Slashdot Mirror
Fewer People Are Dying of Cancer Than Ever Before (theoutline.com)
The number of Americans dying of cancer has dropped to a 25-year low, equaling an estimated 2,143,200 fewer deaths in that period, says the new annual report from the American Cancer Society. In that time, the racial and gender disparities that exist in cancer rates have also narrowed somewhat, but they remain wide in many places. From a report on The Outline: Though the incidence of cancer remained stable for women and dropped slightly -- by 2 percent -- in men, rates remain overall 20 percent higher in men while rate of death for men is 40 percent higher than in women. The rates of both incidence and death vary wildly based on the type of cancer. The data that the ACS is using run through the end of 2014 for incidents of cancer and through 2013 for deaths. Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in the United States for both men and women..
14% of all new cancers are lung cancers. 90% of lung cancer is due to smoking. Stop smoking.
"Lung cancer remains the leading cause of cancer death in the United States for both men and women." This is information that every child should learn.
"The report estimates that the Affordable Care Act is working to reduce long-standing racial disparities in cancer rates."
Has the ACA been around long enough to impact cancer rates? The law was passed in 2010 and it took quite a while to get the exchanges up and running, get people enrolled, and then get them to actually see a doctor.
I have a hard time believing that in a few short years, the ACA could have a meaningful impact on cancer rates.
This smells like propaganda.
folks usually tend to die do to complications associated with Cancer, versus the disease itself.
For example, you get Cancer and go through the treatments.
The treatments absolutely destroy your immune system.
The $common_ailment shows up and kills you because your body cannot defend against it.
In trying to stave off the inevitable, we make it easier for the common cold to kick our ass.
As for the lung cancer prevalence being so high (which was never helped due to smoking, environmental pollutants, and the like) I keep hearing more and more about radon and getting your house tested for it. Apparently it's a sure fire way to get lung cancer if the concentrations are high enough.
I've heard that in the US, there are higher concentrations of the stuff in the ground on the east coast, but I'll have to google.
Also, I wonder if this shed any light on why cancer rates are so much higher in 1st world countries, though I'm sure a lot of that has to do with some of the factors I mentioned earlier.
"This smells like propaganda."
No, that's just your brain tumor.
I ignore Anonymous Coward posts. If you want to discuss something, that's awesome. Log in.
"Fewer People Are Dying of Cancer Than Ever Before"
I'd hazard to posit that fewer people died of cancer in the ancient Mesopotamian era than died in 2016.
that's all you care about
You die of something else.
Other causes are now increasing their %share in the gotcha game. (which is probably a good thing since cancer seems a pretty horrible way to die- I'd rather be got by a sudden heart-attack in my sleep).
"That's the way to do it" - Punch
See, we ain't need no stinkin' ACA; market forces are solving illnesses.
Market forces will also solve global warming (if real). Humans will evolve fans on their head to keep cool similar to how Kevin Costner evolved gills in Waterworld.
Oh wait, evolution is false. Hollywood brainwashed us. I mean God will blink fans onto human heads, but only if we follow his law and keep gender dodgers out of the wrong restrooms.
What, monitoring genders is gov't regulation you say? You see, many will volunteer to monitor wankers for free. No new taxes needed. I know plenty of conservatives who actually enjoy monitoring wankers.
It all works out logically if you follow all conservative principles rather than just some.
Table-ized A.I.
Somebody trying to raise page views no doubt. There was a time it worked so well site got "slash dotted". Now, not so much. Here is the link that should have been used for this piece...
http://www.cancer.org/cancer/news/news/cancer-facts-and-figures-death-rate-down-25-since-1991
You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
All people will die eventually.
So if fewer people are dying of cancer, it should mean that more people are dying from other causes. I've seen somewhere that Alzheimer is on the raise, maybe that's it.
In developed countries the main causes of death are roughly 1/3 cancer, 1/3 heart diseases, 1/3 others. With cancer death rates steadily increasing passed 60, it can almost be considered dying of old age.
And as we all know, that is unnatural. Mining asteroids and living on Mars, however, are clearly natural and must be heavily invested in.
Colon cancer rates dropped thirty percent by 2012 from where it was 10 years earlier. It's been attributed to better screening technology, which can detect and even eliminate pre-cancerous growths....
http://www.cancer.org/cancer/n...
I'm not!
in men, rates remain overall 20 percent higher in men while rate of death for men is 40 percent higher than in women
Plainly what needs to be done is too increase the doses of Radium in women's makeup products until the cancer acquisition and death rates equalize.
Although come to think of it that would simply increase the death rates for men as well... curse you metrosexuals for making true equality of the sexes impossible!
"There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
A high deductible is better than NO insurance at all, especially when you are diagnosed with cancer. The law can be charged to require a lower deductible, but that would raise somewhere else to compensate. Democrats have not been against practical changes to ACA.
As far as general ACA criticism, I invite any conservative to propose a better alternative. All the proposals from conservatives so far either don't have any real numbers behind them, or some group or type of coverage takes a hit to help a different group.
There are inherent trade-offs that need to be balanced; there is no free lunch or magic formula. It's easy to complain, but hard to offer alternatives that actually add up. (Single payer has reduced general medical costs overseas, I would note, but arguably creates less choice and longer waits.)
Some have proposed requiring states to accept out-of-state insurance companies to increase competition. For one, this risks trampling on state's rights. Second, states can already optionally allow any outside insurance company they want in by lowering or eliminating state standards. It hasn't reduced their costs in practice. It appears to be a ploy by GOP to reduce patient safeguards (and increase profits) by not allowing states to legislate medical safeguards.
Yes, taking away safeguards will reduce rates for many or most. But, some will then get hit harder with the consequences of lower safeguards. That defeats the very purpose of insurance. GOP seems to want insurance-lite. It's okay to propose such to the public, but be honest that it's really half-ass insurance rather than dress it up in fancy political-speak.
Obama got the Lie-of-the-Year award for implying most or all can "keep your doctor". Don't make the same mistake, GOP, you will also deserve a Lie-of-the-Year award. (I kept my doctor, by the way.)
Table-ized A.I.
I'm wondering if some of this has to do with our ability to take viruses like Measals and Polio, and use them to devour Cancerous Tumors vulnerable to said virus.
I wonder how much this will have to do with our new ability to use Measals to destroy some cancers.
Better solution (I am the one who wrote what you replied to)
Just PAY medical costs for the 20 million who got coverage. Nothing else, just pay for it. It will be LESS than $1 Trillion over 10 years (its cheaper), it will not have a $600 million website (its cheaper), it will not tax blue collar workers who can't afford an ACA plan (its cheaper), and STILL has all the benefits that are CLIAMED by ACA supporters.
Yep, in literally 20 seconds I came up with an easier plan, that is just as effective and CHEAPER for everyone. Of course it doesn't pay off DNC donors and Obama's friends, what the ACA was really about, but I don't really care about that part like you do.
Yes, the ACA is just a way for the DNC to rip off the middle class. It was nothing else.
Actually it probably has more to do with lower red meat consumption per capita. Red meat consumption is down 25% per capita.
Screening tech hasn't changed in 10 years. They use the same colonoscopy machines in 2012 that they used in 2002.
http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/the-decline-red-meat-america
In Germany, the absolute number of cancer deaths has been increasing for decades. The common explanation is: higher life expectancy => more people live to get cancer, because cancer is largely an old people's disease => more people die of cancer.[German Cancer Research Center (in German)] Only age-adjusted rates are decreasing. So what is the difference between the US and Germany?
How many of those who now survive don't become bankrupt in the process?
...their own hook.
Without changing the retirement age, all this is doing is burdening the generation at its peak earning potential with caring for aging parents. You can only have so many people on the dole before the system fails.
And making middle class worker pay $4800 a year to "have insurance" they can't use because of the deductible is a win?
You are a fool. This is why people HATE the ACA.
burdening the generation at its peak earning potential with caring for aging parents
Those aging parents are why you have as high an earning potential as you do now. They invented, built, and maintained the very society that did such things as preventing you from being murdered in your crib by roving bands of savages and giving you pernicious worldwide communications capabilities. Many still have wisdom to contribute even in senescence.
Someone had to do it.
I can definitely see less smoking being a huge contributor to lower cancer rates. It's no surprise that lung cancer is still the most prevalent cause of cancer death though. Smokers are almost guaranteed to have expensive health issues later in life, and a shorter lifespan overall. Consider that more than half the male population and almost 30% of the female population smoked in the 50s, and in 2017 smokers in the US and many other countries are relegated to a sad little corner away from basically any public place. People used to smoke heavily in their offices, their homes, etc. In the circles I run in it's very rare to find smokers; if they are they're older and just don't want to quit...in for a penny in for a pound I guess!
If the study went back further than 1991, I'd also think that deindustrialization and environmental regulation in the US might have something to do with it. Around the 70s and 80s was the time people got serious about not letting companies dump toxic waste into the groundwater, and companies also offshored a lot of their manufacturing. Reduction of air pollution might also contribute - it still amazes me when I drive through big cities with terrible traffic and imagine thousands of pre-catalytic converter 1970s GM/Ford/Chrysler V8 tanks pumping crap into the air.
That said, I don't think I'd want to fight cancer if it turned out I had it. I'd rather have the option of a quick painless death than endless rounds of chemotherapy, radiation and surgery that would only give me a few years of painful life at best. We can't live forever -- even though average lifespan keeps increasing. What kind of shape would most people be in at 100? 110? 115? I'd rather get my 85 or so years in and make the most of them than end up in a progression from assisted living to nursing home to the hospital. It really seems like cancer is an evolutionary check on longevity given that it's a spontaneous uncontrolled cell growth. Pediatric and mid-life cancer is sad, but cancer at an old age is almost expected.
Eat more chicken!
Eat the rich.
Could we ask that the headlines indicate when it's only in the US?
"Fewer Americans Are Dying of Cancer Than Ever Before"
It intrigues me how some of the most ardent socialists here don't seem to realize that Trump and the Republicans would now be in complete control of their healthcare.
Trump has inspired some people to re-discover federalism. At least some people can connect the dots here.
A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
It's been around long enough to impact Survival Rates. I've had (young) family members who survived cancer because they got treatment. That treatment cost millions and was paid for by taxpayers. There's no other way, it's just too expensive to keep them alive otherwise. For get taking a village. It takes a country. In poorer regions that money comes from ACA in the form of the medicaid expansion. Without it those kids don't get treatment. They die.
This isn't hyperbole. It's one of those 'inconvenient truths' folks don't like to talk about. And yes, I know that term is loaded. That's my point. It's the same as Climate Change. It's easy as hell to turn away from it. People are going to die when the ACA is repealed. Many of them children. And nobody, and I mean nobody is talking about it.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
you're seeing short term costs rise as people who put off treatment for years are finally getting it. Long term costs go down as preventative care does it's job and people use less of the really expensive stuff.
Now, just because the insurance company's costs go down doesn't mean yours will. Left alone they'll just pocket it all. That's where the public option (aka single payer) comes in.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
but you need access to medical treatment early on to do so. Total Biscuit of youtube fame got it (he's British, single payer) and he's in remission and just fine. I've got a family member in the same boat and I've known a survivor of childhood leukemia in her mid thirties who's just fine. The key is early detection and treatment.
Now, as an American you're probably screwed unless your independently wealthy. But we prefer to play the odds. We treat luck as a skill. Something you cultivate (often by praying). That's not rational, but most of us aren't.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
there's a lot of folks who really hate the thought of their tax dollars going to treat lazy blacks. It's called the "Southern Strategy" and it's been a cornerstone to the Republican's coalition for decades. Google "Dog Whistle" and "Welfare Queen" and watch a bit of your soul recede away. Sure, it's only about 10% of our population, but that 10% vote and they win elections.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
of course we realize it. We're utterly terrified.
Hi! I make Firefox Plug-ins. Check 'em out @ https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/youtube-mp3-podcaster/
From TFA: "Although the cancer death rate remained 15% higher in blacks than in whites in 2014, increasing access to care as a result of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (AKA Obamacare) may contribute to a further narrowing of the racial gap across all population groups. In 2015, 11% of blacks and 7% of non-Hispanic whites were uninsured, compared with 21% of blacks and 12% of non-Hispanic whites in 2010. Progress for Hispanics is similar, with the uninsured rate dropping from 31% in 2010 to 16% in 2015."
If conservatives don't kill off Obamacare quickly enough, there's a chance some of those non-whites might survive to voting age...and not be too sick to get to the polls.
I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
I am about to buy sports air filters that should save your lungs while making sure you still exercise.
This is the model I plan to buy within the next few weeks.
I have no affiliation with this company and I haven't tried them yet, but the research may prove fruitful for you.
Healthcare is a good. How can one have a right to a good?
We abolished slavery long ago. What do you call a doctor who is forced by the government to treat patients? If we ever encounter a doctor shortage - would you use the power of Government to force doctors out of retirement to treat patients?
The people that provide our healthcare are not the slaves of those that need medical care. They are laborers and should sell their labor as every other laborer does.
Forcing everyone to pay for this is only one side of the coin - to declare healthcare an inalienable human right - you need to enslave doctors.
After they have cured all disease, then we can mock all the people in hospitals. Dying for no reason.
Tracy Johnson
Old fashioned text games hosted below:
http://empire.openmpe.com/
BT
folks! cancer has been at an all-time low since I became the president-elect. Unpresidented one might say!!!
anticipated tweet from a certain Orange-utan
Yeah but usually it seems to be people I'm keen on not having dying. Relatives, friends - you know the type. Arsehole dictators and general mongrels seem unrepresented in those stats. Yes, I do realise the sample sizes are different but Fuck Cancer.