06.08.06
More on increased incidence of cancer
More on cancer screening. Remember my previous posts on the value of increased diagnosis and treatment of cancers, which may not be entirely necessary? See this from today’s IT
“Report warns incidence of cancer to almost double in next 14 years
The incidence of cancer is projected to almost double here in the next 14 years, a report from the national Cancer Registry (NCR) warns.
While the total number of new cancers is predicted to increase by 90 per cent by 2020, some of the largest increases are expected in cancer of the prostate (a 275 per cent increase), kidney (160 per cent for women and 200 per cent for men) and melanoma (130 per cent increase in women and 170 per cent in men). ...
However, the Health Services Executive (HSE) must be proactive in addressing these increases, he added. The growing numbers of people diagnosed with cancers will place a significant extra burden on health services and this must be taken into account when planning for staffing and capital investment.
..Action to reduce cancer will have only a limited impact "as much of the anticipated increase in numbers will be caused by the growing number of older people in the population".
Seems to me that it maybe time for a cost/benefit analysis. What's the point in loading money into trying to prevent cancers in an ageing population, (since cancer is primarily an aging disease) and then screen and treat those cancers with perhaps limited success - certainly in terms of affecting the death rates - since as discussed earlier, we acknoweldge that cancers in the elderly don't always kill them (they die "with" rather than "of" the cancer. Obviously these decisions are made on a case by case basis but...maybe we should not automatically assume that finding and treating cancers automatically saves lives and is indisputably good for all patients.
graham said,
June 8, 2006 at 12:11 pm
hi Sarah
This kind of ‘scientific’ report really annoys me. They predict that the total number of new cancers will increase by 90% by 2020. On what basis? The 270% increase in prostate cancer! Based on the findings of which crystal ball?
This is blatant scare mongering. There is no way to predict an actual increase in the incidence of any cancer. They can predict an increase in diagnosis, but even so, that doesn’t alter the death rates significantly. Unless there is some factor that they believe will lead to this rapid rise in cancers I really think they should be spending their money on more worthwhile projects.
I accept that an ageing population will lead to increased cancer rates, but as you rightly pointed out, that doesn’t mean those people will die from those cancers. And also, often the side effects from cancer treatments have a greater impact on the quality of life than if the cancer was left alone. This is of particular concern for elderly people.
Pete said,
June 8, 2006 at 12:16 pm
>Seems to me that it maybe time for a cost/benefit analysis.
Why not just go the whole hog and withdraw all state-funded medical care from everyone over the age of 60? They won’t be generating enough wealth for the country to make treatment cost-effective, in fact the most cost-effective thing they can do it die quickly. Actually, lets make it 50, most people’s productivity is in decline by then anyway. And lets include the long-term unemployed, and the disabled, and those who less than 200 points in the leaving cert. And ugly people.
Pip Hayes said,
June 8, 2006 at 1:19 pm
For those of you interested in a considered debate on human popuulation, including ageing populations- visit http://www.optimumpopulation.org
Join up if you agree this needs to be on the political agenda.
John of Dublin said,
June 8, 2006 at 2:39 pm
There is much sense in what you say Sarah.
My mother was in hospital for tests at age of 87 in 2001. They kept her in for two weeks with all sorts of tests as they said there was some mass in her lung area.. She was very stressed and confused and was rather senile anyway at this stage.
They told me after the two weeks in hospital that they wanted to do a more serious investigation. So I asked them what they thought might be wrong and they said that it could be something cancerous. I then asked them what they would do if they did all the heavy tests and discovered cancer. They said they could do virtually nothing because of her age and her having a weak heart but if it did progress it would be very slow. On that basis I discussed the logic of it all with them – they were causing her huge distress already, now wanting to do a very stressful further investigation, and they were in effective reality putting her though all this mainly for professional curiousity.
So we all agreed it was better for my mother to be discharged from hospital. She eventually died peacefully and with dignity in a nice room in her nursing home from failure of her weak heart.
As I tell this story I feel pangs of guilt again but the best advise I had was that nothing useful could result from all the invasive barrage of tests – except that we would know if the mass was cancerous.
Sarah said,
June 8, 2006 at 2:59 pm
Sounds like you did the right thing John. In fact, when my grandmother die eventually, at 96, she was brought into hospital and we were told she had liver cancer. But the doctor admitted that she could have had this for years and years. She was just old, and dying of old age, not cancer.
Billy Waters said,
August 8, 2006 at 12:13 pm
Ireland has zero interest in preventing cancer.
When we close down quangos like the NDC, Bord Bia and stop putting flourine in the water we will lower our cancer rate.
In all fairness if you watch the ad with the cartoon cows drinking milk (Cows don’t drink milk being all grown up) with the pizza on the table how can you say we have any care for our health.
http://www.pcrm.org/health/prevmed/dairy_prostate.html
And Tallaght is the pizza capital of the world according to the Sunday Times. I challenge you to find me a healthy skinny person that lives on pizza. Health food my arse.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2091-2291359.html
We need a reasoned debate about food and diet in this country. But I doubt it wil lever happen because the food companies are too powerful and the farmers they doth whinge.
Cancer. We as a country could not care less. I mean its not going to happen to us is it? Individual cases we will hilight but the underlying cause is never going to be tackled becasue there is money involved.