4 ms·
"They found that in 2019, there were 3.26 million cases of early-onset cancer diagnosed worldwide – a 79% increase since 1990" Or you know, it could be that ea
by siva7 3y ago
"They found that in 2019, there were 3.26 million cases of early-onset cancer diagnosed worldwide – a 79% increase since 1990"
Or you know, it could be that early-onset cancer diagnosis simply improved but that wouldn't make for some shitty clickbait.
- misja111 3y agoNot to mention that world population went up by 60% in that period, so it would have been very strange if cancer diagnoses had stayed at the same number.
- jncfhnb 3y agoThe article isn’t good about terminology but it it’s incidence rates.
- jncfhnb 3y agoThat was my gut reaction too, minus the overconfident snark. Later the article claims that cancer deaths are also up 28% so it seems unlikely that this is the full story.
- glandium 3y agoThat could still be due to increased detection.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jncfhnb 3y agoSeems unlikely to my layman perspective. Tumors aren’t hard to identify in an autopsy. Do we really think we have gotten so much better at detecting cancers proactively that led to death that would not have been discovered after it killed them?
- glandium 3y agoDo you think all deaths are autopsied? https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/autopsy-rate https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/autopsy-rate
- jncfhnb 3y agoNo, but I don’t think that you can get 30% more deaths from young people from a failure to measure cause of death. You can caveat that to western society if you want.
- wouldbecouldbe 3y agoYeah that's part of it, but to easy to dismiss it as such. Breast cancer for instance also has been on the rise for the last century, and that's pretty hard not to diagnose: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9038417/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9038417/
- wouldbecouldbe 3y agoOne of the most interesting facts I've read in breast cancer studies is that not breast feeding in twenties seems be a pretty high risk factor for developing breast cancer.
- stareatgoats 3y agosource, please
- hackeraccount 3y agoThe closest I've seen to that is that having children (with each additional child providing a bit more) adds a protective effect. https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/hormones/reproductive-history-fact-sheet#:~:text=The%20risk%20of%20breast%20cancer,not%20given%20birth%20(7) https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/h.... The risk of breast cancer declines with the number of children borne. Women who have given birth to five or more children have half the breast cancer risk of women who have not given birth
- stareatgoats 3y agomany thanks - that's an interesting correlation! and the first I've heard of it. If there is a causal relationship here then that would surely account for a certain percentage of the change in cancer rate under discussion here, as women (in developed countries) tend to get their children ever later in life, and fewer of them.
- wouldbecouldbe 3y ago
- celdon25 3y agoOr you know, cancer rates are actually going up.
- nonethewiser 3y agoTo be clear, what you describe would be people that get cancer anytime before 50 then either die without knowing its cancer or live with it until they are 50+ and get diagnosed.
- TaupeRanger 3y agoThat, combined with more widespread, accurate, and centralized systems of medical recording are almost certainly the reason for purported "rise", though there are probably specific cancers that are really more prevalent now, like colon cancer.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]