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?

Yes and we need to start holding big corporations to account for this.

Micorplastics disrupt hormones. It’s not good that the age of puberty is getting lower and lower.

By just claiming fat unhealthy people get cancer we take the focus off the environmental factors. That governments should be investigating.

I think a large part of it is perception too. I was a teenager when Kylie Minogue had breast cancer and remember thinking it wasn't such a big deal, she wasn't that young - she was 36

When it's your parents' generation getting sick you don't really notice it, it's only when your friends start that it hits home.

(Not disputing the increasing rates but I think our perception makes the increases seem higher than they are iykwim.)

DH and I are mid-40s. I'd say we have 25-30 close (enough that we would invite them to a wedding if we got married now) friends between us who are a similar age (45 - 50).

4 of those have been diagnosed with cancer in the last year. It's replaced 'how many people do we know who are getting divorced' as a topic of conversation.

Possibly, but that doesn't explain the increase in case rates. There are various different hypotheses that you could come up with for why parents with cancer-prone genes might be more likely to survive and have children over time, but none of them fit the facts and the dates.

Surely a lot of it is likely to be down to earlier and improved detection?

It's not just that. Loads of reputable researchers have concluded that there are genuine increases in cancer incidence pre-50, especially bowel cancers, but others as well.
https://news.cancerresearchuk.org/2023/01/24/early-onset-cancer-why-are-more-young-adults-being-diagnosed/

I am not even slightly a scientist, but I spend a lot of time with haem and onc professionals at work. Quite a lot of them enjoy explaining their work in a dumbed down way so I hear some interesting stuff.

The hypothesis that I hear the most is stuff about cancer 'switches' - the idea that to get cancer you need, say, 9 different switches in your system all to be on 'on'. So one switch might be activated when you're in the womb, another when you get a bug your body deals with a bit badly when you're under 2, then 3 more switches are lifestyle ones, 2 are switched on by something in your environment, etc etc and you need every switch to be on to get cancer. That makes sense to me because cancer is almost never a simple cause=effect, we all know lifelong overweight smokers who don't get it and super fit vegetarian athletes who do. And it makes sense that our diet, lifestyle etc do have an effect, but aren't the whole story.

That's my twopenneth anyway. Cancers don't have a simple cause, and people whom get cancer aren't to blame for it.

I'm sorry about your DS

His consultant isn't being nice, there really is no evidence of anything that causes rhabdo or anything you can do to prevent it. Honestly. I work in an adjacent field and I have known the sarcoma team at a major hospital well for many years, not once have I ever heard any suggestion at all that a rhabdo has a known cause, ever. It's not your or his fault, it's really shit luck.

Re: the "myth", thank you for saying this. Plenty people abuse their health but don’t get cancer. When you’re handed the dreaded diagnosis, reflecting on how you may have caused it yourself is agony and helps not one bit, but yet we are bombarded by dietary and lifestyle advice.

I often feel that the stress and pressure put on people to be healthy, go running, hit the gym every day at 5am for two hours, walk, eat plants only, no UPC, 15 f+v a day, work hard, give your kids a healthy life, look after parents, and everything else in between leads to serious health outcomes. Cancer being the principal one at the age people in general are able to do all the above!

Maybe that's why indolent, overweight people often escape this illness.

I think stress can play a big part too, especially if you’re already predisposed. I know two people who went through horrendous bereavements and were then diagnosed with cancer themselves within the next year.

agree about stress being a trigger. I do think it's weird that so many think cancer is a lifestyle disease & being healthy you can escape it.

Even so people are still living a lot longer than they used to

Healthy life expectancy hasn't increased though has it?

That’s really interesting - a friend observed that she has know a couple of people
who went through a stressful divorce and then were diagnosed with cancer the following year.

Could it be connected to the fact that successive generations seem to be getting taller and taller? I vaguely remember reading somewhere that human growth factor is a driver of cell proliferation. Correct me if I've misunderstood this, please.

I was going to say about stress too. I remember thinking how sad it was that Jill Saward and Stephanie Slater both died of cancer after suffering extreme trauma years earlier. Obviously thats just 2, but thats 2 in the public eye . We very often don't know what trauma our friends have suffered before we met them or maybe they don't even mention it.

Edit - sorry just seen that Jill Saward died of a stroke, not cancer. Still I think strokes are related to stress too.

Anyway, don't want to derail the thread which is obviously about cancer.

@NotSuchASmugMarriedAnymore sadly, Stephanie Slater became a alcoholic which likely also played a part. She was so courageous & it’s uncredible she lived through ordeal.

Cornettoninja what sort of checks do you mean .? Id love to have them as lost my df and dg to cancer .

body scan ?

anyone know what wd be useful.

I think that rates of some types of cancer are rising because of lifestyle choices that perhaps didnt apply in the past (more tar and additives in ciggies etc). But generally I just think that diagnosis rates are increasing due to improvements in medical diagnostics

Surely that can’t be right, though. Death certificates will reveal if there was cancer. It’s not just about early diagnosis. And fewer people smoke these days. I personally believe growth in cancer rates are down to toxins in the environment- in plastics particularly, ultraprocessed food, hormones in the food chain, etc. I think “lifestyle choices” is far too easy a getout for those who think it could never happen to them.

"It's replaced 'how many people do we know who are getting divorced' as a topic of conversation."

@deepsea9

Sorry but I really laughed out loud at that, and am laughing again typing this. Sorry All.

My friend who had a family member die of bowel cancer goes to her home country every year to get a full (private) preventative check up she wouldn't get on the NHS. I don't think she gets MRIs though. There are other ways to check.
I wish mole mapping was more of a thing in the UK.

I was diagnosed at 38. I really had to push for genetic testing. I have two gene mutations linked to cancer.

What sorts of cancer? And at what age? The answer to those questions should guide your choices. And what other specific risk factors do you have?

For example, I'm low risk for most cancers but used sun beds as an idiot teen so I get private annual mole checks.

Perhaps children with genetic disposition to cancers tended to die from childhood diseases in the past, Who knows, but the genetic problems may have lowered their resistance to other diseases. Many children used to die young that now survive due to vaccination and better treatments.