To think cancer is rising exponentially in under 55s?

[Peverellshire]

Anecdotes not data, but:

1. Kidney cancer that’s spread - friend - fit, well, 52, diagnosed after routine check for something else. Spread to other organs, no symptoms
2. Triathlete colleague, 52 years. Stomach/ bowel cancer, spread. Diagnosed after, a sudden, violent, stomach upset. Stage 4.
3. Colleague / stage 4 bowel cancer, aged 47, no real symptoms.

Numerous other acquaintances in 50-55 bracket.

Should we have ‘preventative’ MRIs?
To be expected in 50s as old/older?
Does it reflect your experience?

Both DH and I got cancer in our early 50s, twice. We were/are fit, not overweight, plant-based, non smokers and non drinkers. MRIs throw up all sorts of benign things, which would then need investigating. Even DH and I with our histories aren’t offered MRIs or any scans at all.

No, this is all anecdotal and nothing " clearly" about it. We have the data, what does it say?

I might as well say "clearly " most people stay married for decades as most of our close friends are silver wedding plus. But it would be stupid of me.

What's clear is that the general population needs a lot more education on how stats and evidence work

Yes.

OPs post may be anecdote but the data supports what she is saying. Cancers are rising in younger age groups.

My personal experiences matches OPs of young healthy people I know in their 40s and 50s being diagnosed with cancer.

I'm not convinced about all this healthy weight and exercise discussion about cancer . I think they certainly affect other illness eg heart disease , diabetes but I'm not sure about cancer .
I saw a consultant as I was on the 2 week pathway for a raised lymph node in my neck .
He had and asked me a shopping list of risk factors in this order, .
Did I have a family history of cancer
Did I smoke
Had I worked anywhere with chemicals of pesticides
Had I worked anywhere that had asbestos

Did I drink access alcohol
Nothing about diet and exercise habits .
When I was given the all clear I asked him about weight and he said no most of his patients are slim / normal .
My personal knowledge of people I've known with cancer have all been slim active people just very unlucky.
I hate people thinking those with cancer have somehow brought it on themselves.

The data says that cancer incidence in the under 50s has been steadily increasing for decades. See several links from reliable sources throughout the thread.

Yes, I know that researches have suggested that increasing rates of bowel cancer in younger people may be due to that cohort having a lot of highly processed food as children.

I think what's needed are good diligent gps
People report symptoms time and time again and get told it's viral should go away come back another time without even considering doing explorations. I am luckily with an excellent and very through gp practice who have has tracked me and my family for necessary tests when needed

Well this was a cheerful read on a Sunday afternoon

I think diet plays a huge part. Supermarkets these days are 10% natural state food and 90% UPF's. People seem very ignorant of the crap that they are shovelling into themselves... or are happy to take the chance with their health. It horrifies me what people feed their children under the food aversion labels. Kids wouldn't know they only like beige food unless they're given it in the first place.

Don't read it then! Your comment is not helpful to those like myself whose lives are affected by cancer every day.

Yes, I was saying this to a friend the other week. Just the past month I have heard of 3:

38 year old, stage 4 bowel
55 year old, stage 3 lungs and bones
37 year old, bladder which apparently is very rare.

Do you know what "exponentially" means?

DH and I have reached our early 60s and several of our friends have been diagnosed with one cancer or another over the last few years.

I put this down to age, and the fact that cancer is more diagnosable than it used to be. There are several types of cancer where it used to be more likely that people died WITH it rather than OF it (eg prostrate), but it's more diagnosed these days.

It's definately more prevelant, I see that around me, I don't need to look at stats, I know what I see.

There is someone in the modern lifestyle, probably UPF and pollution that is having a very bad effect on our health.

There is a significant impact from lifestyle on the likelihood of developing cancer
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41416-020-0741-x
'Adopting the healthiest lifestyle was associated with a 29 and 52% lower risk of incident cancer and cancer mortality compared with having the least healthy lifestyle

Body weight was also associated with several site-specific cancers: each five-unit increase in body mass index was associated with 5–50% higher risks of postmenopausal breast, colon and rectal, endometrial, oesophageal, gallbladder, kidney, liver, ovarian, pancreas, stomach cardia, and thyroid cancer, along with meningioma and multiple myeloma'

What you see is a tiny tiny field compared to national data. Think about it, how many people do you know? What proportion of the population of the UK do you think that is?

I'm not sure if it's arrogance or ignorance or both that makes you think that you can say that something is definite, based entirely on your own circle of acquaintances.

I feel by this constant victim blaming we are missing some
of the other environmental causes of cancer that accounts for 60%.

50% of us are going to get cancer. If you have 2 children that’s one of them. People need to wake up. It’s not all overweight, unhealthy people. I know it makes you feel better - that you can control this. That if you are a healthy weight and eat well you’ll escape. But not always the case. I’ve never met an overweight person with cancer. We are overplaying these factors and ignoring others.

I think people think they can control whether or not they get cancer with the whole diet and exercise thing. But I think so much of it is down to genetics.

All I'm saying is that I have a massive family full of fat, quite unhealthy people who don't exercise or eat well and yet none of them has, as of yet, had cancer. The only explanation for that can be genes.

Yes, genetics is a huge component. You can't control those.

And lifestyle factors do increase or decrease risk. You can control those, and therefore reduce your risk, albeit not eliminate it.

Being as those lifestyle choices will also reduce your risk of a whole other host of diseases and infirmities which will make your life crapper, its definitely better to adopt those healthy lifestyle choices rather than rely on having inherited lucky genes.

I don't disagree, I just don't like the victim blaming tone adopted by some of the posters on this thread.

It’s a very smug victim blaming too.

A former work colleague died of bowel cancer aged 40. They were very slim and put the weight loss and tiredness down to having taken up running.

Anecdotal evidence may not be enough, but there has been research that demonstrates that cancer rates among under 50s have risen significantly.

https://www.ed.ac.uk/news/2023/global-surge-in-cancer-cases-among-under-50s#:~:text=Global%20cancer%20cases%20in%20people,year%20now%20dying%20of%20cancer.

IIRC most people who get cancer young are likely to have a genetic predesposition. I believe Deborah James did. Cancers caused by lifestyle factors tend to fall in the older group.

There are also plenty of potential environmental factors that we cannot control by trying to "live healthily".

For example, we don't yet have any real idea what microplastics are doing to people's bodies. And everyone is ingesting those constantly - they're in the water, in our food etc...