There are rising cases of breast, colorectal and other cancers in people in their 20s, 30s and 40s. What is going on?
Over the past 10 years, rates of colorectal cancer among 25 to 49 year olds have increased in 24 different countries, including the UK, US, France, Australia, Canada, Norway and Argentina.
The investigation's early findings, presented by an international team at the Union for International Cancer Control (UICC) congress in Geneva in September 2024, were as eye-catching as they are concerning.
The researchers, from the American Cancer Society (ACS) and the World Health Organization's (WHO's) International Agency for Research on Cancer, surveyed data from 50 countries to understand the trend. In 14 of these countries, the rising trend was only seen in younger adults, with older adult rates remaining stable.
Based on epidemiological investigations, it seems that this trend first began in the 1990s. One study found that the global incidence of early-onset cancer had increased by 79% between 1990 and 2019, with the number of cancer-related deaths in younger people rising by 29%. Another report in The Lancet Public Health described how cancer incidence rates in the US have steadily risen between the generations across 17 different cancers, particularly in Generation Xers and Millennials.
It's not just capitalism. I'm from east Germany and you wouldn't believe how much crap was buried, fumed into the air or pumped into the water in the name of peace and socialism.
Don't forget, Chernobyl happened because of a cost saving measure.
BTW, you forgot alcohol, tobacco, vapes, stress and enforced sedentary lifestyle in your cancer list.
Younger generations drink less and use less tobacco than basically any other generation, so that's probably not it.
I don't know what you mean by "enforced sedentary lifestyle," but young people tend to do activities that don't involve exercise in their free time: computer use, phone use, video games, etc.
I think the fact that obesity is up something like 20% since the 90s is probably related. Young people exercise less and eat like shit, which seems pretty related to rectal/colon cancers.
Honestly the working from home with less walking and more sitting seems like the biggest reason for this since there’s some pretty major dietary differences between all these countries, but they probably have a higher rate of WFH compared to other countries.
Lead and Teflon have gone down since the 90s. I'd say it's mostly plastic. Up and into most all of the 80's everyone drank tap water and sodas/other drinks were all canned or glass bottles.
Then around 1990 everyone started putting their drink in plastic. Then 15 years later for some dumbass reason, people started to buy and drink all their water out of plastic as well.
Problem with PFAS and many other stuff is that it is accumulating in the biosphere. So while the new emissions go down, you still end up being exposed to more and more of them over time. They still get into the water and then into the plants and animals that you eat later.
The largest contributor to the micro-plastics in your body is tire dust, though, it's not new. More of it since the 90s, yeah, maybe there's a threshold?
Despite the pandemic, and in contrast with other leading causes of death, the cancer death rate continued to decline from 2019 to 2020 (by 1.5%), contributing to a 33% overall reduction since 1991 and an estimated 3.8 million deaths averted.
According to the American Cancer Society's 2024 stats cancer deaths are declining in some areas (ie: lung cancer) but increasing in many others.
In 2024, 2,001,140 new cancer cases and 611,720 cancer deaths are projected to occur in the United States.
Cancer mortality continued to decline through 2021, averting over 4 million deaths since 1991 because of reductions in smoking, earlier detection for some cancers, and improved treatment options in both the adjuvant and metastatic settings.
However, these gains are threatened by increasing incidence for 6 of the top 10 cancers.
Incidence rates increased during 2015–2019 by 0.6%–1% annually for breast, pancreas, and uterine corpus cancers and by 2%–3% annually for prostate, liver (female), kidney, and human papillomavirus-associated oral cancers and for melanoma.
Incidence rates also increased by 1%–2% annually for cervical (ages 30–44 years) and colorectal cancers (ages <55 years) in young adults. Colorectal cancer was the fourth-leading cause of cancer death in both men and women younger than 50 years in the late-1990s but is now first in men and second in women.
Progress is also hampered by wide persistent cancer disparities; compared to White people, mortality rates are two-fold higher for prostate, stomach and uterine corpus cancers in Black people and for liver, stomach, and kidney cancers in Native American people.
Source
Despite the pandemic, and in contrast with other leading causes of death, the cancer death rate continued to decline from 2019 to 2020 (by 1.5%), contributing to a 33% overall reduction since 1991 and an estimated 3.8 million deaths averted.
that could also be because less people are being tested as a result of medical burnout, faculty reductions, or other more lethal illnesses taking it's place.
just because it's declining generally doesn't mean it's actually going away.
Yes, in particular the non-stick forever chemicals known as PFAS (aka Teflon and its precursors). The same chemistry that makes these plastics so non-stick also makes them resilient to being broken down chemically in our bodies. And the more the government tries to regulate them away, the more the industry plays whack-a-mole with modifications to the formula. It’s the designer drug problem writ large!
Wireless communications radiation physically cannot cause increased mutation rates and this is quite well studied. Wireless communication operates on frequencies (for the most part) below 10GHz, which has wavelengths measured in centimeters and meters. The biggest wave that can impact human DNA is UV which has wavelengths measured in nanometers - orders of magnitude of difference. So no, wireless communications are super unlikely to impact cancer rates.
TL;DR, the article says obesity rates and sugar account for a lot but not all of the increase so there is probably something else as well. Some suggestions from the article: artificial light, sleep-patterns, changes in biological clock as a result. Microplastics, especially for colorectal cancer. Ultra processed foods. Increased usage of antibiotics.
Obesity and sugar are presented as known cancer causes while the others are proposed or suggested by experts in the article but nothing to back it up yet, further research needed.
thankfully someone actually read the article (which is pretty bad in terms of accurately representing its citations). One of the other articles cited in OP says:
Research published in BMJ Oncology found there had been 3.26 million cases in 2019 - 79% more than in 1990.
But experts cautioned against reading too much into the findings.
The research did not take into account a 40% rise in the total population, while factors such as better reporting may also have played a role.
The team, of experts from around the world, including the US, China and the UK, agreed no firm conclusions could be drawn.
Deaths (as opposed to "incidents") is a more accurate metric to track since it's more reliable in terms of detection (obviously) and reporting:
Cancer killed more than a million under-50s in 2019, a rise of over 25% - but with the 40% population rise, this could actually indicate a falling death rate.
So "no firm conclusions" means what, in terms of the other comments here?
As far as I can tell, people are understandably a bit troubled, and a bit cross (since some of the proposed causes probably should have been dealt with a lot earlier). They're maybe hastily jumping to theories about a few likely candidates. Do you blame them?
Or should we just do nothing? Wait, and put all our faith in...? What?
The vast majority of the things mentioned would do us absolutely no harm at all to avoid, or even legislate against as a precaution. So is there a good reason we should wait for "firm" conclusions?
Does anybody cook anymore? I have started cooking again for my girlfriend and honestly it's like having another job, it takes fucking ages every day. When I lived on my own I would sometimes go months without a hot meal, because realistically, how can you work full time and attend to the daily tasks of living? Genuinely, where is the time? I'm out for twelve hours of every day.
Easily: leftovers. Literally just cook on sunday. Takes like 1.5-2hrs. Make 10-12 servings. Dinner for 2 for 5-6 days. Eat it all week.
I have done this every week for my entire adult life and have never spent more than like 2hrs per week cooking unless I wanted to make something particularly difficult for fun.
Also, you can make big batches of stuff to freeze or can. Canning is easy: get a pressure cooker, buy some big mason jars - they're cheap and reusable, look up the pressure and time requirements (especially if the dish contains meat), and boom. Shelf stable food you can store in the pantry and eat whenever.
Meal prep ideas:
Spend like 3hrs making 10 dozen pierogies (potato & cheese and pork & mushroom & sauerkraut are my favorites), freeze half & boil/pan fry whenever. Eat the rest for the week with some sauerkraut or cucumber dill salad (umborksalat) as a side. Costs maybe 30 bucks for everything and makes food for 2 weeks (6 pierogies per serving). Make more if you want - it doesn't take much extra time.
Chinese style dumplings are the same as pierogies but with square wrappers and more ingredients. Buy wonton wrappers. Make filling with ground pork, garlic, green onion, msg, ginger, salt, pepper, soy sauce, vinegar. Add napa cabbage if you want to stretch the filling. Fill wonton wrappers. Make however many you want. Takes a few hours if you're gonna make a shitload, but it is easy - pop on a movie and make hundreds if you want. Freeze and boil whenever. Or make potstickers by heating oil in a pan, putting in fresh or frozen dumplings, cooking for a bit before adding some water before immediately covering with a lid. Cook a bit and they should release from the pan - scrape them up with a spatula if they don't.
Get a very large pot. Make a full pot of gumbo, red beans and sausage for red beans & rice, or split pea soup. You can make gallons of these very cheaply in the same time it'd take to make a smaller quantity. Freeze or can most of it. Cook rice for the week for gumbo or red beans and rice (20mins on the stove, 2mins of prep). Serve over rice (don't serve split pea soup over rice unless you're a psychopath). Done.
Make west african peanut soup. Made of sweet potatoes, peanut butter, chicken if you want, collard greens, tomatoes. Fucking delicious. Very filling and calorie dense. Like 25 bucks for a week of delicious soup. I make like 2kg when I do this. Could double batch and freeze/can half as well.
Jambalaya/jollof rice/other similar rice dishes. Make 10-12 servings for the week or double it and freeze half.
Lasagna or other pasta bake dishes. Make one dish for the week. Make another to freeze and pop in the oven to cook whenever. Serve with a quick salad.
Enchiladas. Same as pasta dishes (can freeze and cook later). Cook meat/other filling. Heat up a bunch of corn torrillas. Fill with filling. Put into a rectangular casserole dish with some enchilada sauce. Top with enchilada sauce and some cheese. Boom. 12 enchiladas - enough for a week. Especially if you make some cilantro-lime or 'spanish' rice to go with it (rice, boullion, onion, tomato paste, diced tomato, garlic, little oil, water) - throw it all in a pot, simmer 20mins, refrigerate, eat all week as a side dish. Maybe use canned refried beans as a side too.
Tacos. Shred up a rotisserie chicken. Pan fry with onions, garlic, peppers if you want (chipotles in adobo are my favorite. You could use salsa instead or jalapenos or whatever). Boom. Freeze or refrigerate. Heat up and put in tortillas whenever with some fresh cilantro/onion/hot sauce. Make rice as with enchiladas. Can serve with beans, too.
Yeah — I maybe cook 1-2 meals a week, and that usually involves some prepackaged ingredient that saves me time. The rest is quick like oatmeal, toast, etc, or I’m just ordering takeout. I don’t have the energy to cook a lot, nor do I want to spend my free time doing it after work.
My wife and I have a system that works for us. I do the food shopping and clean up, and she does the cooking (the woman is a sauceress).
Shopping happens on saturday (sometimes pre-cooking prep too), cooking on sunday. We cook two meals and have it throughout the week. Sometimes we'll freeze some of what we cook using souper cubes (for soups, stews, and chili).
You can do it! You just have to get into the routine of it.
I once read a quote that said meal prepping is the perfect method to ensure that you always have food that is cold, old, and not what you're in the mood for. And although my love goes out to everyone who does meal prep (it's great!) this quote put into words a feeling that I always failed to grasp.
I love cooking and I have tried meal prepping in different forms so often. But 90% of the evenings I end up cooking something from scratch that I am actually in the mood for. It feels - whatever the opposite of empowering is. My spouse is happy to eat the same meal 5 times in a row, I have a hard time even with 2 different meals in between. My freezer is full of "prepared" food that we could just dethaw and eat and it ends up being eaten by my spouse or trashed after months of me not unfreezing it.
Like, pumpkin soup the other day! So easy to make a big batch! Efficient and fun! I make enough for 6 portions and we have delicious soup and I am so proud that I made enough to last for a couple of meals but I hate to see that soup in the fridge the next day.
There's so many factors. Pesticides, nitrates are prevalent in most meat products, lack of dietary fibre can increase risks of colon cancer and high cholesterol.
Not to mention micro plastics (though they've been around for longer than we've known I bet) and forever chemicals like PFAs (though not sure if they're cancerous??).
Recently I went to Seattle's children's museum and when it was about to close I found my self staring at the cosmic particle fog tank. It's a tank that has low temperature evaporated alcohol in it which creates wisps of fog if highly energetic particles pass thru it. Well I didn't know what it was until I started noticing the wisps and remembering a YouTube video in the device. It was like a wisp every 10 seconds. Suddenly this family passed by and the little 3 or 4 year old kid approaches the box to see what was in it. The thing lit up like a freaking Christmas tree. Like 10 wisps per second as soon as the kid put his hands on the side of the glass. I looked at him thinking, you don't know, just live out your life in happiness kid.
I was totally bewildered. I should have run to the parents to show them. It was just crazy. Maybe they gave him a hammer and a bunch of smoke detectors the day before.
Better back that colonoscopy screening up earlier then. I think it’s recommended at age 45 in the US, but I’m guessing insurance won’t want to cover screenings at 5-year intervals for an extra 20 years because money, dear boy.
It was recently dropped from 50 to 45 in the US. Was that also done for other countries?
Regardless of improved detection, the most likely explanation is increased obesity rates, which is covered in the article.
Last time I pointed this out, the toxin and micro plastics people blamed chemical exposure for increased obesity. They don't want the Boogeyman to be a fat guy.
Obesity tracks with this. Maybe not the direct cause, there might be some underlying cause for both, but excess fat absolutely does increase your risk of cancer. I'm pretty sure being big in any way does - if there is more of you, more cells, more chance of mutation.
Interestingly, one accessible and effective way to remove microplastics in your body is donating plasma. You can literally get paid to decrease your circulating microplastics.
These kind of cancers are the sad kind where they're readily treatable if you catch them early. But if you put it off and wait too long, you can literally die anally and painfully from your procrastination.
All you'll likely feel is pain and regret for the remainder of your life. Not just for putting this off, but for all the other things you put off for "later" as the end rapidly approaches. Doesn't sound great.
Older people have cancer and a lot of doctors just call it aging. That’s how common it is. It’s normalized. Now that the younger are catching up they are suddenly concerned that this is a problem.
The nightmare scenario is it being caused by something even more insidious and omnipresent than microplastics. The second nightmare scenario is microplastics.
Doritos 🌮 Takis and flaming hot Cheetos are definitely in my top 10 culprits for stomach ulcers and cancers. Imagine otherwise where one could get better sources of voluntarily self harming humans for experimentation with very acidic foods.
Funny how so many responses have skimmed over the implication of antibiotic use.
Now ask yourselves, these antibiotics... If you'd have asked your doctor at the time "are these drugs safe and effective?", what do you think the answer would have been?
Now ask your doctor if the latest vaccine is safe and effective and tell me how confident you feel about their response.
I'm pointing out that concern about vaccine safety is legitimate given that many treatments thought "safe and effective" at the time later turn out to have been harmful. The effect antibiotics have on the gut biome being just the latest example.
People concerned about the safety of the drugs they are told to use are not all "lunitic conspiracy theorists" as often branded. Some simply have a completely reasonable caution about the hubris of the medical establishment.
Antibiotics and other prescription medications are more often prescribed to older folks, so the increase should be seen in those populations, not primarily more in younger populations. It is unlikely that antibiotics or other similar medical interventions are responsible for the phenomenon seen in the op article.
Also, as a prescriber, I do warn my patients of the dangers of taking antibiotics willy nilly. 🤷🏻♀️
In this study, we also analyzed antibiotic prescription rates according to age. The highest prevalence rates were observed in patients aged 71 years (80.3%) followed by 4-year-old children (60.7%).
Since 71 year olds wouldn't show any long term effects, that leaves the four year old group.
as a prescriber, I do warn my patients of the dangers of taking antibiotics willy nilly.
Of course you do, I've no doubt you're very diligent. Because now we know they have serious negative consequences. 40 years ago, however, the people this article is about would have merely been told they were "safe and effective". That's exactly the point I'm making.
You now have to take precaution with a medicine because of new information about its safety that wasn't known at the time it was developed.
Same is true for every other factor mentioned in the report. Human innovation is absolutely suffuce with things we thought were safe and effective at the time, but later turn out to be quite unsafe.
Yet taking this unequivocal fact and applying it to a rational scepticism about new medicines has, since 2020, become 'misinformation'.