Is cancer becoming more common in younger people?

[AmandaC]

Ah yes we have this debate all the time don't we Steve...its not about doing something bad yourself its about realising unexpressed emotions can cause disharmoney in the body. In the world of metaphysics my cancer comes about by 'never being herd' and we both know that is true and my biggest bug bear. So as Loralee says its about how we deal with these emotions that may have the link to cancer itself. Interesting articles on statistics BTW 🙂

[AmandaC]

I spent 6 years ill with a mystery illness before diagnosed with thryroid cancer and I think that there is not 1 particular thing but a collective of things that maybe compounded. I don't believe stress as such is a cause but more our unexpressed and bottled up emotions, but I also beleieve there are so many environmental factors (including upbringing) that it would be hard to pin point a moment. MY MIL loves to tell everyone that she believes my cancer was what stressed my husband out and caused his cancer, this starts to become more about the blame game than causes I feel. As you have read form Steve we had a collective of traumatic events my illness was just a drop in the ocean. I have herd from others about the links to sugar and cancer, apparently cancer feeds on sugar. Who know if it is true but I am not taking any chances I eat healthy food, I exercise (when I can with 2 kids), I do a little yoga for stress relief, clean with natural products (no carcenogenes) and i now talk about my feelings openly so I figure I can't do much more than that I love thsi debate BTW its so interesting to find out everyones views and researched information 🙂

[Loraleeb]

Had a look at your mentioned sites. Interesting that there was a plateau of testicular cancer in the early '90's. I wonder if it has anything to do with smoking pot and/or cigarettes. I remember very clearly that there was a health movement going on in CA during that time. Suddenly youngsters around my age (20) became more aware of their bodies and health issues. The government put a band on even smoking cigarettes outside at bus stops, etc. It became very uncool to smoke, and young men got very into working out and their bodies. Much of prevention seems to indicate that a suppressed immune function can lead to cell misfunction - leaving the door open for disease -- and the best way to prevent that happening is: 1. exercise which increases oxygen levels causing the immune system to function better. 2. Letting rip with our feelings - angry and passionate people breathe in more deeply which, again, increases oxygen levels. 3. No more smoking which obviously decreases our oxygen levels. 4. Environmental factors such as oestrogen in our water, plastic bottles, meat etc should be avoided because of it's effects on our endocrine systems and because it's food for cancer to dwell. In my mind, anything that leads to our bodies having to work double time to heal itself leaves our bodies susceptible to disease. Perhaps stress and depression isn't a direct cause -- perhaps it's the lifestyle that results as part of it. What I would say with absolute determination is that one can not dismiss the role stress and how it is handled as part of the equation. It seems some get angry at the thought that their emotions could play a part because it implies it may be their fault that the cancer is there because of them. Even I wrote that in my book! I was so tired of people insinuating it was always my fault somehow. If it wasn't my poor Western diet, it was what I wore, what I put on my skin, what I drank, my poor mental state, the red meat I ate, bubble bath, microwaves, mobile phone masts, drinking out of plastic bottles... What I decided in the end was that it wasn't my fault, but there were some things I could do to help prevent its return. For me, and that doesn't imply everybody has to, I decided to seek help in expressing my emotions, meditation, healing and hypnosis, an exercise program and a change in diet. If I believe this works, and the mind can be a very powerful tool in fighting disease, my body will follow. I do worry that with our stressful lifestyles, more and more young people will be vulnerable to disease. With my children I am imparting what I have learned and trying to teach them ways to handle such a fast paced life. Who knows if it will stop them from falling prey -- what I do know is it can't harm them 🙂 LLx

[samex]

A great conversation and one that perplexed me even before I became sick as I had 2 close friends diagnosed before me. One was definitely industrial related. I won't mention the company but it was BIG and they settled out of court. My husband worked with this guy(hence the friendship)and was exposed to the same chemicals as were hundreds of others. The only explanation that was given to my friend who was extraordinarily fit, didn't smoke and ate well, was that he was unlucky or that there was a possible predisposition to lung cancer and the factors all combined. Personally, I feel that there may be a link to stress but this wasn't the case for this friend. While I have a family history of bowel cancer, the geneticists are still trying to work out whether mine was the inherited type. I haven't got my head around all the terminology yet.I had a stressful job (teaching)and was overweight but that was probably linked to stress as well. I had had a colonoscopy 2 years before my dx due to my family history and was clear. My 30mm tumour grew in 2 years - go figure!I understand that there has been established a strong link between weight and exercise and bowel cancer but I think we have to be careful to ensure that we don't lay guilt on ourselves. Sailor, I do enjoy your quotes at the end of each post!! Samex

[Kate_Unicorn]

Hi Everyone, Sorry, we appear to have another "visitor" to our site posting some innapropriate links - I have reported these and hopefully things will be tidied up shortly. Cheers, Kate

[#6]

It's interesting that the statistics generally exclude the non-melanoma skin cancers, which are squamous and basal cell carcinoma. I'd be interested in knowing why this is the case. SCC and BCC are statistically the most common cancers in Australia (which might be why they are excluded) but primarily occur in people over 50 and are rare and aggressive in young people. I had SCC of the tongue at 29 (I've never smoked either), and my ENT specialist said he knew of only ONE other case in the whole country of oral SCC in a patient under 35. Non-melanoma skin cancers could potentially be an excellent 'control' group for research into the characteristics of cancer biology, specifically in young people.

[#7]

You all probably know my story by now...my husband was diagosed with secondary liver cancer(unknown primary)at 35 years of age. He died a year later. Can I tell you that at our children's school(infants department only), Andy was the 5th parent to be diagnosed with cancer within two years. And this includes only the people who have 'come out' with the disease. Some people decide to keep their disease private. I'm no expert, but when I was growing up, it wasn't a common occurance that my friends parents were struck by life threatening illnesses. Sal

[Wilmo34]

In some cancers i would say yes. Melanoma is highest and most deadly in the 25-48 age group. As a whole cancer survival rates are up (30% of the last 30yrs) but if you look at the YA group there has been no survival increase in the same time frame. I think its because the YAs are now more vocal then ever which can only be a good thing.

[bugger]

Is it possible that we are becoming to clean? Some cancers (lymphomas) are on the increase in the Western world but not in 3rd world countries. There is some thought that as youngsters we are not exposed to enough bugs to build our immune system.

[Sailor]

Hi Wilmo34 One of the problems with making a statement that there has been no survival increase in the last thirty years in a particular group, is that it doesn't say what the underlying survival rate is. A couple of years ago I heard Archie Bleyer talk about the lack of increase in survival in the 20 - 40 age group. I had been quoting his North American data for a while. So I decided to see what the Australian data was. So I looked up the data from the Australian Institute of Health and Welfare website and didn't get the same story. I did a bit more enquiring and then someone pointed out to me that you need to look at the underlying survival rate first. So for childhood cancer the rate was fairly low and now it is good so there has been a big improvement in the last thirty years. For cancer in the 60+ age group the story is rather similar. For the 20 - 40 year age group, the survival rate was fairly high thirty years so any improvement can only show up as a small survival increase. Let me take some numbers. If thirty years ago the five year survival rate was was 30% - i.e. on average 30% survived 5 years. In that period the survival rate is lifted to 50%, then that is (50-30)/30 - a 60% relative increase in survival! If thirty years ago the survival rate was 80% and in the next thirty years that increases to 90% , then that is (90-80)/80 - a 12% relative increase in survival! If you play around with the figures, if you started with a 80% five year survival and lifted that to 100%, you would still only have a 13% increase in survival. From memory, the five year survival for all cancer in the 20 - 40 age group was of the order of 80% thirty years ago in Australia and is now of the order of 85% (I could be wrong as I haven't dredged through the data again and I am relying on memory) so you can't expect huge survival increase, expressed as percentages, for that age group. Now that does not detract from the needs of AYA's with cancer. They are a group whose supportive care needs have not been met. They are a group where the impact of cancer is huge as they are people with family responsibilities, huge financial commitments. It is just that their survival statistics have ben good for the past thirty or so years. Regards Sailor An incorrectly identified mark is a hazard, not an aid, to navigation. Alton B. Moody