Scientists think the RISE in early-onset diagnoses may be changes to lifestyle factors in young people What do you think.? This is happening in Australia at an Alarming rate. For younger Australians, the growth in cancer rates has been “appreciably greater than population growth”, a Health and Welfare report noted. In the previous two decades, the incidence of bowel cancer in 20- to 39-year-olds more than doubled, from 4.4 to 10.3 cases per 100,000 people. Over the same period, thyroid cancer rates jumped from 6.5 to an estimated 10.9 cases per 100,000. https://apple.news/Azc3IesQWSzetzrpblPjNWA
That article really gave no insights. The talk about the increased consumption of red meats, but that's nothing particular to people under 50. They talked about age and obesity, yet the main character was under 40 and was a personal trainer. Here's what I got from cancer.gov: -The rate of bowel/colon cancer is rising among young adults --The rate is still tiny..."well under" 1% -American Indian, Alaskan Native, and Whites have experienced the greatest increase --Blacks are still more likely to get the disease, but the gap is narrowing -Similar trends have also been documented in Canada, New Zealand, Australia, and some parts of Europe and Asia. In most of these places, the number of cases in younger adults started trending upward around 1995. --Some factors that raise the risk in older adults, including obesity, physical inactivity, and smoking (none of which apply to the 39 year old personal trainer.) Most of the discussions about the possible causes of early-onset disease converged on three interrelated factors: diet, bacteria in the gut (possible antibiotic overuse), and inflammation. But no one really knows the exact reasons at this time. It's interesting that there's this media attention over an increase of a malady that is still a rate well under 1%.
I was wondering if they wanted to beat the "you're eating too much red meat" drum. What stinks is I recall devouring articles on health in order to increase the breadth and the depth of my understanding. Now I read them and wonder which lie they're pitching. It sucks.
I copied this from the link of the article @John Brunner This was in the nightly news as a major Heath concern for younger Aussies, so who do we believe I personally believe the lack of consumption of fruit and veggies is way down in the younger generation. For younger Australians, the growth in cancer rates has been “appreciably greater than population growth”, a 2021 Australian Institute of Health and Welfare report noted. In the previous two decades, the incidence of bowel cancer in 20- to 39-year-olds more than doubled, from 4.4 to 10.3 cases per 100,000 people. Over the same period, thyroid cancer rates jumped from 6.5 to an estimated 10.9 cases per 100,000.
That very well could be true. A few years ago, my local Walmart was undergoing a remodel of the grocery section. I was hoping that they would be expanding the produce department, since it is woefully under-stocked. Nope. They reduced the "from scratch" cooking products and expanded the snacks & processed foods. Sadly, this is in response to demand for processed stuff (or lack thereof for produce.) I would like to know more about the personal trainer in that article. One would assume that he would have a healthier-than-average diet. I could not find if he has a website for his business to read more about him. Here's another article where his cancer story is the sole focus. But it only talks about his cancer experience, and nothing about his lifestyle. One would think a personal trainer's diagnosis would be a great opportunity to start weeding out causal issues (bad diet, no exercies) and to focus on what's left (bad environment.)
I haven't seen any young person eat well in a long time. They eat nothing but fast food and are always dragging around huge bottles of soda and eating some kind of junk food, and the amounts of this stuff they consume is huge. I think a lot of “trainers” are focused on those muscle building energy drinks that can be bought in huge containers at any health food store. Plus, I think they take multiple supplements for the same purpose, instead of eating 3 healthy square meals a day but I don’t know that for sure. It is just what I have observed and listen to on occasion, when I visited the health food store and the gym. Trainers may look good, but I don’t think they really eat all that well. I had a routine doctor’s visit a while back. I had to fill out a new form, which I never had to do before. The form was a cancer assessment risk paper. It asked if I, or any of my family members, which include parents, grandparents, aunts, uncles, siblings, and half siblings, has had any of the cancers (and the list had particularly every cancer listed) listed, and what age when diagnosed. They only wanted me to check the box and answer the questions, if I or a family member had any of the cancers before the age of 49. I asked the receptionist, why I had to fill this out because I was a little past the age of 49. Her answer…everyone has to fill it out now. My cynical mind has it’s suspicions as to why. Several hospitals were sold out to a larger one awhile back. They want the doctors to order more tests, more money.
That's interesting. I've had to fill out the Family Cancer History stuff at most doctors, but there's never been an "At What Age" question. Honestly, I don't mind more tests. I had some issues 5 years ago that cause my doctor to prescribe a full body CT scan. It discovered a few unrelated issues: a bladder stone and a kidney cyst (that ended up being benign.) There are serious things that are easily remedied if caught early when they are asymptomatic. It's interesting that not too long ago there was concern over people "overusing" medical resources, and now those tests seem to be an often-recommended revenue stream. I've had a couple of CT scans and some number of MRIs, and I've never had to wait any significant amount of time to have them scheduled. The shortage seems to be one of doctors, not one of equipment or technicians.
I have always had to fill out a family cancer history form too, but this age before 49 thing threw me. I told the receptionist that all my answers would be blank. However, I told her my dad died of colon cancer and shouldn't I mark that? She said no, not if he didn't have it before the age of 49.
THAT doesn't make sense. Are we setting our Life Expectancy sights a little lower there days? I could not find an internet answer to my general search on why is age 49 a threshold, but I found a women's clinic intake form that had the "Age 49" threshold on Breast Cancer, Colon Cancer and Uterine Cancer. All other familial cancers had no age qualifier. I would be tempted to note "Over Age 49 Incidents" by each to put the doctor on notice.
Who knows? Maybe they’ve gotten better at catching it early with all these at home kits available now. Maybe success with other cancers mean more people live long enough to get colon cancer instead. I’d hate to be the one to try to tease clean data out of all this mess, especially with such small variations in numbers.
Yup. The articles did make reference to the fact that modern diagnostics were not the reasons, but as you said, when the total number is "well under 1%," we're kind of talking Standard Deviations, huh? I still think we're getting set up to Eat Mo' Bugs.
This was in TV this morning a doctor chatting about the same topic I bought up ….she was saying allot is related to the gut And Modern food lifestyles effecting an alarming proportion of young people in Australia with that C word. So take good care of our gut ….
She’s a doctor , she mentioned consuming high fibre foods ,was chatting more about the rise in cancer cases in Australia I’ll look if I can find the segment it was only on morning TV 10 min ago it’s on channel nine…