Report: Number of cancer cases worldwide could go up 75% by 2030
May 31st, 2012
07:43 PM ET

Report: Number of cancer cases worldwide could go up 75% by 2030

If current population trends continue, the number of people with cancer worldwide will go up to 22.2 million by 2030, up from 12.7 million in 2008, according to a study published in The Lancet on Thursday. Cases are expected to surge in poorer parts of the world, which are ill-equipped to handle the burden.

For the past few years, experts have been warning about the rising incidence of global cancer rates. In 2009, researchers were predicting cancer would overtake heart disease as the world's leading cause of death.

The new study, led by Dr. Freddie Bray of the International Agency for Research on Cancer, confirms that we're headed in the wrong direction when it comes to controlling cancer rates worldwide.

Bray and his co-authors looked at how cancer cases and deaths for different types of cancer vary among countries with different levels of economic development. The study found that any reductions in infection-related cancers like stomach, cervical or liver cancer (still more common in low-income regions of the world), are being offset by "an increasing number of new cases that are more associated with reproductive, dietary and hormonal factors." Tobacco usage also contributes to an increasing number of cancer cases.

"This study underscores the fact that there is significant variation in the types of cancer occurring in various regions of the world based on different levels of development," says Nathan Grey, national vice president for global health for the American Cancer Society and one of the study authors.

Grey says the predicted increases are dramatic, particularly in middle-income and low-income countries, many of which are set up to deal with diseases like HIV and tuberculosis, but don’t have an infrastructure to deal with increasing cancer cases.

"This will add a lot in terms of human suffering and also in terms of the economic consequences," says Grey.

He says the middle-income regions will face a double whammy because they haven't yet really conquered the infection-related cancers ( like stomach, which can be caused by bacteria and cervical, liver and Kaposi sarcoma, which are caused by viruses), and they face the looming surge in cases often linked to a more 'Westernized" lifestyle, due to tobacco use and obesity (lung, breast, colorectal).

“Sustained prevention efforts are also needed to lower these projected increases. As cancer becomes more globally prevalent, initiatives like tobacco cessation and immunization are crucial in reducing the disease’s worldwide burden," says Dr. Michael P. Link, president of the American Society of Clinical Oncology.

Grey agrees.  He says the results of this study are a wake-up call for the global community, but points out that there are low-cost ways to head off this dire cancer forecast: "You can do vaccinations and you can do low-cost screening and you can put taxes on tobacco products to reduce usage and that would make a huge difference."

soundoff (745 Responses)
  1. USA401

    Is it me or is the human race falling apart? Pretty soon we will be envying those remote tribes in South American and Africa.

    June 1, 2012 at 07:25 | Report abuse | Reply
    • steve

      we might envy them if cancer doesn't get them first!

      June 1, 2012 at 07:48 | Report abuse |
    • kingkong

      it's you.....

      it's always been you...for a long, long time.

      June 1, 2012 at 08:57 | Report abuse |
    • Richard

      What nonsense. Humans are living longer than ever and the net result is, instead of quick deaths, we are seeing more chronic illnesses.

      June 1, 2012 at 09:07 | Report abuse |
    • Annie

      Wait until they are exposed to toxins in food and environment and these tribes will join the rest of us! 🙂

      June 1, 2012 at 12:05 | Report abuse |
    • Tanner

      all you

      June 1, 2012 at 18:33 | Report abuse |
    • chefdugan

      Maybe cancer and other happenings are God's method of poopulation control.

      June 2, 2012 at 08:25 | Report abuse |
    • paulronco

      >> Is it me or is the human race falling apart?

      The human race is falling apart. More specifically, the current paradigm is collapsing under its own unsustainable weight. In eighteen years cancer will probably be one of the lesser problems. The real problem will be the climate.

      June 2, 2012 at 13:17 | Report abuse |
    • paulronco

      >> Maybe cancer and other happenings are God's method of poopulation control.

      No, it's man's. We are responsible for the increase in cancer. There is a reason America has the highest rate of cancer in the world. Like a smoker who refuses to quit, however, it is unlikely that we will change our poor habits anytime soon.

      June 2, 2012 at 13:19 | Report abuse |
    • paulronco

      >> What nonsense. Humans are living longer than ever and the net result is, instead of quick deaths, we are seeing more chronic illnesses.

      You've fallen for the corporate healthcare industry's lies. One hundred years ago, heart attacks and cancer when you were thirty was unheard of. Child obesity was extremely rare. Our food supply is poisoned, among many other things. Our stress levels are also off the charts, this is also a major contributing factor.

      June 2, 2012 at 13:22 | Report abuse |
    • Mark Glicker

      No doubt that cancer will flourish. We cannot put the Genetically engineered crops back in the bottle.

      June 3, 2012 at 03:41 | Report abuse |
    • EdL

      I am really concerned? when I read and hear about these death-causing cigarettes. If they are death-dealing why do cigarettes remain a legal product? Increasing the cost can make cigarette use prohibitive for the less than rich, who make up the majority of smokers. How about keep raising the cost until these less than rich have to quit? That ought to do it! Meanwhile I will continue to enjoy smoking, as I have so enjoyed for the past 60 years, averaging two+ packs a day. I know I should have passed away numbers of years ago but at 81 I continue to be in excellent health. When I pass away there are those who know me who will say smoking, drinking, and eating the wrong foods caused my death. This will please them. The fact remains I have outlived most of my friends, including those who led the clean life, avoiding all my 'bad' habits. I know of quite a few anti-smoking crusaders who have passed away before reaching my age.

      June 3, 2012 at 12:07 | Report abuse |
    • Germania88

      The people make the country and all western countries have been over ran by low quality disease infested third world immigrants. Not only do they breed like rats, get free government handouts, the native people in the western countries are tought that they are the best. And you wonder why everyone is an arrogant rap music listening idiot. America is the world's toilet bowl, infested with human trash.

      June 3, 2012 at 12:11 | Report abuse |
    • Ancient Curse

      "Maybe cancer and other happenings are God's method of poopulation control."

      My grandpa lost his poopulation control. He wore Depends, but it really made him angry. Don't know that God had anything to do with it, though. He just got old.

      June 3, 2012 at 15:12 | Report abuse |
    • Mark Glicker

      Encouraging news.

      June 4, 2012 at 05:06 | Report abuse |
  2. icallbs

    riiiiight cnn...maybe report on Fukashima and the amount of births it will prevent by 2030 or how many cancers will be caused by it spewing radiation non-stop 24/7 for over a year now.

    tobacco is crap for health I can agree; however, i'm sure radiation is more harmful.

    June 1, 2012 at 07:26 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Montyhp

      Don't assume that. The number of people exposed to tobacco is MUCH more than the number of people exposed to radiation at levels to significantly increase cancer risk.

      June 1, 2012 at 08:10 | Report abuse |
    • WhatWhat?

      That's fine, but why be singularly focused? Radiation and Tobacco are both bad and it all puts a burden on healthcare costs.

      June 1, 2012 at 21:15 | Report abuse |
    • Mark Glomski


      June 2, 2012 at 00:27 | Report abuse |
    • SixDegrees

      Your certainty is misplaced.

      June 3, 2012 at 07:09 | Report abuse |
  3. Really Cnn?

    Sooo. CNN reports think that cancer cases will grow 75% by 2030? Maybe due to over population... But by that time a cure should already be available to those who that can afford it. Thats what the article should say. Very sad.

    June 1, 2012 at 07:36 | Report abuse | Reply
    • maximusvad

      CNN thinks ? L2 read CNN did not do the scientific research.

      June 1, 2012 at 08:17 | Report abuse |
    • ladydi

      there will NEVER be a cure – its too much of a money maker for the doctors, hospitals, pharmacuticals, etc..........

      June 1, 2012 at 09:16 | Report abuse |
    • paulronco

      >> But by that time a cure should already be available to those who that can afford it.

      Don't hold your breath. The health care industry, as a general rule, already knows what causes cancer.

      June 2, 2012 at 13:24 | Report abuse |
  4. L C B

    so – let's keep 'radiating' females with xray screenings, to 'find' the cancers our machines are causing!

    June 1, 2012 at 07:40 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Annie

      You forgot to mention the toxins in our food and environment 🙂

      June 1, 2012 at 12:07 | Report abuse |
    • j

      Amen to that!

      June 1, 2012 at 16:23 | Report abuse |
    • j

      Agreed – the biggest culprit.

      June 1, 2012 at 16:24 | Report abuse |
    • paulronco

      >> Agreed – the biggest culprit.

      I would have to say that chronic stress is probably bigger.

      June 2, 2012 at 13:25 | Report abuse |
    • SixDegrees

      So – let's completely ignore the facts as presented in the article, and pretend something else is causing cancer rates to increase.

      June 3, 2012 at 07:11 | Report abuse |
  5. Eddie

    ye what about the cancer allies of the industrial areas of this country

    June 1, 2012 at 07:41 | Report abuse | Reply
  6. rj

    To bad the politcal campaign contributions (both parties) cant go to fixing this..

    June 1, 2012 at 07:49 | Report abuse | Reply
  7. eatright

    cancer = no nutrition cancer mostly is caused by bad diets....read dr fhurmans book and learn to eat healthy...

    June 1, 2012 at 08:12 | Report abuse | Reply
    • HeHasRizen

      another brainwashed fool. remember when cigerettes were good for you?? quit reading material a paid doctor wrote and do research yourself. The whole food supply is contaminated. wake up. if i write a book about how d umb you are most would beleive it as well.

      June 1, 2012 at 09:15 | Report abuse |
  8. Walter

    The goal always seems to be keep people alive no matter what. Why can't people simply say I've got something I don't want to fight (cancer, depression, etc.) and I feel I've lived long enough. It's amazing to me in a country where we believe in a woman's right to choose regarding another life, we don't grant the same right to end our lown ives in a manner of our choosing.

    June 1, 2012 at 08:16 | Report abuse | Reply
    • farmer laurie

      yeah Walter, you wait till you have cancer, then you'll find out how much you want to live.

      June 1, 2012 at 08:54 | Report abuse |
    • paulronco

      Why is it amazing? The people who are opposed to abortion are also opposed to assisted suicide. But this is still a matter for the states to decide. Oregon has passed favorable assisted suicide laws.

      June 2, 2012 at 13:27 | Report abuse |
  9. David

    How about instead of tests to detect cancer, we radically change our diet to avoid it in the 1st place?? What a simple concept. Reduce consumption of animal products to less than 10% of your diet and eat a mostly whole food, plant based diet.

    June 1, 2012 at 08:18 | Report abuse | Reply
    • tesla1908

      Another lose r who thinks diet will change everything. It won't. You've been brain washed.

      June 1, 2012 at 08:33 | Report abuse |
    • Really?

      tesla1908: Thanks for takin a break from stuffin your fat face with fast food like it was a race to see who can get diabetes first. The world really needs tidbits of wisdom from morons who haven't seen their feet in 10 years. You account for over 60% ( and rising ) of all healthcare costs and let me just make a wild guess; I bet you're one of those who is all balled up in their shorts about having to actually participate in the healthcare system that you are bankrupting, because it's your God given right to let ME shoulder the expense of YOUR fast fat food addiction.

      June 1, 2012 at 09:49 | Report abuse |
    • Annie

      Tesla is busy eating donuts since it is donut day today! 🙂

      June 1, 2012 at 12:09 | Report abuse |
  10. farmer laurie

    of course they will! All the chemicals and hormones the big ag companies and food companies are putting in our food are causing us to have the biggest cancer rate in the WORLD right now.

    June 1, 2012 at 08:52 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Anca

      Sri Lanka is definitely no senocd string team in this Zim Tri Series .They are a very good mix of young cricketers with most of them, except just a few may be, who lack more exposure .Having lost to India fairly & squarley this is no excuse !! (0)

      July 3, 2012 at 04:38 | Report abuse |
  11. MIke

    Most cancers are related to lifestyle and diet..... ....

    June 1, 2012 at 08:57 | Report abuse | Reply
    • HeHasRizen

      You are brainwashed. there was no cancer in 1900.. its all recent its not lifestyle and diet of course thats what the gov't tells you but they really don't give a crap about you. wake up your freedom is gone but hey go watch your tv shows and stay a sleep while the NWO takes control.

      June 1, 2012 at 09:12 | Report abuse |
    • morgan

      Consider this, in 1900 farmers were NOT dousing our food with a wide variety of chemicals. You seem to think diet has nothing to do with cancer, but I see the increased use of chemicals as contributing to the increase of cancers. Cancer has been afflicting the human race since before the year "0" but the increase in the frequency and the types since 1900 is alarming. Children almost never got cancer before 1900, now it is the second cause of death in children under the age of 14.

      Chemicals are not the only cause, but I suspect they act as a catalyst for the illness.

      I plan to begin growing the majority of my food WITHOUT the use of chemicals.

      June 3, 2012 at 13:10 | Report abuse |
  12. HeHasRizen

    60 years ago they had to go over seas to study cancer.. now its at a all time high. Why? well the globolist (NWO) created these viruses to kill you. Most Sheep Americans are brainwashed anyways and believe what CNN says even tho they are ran by the rockefellers and the rothchilds. USA stands for "Under Satans Authority"

    June 1, 2012 at 09:09 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Really?

      Did you get that cute tin foil hat from the same guy that gave you the koolaid?

      June 1, 2012 at 09:20 | Report abuse |
    • WhatWhat?

      Dude, please select the country of your choice and go live there. Or better yet, pick a different planet.

      June 1, 2012 at 21:28 | Report abuse |
  13. Really?

    Cancer cases may go up by 75% in a time frame where the population will for sure go up by at least 100%. Hmmmm ..... seems like progress, if you don't consider the that the social, economic and health issues from doubling the population will make the number of cancer cases irrelevant in the big picture.

    June 1, 2012 at 09:16 | Report abuse | Reply
  14. m@yahoo.com

    i wont deny cigarrettes have carcinogens in them or that they are bad for you. but there are over 80,000 chemicals that are used in production processes and the EPA only requires testing of a whopping 212 of them. thousands of which we know have carcinogens in them yet they arent banned due to the outdated toxic substance law. even asbestos couldnt get banned due to the flaws in the law. so while smoking is bad, its not the cancer causing giant of the world, its no more dangerous than walking outside and letting the suns radiation beat down on you or using petroleum jelly products or even getting into a car and driving 60 mph on a highway with thousands of other 2000 lb machines.

    June 1, 2012 at 10:07 | Report abuse | Reply
  15. Karl

    Much of that increase will be due to an aging population–more people will be living longer and cancer rates increase with increasing age.

    June 1, 2012 at 10:46 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Annie

      It is said over and over again that population is not aging longer, it is the opposite! The infant mortality is lower that makes the numbers like we are living longer. We are living shorter lives and in misery with a number of various diseases hitting in early age.

      June 1, 2012 at 12:15 | Report abuse |
    • WhatWhat?

      Annie what have you been reading? If you look at the human race as a whole, over time (not just one or two generations) more people are living longer.

      June 1, 2012 at 21:25 | Report abuse |
  16. doc

    Agree wtih Karl, the actual rate will go up due to better detection, what will be important is to track the morbidity and mortality...

    June 1, 2012 at 11:21 | Report abuse | Reply
  17. Fifi

    On a purely analytic level, cancer is a class of diseases ( to lump all cancers together is questionable, bit that's another discussion) that controls population growth worldwide. Just as famines have historically done - before the advent of large-scale humanitarian aid– and plagues and pandemics still may do.

    If the growth in cancers is seen in "reproductive, dietary and hormonal factors", however, the culprit is likely environmental pollution and factory farming. Are endocrine systems being disrupted worldwide?

    June 1, 2012 at 11:59 | Report abuse | Reply
  18. dan

    This is refreshing. At least not another article about someone eating someone else.

    June 1, 2012 at 13:19 | Report abuse | Reply
  19. Johnny

    So they are saying cancer cases will go up 75% by 2030, right? Well, if all these people get cancer (and many die), isn't the problem self correcting?

    June 1, 2012 at 13:32 | Report abuse | Reply
  20. Dale

    Have any of you noticed when someone of high society influence or power, when they find out about they have cancer they get treatment with the most up-to-date chemotherapy treatments for cancer, they use their power and influence the hospitals and doctors don't want to lose their funding money if they die.

    June 1, 2012 at 14:06 | Report abuse | Reply
    • WhatWhat?

      Sounds like victim mentality. If you had the money for the best treatment wouldn't you do the same? Not all rich people fund hospitals AND not all rich people pay their bills. You can't lump people into the same bucket. But if we were, what bucket would you put yourself in?

      June 1, 2012 at 21:21 | Report abuse |
    • morgan

      they couldn't save Patrick Swayze or George Harrison and they had lots of money. I guess the disease didn't have enough sense to leave the wealthy or famous alone.

      June 3, 2012 at 13:14 | Report abuse |
  21. Sarah M

    Oh c'mon. There *is* a cancer cure out there, but gawd forbid it's disclosed. Drug companies would lose so much money if curing cancer was possible through a natural remedy. It all comes down to money, in my opinion.

    June 1, 2012 at 14:56 | Report abuse | Reply
    • WhatWhat?

      You may be right but I don't think there is a cure out there for all cancers – they are not all the same. There is however a huge incentive for Big Pharma to suppress any cure that cannot be patented because the price cannot be controlled.

      June 1, 2012 at 21:19 | Report abuse |
    • Maya

      If you understood anything about patent law, you'd realize that argument is ridiculous. It doesn't matter if the treatment is derived from a natural product. If it has to go through any sort of non-obvious process, the resulting drug can be patented.

      June 1, 2012 at 22:21 | Report abuse |
    • EdL

      I wonder if the same would apply to universities who receive government money to find the cancer cure. If the cure is found they lose their funding.

      June 3, 2012 at 12:28 | Report abuse |
  22. AJD13

    They seem to be saying in this article that colorectal cancer and breast cancer are caused by obesity..."they face the looming surge in cases often linked to a more 'Westernized" lifestyle, due to tobacco use and obesity (lung, breast, colorectal)."

    This is definitely not always the case. I've never heard of breast cancer being linked with obesity though I'm not saying there might not be some cases but have known women that were NOT obese that had it. My grandmother died from colon cancer but she was not obese. She was born in 1917 and lived on farms all her life, ate fresh foods, never smoked, did everything that today would be considered "right." She was almost 88 when she was diagnosed and 88 when she died 8 months later. Up until the time she was diagnosed she had always been very healthy, was still living on her own and able to do anything she wanted and needed to do and was not on any medications which is amazing.

    June 1, 2012 at 15:09 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Maya

      You do know that an effect can have more than one cause right?

      Aside from the quacks who make a living pushing their quackery on daytime TV shows and books, any doctor will tell you that many cancers have more to do with genetics than lifestyle.

      June 1, 2012 at 22:24 | Report abuse |
    • A scientist

      Being overweight both substantially increases a person's risk for breast and colorectal cancer (as well as a number of other cancers). However, that doesn't mean that every breast or colon cancer case is caused by obesity, just as the fact that some non-smokers get lung cancer doesn't disprove the idea that smoking causes lung cancer.

      June 3, 2012 at 10:17 | Report abuse |
    • A scientist

      opps - I meant to say that it both substantially increases cancer risk, and reduces cancer survival rates.

      June 3, 2012 at 10:18 | Report abuse |
  23. WHHuang

    Romney or Obama, either one of them shouldn't cut budget on cancer research when they got elected. That our only way to survive through this as a whole.

    June 1, 2012 at 15:20 | Report abuse | Reply
  24. Julnor

    When you reduce the death rate from other diseases, the ones that are less curable will become more prevalent.

    June 1, 2012 at 16:10 | Report abuse | Reply
  25. Marc

    Really? You people REALLY think cancer is new, and invented?? There's evidence of cancer back to ancient Egypt. It's been around for a while. Some may be attributed to lifestyles, but before anesthesia and modern science those ancient Egyptians just had the cancer BURNED out of them, and left with open wounds. Learn about history instead of trying to pretend as if you know everything.

    June 1, 2012 at 21:33 | Report abuse | Reply
  26. Lindalou

    Cancer is so pervasive any more. I feel like whenever someone mentions not feeling well, they come back with a diagnosis of some type of cancer...watch out...it's like tag and you don't want to be IT!

    June 1, 2012 at 21:48 | Report abuse | Reply
  27. Maya

    The people wailing about how all this cancer is being caused by x-rays, cell phones, animal products etc. are pretty amusing because they fail to realize that they are being played as much as anyone else. These quack "doctors" (many of them aren't medical doctors) who populate TV and the internet, telling you that you just need to eat certain foods and get a colonic to cure cancer, are playing you like a fiddle. They are telling you what you want to hear: that you can control cancer. I'm not saying cancer doesn't have contributing environmental factors; it certainly does. These quacks are telling you that it is ALL your environment because they want you to believe that if you just do what they tell you, you won't get cancer. They are getting rich off of your insecurity.

    June 1, 2012 at 22:30 | Report abuse | Reply
    • Mitch

      @Maya... it's people like you that remind me that there intelligent people out there. It's so sad to see individuals shell out their life savings to internet quacks, only to get nothing in return besides false hope.

      June 3, 2012 at 01:01 | Report abuse |
  28. mary

    Yea, lets NOT factor in the release of radioactive materials all over the world for the past 67 years..
    "background radiation"?? What they won't tell you is that humans are responsible for most of it.. And the kind humans create should never have even come into existence.
    By products of nuclear fission ..

    June 2, 2012 at 03:27 | Report abuse | Reply
    • BillyBobJoe

      That factor is absolutely and positively negligible. Unless you are/were a Chernobyl survivor or near Fukushima, or exposed to atomic weaponry like >99% of humans, radiation from the sun is a more significant factor that man-made radiation, and that has been around since long before man.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:10 | Report abuse |
  29. mindanoiha

    Here is just one example which concerns many thousands of young girls. Incredibly, the so-called cervical cancer vaccine Gardasil may actually increase risk of cancer:
    1) – Due to the ingredients (the vaccine has not been tested for carcinogenicity)
    2) – Due to replacement (virus strains which are removed may be replaced by strains which are more carcinogenic)
    3) – Due to the presence of recombinant HPV DNA (discovered by an independent laboratory), the consequences of which may be horrific.

    June 2, 2012 at 06:58 | Report abuse | Reply
  30. Jules Vice

    I thought the report was hiliarious, especially the guy from the American Cancer Society seeming to put so much blame on cigarettes. My mother died almost a year ago and it was from Mesothelioma and that isn't caused by smoking or being exposed to smoke. Cancer is from what our government allows big corporations to do to the American people and now we are expanding worldwide more and more and they are bringing these cancer causing agents with them. We can't go after, and send to prison, the leaders of a corporation for knowingly using products that cause cancer, but we can send the Bernie Madoffs and Ken Laye's to jail. Well people when you continue to let the government allow corporations to put money over peoples lives then you got your answer

    June 2, 2012 at 07:40 | Report abuse | Reply
    • BillyBobJoe

      Are you saying cigarettes aren't carcingoens? They may not have contributed to your mother's death or my grandfather's, but they do contribute to lung cancer, which is the most prevalent cancer in the world. Cancer is caused by a variety of factors; it can be mutagenic exposure, viral exposure, radiation exposure, dietary exposure, genetic predisposition, etc. Cancer is a symptom of a developing world, and also a symptom of people living longer and us having better detection systems. However, cancer is not some sort of conspiracy put on us by the government, corporations, doctors or hospitals in order to make money. That idea is sick and disgusting. There is no universal cure being held back to make money. The people who work in that field (which includes me) are driven to stop cancer, and if the FDA or anyone held it back I would raise up a firestorm, as I am sure many others like me would. A lot of the construction materials you are referring to, like asbestos, were used long before it was known they were carcinogenic, and nowadays any company that uses them with get sued instantly if an employee gets mesothelioma. Cancer is the West's disease, and I'm not hearing much resolve to change lifestyles to combat it or support for organizations trying to find cure(s), but rather whining about how corpoations and doctors are purposely keeping cancer alive and telling people who wish to curb environmental risk factors they are drinking the "Kool-Aid". Obviously, no one's risk can be 0 (other than Mighty Mouse; look that mouse up, a fascinating lab case), but you can lower it.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:03 | Report abuse |
  31. Anne

    I'm hearing almost all the time of someone who has cancer. Different forms of cancers, breast, lymphoma, lung, etc. It could be caused from anything. I've even thought about germ warfare. Who knows what really causes it. They say we are all born with it, and some kind of virus sets it off. For the past 2 yrs. I watched my husband battle cancer with chemo. I don't think it was the cancer that killed him, it was the chemo that killed him. They told him from the very beginning that the chemo would kill everything in his body. Had to have platelets, and then he also suffered from dehydration. Sometimes I wonder if it was all worth the suffering he had to go through. My thinking now is if I ever get cancer I'll just live my life out fully until the end, instead of taking chemo. Also with all the money they have been given over umpteen years you would have thought they would have a cure by now. My father use to say they have a cure but they don't want to give it because it would put all the cancer hospitals, doctors, etc. out of business. I'm beginning to believe it. Thank goodness the insurance we had took care of all his treatments otherwise we would have went broke.Considering some treatments were $11,000.00 or more.

    June 2, 2012 at 08:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  32. Macmaven

    Nature's way of 'thinning the heard'.

    June 2, 2012 at 10:42 | Report abuse | Reply
  33. Riaz Castillo

    Well duhhhh. Cancer loves red meat, sugar and milk. What do you expect when these products are promoted and so much money can be made on cancer, heart disease and diabetes...

    June 2, 2012 at 10:49 | Report abuse | Reply
  34. festiveintoxications

    Without a doubt, infections and tobacco are catalysts for cancer. But the type – and sheer amount – of food we eat, especially in North America, can be as equally malignant. How can a body digest such overly processed food, and the constant intake of high fructose corn syrup? Look at the Mediterranean Diet or even the 'French Paradox.' Those who have lived a life on this type of diet live well into their 80's and beyond- with great mental and physical health. For the first time in history, the number of deaths related to being obese have beaten out deaths caused by being malnourished. We need to take a step back, and reevaluate what we put in our bodies.

    June 2, 2012 at 11:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  35. wrm

    The number of cancer cases could go up by 2351.2%

    June 2, 2012 at 16:53 | Report abuse | Reply
  36. Kiri

    I live in a small village, mt.selinda in africa. The area has lots of wild guavas, avocados and numerous other fruits. We grow sweet potatoes, pawpaws, bananas and oranges. We can hardly access fertilisers so we use cowdung from cows that eat grass. As for transport, we walk almost everywhere because there are hardly any cars. Also we hardly get cancer in the area..As for water we get from springs in the mountains which we carry with buckets..

    June 2, 2012 at 17:49 | Report abuse | Reply
    • SGK

      I am surprised you have access to internet !?!?

      June 4, 2012 at 00:51 | Report abuse |
  37. WillH85

    Like it or not, cancer is one of nature's ways of thinning out populations and part of natural selection. People seem to take it so personally, but it's not. We're mortal, though some people can't seem to accept that. True, we should try and cure what conditions and diseases we should, but we should also remember that we're trying to stop something that's been killing people since, well probably since there were people.

    June 2, 2012 at 18:38 | Report abuse | Reply
  38. mmi16

    In the past – the other diseases that afflict humans in subsistance living conditions killed them before they were able to age enough for cancer to gain a foot hold of their bodies and grow to kill them

    June 3, 2012 at 03:50 | Report abuse | Reply
  39. Alexandra

    And, no mention of the President's Cancer Panel's Annual Report, warning that so many cancers are caused by exposure to radiation and toxic chemicals in the environment? I suggest legislators sponsor the Safe Chemicals Act and get the ball rolling on reducing cancer cases here in the USA. Have you contacted your senator yet about this important legislation?

    June 3, 2012 at 08:02 | Report abuse | Reply
  40. EdL

    People living longer, continuing developments in heart attack death prevention, already with bypasses, valve replacements, transplants, etc., it is understandable there will be more deaths from cancer. Conversely should there be an overall cure for cancer more will die from heart attacks. We think we have all the answers, but the fact remains we can delay but cannot prevent our passing away. If we are all going to die from old age, whatever that will be, we will be flooding nursing homes with accompanying increased costs. And new developments such as the cure for alzheimers will increase the age of nursing home residents. Come to think of it maybe it would be pretty nice to live until 120+.

    June 3, 2012 at 11:35 | Report abuse | Reply
  41. LIN

    Why are we waiting for the statistics THE SCIENTISTS, DRUG COMPANIES have the CURE they want more and more of us to be statistics THEY CAN FIND A CURE BUT THEY WANT THE MONEY INSTEAD!

    June 3, 2012 at 12:09 | Report abuse | Reply
    • BillyBobJoe

      On behalf of the civilized non-paranoid normal people who understand why a universal cure will not come, please leave, and take your fellow ignoramuses with you on your trip through la-la-land, where everyone is conspiring against you and those who work tirelessly, work themselves half to death, for your health and safety are ACTUALLY just using you to make money, which they make more than enough of anyway. You silly fools make me laugh; oh yes you do. Now please, try to contribute something realistic and useful......

      July 30, 2012 at 11:19 | Report abuse |
  42. chefitup

    This has a lot to do with things like cell phone usage, wireless technologies, x ray machines, pesticides, genetically modified foods, Brazilian blow outs, MSG and other preservatives... A lot of this is due to carcinogens created for profit.

    June 3, 2012 at 13:06 | Report abuse | Reply
  43. Azezel

    We have a sick culture in the us and the world. I don't think it can be solved democratically.

    June 3, 2012 at 16:26 | Report abuse | Reply
  44. Kay

    What, find a cure and end the gravy train for the doctors, hospitals, and drug companies? It'll never happen. Too much money to be made!

    June 3, 2012 at 16:29 | Report abuse | Reply
    • BillyBobJoe

      You are concerned about doctors and hospitals (people who do their jobs solely to save lives) holding back treatments. Yeah, why don't ignorant fools like you keep your head stuck in the sand while the world passes you by. It is well-known that biologically a universal cure is near-impossible, but multiple new, better treatments for each type of cancer come out each year. I would like you to come in to work with me one day, and honestly tell me and the doctors here that we, while we give consults and on a patient-by-patient basis perscribe treatments and do, many times, provide complete cures, are holding back new treatments to make money. You and those ignoramuses like you are sick, just plain sick.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:15 | Report abuse |
  45. Greg

    So cancer rates would be up 75%, but chances are deaths from cancer would be way down. There are a lot of treatments on the horizon which would allow for the treatment of even metastatic cancers. It's possible by then, a cancer diagnosis might not have the scare factor it does nowadays.

    June 3, 2012 at 17:05 | Report abuse | Reply
  46. Jeff

    Life expectancy is dropping in the United States due to obesity problems. Eat whole foods and exercise. Can you pronounce all the ingredients in your food? If not better rethink what you're eating.

    June 3, 2012 at 20:08 | Report abuse | Reply
  47. Chels

    more people on the earth, more people living longer, increased obesity and lack of exercise this is not surprising

    June 3, 2012 at 21:01 | Report abuse | Reply
  48. chieatfetus

    One way to help is for the FDA to start regulating what goes into our food supply. Read '9 Natural Cereals That Aren't' and you'll see how much cancerous substances are in some of the items you may eat because there is no policy or regulation: It is a SHAME.

    June 3, 2012 at 22:55 | Report abuse | Reply
  49. acajunthatsagun

    Mother Earth is fighting back to protect herself.

    June 4, 2012 at 01:30 | Report abuse | Reply
    • BillyBobJoe

      From what? "Mother Nature" is no sentient being saying "These humans anger me. Give them all cancer!" No, it's better diagnosis on our part and lifestyles that increase our risk for getting cancer.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:26 | Report abuse |
    • BillyBobJoe

      From what? "Mother Nature" is no sentient being saying "These humans anger me. Give them all cancer!" No, it's better diagnosis on our part and lifestyles that increase our risk for getting cancer. The rest is factors not under our control, but they are not under "Mother Nature's", either.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:28 | Report abuse |
    • BillyBobJoe

      Whoops double-post.

      July 30, 2012 at 11:29 | Report abuse |
  50. BillyBobJoe

    A lot of the rise in cancer treatment is much better diagnosis. Someone who had renal carcinoma in 1850 or 1900 might be diagnosed with kidney failure as cause of death, while now, that person would be correctly diagnosed. Additionally, egads of elderly who would otherwise live their lives unaffected by slow-growing, unaggressive cancers and die from something else are diagnosed, raising the number of cases while a significant change in cancer rates did not exist. The rest can be attributed to bad diets, exposure to things like smoking, and high rates of genetic predisposition as rather than dying off sooner, more gentically predisposed people live long enough to pass on their "bad" genes.

    July 30, 2012 at 11:24 | Report abuse | Reply
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Leave a Reply to semi truck paint shops near me


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

About this blog

Get a behind-the-scenes look at the latest stories from CNN Chief Medical Correspondent, Dr. Sanjay Gupta, Senior Medical Correspondent Elizabeth Cohen and the CNN Medical Unit producers. They'll share news and views on health and medical trends - info that will help you take better care of yourself and the people you love.