Younger generations are facing a higher risk of cancer than their parents. Each successive generation born during the second half of the 20th century has faced a higher risk of 17 cancers (www.scimex.org)

submitted 4 months ago by realitista@lemm.ee to c/science@hexbear.net

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

cross-posted from: https://lemmit.online/post/3567461

Younger generations are facing a higher risk of cancer than their parents. Each successive generation born during the second half of the 20th century has faced a higher risk of 17 cancers, accordi...

This is an automated archive made by the Lemmit Bot.

The original was posted on /r/science by /u/mvea on 2024-08-01 06:59:55+00:00.

Original Title: Younger generations are facing a higher risk of cancer than their parents. Each successive generation born during the second half of the 20th century has faced a higher risk of 17 cancers, according to a US study. 10 of these cancers are linked to obesity.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] MeowZedong@lemmygrad.ml 4 points 4 months ago

I'm convinced the reason they only look at 5-year survival rates is because this drops precipitously after 5 years because they induced chemo resistance.

Cancer is an evolutionary disease and we don't treat it as such. In cases where a tumor isn't immediately life threatening, it may be more helpful to maintain a treatment that only stops the growth of a tumor and maintains it at that level rather than nuking it from orbit. It would allow us to mitigate treatment resistance by rotating through therapeutics and have reduced side effects on the patient.

If the typical chemo nuke doesn't kill ALL of the cancer, it's going to come back stronger. We have other models where we treat this way for evolutionary threats and it's proven effective.