Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 171 posts

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#131

Post by Declanomous »

randomgyatwork wrote: post #125
roldie wrote: post #106

>A bigger concern to me is that people might interpret these findings as assigning fault to people who get cancer. You don’t want to get into situations where you feel as if people don’t deserve help because they didn’t try hard enough to stay healthy. Much of cancer is still out of people’s control. Although only one paragraph, I'm glad the author addressed this. All of these tips and lifestyle changes are great but…

I agree, a woman who worked for my mom died of lung cancer, she never smoked once in her life.

Lung cancer is most closely associated with smoking, but lung cancer can be caused by many air contaminants. Radon is the second leading cause of lung cancer, causing 21,000 deaths each year. About 2,900 of those people are non-smokers.[1]

Cancer can be caused by things other than mutagens though. There is a certain rate of transcription errors when cells divide, and these errors can build up in the same way mutations from radiation, etc. build up. Things that kill cells and force them to divide speed up cell division, and can cause cancer that way. For instance, acid reflux and drinking can both cause esophageal cancer.

You can also get cancer from just being extraordinarily unlucky.

[1] https://www.epa.gov/radon/health-risk-radon

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#133

Post by sliverstorm »

sosborn wrote: post #14
amock wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's wrong with BMI for something like this? It's such a simple measure and it seems to be useful for predicting health issues. From what I've read body fat percentage is what really matters, but accurately calculating that takes expensive equipment. http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/projects/cp/summer-of-sci... seems to indicate that BMI does a pretty good job, although it may be too generous on the high end.

> It's such a simple measure and it seems to be useful for predicting health issues. It is good for predicting in general populations, but can easily fall apart with individuals. It doesn't take into account what the makeup of your mass is. Muscle is denser than fat, so a muscular man and a fat man of the same height and weight would have the same BMI, but vastly different health profiles.

I think the sort of person to be incredibly muscular is probably also one of the most likely groups to get body fat measurements, and be educated about the limitations of BMI. Because that person is almost certainly a bodybuilder, serious athlete, etc.

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#134

Post by rsync »

MicroBerto wrote: post #108

I recently wrote an article discussing how increased fruits and vegetables can prevent mortality from cardiovascular diseases , yet not cancer.[1] My conclusion was that cancer is best prevented by removing negatives from life, not necessarily adding positives. ie avoid anything from stress to pollution to sunburn to obviously smoking. Interestingly, organic food doesn't seem to matter in the cancer equation, given t…

"My conclusion was that cancer is best prevented by removing negatives from life, not necessarily adding positives."

I'm also skeptical that adding foods/vitamins/supplements will prevent cancer.

However, there is one area that adding things seems to be very beneficial, and that is adding things that promote regular bowel movements.

There have been studies of heavy coffee drinkers and their reduced risks of colon cancer. Everyone is looking for some mysterious phenol or antioxidant from the coffee as a magic elixir, but I think it should be obvious that coffee as a laxative is the agent here.

There's also the age-old rule of thumb: an apple a day keeps the doctor away. It's not the apple, it's the fiber.

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#135

Post by sliverstorm »

roldie wrote: post #106

>A bigger concern to me is that people might interpret these findings as assigning fault to people who get cancer. You don’t want to get into situations where you feel as if people don’t deserve help because they didn’t try hard enough to stay healthy. Much of cancer is still out of people’s control. Although only one paragraph, I'm glad the author addressed this. All of these tips and lifestyle changes are great but…

On the bright side, I hear from medical friends that being otherwise really healthy is helpful because the doctors can hit you a lot harder with treatments like chemo and expect you to survive it.

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#136

Post by yaks_hairbrush »

bbarn wrote: post #88
l1feh4ck wrote: post #44

To guys out there who still smoke. Please quit. It can be done.

I think as a culture (speaking here in the US) we've made quitting smoking out to be much harder than it actually is. One of the problems with this massive marketing campaign saying things like "You can quit with help!", etc.. is it's focusing on how difficult it's supposed to be. After 20 years or so of being a smoker, I just decided I didn't want to be embarrassed about the way I smelled in elevators anymore, and q…

It's great that you had it easy. I didn't. When I quit nicotine about two years ago, I got kicked into a deep depression that lasted about 3 months (Worth noting: I had a history with depression). I developed panic attacks (and I had no previous history with those).

On the plus side:

1. I quit and stayed quit.

2. I'm mostly back to my old self. No more depression or panic attacks. Not now, and never again!

3. The whole experience cost me so much that I doubt I'll feel much temptation to use nicotine ever again.

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#137

Post by MicroBerto »

rsync wrote: post #134
MicroBerto wrote: post #108

I recently wrote an article discussing how increased fruits and vegetables can prevent mortality from cardiovascular diseases , yet not cancer.[1] My conclusion was that cancer is best prevented by removing negatives from life, not necessarily adding positives. ie avoid anything from stress to pollution to sunburn to obviously smoking. Interestingly, organic food doesn't seem to matter in the cancer equation, given t…

"My conclusion was that cancer is best prevented by removing negatives from life, not necessarily adding positives." I'm also skeptical that adding foods/vitamins/supplements will prevent cancer. However, there is one area that adding things seems to be very beneficial, and that is adding things that promote regular bowel movements. There have been studies of heavy coffee drinkers and their reduced risks of colon can…

That's a great point. Thanks!

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#138

Post by gmarx »

rsync wrote: post #134
MicroBerto wrote: post #108

I recently wrote an article discussing how increased fruits and vegetables can prevent mortality from cardiovascular diseases , yet not cancer.[1] My conclusion was that cancer is best prevented by removing negatives from life, not necessarily adding positives. ie avoid anything from stress to pollution to sunburn to obviously smoking. Interestingly, organic food doesn't seem to matter in the cancer equation, given t…

"My conclusion was that cancer is best prevented by removing negatives from life, not necessarily adding positives." I'm also skeptical that adding foods/vitamins/supplements will prevent cancer. However, there is one area that adding things seems to be very beneficial, and that is adding things that promote regular bowel movements. There have been studies of heavy coffee drinkers and their reduced risks of colon can…

When I was young the idea that high fiber reduces colon cancer risk was very high profile and based on pretty stupid studies. Later when more rigorous studies failed to find an association, no one noticed. It's like antioxidants and a host of other "eat this and you'll live forever" studies/stories.

Regular bowel movements are their own reward!

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#139

Post by Stwerner »

l1feh4ck wrote: post #44

To guys out there who still smoke. Please quit. It can be done.

One trick that worked for me (pack+ a day smoker for 5+ years) was not exactly calling it "quitting". I had tried quitting a bunch of times, but every time I had a lapse in will power and had a cigarette, the justification to start again basically went "oh well, guess I failed quitting, time to go out and buy a pack."

When I changed my mindset to more of a "I just don't really smoke anymore." it was ok to have one every once in a while when I was out with friends and not feel like I failed. Now I'm basically down to only one cigarette a year or two when I'm with old friends, and I usually feel bad enough in the morning after it that I don't really have any desire to smoke again for a long time.

Re: Helpless to Prevent Cancer? Actually, Quite a Bit Is in Your Control

#140

Post by Tenhundfeld »

15charlimit wrote: post #114
Pica_soO wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I would think it only fair to put the burden of the health damage on the company who sells addictive products. If you sell cigarettes and a customer looses part of the lung, you pay or behave to prevent. If you sell alcohol and a customer drives a car in a crowd, you pay or behave to prevent. If you are a narco and sell crack, you pay for the results. The problem is not the unknown problems with those substances, its…

By that logic, no individual is responsible for anything they ever do because just about everything is "addictive" or "habit forming" in some way. Your suggestion is terrible for a number of reasons, but primarily due to the shirking of personal responsibility that it promotes. Should Hershey be required to pay medical costs for morbidly obese individuals because they eat a dozen chocolate bars a day? Sugar is a high…

Ugh, what a nasty little, finger-pointing, stone-casting society you seem to desire. Is there anything that you'd blame on society/industry/government, or is it always 100% the individual's fault?
Post reply on HN