Lung cancer screening should be used more broadly and improved over time in a data driven fashion!
We can catch things early, it shouldn’t be limited to only for smokers.
Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
131–140 of 361 posts
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#132I used to live by a busy street in a semi-dense part of town. Cars would be going around 45mph. When I moved from that apartment after 4 years. I was shocked by the amount of black dust covering everything. from the walls to the shelves and floors. I think it was all tire pollution so switching to 100% electric won't mitigate. It was pretty shocking and I wondered how much i increased my risk for lung cancer or other…
Tires and brake dust (yuck)
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
The present value of $7 in 35 years is $1.45, assuming a risk free rate of 4.5%. Paying $2940 over 35 years is much more affordable than paying $2940 up front. If the goal is to be rational about risk, let's right-size the numbers. Otherwise our figures will be misleading.
You're not going to spend a fixed price over time. You're going to consume a fixed amount of energy and pay an increasing rate as the dollar inflates.
Ideally we'd model all relevant parameters, my main point is that presenting the cost as $2940 is misleading.
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#134Among certain groups of Asian and Asian American women, that share is estimated to be 50 percent or more.
I suspect certain perfumes may be causing it.
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#135Among certain groups of Asian and Asian American women, that share is estimated to be 50 percent or more. I suspect certain perfumes may be causing it.
Or perhaps cooking? Cooking can really spike AQI if ventilation is suboptimal.
Another potential explanation is cleaning products.
I think these are both far more likely than perfume, as there is a much stronger link between AQI and lung cancer than perfume and lung cancer (if there is any at all).
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
For 93% of people the only cost is the $15 test kit to verify "yep, don't need to even think about it". For the other 7% that then need to really do a cost-benefit the data is out there but you do need to go through your specific circumstances to get a meaningful number. The risk levels vary vastly (orders of magnitudes) between both the radon level and your life choices/situation, so it's relatively meaningless to s…
Yeah, this is the correct heuristic. Spend $15 or $100 for one or two measurements, *then* worry about cost to mitigate.
Our local library system offers these to borrow for six-week spans (or whatever the length of the testing is). It’s a one-and-done deal and you’re good for as long as you stay in your home. Batteries included.
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#137The second leading cause of lung cancer is radon. My high schooler came home and said her science teacher said everyone should do a radon test. I scoffed, but humored her by getting a kit from Home Depot and sending it away to a lab. The results came back very high. So I purchased an electronic radon monitor and it showed almost the exact same results. Well, crap. I installed a radon mitigation system and now the num…
The difficult thing for me is that while I believe radon can cause lung cancer, I think products are often sold based on fear. “Second leading cause” doesn’t really mean anything in isolation, does it? What slice of my mortality pie was radon before and after spending $5000? Could I spend $5000 to cut a bigger slice out of it in another way, like eating better or hiring a grizzly bear to make me exercise more often?…
> What slice of my mortality pie was radon before and after spending $5000?
You'll never know. The same way people in the exclusion zone will never know if their thyroid cancer was always destined to be or if it really was related to the Chernobyl meltdown.
But spending (closer to $1000) to mitigate some risk from a known threat vector does seem thrifty.
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#138I used to live by a busy street in a semi-dense part of town. Cars would be going around 45mph. When I moved from that apartment after 4 years. I was shocked by the amount of black dust covering everything. from the walls to the shelves and floors. I think it was all tire pollution so switching to 100% electric won't mitigate. It was pretty shocking and I wondered how much i increased my risk for lung cancer or other…
This might actually be brake dust. In that case, the situation most likely will be improved by electric cars because they use their brakes far less often, decelerating with their motors.
I've heard that regenerative braking helps, but the relatively higher mass of an electric car (because of the battery) hurts. I wonder how it adds up in terms of brake dust produced.
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#139[dead]
Re: Many lung cancers are now in nonsmokers
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
It would be radon, wouldn’t it?
... well that is irrational
I can’t find any complete numbers (most prevalent factors after smoking would be environmental, and therefore underreported, especially when as hard to detect as radon), but national health agencies tend to put the Radon section second, after Smoking [1,2]. An uncited figure on a Hopkins webpage suggests 30% of non-smoking lung cancer cases are caused by Radon [3]. Among the well-known environmental factors (asbestos, secondhand smoke), it seems to be about equal for risk increase [4]. Given that asbestos and secondhand smoke are on the decline, it stands to reason that radon will tend toward being the top cause, barring a rise in prevalence of one of the disease risk factors (asthma, pneumonia, HIV, tuberculosis).
Of course this is all moot because vaping will be revealed to be the current #1 cause of lung cancer in the coming decades, by a long shot. No citation necessary.
[1] https://www.cdc.gov/lung-cancer/risk-factors/index.html
[2] https://www.nhs.uk/conditions/lung-cancer/causes/
[3] https://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/health/conditions-and-diseas...