May 22, 2010
Is Lung Cancer Common?
Approximately 219,000 people are diagnosed with lung cancer in the U.S. each year – over 103,000 women and nearly 116,000 men and kills more than 160,000 people annually – more people than breast, colon and prostate cancers combined. It is responsible for more than 28% of all cancer-related deaths every year.
Roughly 84% of people diagnosed with lung cancer die within five years of their diagnosis, compared to 11% of breast cancer and less than 1% of prostate cancer patients.
While this may sound depressing, it should be borne in mind that people tend to control their risk factors for the disease by making lifestyle choices. It would be surprising if any reader is not aware that smoking dramatically increases the risk of contracting the disease, nor that passive smoking is linked to increased incidence of lung cancer amongst those who do not smoke.
Nevertheless, the incidence of lung cancer is primarily constrained to the elderly, i.e. those over the age of 65 years. Lung cancer is rarely found in patients under the age of 45 (less than 3%), and more than 70% are over 65.
The incidence of lung cancer rose dramatically from the 1930′s as tobacco smoking took hold and became fashionable and socially acceptable. On a global basis, it can be seen that lung cancer rises where anti-smoking education is not practised, however, where countries implement smoker awareness campaigns and it becomes recognized that smoking is a major factor in disposition for contracting the disease.
Men’s mortality (death) rates from lung cancer began declining more than 20 years ago, while women’s lung cancer mortality rates have been rising for decades and just recently began to stabilize. African Americans experience the highest incidence of lung cancer, and the highest death rate.
Less money is spent on lung cancer research than on research on other cancers. In 2007, the National Cancer Institute estimated it spent only it spent only $1,415 per lung cancer death compared to $13,991 per breast cancer death, $10,945 per prostate cancer death, and $4,952 per colorectal cancer.
It is clear from this data that while lung cancer is on the rise in the general population, that there is much work still to be done on researching the condition and developing effective treatments. While anti-smoking legislation and education continue to persuade smokers to quit and non-smokers from starting, we can anticipate a return to the low rates of incidence of this condition in the future. However, at this point in time, it is reasonable to assume that there will in fact be a spike in lung cancer diagnoses as those who have a history of smoking, even though they may have quit, develop the condition.
The very strongest advice for anyone who is concerned about developing lung cancer is simply this – do not smoke! If you already smoke, then quit – there are numerous programs which are highly effective in helping nicotine addicts with kicking the habit and the benefits in financial and health terms is enormous. Stopping smoking very quickly leads to a reduced risk as the lungs can heal very quickly and it is estimated that over 15 years of abstinence, the risk will fall to close to normal levels for non-smokers. If you already do not smoke, then never start!
Find the right doctor for lung cancer treatments Early diagnosis can lead to successful results. For Other information Check out Health Facts
Related posts:
- An Overview Of Cancer
- Finding Articles on Lung Cancer
- Lung Cancer Can Be Deadly
- Prostate Cancer Question And Answer
- Articles on Lung Cancer
Leave a Comment
You must be logged in to post a comment.


3 Comments on Is Lung Cancer Common? »
April 14, 2011
star @ 1:01 am:
Welfare moms don’t buy cheap knock-off food. They fill their carts with name brands, usually junk food. They don’t shop at the thrift store. They wear name brands, Apple Bottoms, Rocawear, and yes, even fur coats. I can’t count how many times I’ve seen women pay for groceries with a Link card this winter while wearing very fashionable fur coats. Barely pay their bills? Give me a break. They get Section 8 to pay their rent, their utilities are paid in full if not drastically reduced, they get free cell phones, free day care for their children, free medical and dental, and free college education if they so desire. Low income housing? Maybe. Or maybe they live in “mixed income housing” which is becoming very popular in Chicago. I lived in a fantastic apartment where my rent was $1500 per month. Sec 8ers paid less than $100 for the same apartment. I have a family member that rents out houses to Sec 8ers. You know what they drive? Mercedes, Navigator, Hummer, Lexus, all brand new. I can’t count how many times I’ve seen women pay for groceries with Link cards and carry their groceries out to one of these cars.
April 20, 2011
bill bannon @ 5:07 am:
Gerald
Totally enforceable by fining heavily any business who hires an illegal and enforce it fast. Overnight it would be solved. In fact if you fined criminals and made them work off their rent,food and medical and dental in prison by doing factory work 10 hours a day…(still less work than many of our execs do)….the prison population would also fall overnight. But if you tell thugs that effectively their punishment is to work 4 hours and then hang out in cell and never worry about bills, medical and dental and buying weights at Modell's…well then, you are going to have prisoners galore. And if they stab someone who stole their coffee, they simply receive more time in that context….well then…stabbing is pretty consequent free for someone who does not think past the next year.
May 10, 2011
johnson m @ 6:54 am:
coughing out blood and no energy….