk factor for colorectal cancer, which is not only the
| 3rd most prevalent type of cancer, but is increasingly being
| discovered in younger people. Alcohol has a number of
| deleterious effects, from microbiome destruction, to the
| genotoxicity of alcohol's metabolite acetaldehyde, and finally
| alcohol changes your behavior to make other cancer causing
| activities like smoking more likely.
| hunter-gatherer wrote:
| I'm not sure it in interesting to lump alcohol in there. I
| thought everyone knew it was wikdly unhealthy, just also wildly
| fun.
|
| Air pollution deserves more attention IMO. I live along the
| Wasatch from in Utah and have been trying to strategize a move
| out of state because of air pollution. In sure I won't be
| surprised if it kills me and my family in the end.
| flenserboy wrote:
| There are plenty of newer approaches to this, but this older blog
| post points to some possible reasons:
| https://www.jeffnobbs.com/posts/death-by-vegetable-oil-what-....
| paulcole wrote:
| How much of this is attributable to a) people in developing
| countries living longer and having the chance to get cancer
| before something else kills them and b) improved diagnostic
| methods that allow more cancer cases to get diagnosed?
| thomond wrote:
| > Global cancer diagnoses will reach 35 million in 2050 ... from
| the 20 million cases diagnosed in 2022.
|
| How much of this can be attributed to population growth?
| zaphod12 wrote:
| Perhaps some, but only a small amount... current targets are
| hitting between 8.4-9.5 billion by 2050 (some estimates are
| we'd have already hit peak and be going down)! At about 8
| billion today, we're talking between a 5% and an 18ish%
| increase. Either way much less than the increase in cancer
| diagnosis incidence.
| paxys wrote:
| - Population growth
|
| - More access to testing
|
| - People living longer, and not dying of other causes first
|
| While yes tobacco, alcohol etc. do contribute to increased rates,
| _everyone_ is going to get cancer at some point simply by living
| long enough.
| Spooky23 wrote:
| This is one of those stats that get abused as fairly benign
| cancers like certain prostate cancers get diagnosed more.
|
| But as someone who just lost my wife to melanoma, I can tell
| you that despite the fact that treatment advances has brought
| 5-year survival rates from 10% to 70%, deaths are increasing.
| The oncologists I spoke to attribute it to the ozone hole in
| the 80s and 90s and the tanning bed phenomenon of the 90s and
| 2000s.
|
| Think of cancer not as a thing but as a disease process. Each
| variant has different drivers and each treatment regime has
| different risks. Social and environmental factors drive many
| negative outcomes.
| _qua wrote:
| This is what I tell patients. Eventually something happens to
| all of us, we just try to extend the time until that happens.
| westurner wrote:
| But how will it be treated in 2050?
|
| Which cancers cannot be treated with NIRS-guided ultrasound?
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2024-02-03 23:01 UTC)