Mens Health Blog. Medical Blog » Cancer

CAUSES OF CANCER: VIRAL AND MEDICAL FACTORS

admin — Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:28:02 +0000

Viral factorsThe chances of becoming infected with a “cancer virus” are very remote. Over the years, several forms of virus-induced cancers have been observed in laboratory animals and there is some indication that human beings display a similar tendency toward virally transmitted cancers. Evidence that the herpes-related viruses may be involved in the development of some forms of leukemia, Hodgkin’s disease, cervical cancer, and Burkitt’s lymphoma has surfaced in recent years. The Epstein-Barr virus, associated with mononucleosis, may also contribute to cancer development. Cervical cancer has also been linked to the human papillomavirus, the virus that causes genital warts.Although research is inconclusive, many scientists believe that selected viruses may help to provide an opportunistic environment for subsequent cancer development. It is likely that a combination of immunological bombardment by viral or chemical invaders and other risk factors substantially increases the risk of cancer.
Medical factorsIn some cases, medical treatment increases a person’s risk for cancer. One famous example is the widespread use of the prescription drug diethylstilbestrol (DES) during the years 1940 to 1960 to control problems with bleeding during pregnancy and to reduce the risk of miscarriage. It was not until the 1970s that the dangers of this drug became apparent. Although DES caused few side effects in the millions of women who took it, their daughters were found to have an increased risk for cancers of the reproductive organs.Some scientists claim that the use of estrogen replacement therapy among postmenopausal women is dangerous because it increases the risks for uterine cancer. Others believe that because estrogen is critical to the prevention of osteoporosis and heart disease in aging women, its use should not be curtailed.Numerous drug regimens given to patients in the form of chemotherapy to treat one cancer may also increase the risks of the patient developing other forms of cancer.*12/277/5*

LIFESTYLE FACTORS FOR CANCER DEVELOPMENT

admin — Mon, 14 Feb 2011 16:44:08 +0000

Over the years, an emerging pattern of higher risks for cancer among persons who engage (or do not engage) in selected lifestyle variables has captured the national attention. In particular, diet, sedentary lifestyle, consumption of alcohol and cigarettes, stress, and other health-related behaviors have provided fertile ground for speculation about risks. Many of the studies supporting these purported risks show associations with lifestyle risks, but they have not been shown conclusively to be a causal role in cancer development. For example, although international variability in breast cancer rates indicates that diet, especially fat intake, increases risk, a cause-and-effect relationship has not been established. Alcohol consumption, weight gain, and physical inactivity also appear to increase risk, but this same causal relationship continues to be inconclusive. Smoking has been one of the most researched areas of behavioral activity and is often cited as the major risk for lung cancer and chronic obstructive pulmonary diseases.
Likewise, colon and rectal cancer appears to occur more frequently among persons with a high-fat, low-fiber diet; in those who don’t eat enough fruits and vegetables; and in those who are inactive; yet we can’t say that these behaviors actually will cause cancer. Such clear-cut indicators are difficult to establish, and years of careful research will be needed to specifically pinpoint the mechanisms that act in the body to increase risk. For now, there is compelling evidence that certain are clearly associated with a greater than average risk of developing diseases. In any of these situations, apparent increases in risk provide fertile ground for behavior modification.
*6/277/5*

COLORECTAL CANCER

admin — Wed, 29 Dec 2010 16:24:36 +0000

The incidence of colorectal cancer in western countries ranks second only to cancer of the lung. It is unusual to see this malignancy before the age of 40 in both men and women and the incidence reaches its peak between the ages of 75 and 80 years. 50 per cent of large bowel malignancies occur within 12 inches of the anus. The most common presentation in such instances is the passage of blood with the bowel motions. In spite of the presence of hemorrhoids, a doctor must check for cancer of the colon in all cases of anal bleeding. It is worth repeating “If a doctor doesn’t put his finger in it, he puts his foot in it”.
Surgery is still the mainstay of colorectal cancer treatment. Radiotherapy has a growing role and anticancer drugs have yet to prove a spectacular success. Survival from colorectal cancer depends on the extent to which the cancer has spread before therapeutic intervention. Almost 80 percent of colorectal cancer victims will survive, if the cancer limits itself to the inside of the bowel wall at operation. This percentage falls as the tumour spreads through the bowel into the lymphatic system, the venous circulation and the peritoneal cavity outside the bowel walls.
Current opinion favours the argument that nearly all forms of bowel cancer start as small growths on the inner surface of the bowel wall. The promising implication of this point of view is that deaths from cancer of the colon are entirely preventable – if investigation and diagnosis take place early enough. The question as to what age constitutes the first time everybody in western society needs to undergo their initial screening colonoscopy remains unanswered.

Home Remedies
A high incidence of colorectal cancer occurs in societies where high fat, low fibre diets are prevalent. One study has found a positive association between high cholesterol and colorectal cancer. Another report found that a higher frequency of pre malignant growths in the colon correlated with a high serum cholesterol.
A low fibre intake makes two contributions to cancer of the large bowel. Firstly, a low faecal bulk means cancer forming chemicals reach higher concentrations in contact with the inner bowel wall. Secondly, it means that cancer forming chemicals travel through the bowel slowly.
High fibre, low cholesterol diets not only protect from heart disease and cancer of the breast but they also protect from cancer of the colon as well.

*4/131/5*

PREVENTION OF LOCAL RECURRENCE – RADIATION AFTER AN OPERATION

admin — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:27:27 +0000

Radiation after an operation is often recommended when it is either suspected or definitely known that cancer cells have been left behind. You will remember from the chapter on surgery that the chances of not being able to completely remove the cancer can be reduced by careful assessment before the operation. Postoperative radiation is more likely to be recommended after poorly planned than after carefully planned surgery. Radiation in this setting is also very unlikely to improve the cure rate. However, depending on the type and location of the cancer it can certainly reduce the chance of local recurrence. If this approach is recommended to you, ask what the chances of local recurrence are with and without radiation. Of course, if your surgeon knows that cancer cells are still there, local recurrence is certain if no other treatment is given. Find out how much the chance is likely to be improved by radiation and at what ‘cost’ to you. Are there any other ways of reducing the chance of local recurrence? Ask what difference it would make if radiation was reserved until the local recurrence occurred, instead of being given as a preventive. Would cure still be possible if you waited until you got a definite local recurrence? What symptoms could a local recurrence cause and how could they be treated? Don’t agree to the additional treatment unless you feel sure that the likely benefit is greater than the likely cost.

*280/40/1*

Cancer

PREVENTION OF LOCAL RECURRENCE – RADIATION TREATMENT

admin — Wed, 02 Jun 2010 09:26:34 +0000

Radiation treatment is often recommended before or after surgical removal of a primary cancer. It is important that you understand what can be gained by doing this.

Firstly, as I mentioned in the previous section, the addition of radiation to surgical removal of a primary cancer very rarely makes any difference to the chance of complete and permanent cure. However, it can make a difference to the chance that cancer will grow back again in the same place — local recurrence.

Radiation before an operation may be recommended if you have a large primary cancer that your surgeons feel they cannot completely remove. Their recommendation is based on the hope that shrinking your cancer by radiation could change it from one that is too large and extensive to be removed to one that can be removed completely. The fact is that a cancer that is too extensive to be removed can rarely be cured by any means, unless it is a type that is extremely sensitive to radiation or chemotherapy. It is also a fact that radiation, followed by a less extensive operation than would have been necessary to start with, is an approach that very rarely produces cures. It sounds like a good idea but unfortunately, it doesn’t work. I would question the radiotherapist and surgeon very closely indeed before agreeing to such a plan.

*279/40/1*

Cancer

BALANCING COST AGAINST BENEFIT

admin — Mon, 18 May 2009 06:57:01 +0000

As with any treatment, you need to weigh the likely ‘benefit’ against the likely ‘cost’. These are some of the questions to which you will need answers:

-What is the aim of the surgery?

-What is the chance of achieving that aim?

-Would there be a better chance of achieving that aim if I had other forms of treatment as well as, or instead of, the surgery?

-What would it cost financially?

-How would I look afterwards? (You can ask to see photos of patients who have had the proposed operation.)

-What would be removed or damaged?

-How would my body function without these parts?

-Can other parts of my body take over the function of the removed or damaged parts?

-Is there some artificial means of doing this? If so, what exactly would it involve for me?

-What is the risk of dying during or soon after the operation?

-What complications are likely?

-Can they be treated?

-Would they be temporary or permanent?

-How long would I be in hospital?

-How long, if ever, before I would return to normal?

You will get the most accurate answers to these questions from surgeons who have a lot of experience with the particular operation under consideration. These surgeons are also most likely to ‘deliver the goods’, that is, to carry out the proposed operation skilfully and to actually achieve the promised results. Ask your surgeon how many of these particular operations he or she has done, whether or not you suspect lack of experience because you are getting vague or evasive answers to your questions. Ask if there are surgeons in your area who specialise in this type of operation. If there are, ask for a referral to them. Don’t settle for an inexperienced surgeon because you don’t wish to give offence. Your health and comfort are more important than that.

Remember, there are always alternatives. Ask about these if they are not volunteered. What other forms of treatments are possible, including those whose aims are not the same as the proposed surgery? What is the likely benefit and likely cost of each? Don’t forget there is always the possibility of having no anti-cancer treatment at all. This possibility will rarely be mentioned, so you will probably have to ask directly. Try to find out what is likely to happen if you have no actual anti-cancer treatment.

*222/40/1*