Ever since Rachel Carson's Silent Spring, and more recently in Theo Colburn's Our Stolen Future, the fear mongers and junk scientists of the world have been running around screaming that cancer rates are rising. Breast cancer. Prostate cancer. Lung cancer. You name the cancer. There's more of it now than ever before. But is this so?
Also, cancer researchers are quick to point out that, although the war on cancer has not been won, many cancer survival rates are up. But are they?
Swedish researchers have now observed that as the reported incidence and prevalence of prostate cancer increased in Sweden, patient survival appeared to improve, despite the absence of any effective treatment. How could this be?
Simple. Advances in tumor detection techniques and broader criteria used to define the disease have allowed more prostate tumors to be found. This translates directly into increased incidence and prevalence of prostate cancer.
But, paradoxically, these improved detection techniques have confounded the ability to assess the efficacy of treatment.
While improved detection techniques and broader criteria have improved the ability to detect lethal prostate tumors, they have also improved the ability to detect nonlethal tumors. Not only does a nonlethal tumor count as a cancer, but it also goes in the survival column as well.
Second, improved detection techniques find tumors earlier. Earlier tumor detection means longer survival times in cases of lethal tumors.
So more cancer is found (good for fearmongers) and more cancer is cured (good for physicians), but nothing has really changed (the public gets bamboozled again)!
Material presented on this home page constitutes opinion of the author.
Copyright © 1996 Steven J. Milloy. All rights reserved. Site developed and hosted by WestLake Solutions, Inc.